|
Pages: [1]
|
 |
|
 Author
|
Topic: Letters To The Times (16/01/2007) (Read 2755 times)
|
|
Lee
|
These include one from Alison Forster (link below.) http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2007/01/only_the_government_can_overha.html#moreQuotes : "Sir, FGW has 130 carriages on its fleet of West country regional trains and this is three fewer than we inherited from the previous franchisee, Wessex Trains." "We are due to return carriages to the train-leasing companies but we will not do so until local performance and seating capacity issues have been resolved. To run the new timetable, we need 108 carriages but we will have a fleet of 112." |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Sion Bretton
|
Come Alison come over to Bristol Temple Meads were you once work and see the trains for yourself between 5pm & 7pm
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Graham Ellis
|
So First are hoping for an availability of between 96% and 97% from the units. Is this practical? I've seen 84% quoted elsewhere, haven't I, and I think 90%? 4 spare carriages beween Great Malvern and St Ives, Brighton and Rhoose seems optimistic.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Lee
|
So First are hoping for an availability of between 96% and 97% from the units. Is this practical? I've seen 84% quoted elsewhere, haven't I, and I think 90%? 4 spare carriages beween Great Malvern and St Ives, Brighton and Rhoose seems optimistic. 84% was the Jacobs figure (page 17 of the link below.) http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_foi/documents/page/dft_foi_612538.pdf96 - 97% practical? I wouldnt have thought so. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Graz
|
^ Exactly. I feel it's more about cost-cutting and scraping together every penny possible that seems more important than ensuring good reliability and scope for improvements.
In my opinion, the more trains FGW get rid of, the more likely it is that we'll see severe overcrowding, cancellations and 'revisions' when they run out of units = more complaints, and the less likely we'll see any form of decent timetable improvements.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Steve35
|
96.4% is clearly not practical. I think she just didn't explain herself very well. Assuming 84% availability (for argument's sake) I think she meant to say:
"To run the new timetable, we need 91 carriages in traffic. Assuming 84% availability this means we need a fleet of 108 carriages, but we will in fact have a fleet of 112."
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Lee
|
I have e-mailed her for clarification.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
|
 |
