Mike_Walker

It might have been supported by the unions but not by their members who were not consulted. GWR drivers are furious that their HSTs are being taken away regarding their cab as considerably safer than those of Sprinters. The objections largely come from Scotland and are more a case of objecting to being given the castoffs of those nasty Sassenachs..

I scan any articles that I think I might want to refer to in future then bin recycle the paper copy.

Thanks for the correction, I'd been misinformed.

They could not be reused in the UK because the DfT has specifically instructed both GWR and XC to withdraw them as they claim they are too expensive to operate. It is therefore only to be expected that the ROSCOs that own them and spent huge sums on their upgrades should seek to find new pastures for them to recoup their losses. Please remember, our railways are not run by experienced managers but by clueless civil servants and ministers who give the orders .

Having heard first hand from those actually involved in the fitting power doors to two Mk3 fleets I can tell you there was serious corrosion in the bodies particularly at the ends and around the toilets. This was cut out and replaced as part of the work. Unfortunately thanks to the DfT changing its mind, others are getting the benefit of this not us - the trailers being exported to both Mexico and Nigeria all have power doors. Similarly the power cars have corrosion issues which had to be corrected alongside the power door programme. At least on a HST power car the driver isn't in danger of putting his feet through a rotten cab floor like is happening on the IETs!

For a short time around 1978/9 the ER loaned some of its 254s to the WR. One day I was presented with the sight of two PCs in adjacent platforms at Paddington sporting the same number on their noses. No camera of course in those pre-phone days.

I found similar issues trying to find Thameslink from the Liz Line at Farringdon. Judging from the reaction of staff, I wasn't the first!

They would appreciate it more if you'd actually bought the ticket from them rather than on line then pick it up. That way it is an additional sale counted to the BO.

That's unless those redeployed staff hadn't left already of their own volition. I know that's what would have happened at my local station and it would have saved on redundancy payments.

Off topic, I apologise, but several years ago I was chasing Southern Pacific 4449 up the Feather River Canyon on its way back to Portland. BNSF had provided a brand new GE also numbered 4449 as helper right behind the kettle - I understand it had been rushed to California from the factory especially. Anyway, with both crews talking to the dispatcher over the radio, the latter was getting totally confused handling messages from BNSF 4449 and SP 4449!

Except they've just been through a refurbishment so perhaps the seats have been replaced to match the forthcoming Avanti IETs...

I also understand that the Rolling Stock Library that manages the allocation of class and vehicle numbers operates a moratorium system that permits reuse of numbers but only after a set dormant period.

They most certainly were Class 43s throughout their lives. Classes 253 and 254 were the numbers given to the complete sets and were originally applied to the power car noses but this was soon abandoned when it became obvious that the power car maintenance cycles differed widely from that of the trailers and therefore keeping them together was inefficient. Likewise, attempts at keeping complete sets of trailers together didn't always work. Laira for example would usually reform at least one set a day to switch out a defective vehicle and replace with a spare; hence the the regular sighting of odd liveries in sets during times of livery transition. Classes 253 and 254 continued to be used in operating publications such as the Sectional Appendix up to the present as a convenient way of identifying the different length sets and where they could or could not be used as an example. GWR refers to its short "Castle" sets as Class 255 although I'm not too sure how "official" that is. Other class numbers have been reused. The D600 series Warships were, on paper, allocated Class 41 although their demise in December 1968 coincided with the introduction of the TOPS classifications and Class 41 was used for the prototype HST power cars 41001 and 41002. These later became W43000 and W43001 in the carriage series (pre-TOPS for those) which were then followed by the production power cars starting at W43002. When the power cars became regarded as independent locomotives in their own right they became Class 43. And, of course much in our thoughts at the moment, the Southern "Booster" locos were Class 70 now reused for the Freightliner and Colas GE locomotives.

Don't need them, they've got "boosters". Hat, coat...

I've heard a lot of criticism of Chiltern's TVMs. They appear to be particularly poor.

Along with Audis, BMWs and Mercedes...

At our local station, on the next branch to Mike's, the clerk in the BO says he has an average 5-6 enquiries every day (only open Mon-Sat mornings) from folk who've encountered problems trying to book on line or with the TVM.

It was easy to close ticket offices on LU because of the simple fare structure which can be handled effectively by TVMs. This does not translate to the national network with its huge range of destinations and complex fares. Same goes for tap in tap out contactless payments. Of course a dim witted SoS or civil servant wouldn't be able to grasp that.

Hey guys, relax. When Mark said "seaworthy" it was with tongue in cheek and was a reflection of his frustration at the trains not doing what was claimed.

In his weekly staff address this week Mark Hopwood related that he was going to dig out the 2016 paperwork from Hitachi where they gave assurances the IET would be, in his words, 'seaworthy'. They're not.

But this case has nothing to do with removing route knowledge. I understand the driver involved still signs both routes. The issue was that the train was being misrouted without prior warning so the driver correctly stopped and challenged the route.

Mark told me once that when he arrived at FGW he found trains leaving Paddington late because drivers couldn't be bothered to drink up their tea and vacate the mess room on time. He said you can't condone such practices but if you treat your staff like s**t don't be surprised if they take that attitude. His approach is that every member of staff is there to perform a vital role in the company from deputy MD down to cleaners and you treat them all equally and with respect. In his time morale has soared at GWR. By contrast, after Adrian Shooter retired from Chiltern that morale their is on the floor.

Avanti has not been absorbed into the Government's Directly Operated Railways although it is micro-managed by the DfT just like the other TOCs.

But, as we all know - and not just us enthusiasts, this plan originated from within the DfT not the TOCs. They were just the fall guys and are reported to be "furious" as a result.

I thought we only did that at Swindon Panel! Don't feel so bad now . 😀