W14_Fishbourne wrote:

No, the reliability figures are based on miles per casualty, a
casualty being defined as a fault which causes a delay of five or more
minutes. Air-con faults do not normally result in a train being
delayed. Faults with engines, doors, couplers, TPWS, etc do, and when
a train sits down on the line with one of those, there's no question
of under-reporting it.

In that case I definitely don't believe that they have got *that*
dramatically worse. You couldn't travel up and down the line (almost
exclusively on 165s) as much as I do and not notice at least some
cancellations or have some problems en route. The only thing that I have
noticed is the more regular use of the 121 on the branch during the day,
periodically, which is generally cover for when depot-based refurbishment
work or mods are being undertaken on 165s.