To say they are ‘mainly five car units’ isn’t really correct. The odd service runs with five when it should be more but the majority of trains leaving London have nine or ten coaches, as planned.

 

Things may be getting better though.

The 18:00 Temple Meads to Paddington was just a five car, but by 19:00 the Temple Meads to Paddington was up to 9 cars, and the train arriving into Temple Meads fromn London was ten.

 
And how many years is it since my now famous crystal ball predicted that the new trains "would in practice be mainly 5 car units"
Such views were widely criticised as being unduly negative.

 

Not sure if your statement could grammatically be classified as an oxymoron...............but it certainly seems to contradict itself. Will the IETs EVER provide a full, reliable service ?    They already seemed to be suffering from premature problems of old-age, long before the initial into service problems have been resolved.

I recently spent several hours between Bath and Maindee Jct (mostly at BRI) and did notice, at the time, that the vast majority of IETs we saw/passed were only 5 car units. The only 9 car I can definitely remember seeing was outside WSB, heading towards BRI............as ECS !

 
They should have kept the HSTs ! not forever of course, but until the wretched IETs could work reliably enough to provide a full service.

 
Have the Tanat Valley still got those Pacers to sell ?

 
There has been a varying dog's dinner from day to day of allocations on diagrams this week, no doubt to utilise what is available.. As well as short-forming and cancellations there has also been long-forming of 10 vice 9 and 9 vice 5. Only the last is a real pleasant surprise.

 
Has there EVER been a week when IETs have not been short formed due to faults ?

 

Could this explain 3 x 165 on a Bristol (Temple Meads) to Reading train recently?

 
The Intercity Express Train (IET) fleet is currently experiencing a reduction in available units due to an increase in GU (Generator Unit) faults, which are under investigation by Hitachi. As a result, there will be a rise in short-formed and cancelled services while Hitachi develops an engineering solution. In the event of an incident this will impact service recovery due to the need to keep traction on certain diagrams.

 
Wonder how long it'll be before this 'problem' in RTT is raised again?

 

This is a well-known issue on RTT, there's a recent thread on Rail UK Forums which explains how it happens:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/22-coach-pendolino.290852/

 
08:27 Plymouth to London Paddington due 11:59
Facilities on the 08:27 Plymouth to London Paddington due 11:59.
Will be formed of 8 coaches instead of 10.

One carriage locked out of use I wonder?
It then forms the 12:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:05
Will be formed of 8 coaches instead of 10.

16:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 17:37
Will be formed of 8 coaches instead of 10.

18:00 London Paddington to Plymouth due 21:31
Will be formed of 8 coaches instead of 10.

Finally 5C25 2202 Plymouth to Laira T.& R.S.M.D.

 

I would be surprised if 14 carriages made Paddington.  Maximum platformed is 12 IET carriages (but how would you do that?) in Platform 1, but a long lead out past the old parcels / mail platform without points might provide an exceptional ability to handle more?

From the sectional appendix PDF - here:



If that "26 chains" on the left is the distance to the first point, then physically 20 carriages of 26 metres could just fit in there.

 
Totally confused on this one,did 14 coaches actually make the journey from the west of England to Paddington?

If it did how was the train accommodated at Paddington?

 

Yes, as specified for passenger operation it's two units and 312 m - twelve vehicles. Given the unit lengths in existence that means only trains that actually operate now.

For ECS and rescue modes, twice that is allowed. That means any train operating now can rescue any other, but it does not have to haul anything longer than it is. Thus some theoretical possibilities such as 5+5+5+9 might be allowed as ECS, but not for rescue (i.e. with passengers on board the rescued train).

 
Reminded me of the 23-car lash up through Tonbridge :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jta4c9FMmCA

Is there a theoretical maximum of IETs that can be coupled together?

 
Carting those 9 out of use I think

 
A nice problem to have -
1A84 1020 Penzance to London Paddington
Left Penzance as 5 cars.
9 added at Plymouth!
Showing 14 cars to London!

 

If you want to know more, the Railcar Society website has a useful WR guide to DMU heaters:

https://www.railcar.co.uk/documentation/

Scroll down the page a little to find it

A manual for the Smiths heaters can be found by scrolling a little further

Now I'm down a rabbit hole:

https://preserved.railcar.co.uk/documentation/tsu-89-99-heaters.pdf

[Edit: to add information]

 
AI generated answer:


It's AI generated, but corresponds well with my recollection of the heaters on the Park Royal sets we had on the WSR in the mid/late 1970s

 
Sooo, first gen DMU heating... how'd it work?

Mark

 

That kerosene and sulphur smell that took your breath away!

 

Oh, happy memories of first generation DMU heating!

 

Door fault?  Aircon intake fault - filling passenger cabin with diesel exhaust?

 
Eh?

12:15 Penzance to London Paddington due 17:31
12:15 Penzance to London Paddington due 17:31 has been cancelled.
This is due to a fault on this train.
Additional Information
Customers making journeys within Devon and Somerset can travel with Cross Country's Edinburgh service as far as Taunton, which departs Plymouth at 14:27.

RTT at Penzance shows -
1A88 1215 Penzance to London Paddington   This service is cancelled.
This service was cancelled due to a problem with the traction equipment (MD).
AND
5A88 1215 Penzance to London Paddington
Empty Coaching Stock

A fault on the train, but it can run through to Paddington empty?

 
Another update from Richard Clinnick. This has been going on so long that he's now on his 3rd job since the start, and is now editor, Modern Railways...

So far treated - 7 5car 800/0s, 3 9car 800/3s, 12 5car 802/0s and 6 802/1s
800013 & 802017 currently at Eastleigh

In total, there are 93 IETs, 57 owned by Agility. Of those, 28 5car 800/0s and 18 9car 800/3s still need to be treated That  leaves 36 IETs owned by Eversholt of which 9 5car 802/0s and 7 9car 802/1s have yet to be treated

[if these figures don't add up, they're Richard's not mine!]

 
Richard Clinnick (editor, Modern Railways) tweeted a fleet update on GWRs IETs with the cracking problem still ongoing....


So many years yet.....

 

https://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=27903 - and we included "carriages" but not "vehicles".

 
I've noticed 'recently/a while ago' that there were a few 5 car units doing the rounds(more trains than usual, etc).
However, it is now more common to see 5 cars from Penzance to Paddington with no additional cars at Plymouth.
It is easy to say West Country services must be 9 or 10 cars at all times, but that means perhaps Bristol/Wales/Hereford lose out.
Whilst Hitachi might well be working quietly behind the scenes, I'm surprised that the 5 car issues have not been sorted at all.

Debate cars vs coaches! (I seem to remember we did have that debate a while ago).
The IET's are 5 car/coaches units, or a 9 car/coach formation anyway.

 
The Paignton service has been reinstated starting from Taunton, using a 3 car unit, according to Journey Check.
Running as 3C70 ecs from Bristol according to Traksy

 
I would say likely to do with the 07:03 being cancelled:

 
08:03 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:07
08:03 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:07 will call additionally at Castle Cary.
This is due to a fault on this train.

Just wondering why a problem will give an additional station stop?
I've seen it on other trips since IET's started.

 
At least you refrained from suggesting steam engine haulage on this particular occasion I suppose.

 

I simply suggested possible sources of alternative rolling stock IF significant numbers of IETs are withdrawn. I see no propaganda in such a post.

 
Thanks for the information, it will be interesting to hear of any plans 

 
Oh now, now folks 

I do know of some rolling stock plans - but in them the IETs are very much here to stay.  And there's an update briefing later this week that I'll be attending and I will report back if there's different news.

 
Thank you for the explanation  Yes I agree with you on Broadgauge's piece of false propaganda. 

 

I was replying to Broadgage who had made the previous post, and, unfortunately, had rather hijacked your original question with his own unique brand of propaganda. 

 

All i wanted was further information, there is no need to be rude.

 

I certainly can, I heard it from a friend. I highly doubted this would be true anyway, I just wanted further information to see whether anyone has heard anything similar. 

 

I've had a look at RTT for my local station (Tiverton Parkway) and only four of the GWR trains stopping or passing through today are not 80x types. 3 are 158s doing positional stuff I suppose. The other outlier is the only loco hauled service of the day, the sleeper, which was part-cancelled and began at Reading instead of Paddington. That would be a lot to replace. Given that they are largely running to time, I very much doubt that will happen.

 

Indeed.  Perhaps GWR 158 can tell us from where he heard the rumour?

 
They are never going to get rid of the 800s. With all the variants there are 262 sets from the 395 Javelin to Aurora 810s

 
Surely Hitachi are on the hook for these trains and a failure to provide sufficient sets a day costs them a few quid. I know they’re not responsible for the ‘lovely’ carriage interiors but you would think they’d make sure the exteriors were fine and mechanically sound.

Then again this is just a rumour isn’t it.

 

I think I have now realised why Network Rail have not remedied the persistent issues with flooding in various parts of the network. I contend that they are covert water troughs designed to support the Strategic Reserve.

 
Sounds like a great idea to me.  Perhaps it will allow GWR to operate that service to Fantasy Island at long last so we can come visit you.

 
Hopefully not every unit will need immediate withdrawal, some might be be allowed to run for months yet.
Some spare stock s available, the ex-TPE stock has already been suggested, and there are still some surviving HSTs stored. mainline passed stock from heritage lines is another possibility. Not adequate but a lot better than nothing.
Building loco hauled coaches  is well understood and relatively quick.
The special bi-mode locomotives/power cars would take longer, but in the short term existing diesel locos would be better than nothing.

 

Where are the replacement 93 trainsets coming from?

(other than the Strategic Reserve in Box Tunnel, obviously)

 

And what exactly is wrong with calling for proper trains to replace IETs ? With the features listed above, and also fixed formation. No flexible train length as flexible means shorter.
Before the wretched things were even introduced it was clear that they represented a backward step in comfort and facilities They have now been in service for some years and poor build quality and unreliability are major problems.

 

I had a vague, yet somehow certain feeling that one would come along! 

 
Build some more HSTs !
Not of course an exact copy of a near 50 year old design, but something similar in design.
A BIMODE power car or locomotive at each end, no more underfloor bus gin palace engines.
Total train length similar to a 5+5 car IET.
Buffet car, padded seats, tables, luggage space etc.

 
There’s loads of rumours surrounding IETs!

Most, if not all, concern their withdrawal.  We can only hope one, just one, turns out to be true.   

 
No it didn't thankfully

 

.............rumour didn't come from a certain Port quaffing member of this esteemed forum by any chance? 

 
Hi all,

I heard a rumour recently that suggested GWR are planning to withdraw IET sets permanently due to rusting/corroding bolts. Does anybody have more information on this? Or is it untrue

 

 
Suggest merging this thread with the main "problems with IETs" thread.

 

In the early days of the project, many promises were made about the quality and reliability of these new ..............roads/hospitals/libraries/sports centres/airports/aircraft carriers/armoured cars/mail deliveries/bank availabilities/flood prevention schemes/electric cars/supermarket cashiers/Boeing 737s/etc/etc................

 

I thought that the price was relatively high, one criticism of the project was the substantial cost of the trains. IET=Incredibly Expensive Trains ! According to some critics.

In the early days of the project, many promises were made about the quality and reliability of these new trains.

 

We need something more robust, successful and enduring - like the APT perhaps?

 
Sadly as with so many things these day, IET built to a price ,not to a standard.

 

But only if not allowed to run in the worst conditions, an IET confined to the depot should survive Dawlish just fine.

 
Whatever happens it’s down to Hitachi to sort out as part of the maintenance contract. 

Just like they are quietly doing with the cracks issue that people were getting excited about.

 
And that is just the parts you can see!!

 

Ah, but don't forget, both Hitachi and GWR have assured us that their IETs are 'Dawlish proof' 

 
It will be that salt ridden sea air on the Northumberland coast..... 

 
Aluminium is very vulnerable to corrosion especially if in contact with steel.
Did someone use steel fixings at the factory?, or subsequently during maintenance, either is a rather basic error.

Even different grades of aluminium alloy are liable to corrosion if used in contact with each other.

Electrical leakage currents through aluminium  structures can also accelerate corrosion. DC is worst.

 
There's a Twitter thread running on the subject of visible corrosion involving LNER's IEPs, which put me in mind of a photo from December (hopefully visible below) showing either a failure in the surface coating or corrosion around a GWR IEP window. It's reasonable to wonder if these trains are going to have 'A problem'.

Regarding the LNER twitter thread, someone's remarked that water ingress at the windows is causing issues as it's able to travel to where it can cause galvanic corrosion. LNER's trains run in a somewhat salt-rich environment, and GWR's even more so, and this cannot help either.

Mark

 
Industry expert Gareth Dennis has posted on X some quite alarming photos of corrosion on LNER Azumas:

https://twitter.com/GarethDennis/status/1753413827067097297

 

Thanks for that.  Might explain the confusion.

 

Two full sized crew, or three small ones.
Catering crew, mainly, possibly hitachi fitters
Two hours at a time, without being let out for exercise.
Strike bruvvers !

 

How many crew can you get in a crew storage area ? what type of crew are stored there? how long can they be stored for? and has this been agreed with the Unions?

 
According to this, Unite accepted the pay offer:-

https://www.cityam.com/400-rmt-workers-at-hitachi-to-strike-on-saturday-until-1-february/

A Hitachi Rail spokesperson said: “We are disappointed at RMT’s decision to carry out industrial action.

“We believe the combination of last year’s pay increase, and this year’s pay proposal, is fair and highly competitive in the current economic environment. As demonstrated by Unite members accepting the same offer this week and ending their planned industrial action.

 

Not according to the official press release from UNITE:

https://www.unitetheunion.org/news-events/news/2024/january/national-strike-by-hitachi-rail-workers-over-pay

 

There are 17 class 153 in store. One wonders if too early - I know the need for disabled loos these days but really wonder if 2 x 158 trains could run as 1 x 158 + 2 x 153.  Of course, whilst one wonders, one expects there's a very good reason why castles and 153s (and the 6 stored 156s) could be be used.

 
yes, indeed.

 

Also covering the shortage of other DMUs. Last Wednesday one of the Bristol-Worcester workings was being covered by a 5 car IET.

 

That dispute is only in Hitachi LNER depots, not GWR.

The short forms are all down to the withdrawal of the Castle sets & IETs being transferred westwards to cover.

 
Or that it even ran at all. Next Sunday it won’t be.

 
Journey check has now been updated to include the 1635:

I can assure the person writing this that the train was full and standing when it left Paddington.

 

Could well be linked to the Hitachi maintenance staff industrial action which started yesterday and runs until Friday.

 

I expect you will be told to be grateful they managed to find 5!

 
Stickers have finally started appearing on the trolley/urn store in the middle of the IETs.  Passengers have been confusing them for toilets since they were introduced!

 
Another poor customer experience for those aboard the 1635 Paddington to Plymouth 5 vice 10 and absolutely rammed according to my wife who’s on the train. First declassified. Not listed on JC as being short formed.

 

Yes

 
Answering my own question.  Looking at Realtime Trains it was 166 207 as far as Exeter St Davids and then 150 248 forward from there.   Thinking about it, are turbos cleared on the main line past Newton Abbot?

 
Was it even three coaches or was it swapped for two on the way?  I am told it was 150 248 that arrived at Plymouth.

 

Of course. One can only hope that said travellers were suitably grateful.

 
And Turbos routinely cover much longer trips such as Cardiff<>Portsmouth of course.

 
Not ideal no. But fair play to GWR for able to provide something for travellers from Westbury onwards.

Being a Turbo, there will of course be first class accommodation; just declassified.

 
Westbury to Plymouth in a Turbo??? Ouch.


17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth due 21:25
17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth due 21:25 will be reinstated.

It will be started from Westbury.
It will no longer call at London Paddington, Reading, Newbury and Pewsey.

This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 3 coaches instead of 9.

 First class not available. Catering is not available. There are no reservations on this service. Toilet facilities are reduced. Disabled toilet facilities are reduced.

 
Apologies, yes. Or no. It wasn't here, but on someone's vlog - Mark , and two other gents talking about trains.

 

I'm not sure if it was at our "Meet the Manager" but I have heard that said.  But then more are needed now that the HSTs have been reduced to just three daily diagrams.

 
Didn't the MD of GWR advise the forum "Meet the Manager" that they were in the process of arranging with Hitachi better availability of IET's!

 
The 1635 Paddington to Plymouth was only five vice ten, only went as far as Exeter, was absolutely rammed leaving Paddington and was not listed on Journeycheck as being shorformed. I know II has mentioned before you can’t rely on JC to give the complete picture.

I had elderly relatives on this train. Fortunately they just managed to get a seat, though not together and certainly not the ones that I had been booked for them.

The reason given was the usual ‘more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.’

 

I am told by a couple of passengers that the 10:20 was in fact formed of a 5 car IET.   Looks like there was a set swap at Penzance with an incoming service from Bristol Temple Meads.   The 5 car ran all the way to London with no change of train or attachment at Plymouth.   

As reported on other occasions this wasn't updated on Journeycheck.

 
Of course, residents in Melksham would be delighted to have a regular 2 car train daily with a half hour service!
So Cornwall shouldn't complain.

 
Lower availability today in Cornwall
05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:55
Facilities on the 05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:55.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10. There are no reservations on this service. (No added coaches at Plymouth).
Also
07:12 Plymouth to Penzance due 09:19
07:12 Plymouth to Penzance due 09:19 will be reinstated.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 2 coaches instead of 9. First class not available. There are no reservations on this service.
This turns into
10:20 Penzance to London Paddington due 15:27
Facilities on the 10:20 Penzance to London Paddington due 15:27.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 2 coaches instead of 9 to Plymouth. First class not available to Plymouth. There are no reservations on this service to Plymouth.

 

No, that’s the IET that failed at Teignmouth Tuesday evening on 1C92