That doesn’t make sense to me unless the issue is related to ownership or age (with the 800 being older than the 802) rather than a mechanical fault.

I say this because, all else being equal, an engine that produces more power usually experiences greater stress and heat, which increases the likelihood of failure compared to a lower-powered unit of the same type.
If the engines in the 800 are being downrated (is this true or are they already down-rated?), that suggests the problem is linked to the extra heat and stress. So, wouldn’t it make more sense to assign the lower-powered units to the longer journeys instead of the higher-powered ones as they presumably have a lower chance of failure? I appreciate that would impact on the timings but better to take longer than not arrive at all.

 

Yep ... how to increase frequency when trains can't pass each other.   Also (I think) allows a longer peak train on the Marlow to Bourne End section than can get round to Marlow.

 
Asking questions that perhaps I should not:

* Is there some logic in having a more "cyclic" timetable which allows trains to be longer in summer and shorter in winter, allowing for more units to be under heavier maintenance when traffic levels are lower?  I appreciate that there are Newquay and Pembroke Dock difference already - though are those more vestiges of history?

* A modest thinning out of tourist services during the winter would allow for staff training to catch up and (ducks!) for staff to take their holidays away from the peak  .

* An adding of a few minutes here and there into schedules to avoid working trains to the extreme, though noting that the cycle length increase would tend to add the need for another train in the cycle, or reduce the frequency considering how short most turn rounds are already

* Saving trains / stock and improving reliability and even some frequencies by having long distance trains pick up some intermediate calls.  I could horrify Devon friends by suggesting that the Exeter - Paignton stopper every 30 minutes could, once every 2 hours, be the through train from London Paddington, for example.

I expect howls of "yes, but" ... but questions asked so "why not" can be explained.

 
We could serve tea as well as coffee ...

On this day, 16th December 1773, the "Boston Tea Party" was held - from Britannica

Only tangentially related to transport, but our "On this day" otherwise suggested "no events reported" ...

I was thinking, for 2026 ... oh, never mind ... we still have a couple of weeks to plan and get ideas together.  And our coffee shop seems much more civilised that their tea party if reports from the time are to be believed.

 
3.  The Maidenhead-Marlow branch, which at peak times is operated as two linked hops.

 

Spot on ... and please feel free to fill in more answers.  Good to know I have a fellow timetable aficionado

 
Perhaps timetables are my thing too 

1. Looks to me like the North Cotswolds line out of Paddington, showing the direct trains to Oxford with calls at Slough (none shown), Reading, Didcot Parkway (again none shown), plus the 1704 ‘Halts Turbo’ from Didcot Parkway, as far as Kingham.

 
Travelled past Sydney Gardens last Saturday on a diverted London-bound IET. If the good burghers of Bath really cared about the local environment as much as they claim how come they haven't forced their council to immediately remove the graffiti that I observed?

 
This would make sense - I'm right in thinking that the 802s are GWRs own trains that they specced at the higher power rating for the GUs?, while the 800s are those that Hitachi own & specced to the DfT requirement & are lower rated?

So putting the 800s under less long-distance working off the wires? Ties in with the amended timetable starting on January 5th....

 
175001 is due out at 1340 Plymouth-Penzance-Plymouth same as Monday

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:P22971/2025-12-16/detailed#allox_id=0

175003 is out now on a training run to Penzance and back.

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:V63761/2025-12-16/detailed#allox_id=1

 
10:14 Plymouth to Penzance due 12:12
10:14 Plymouth to Penzance due 12:12 will be cancelled.
This is due to a broken down train.

13:14 Penzance to Plymouth due 15:10
13:14 Penzance to Plymouth due 15:10 will be cancelled.
This is due to a broken down train.

Looking good so far! 

 
And for 16th, I'm going to let this quiz continue with clues.   I should have remembered that timetables are very much my thing and they have proven very hard in the past.

Some extra clues ...

* One of the tables doesn't show a train at all, even though it's in the NR timetable, and one shows a train where the local recommendation might well be to use a bus.

* Two of the timetables show lines that are operating beyond natural capacity and where extreme otherwise-unconventional means are taken to increase the train frequency

* Three of the timetables show "parliamentary" services that only run once a day

 
This was posted by Plymouth based train driver ‘irish_mail’ on RailUK Forums:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/iet-availability.293921/


On another thread it was raised about an unreliable source vs a reliable source. I do tend to find irish_rail’s posts fairly well informed, but take this as you find it. As ever, time will tell.

 

Yes, Chris (fN) - that was the number I had in mind.

I have used it - once - from Melksham and found in very effective in getting the trains stopped / line closed in an emergency. Once in my life I did also dial 999 - not public transport related but where one of my neighbours's two boys had stuck a knife into the head of the other and it was still sticking out.  Their mum was freaking.  An extra loop while I explained to the emergency operator it was medical, accidental, we needed an ambulance and, no, not the police to lead on a knifing.

The past three weeks of reaching out to the public with new timetables has been a fascinating opportunity to look and listen at NaPTANs (National Public Transport Access Nodes) and at shops and events and venues.   We have a system which is a very complex one, and in my view much of it is set up by people who may have some understanding of the issues, but are not in the mind and informational starting point space of the people using or potentially using the services.     I'm only seeing that starting point second hand too - but at least I feel I am seeing it and can make some suggestions and valid comment, and some suggestions might even be able to go somewhere next year.   The world of electronic connectivity and AI adds layers and changes bias, and there is a need to avoid dumbing down to the extent of loosing data access for the knowledgable / repeat customer who makes good use of it.

 
The ‘unreliable source’ is rail journalist Jonathan Webb freelance editor of ‘Today’s Railways UK’.

I would tend to lean towards Jonathan being a more reliable than unreliable source.

 

Not necessarily, ChrisB.

Many of the railway station platform help point machine's 'Emergency' buttons simply go into the local 999 system. However, even the Office of Rail and Road themselves acknowledge that that can be rather flaky.

I would prefer to follow the guidance from Network Rail themselves.


CfN.

 
Protecting the heritage of Bath is not, by any stretch of the imagination, NIMBYism. Thankfully, through dialogue and compromise a good solution was reached. That it wasn't implement was not the fault of those who quite rightly seek to protect Bath's unique beauty.

 
Many thanks for all the helpful comments. It seems you have to be "creative" and careful about what you ask for ! I did try "via" to get the route I was after, but sometimes the result was telling me to get off at a "via" station and get the next train on from there - even though the train I had just got off went to the same place. Most odd !
Eventually I learned to get what I was after. Two changes on the outward leg and only one on the return leg. Still a long ride for him though ! Must tell his mum to give him plenty of sarnies for the trip. £64.75 for an OPR, not too bad !

 

Another forum is describing this as an unreliable source. Does anybody have any good information?

 
And today, it's not the IET engines that are the main source of problems.

There seems to have been a major signalling meltdown.

Final scores:

1P22 1059 Great Malvern to London Paddington : delayed after West Drayton, arrived +34.
1P24 1158 Great Malvern to London Paddington : arrived +23.
1P28 1318 Hereford to London Paddington : cancelled throughout.
1P34 1632 Great Malvern to London Paddington () : started from Worcester Foregate Street, held Norton (17:51 : +54) and Evesham (+73), benefits from a 16-minute stand at Moreton, arrived Reading +56, cancelled thereafter.
1P38 1802 Worcester Foregate Street to London Paddington : cancelled throughout.
2E16 18:51 Evesham to Oxford : started from Moreton-in-Marsh.
1P36 17:26 Worcester Foregate Street to London Paddington (19:53) : held Shrub Hill (17:53 : +22) and Norton (+70), arrived +60.
1P40 19:02 Great Malvern to London Paddington (21:28) : started from Worcester Shrub Hill, operated via Stroud.
1P42 19:45 Great Malvern to London Paddington () : started from Worcester Shrub Hill.
1P46 22:00 Hereford to London Paddington () : departed +22, held Charlbury (+28), arrived +17.

1W01 09:52 London Paddington to Hereford : cancelled throughout.
1W27 13:50 London Paddington to Great Malvern (16:15) : 10-car train, departed +19, arrived Shrub Hill +27, Foregate St +39, cancelled thereafter
1W30 15:23 London Paddington to Foregate St (17:47) : cancelled throughout.
2E14 17:05 Didcot Parkway to Evesham : Charlbury 17:49 (+1), arrived Ascott +55, arrived Moreton-in-Marsh +56 and cancelled thereafter.
1W31 15:52 London Paddington to Great Malvern (18:26) : departed Kingham +8, arrived Moreton +10 (17:28), departed +79 (seventy-nine), benefits from a 143-minute stand at Evesham, arrived Worcester Shrub Hill +76 and cancelled thereafter.
1W33 16:58 London Paddington to Great Malvern (19:25) : departed Charlbury +11, arrived Kingham +47, arrived Worcester Shrub Hill +58 and cancelled thereafter.
1W34 17:57 London Paddington to Worcester Foregate Street (20:11) : operated via Stroud.
1W03 17:34 London Paddington to Hereford : held outside Oxford, arrived Oxford +33, departed +47, held Evesham (+70) and Ledbury (+97 - ninety-seven), arrived +97 (22:02).
1W36 18:57 London Paddington to Great Malvern : departed +16, held Evesham (+45), arrived +53.

The 17:34 to Hereford, currently 97 late departing Ledbury is being reported on Journeycheck as

EDIT (Tue 10:15) : 'Latest scores' edited to be 'final scores'.

 
For anyone who wants to follow the whole debate it is in Hansard for last Tuesday (9th December)

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-12-09/debates/7039D109-38B4-4AF5-A073-F7DABDF1D30D/NetworkRailTimetableChangesRuralCommunities

 
Moray Council have issued a statement.

Mark

https://newsroom.moray.gov.uk/news/garmouthspey-viaduct-update-15-december-2025

 

That would be 999 then.


Or just a couple of key presses on your smartphone app (which I know you have)

 
Chime Whistle Publishing tweeted earlier and here and here


I can not find any further detail yet, but GWR will have to load them fairly soon. Eyes peeled, folks.

 
The £64.75 fare is from "Liverpool Stations".

In spite of this, the National Rail Journey Planner cannot seem to cope with the return destination in Liverpool being different from the Origin (e.g. Lime Street vs. Central). It merely says:


Note: the £64.75 Saver fare carries the 8A restriction - meaning that it is not restricted by time of use, on any day of the week. However, break of journey is not allowed (until recently was allowed on return journey, but no longer?...)

 

More friendly individual tables can be found indeed via
https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/travel-information/timetables/national-rail-timetables/

P.S.  East Coast main line now Table 20.