Why are new trains so awful

[brianusa]

 

 

<<<<<< Given the only way we can accommodate the growing numbers of people using the trains is to increasingly fit more people into a carriage>>>>>>

 

Airlines have taken the same approach for ages - cram more people into ever diminishing seat and leg room, charge more for any 'service' while increasing fares.  This situation will continue to get worse as long as there is a need to travel and as long as there is no governmental intervention, it won't get any better!

 

Brian.

[wombatofludham]

<<<<<< Given the only way we can accommodate the growing numbers of people using the trains is to increasingly fit more people into a carriage>>>>>>

 

Airlines have taken the same approach for ages - cram more people into ever diminishing seat and leg room, charge more for any 'service' while increasing fares.  This situation will continue to get worse as long as there is a need to travel and as long as there is no governmental intervention, it won't get any better!

 

Brian.

I think that's the whole point, Brian, and something a lot of people miss. Whether we like it or not, the railways are entirely a political animal, and providing more, comfortable seating comes down to political will to do something about it. Unfortunately for rail users, no-one yet has ever voted for a Member of Parliament on the basis of their party's stance on the railways. If people vote, it will always be on the NHS, the Economy, or whatever their chosen news outlet or paper makes up about the leaders of the parties, and so as long as more people want to use trains and new trains cost money, it will always be a case of more seats (or fewer and more standing space as is coming soon to the good burghers of Sutton Coldfield on their Cross City services, I guarantee once the new Lizzie Line Aventra clones start running then no-one getting on after Blake St will have a seat) as that is cheaper.

 

For me personally I think the Mk2a-c coaches were the epitome of rail travel. The Mk1 seats were uncomfortable whereas the "ergonomic" Mk2a-d seats were spot on. Right seat angle, no centre armrest, good headrest that would more than meet current whiplash regulations, and of course large picture windows although unfortunately not very good in a roll-over accident as the wide opening, once smashed, could decant occupants out to be dragged along under the coach, however, that is such a rare occurrence it shouldn't be an excuse for prison cell windows. Later Mk2s and the Mk3 are over-rated in my view although the Mk3 scores highly for quietness. I always think it was a shame that BR didn't invest in a new build of UK "80" class DEMUs similar to the NIR units but laid out with Mk2 seating for cross country duties, they could have revolutionised routes such as Birmingham to Norwich, Trans-Pennine and Cardiff to Brighton offering a good quality ambience with rugged, relatively simple technology, allowing the diesel mechanical fleet to be thinned out so that only the very best would have been refurbished. Had they entered service in the late 1970s, who knows, the ridership boost the later "Sprinter" fleet generated could have happened sooner and led to a virtuous spiral of investment.

[jjb1970]

Some of this should be self correcting. If commuting gets so awful and expensive that it is either totally unbearable or unaffordable then people will either find new work, move closer to work or exploit opportunities to work at home. Or look at alternative travel modes. Either way, building more tracks is probably a non starter in the UK (at least on a large scale), platforms can't be extended much and we have issues with double deck trains so the operators are left with squeezing a quart into a pint pot.

[APOLLO]

Agree jib. Travelling by train, plane, car etc is getting to be a PITA these days. 

 

I loved travelling by all the above years ago, many times just for the travel experience. Not so today, I travel now only when I need to. Easier to stay at home, in comfort, and watch old travel you tube vids !!!!!

 

Chat on the York museum thread of 650mph travel in a pod in a tube - stuff that I'll walk !!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

[Mark Saunders]

Agree jib. Travelling by train, plane, car etc is getting to be a PITA these days. 

 

I loved travelling by all the above years ago, many times just for the travel experience. Not so today, I travel now only when I need to. Easier to stay at home, in comfort, and watch old travel you tube vids !!!!!

 

Chat on the York museum thread of 650mph travel in a pod in a tube - stuff that I'll walk !!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

 

It all started to go downhill with the introduction of Mkii coaches and has kept on ever since!

 

Mark Saunders

[APOLLO]

Not trains but - 

 

A few years ago family & I flew to Thailand with Lufthansa. Outbound Manchester to Bangkok via Frankfurt Boeing 737 and 747. Seats etc good. No complaints

 

Return was a different story. Bangkok to Munich, VERY uncomfortable, an Airbus A340, terrible close seat pitch, thin and uncomfortable seats. Even the Germans on board were complaining, The plane was brand new. Munich to Manchester was a small Airbus, leather seats at a very good pitch. I remember telling the Mrs "I could fly round the world in this aircraft - it's great"

 

I'm sure these plane / train / bus etc company's "try it on" with the punters, and if they get away with it try it on again.

 

I fly Emirates A380 now via Dubai. Not superb - but comfortable, and certainly value for money. At least flying to Thailand I have a choice of several airlines. Not much choice travelling by train in the UK. They have you by the short and curlies (especially commuters).

 

Brit15

Edited April 28, 2018 by APOLLO

[rockershovel]

Not trains but - 

 

A few years ago family & I flew to Thailand with Lufthansa. Outbound Manchester to Bangkok via Frankfurt Boeing 737 and 747. Seats etc good. No complaints

 

Return was a different story. Bangkok to Munich, VERY uncomfortable, an Airbus A340, terrible close seat pitch, thin and uncomfortable seats. Even the Germans on board were complaining, The plane was brand new. Munich to Manchester was a small Airbus, leather seats at a very good pitch. I remember telling the Mrs "I could fly round the world in this aircraft - it's great"

 

I'm sure these plane / train / bus etc company's "try it on" with the punters, and if they get away with it try it on again.

 

I fly Emirates A380 now via Dubai. Not superb - but comfortable, and certainly value for money. At least flying to Thailand I have a choice of several airlines. Not much choice travelling by train in the UK. They have you by the short and curlies (especially commuters).

 

Brit15

The now-discontinued BA route LHR-Baku was a case in point - a long-distance flight using old planes from discontinued medium-distance routes, just about ok for three hours but completely inadequate for five hours. Penny pinching on catering meant that meal options were often limited or non-existent on the Baku-LHR leg, penny pinching on stands meant a LONG walk from one terminal to another at LHR, late at night after a long flight, plus a real possibility of slow baggage handling, or even no baggage handling at all - because the carousel staff at THAT terminal had longbsince cleared THEIR last flight. Penny pinching over slots meant no onward connections THAT night.

 

BA didn’t care, they knew that flight was a commuter flight for oil workers who in most cases, didn’t buy their own tickets.

[D826]

Totally agree with Mark above in post 102. Best coach ever was a Mk 2 - memorable journey from Cheltenham Spa to Exeter St David’s circa 89 behind a 47 on a scratch set when services were disrupted by flooding. Opened the ventilator window and enjoyed the run batting through the Somerset levels, roaring through cogload, growling up to Whiteball then racing the traffic on the M5 through Tivvy.

 

I love travelling by train but even my appetite was sorely tested by a recent journey on ECML to Newcastle. Service missed a connection on the way up with consequent overcrowding on the cross country service we caught at Donny (with patently insufficient capacity). Return ride ‘a joyous’one with a reserved seat next to a window pillar Newcastle to Stevenage - and a stream of poor souls drifting through the coach after every stop in a fruitless search for a seat. . (And seat needed reserving about 3 weeks in advance to get a reasonable price). The attitude is driven by getting as many bums on seats as possible - not by passenger experience. Used to be much better under GNER and the service and integration with other services was immeasurably superior under BR.

 

Just my opinion.

 

Matt Wood

[D826]

Ps - BR designed Driving Van Trailer has the best capacity for carrying push bikes - me and some mates go bike touring and the capacity of Voyagers and Pendolino’s to Carry bikes is laughable in the 21st Century. BR design considerations win again!

 

Matt Wood

[caradoc]

Overcrowding on trains is a real issue these days; In March I travelled on a Sunday from Oxford to Birmingham on a 4-car Voyager which was totally inadequate for the passenger loading, with people standing inside the coaches and in the door and gangway areas. Whether the train was booked a single set or was short-formed (it was a bad weather day) I don't know, but for many passengers that was a most unpleasant journey.

 

However, on a more general point, if more seats (and therefore more coaches/trains/maintenance staff/depots/track/platforms) are to be provided, not for extra traffic but to better accomodate existing loadings, how is this to be paid for - Either higher fares (which might eliminate the overcrowding anyway !) or greater Government, ie taxpayer (many of whom never use trains) subsidy ?

[jjb1970]

Ps - BR designed Driving Van Trailer has the best capacity for carrying push bikes - me and some mates go bike touring and the capacity of Voyagers and Pendolino’s to Carry bikes is laughable in the 21st Century. BR design considerations win again!

 

Matt Wood

I am a cyclist but I can't see that it makes sense to lose half a coach of seating capacity to carry bikes when there is a shortage of seating capacity on many trains.

[Northmoor]

As a daily commuter on SWR for the last few years, I am glad I don't travel on Thameslink or Southern.  However I can pass on a few observations of commuters' own behavior by way of balance.  

 

Every commuter will tell you how they never get a seat.  On Inner Suburban I can believe that, but coming from 30-ish miles out, I probably don't get a seat less than one morning a month, but then I am prepared to sit next to people.  I know the middle of 3 seats on a 2+3 is a squeeze so normally leave that to other (smaller) passengers, but on a 2 seat I can easily fit (and I'm not as slim as I should be).  I see plenty of people decide to stand, presumably because they can't have two seats to themselves.

 

This is particularly noticeable in the mornings; in the evening peak much stranger behavior can be observed.  My usual train is fast to Surbiton, so about 50% get out at the first stop as it's quick and for this they are prepared to rush for this train rather than wait a few minutes for a slightly slower train which may give them a seat.  They squeeze themselves into coaches 5-10, rather than walk forward to the front 4 which get emptier as you get towards the front, I sometimes have a 4-bay to myself!  It applies at every station, there are regular commuters who always travel in the same crowded coaches so they can get through the station exits quickly. Fine, they've made their choice to stand, but can't blame the railway for the fact they aren't prepared to take their time.  Getting out at Brookwood  is the same, hardly anyone gets out of the front 4 because you have to walk back along the platform to the exit and everyone else will get away to the traffic lights ahead of you.  After getting out of the perhaps 25% full front 4-car, I walk past the middle 4-car and there are people standing and sitting in every vestibule, which I think lines up with the Farnborough exits.  So again, there is plenty of space on the train but people choose to stand.

 

On one occasion last year I was chatting to another regular at Brookwood when the morning train was 8 and not 12-car.  Again, he complained this was "always" happening.  I said I couldn't remember it happening in the previous 6 months (and I know we're normally on the same train) so he back-tracked and said it was more common in the evening.  I didn't reply that I couldn't remember that either.  

 

As for timekeeping, in the last three weeks, I think the latest I've been in the morning was 3 minutes. We did have one train failure one evening - 20 minutes to reboot the train, who accepted that design?! - but again we are usually within 2-3 minutes of time.  Things got a bit poor after the SWT-SWR transition but have improved a lot lately.

 

So what I can conclude from this, is that commuters just like to moan.  They say there is no smoke without fire, but from my experience, there is a great deal.

[Allegheny1600]

All this crowding, it seems to get worse and worse.

I remember when the Derby to Nottingham (c. 16 miles!) service used one or two class 120 diesel units or from three to six vehicles. When these were withdrawn in favour of the new 150's, they were rarely in my experience doubled up and the trains became so overcrowded, no doubt folk flooded onto the A52 and helped make that even worse.

Back in the mid eighties, the railway seemed to want to drive people away but now they appear to want passengers* again - I have a suggestion;

 

How about some additional coaches or vehicles to strengthen the trains?

 

A very simple solution that will no doubt generate howls of derision or laughter - it'll cost too much being the main objection. Really? If trains are as overcrowded as they appear, surely new vehicles will soon pay for themselves? Or am I being incredibly naive?

John.

 

* I refuse to call them "customers" - that is what freight trains cater for.

[scouser]

Some of this should be self correcting. If commuting gets so awful and expensive that it is either totally unbearable or unaffordable then people will either find new work, move closer to work or exploit opportunities to work at home. Or look at alternative travel modes. Either way, building more tracks is probably a non starter in the UK (at least on a large scale), platforms can't be extended much and we have issues with double deck trains so the operators are left with squeezing a quart into a pint pot.

I really wish I could agree, but population density and wage differences mean people will put up with crappy conditions on trains.

Check out commuter trains in Japan.

[Robin2]

 Really? If trains are as overcrowded as they appear, surely new vehicles will soon pay for themselves? Or am I being incredibly naive?

 

For the new carriages to pay for themselves they would need to be occupied by new passengers while the existing carriages remain overcrowded with the existing passengers.

 

...R

[wombatofludham]

Replacing three car DMUs with two car units in the 1980s was a political decision forced on BR where the DoT said that BR could only replace the Provincial fleet on a two for three basis, it being the era when the Serpell report had been commissioned and the view was only the South East and Intercity were worth keeping.

 

For those who think modern trains are uncomfortable, I remember the Class 304 electric units and their Southern cousins. A fully laden Class 304 was impossible to get into or out of because every door was full of people whose knees were touching and whose feet were where you wanted to get off. I don't know how many feet I've trodden on over the years when I was a student at Perry Barr regularly commuting on the ghastly trains, or when they were bought into use on the Cross City when the 323s were failing to enter service, but it's a lot. Add into the mix the non-corridor nature of the stock meaning that if you wanted the loo you had a 1 in 2 or 3 chance of relief (depending on whether they had their original four cars or later three car formation), the appalling ride quality, and the seats which left you with back ache after twenty minutes and you are left with a train that was not the best advert for the new modern electrified railway. Their Southern cousins were just the same. In some units you had the added thrill of taking your life into your own hands, especially if a woman travelling alone, of full width compartments with no through corridor, where all sorts of anti-social or even criminal activities could be carried out with impunity. Plus of course, the compartments were so narrow again your knees would be touching the person opposite, and if you don't believe that, look at some of the official photos taken of Bullied 4-SUB and 2-HAL units, or the official interior shots of BR built derivatives. Funny how they always used the skinniest people to sit three abreast on the three seater benches.

 

Given the choice between Mk1 slam-door emus or a modern Electrostar I know what I would choose and it wouldn't be the Mk1 stock.

 

Frankly it was no better in Mk1 mainline stock. In second or standard, four people in a seating bay on a long journey either had to sit with their knees touching, or if you were a group of friends, work out a way to stretch your legs between each other like some game of Jenga. The bouncy banquette seats induced backache after a few hours, their shape seemingly forcing you into a strange angle which would induce pressure on your thighs and small of the back. Part of the reason why I no longer go on long railtours in Mk1 stock is because my knees and back ache after eight hours of watching water vapour pass by the window, and it's simply not worth the pain.

 

The past isn't always a better place and older stock isn't the paragon of virtue people make it out to be, unless you always travelled Pullman.

[D826]

I am a cyclist but I can't see that it makes sense to lose half a coach of seating capacity to carry bikes when there is a shortage of seating capacity on many trains.

Not if you don’t want an integrated transport policy - that be witchcraft !

 

Still if there aren’t enough seats and luggage capacity for travellers then cycle carrying capacity will be way down the list.

 

Ok - maybe not on peak hour commuter trains but cross country and other long distance services should make provision absolutely. Coming back from Scotland a couple of years ago on the sleeper our bikes came down in a Ford Transit from Inverness which we met beside Euston Station. Struck me as nuts and still does.

 

Of course, time was a BG would be in most cross country formations.

 

TTFN

 

Matt Wood

[caradoc]

All this crowding, it seems to get worse and worse.

I remember when the Derby to Nottingham (c. 16 miles!) service used one or two class 120 diesel units or from three to six vehicles. When these were withdrawn in favour of the new 150's, they were rarely in my experience doubled up and the trains became so overcrowded, no doubt folk flooded onto the A52 and helped make that even worse.

Back in the mid eighties, the railway seemed to want to drive people away but now they appear to want passengers* again - I have a suggestion;

 

How about some additional coaches or vehicles to strengthen the trains?

 

A very simple solution that will no doubt generate howls of derision or laughter - it'll cost too much being the main objection. Really? If trains are as overcrowded as they appear, surely new vehicles will soon pay for themselves? Or am I being incredibly naive?

John.

 

* I refuse to call them "customers" - that is what freight trains cater for.

 

Extra coaches just to relieve overcrowding, while obviously desirable in a perfect world, cannot pay for themselves (as Robin2 says) because they increase costs without increasing revenue; Bear in mind that as well as the cost of the coaches themselves, many other expenses would be incurred: Additional maintenance facilities, maintenance staff, stabling facilities, cleaning staff, Drivers, and Guards (if applicable). And if the coaches are added to existing trains, can all necessary platforms accommodate them, or if more trains are run, can the timetable handle them ? Passing Clapham Junction or Grove Park, for example, during the day, the number of sets stabled between the peaks is quite astonishing, because of the huge difference in passenger numbers between peak and off-peak hours. 

 

A personal experience; One evening last week I travelled on the 1725 Glasgow Central-Neilston service, formed by a 3-car Class 318. On departing Central the train was absolutely crammed with many people standing. However by the time we departed Mount Florida (10 minutes from Central) enough passengers had alighted that everyone left on board had a seat. That remained the case for the remaining 20 minutes of the journey to Neilston, and (being contra-peak) for the 30 minute return journey to Glasgow. It would be nice if Scotrail could strengthen that train to 6-cars, however the additional set would only be required for one-sixth of that part of the diagram; Can that really be justified ?

[Mark Saunders]

All this crowding, it seems to get worse and worse.

I remember when the Derby to Nottingham (c. 16 miles!) service used one or two class 120 diesel units or from three to six vehicles. When these were withdrawn in favour of the new 150's, they were rarely in my experience doubled up and the trains became so overcrowded, no doubt folk flooded onto the A52 and helped make that even worse.

Back in the mid eighties, the railway seemed to want to drive people away but now they appear to want passengers* again - I have a suggestion;

 

How about some additional coaches or vehicles to strengthen the trains?

 

A very simple solution that will no doubt generate howls of derision or laughter - it'll cost too much being the main objection. Really? If trains are as overcrowded as they appear, surely new vehicles will soon pay for themselves? Or am I being incredibly naive?

John.

 

* I refuse to call them "customers" - that is what freight trains cater for.

All part of the then Tory policy of two new for three old!

[jjb1970]

Not if you don’t want an integrated transport policy - that be witchcraft !

 

Still if there aren’t enough seats and luggage capacity for travellers then cycle carrying capacity will be way down the list.

 

Ok - maybe not on peak hour commuter trains but cross country and other long distance services should make provision absolutely. Coming back from Scotland a couple of years ago on the sleeper our bikes came down in a Ford Transit from Inverness which we met beside Euston Station. Struck me as nuts and still does.

 

Of course, time was a BG would be in most cross country formations.

 

TTFN

 

Matt Wood

You can take folding bikes on trains and certainly on LNWR they allow non-folding bikes outside of peak hours. I have taken my bike on a Virgin Pendolino, at that time you had to reserve a slot for the bike but it was free. A bigger problem than the lack of bike space is the absence of any space for luggage on many trains.

[caradoc]

All part of the then Tory policy of two new for three old!

 

Getting dangerously close to politics, but 2 new for 3 old was at least better than none new ! And to quote the example of the Nottingham/Derby service mentioned above, when worked by Class 120 sets it was hourly for much of the day, today there are 3 trains per hour.

[royaloak]

<<<<<< Given the only way we can accommodate the growing numbers of people using the trains is to increasingly fit more people into a carriage>>>>>>

 

Airlines have taken the same approach for ages - cram more people into ever diminishing seat and leg room, charge more for any 'service' while increasing fares.  This situation will continue to get worse as long as there is a need to travel and as long as there is no governmental intervention, it won't get any better!

 

Brian.

Shirley you cannot be serious!!!!!!!!!!

 

About the only thing the government (through the DaFT) dont control is the colour of our uniforms, the type of trains the franchises are allowed, the number of trains the franchises are allowed, the number of services the franchises have to run, the times of the services the franchises have to run, the speed of the services the franchises have to run, the number and type of staff the franchises are allowed to employ (although they all seem to fall short on certain staff numbers) are all detailed in the franchise commitment which is drawn up by the DaFT, a government department!

[Robin2]

I don't think the balance between public and private transport will settle in a way that provides plentiful and comfortable public transport if it is left to market forces.

 

The only leverage that the over-crowded passenger can exert is not to buy a train ticket - but that just makes road-congestion, road accidents and environmental pollution worse.

 

I know that the idea of a "planned economy" is not generally attractive - but I don't see any other effective solution. And the planning has to be very wide-ranging so that it reduces the need to travel and the directions of required travel (i.e. where people live and work) as well as the means of traveling. Unfortunately I can't see any Government having the bottle to take that on.

 

Providing more trains for peak time travel into and out of London will only make the problems worse.

 

...R

[royaloak]

How crashworthy is an aisle rammed with standees deemed to be, I wonder?

 

The Nim.

Actually the answer is very, its much better to be crammed in than 'lose' as you cannot be thrown about as much because you are restrained by the people around you.

 

The railways spend millions on ensuring trains dont crash but the trains still have to be ridiculously strong and I say that as the person who will more than likely arrive at the crash first, the driver.

 

Given the choice of the cab layout of a 143 or a 450 to drive all day I would prefer the 143 because it is much more driver friendly with its big windows and spacious layout (I am only comparing the cab layouts not the rest of the train), but of course as there is a one in 25 trillion chance of it being involved in a crash neither is now compliant with the crash regs hence the ridiculous situation where sticking 25 tonnes of I beams in front of the driver is seen as more important than the driver actually being able to physically see out the front of the train (I give you the class 380 385), progress? More like cowmanure!

 

I am all for safety but not at any cost, is the 450 unsafe? No of course not but no more can be built because the regs changed, again!

Edited April 29, 2018 by royaloak

[royaloak]

Totally agree with Mark above in post 102. Best coach ever was a Mk 2 - memorable journey from Cheltenham Spa to Exeter St David’s circa 89 behind a 47 on a scratch set when services were disrupted by flooding. Opened the ventilator window and enjoyed the run batting through the Somerset levels, roaring through cogload, growling up to Whiteball then racing the traffic on the M5 through Tivvy.

 

I love travelling by train but even my appetite was sorely tested by a recent journey on ECML to Newcastle. Service missed a connection on the way up with consequent overcrowding on the cross country service we caught at Donny (with patently insufficient capacity). Return ride ‘a joyous’one with a reserved seat next to a window pillar Newcastle to Stevenage - and a stream of poor souls drifting through the coach after every stop in a fruitless search for a seat. . (And seat needed reserving about 3 weeks in advance to get a reasonable price). The attitude is driven by getting as many bums on seats as possible - not by passenger experience. Used to be much better under GNER and the service and integration with other services was immeasurably superior under BR.

 

Just my opinion.

 

Matt Wood

Why did that Cross Country train have insufficient capacity?

Who specifies them as 4 or 5 coaches instead of 5 or 6?

 

Answer the SRA who went on to become the DaFT!

 

Why are people still thinking the TOCs are allowed to order the trains they want in the numbers they want?

That hasnt been allowed since 1993 but people still dont get it.