Stadler to supply new Merseyrail trains

[Marc d]

I'd like to think a 507 and a 508 will be kept for preservation. I'd love to see one restored back to the original br blue and grey and used for special occasions like they once did with the 502 back in the late 80s

[Steamport Southport]

I'd like to think a 507 and a 508 will be kept for preservation. I'd love to see one restored back to the original br blue and grey and used for special occasions like they once did with the 502 back in the late 80s

 

I agree. Unfortunately unless it was someone like the people who are restoring the 502 or the Electric Railway Museum then I can't really see anyone coming forward as it's not something that would be of much use on a heritage railway.

 

I must admit I hated them when they first appeared. But they've grown on me over the years. I'll be sad to see them go.

 

 

 

Jason

[antrobuscp]

There was far less gap from the 502s at their platform interface, Colin - and I believe their antecedents were even closer to the infrastructure with a full length step, or what looked very much like one.  Part of the PEPs' problem is their chamfered-off corner profile.

 

I thought so. I was brought up close to the Liverpool-Southport line in the 502 era. I know the older(and original) L & YR stock was also very large, very square, and very American in style. I must admit I was rather thinking of the underground section of the Southport-Hunt Cross route in my comment, as that had to be designed to cope with the 502s, albeit only for a relatively short period. The 503s, running under the river, were smaller.

 

I wondered, because of the design response(retractable steps) to the gap. whether is is, in fact, much worse than on other parts of the rail network because of the size of the earlier stock.

 

Colin

[royaloak]

I can understand the reason for the lack of toilets on these units - Unfortunately the decision will more than likely lie due to the risk of vandalism. I remember when TfL Took control of the London Overground operations and immediately locked the toilets on the 150s. It's also quite common to see vandalism on SWTs 450s and 444 Fleet when they end up on one of the more suburban duties emanating from Waterloo. Sadly a sign of the times I'm afraid. The better idea would be to make open up more toilets at staffed stations, where the staff can at least attempt to look after them.

Platform staff numbers are getting lower by the day and even ticket office staff are in decline, who is going to keep an eye on the toilets?

['CHARD]

 

I wondered, because of the design response(retractable steps) to the gap. whether is is, in fact, much worse than on other parts of the rail network because of the size of the earlier stock.

 

 

Having traversed about 65% of it earlier this year - albeit not alighting at every intermediate station! - the variance in stepping distances is discernible.  The main issue is track geometry through curved platforms.  I formed the impression that platform heights had very much been standardised to meet the accessibility regs, although some localised low spots still exist - such as here at Hightown for example.

 

[antrobuscp]

There is obviously an issue, at Walton I think, as there are low platform warnings given when the trains arrive there. No other "mind the gap" style warnings elsewhere that I am aware of, but I'm normally travelling close to the city on the Southport and Ormskirk services.

 

Colin

[Reorte]

Seating-wise I'm generally not keen on airline, the legroom is bad on most of them and they give a bus-like, cramped atmosphere. That said when on my own I'd probably rather have an airline seat to myself than share a bay, and since you can fit more airline pairs in than bay fours I suppose that works in their favour if the train is vaguely busy.

[Zomboid]

On a full train there's more legroom in airline seating. You don't have to play footsie with the person opposite, but can put your feet under their seat. On an empty train there's more space in bays, assuming you get one to yourself.

 

The nature of merseyrail as a metro system is such that I'm slightly surprised they're not getting tube-style longitudinal seating.

[Reorte]

On a full train there's more legroom in airline seating. You don't have to play footsie with the person opposite, but can put your feet under their seat. On an empty train there's more space in bays, assuming you get one to yourself.

 

Legs can go to either side of each other, but on the majority of airline seats my knees are pressed against the back of the seat in front. If there's no-one next to me I can move sideways, or knees to either side of the seat in front, but if there is then I have to put up with sitting fairly upright, which can get a bit of a chore on a long journey. Some trains are worse than others (not counting especially cramped commuter trains).

 

Another consideration now is to avoid a seat facing the electronic board that Northern are rapidly adding. I can only assume they've found the cheapest ones they can because they give a really annoying flicker (not as obvious when you're looking straight at them), not helped by constantly scrolling even when only displaying the final destination, which would fit without scrolling. I'm not against having them, just those particular ones.

[Talltim]

On a full train there's more legroom in airline seating. You don't have to play footsie with the person opposite, but can put your feet under their seat. On an empty train there's more space in bays, assuming you get one to yourself.

 

The nature of merseyrail as a metro system is such that I'm slightly surprised they're not getting tube-style longitudinal seating.

There is more legroom in a bay, if necessary you can put you feet between the person opposite's legs, but if your thigh bones are longer than the gap between seat backs in airline style seats they you have no choice but to sit sideways or scrunched up in a ball

Edit: should have read Reorte's reply

Edited December 19, 2016 by Talltim

[jjb1970]

I agree with Zomboid on this, if the opposite seat is occupied then you have more legroom in an airline style seat. You avoid that whole game with strangers of whose legs go where or the uncomfortable tightness of an invisible line down the centre. Personally I also prefer the greater sense of privacy I get.

[Zomboid]

I'm quite tall (though not ridiculously so, I normally claim 6-2) and often have to wedge my legs against the seat in front, but I personally prefer that to negotiating with someone opposite - once I'm in, that space is mine, and I can move a bit, but if I've got someone opposite I don't feel like I can move at all, which is quite uncomfortable after about 15 minutes. Which is why a mix of seating is preferable...

 

It also raises the question of why we specify massive tombstone seats which are high enough for someone 7 feet tall to avoid whiplash, but the legroom provided with them is laughably inadequate for someone just a bit above average height...

['CHARD]

It also raises the question of why we specify massive tombstone seats which are high enough for someone 7 feet tall to avoid whiplash, but the legroom provided with them is laughably inadequate for someone just a bit above average height...

 

The denser the airline pitch (i.e. closer together), the less time for free flight/ travel you have if/ when crashing in a facing direction.  So you impact the seat in front with less force.  This affects the way in which your face impacts the seat back, and the amount of bending moment that your spine has to absorb.

 

I don't have the maths to hand at this point, but I think the crash-test dummy summary is about right.

[jjb1970]

I find the airline seating pitch on the LM Cl.350/1 and 350/3 sets fine, the 350/2 sets feel tighter but I'm not sure whether that is reality or a psychological trick of the high density 3+2 layout.

[wombatofludham]

Well, in all my years of travelling the Birmingham Cross City in the 323s I always made for the face to back (airline) seats, despite getting on at Lichfield TV with the run of the train to choose from.  The only exceptions were when I was invited into the cab for a hooky cab ride.  Purely personal preference.  Similarly, unless I was travelling with friends, whenever I went in a Mk3 I would always make for the face to back seating even in the original 72 seat configuration.

 

When I used the Chase Line and the Centro Class 150s it was Hobson's choice as virtually all the seating in them was face to back, which I have to say in a 3+2 configuration wasn't ideal when busy, reminding me of the bad old days of lowbridge double-deck buses and the person by the window having to ask three others to move so they could get off.  You needed to plan your exit well in advance on those buses which were still chugging around our local routes when I was growing up!

[Steamport Southport]

On a full train there's more legroom in airline seating. You don't have to play footsie with the person opposite, but can put your feet under their seat. On an empty train there's more space in bays, assuming you get one to yourself.

 

The nature of merseyrail as a metro system is such that I'm slightly surprised they're not getting tube-style longitudinal seating.

 

Apart from the Loop Line and part of the Wirral line it's not really like a Metro system. Once you get out of the City Centre (and Birkenhead) then it's more like a cross country railway. You're just as likely to come across day-trippers as commuters.

 

Outside of peak times people like to sit down in comfort and you currently can quite easily. Even in peak times it's tolerable unless they use a single 3 car set. Longitudinal seating would be a nightmare and very unpopular.

 

 

 

Jason

[antrobuscp]

Added to what Jason mentions above, are the parcel laden shoppers returning from a trip to Liverpool City centre. The spacing of the airline style seating better not be too tight or the Liverpudlian humour will lead to the application of some derogatory epithet.

 

The airline style of seating will, without doubt, be a culture shock to Merseysiders who, so far as the electrified system is concerned, have always "enjoyed"(or not) face to face seating. Generally, being a chatty bunch, this has in my experience worked reasonably well.

 

There was a (very) little longitudinal seating in the 1938 502s, but its wide application would be disliked.

 

Assuming I live to see these units delivered, I will have seen 2 changes of stock in my lifetime(3 if you count the Ormskirk line compartment stock). I suspect that this will, as happened on the last changeover, be regarded as a detrimental one - largely because of the seating style and the pressure that will come from so many standing. I do, however, have an open mind and await the introduction with interest.

 

I do feel that DOO is undesirable, in particular, on the underground sections, and maybe a second crew member should be carried on those sections. It probably won't matter unless and until the occasion of "extraordinary incidents", but at that time the extra person could be a life saver.

 

Colin

[The Stationmaster]

I remember FGW/GWR carried out a study on various aspects of train useage, a couple of years ago.

On the HST's heading for London, which are basically commuter trains in the main, they noticed...

 

The first seats taken and filled up were those closest to the vestibules and doors (airline or otherwise).

Next most popular were the other seats in "airline layout"

Last was the bays with tables.

 

They noted that most passengers were travelling solo, or in pairs.

Groups of 3 or more tended to go for the bays first.

 

Admittedly, this was on a specific type of route, on an intercity type train. Passenger habits and patterns will vary across the network.

Metro services, such as Merseyrail, or for example inner-London commuter/local/metro etc, will no doubt see different passenger behaviour.

 

In my own experience, on local services, airline style seating seems to commonly chosen over bays, particularly for solo travellers and women in particular.

 

 

.

 

Odd thing is nowadays when you get on a GWR HST the seats that have been the first to go are the ones in bays with the airline ('bus) style layout seats coming a distinctly poor second.

[Zomboid]

Odd thing is nowadays when you get on a GWR HST the seats that have been the first to go are the ones in bays with the airline ('bus) style layout seats coming a distinctly poor second.

I now commute on GWR HSTs, and I find the opposite.

[Glorious NSE]

The weird think on GWR HSTs is due to the stupidly high seat backs, the airline seats all look empty till you get to them, then the whole coach turns out to be full, after you've wasted your time walking down it....

[corneliuslundie]

Perhaps people are also more chatty in Wales (epecially on the last train back from Shrewsbury!) but on the 158s the facing bays are always the first to fill up. And I have had some very amusing journeys as a result. I always go for the face to face seats anyway rather than have my knees jammed against the seat back in front of me.

My other recent experience is mainly on CrossCountry units where much the same applies, though perhaps not so much camaraderie. And the seat spacing in the airline style seats seems to be even closer. But it is better than standing for an hour (Birmingham to Derby) which has sometimes been the case on Saturday mornings when there is a big game on somewhere on the line. 

Jonathan

[Reorte]

The weird think on GWR HSTs is due to the stupidly high seat backs, the airline seats all look empty till you get to them, then the whole coach turns out to be full, after you've wasted your time walking down it....

Manchester Airport has lights on the drop-off area above the parking spots, so you can see at a glance where a free one is. Sounds like GWR need to borrow the idea!

[The Stationmaster]

I now commute on GWR HSTs, and I find the opposite.

 

Every HST I have got on in  recent months it has been the bays which have been taken first - but then I've not been using them in the 'London commuting direction' but for much longer distance trips (apart from Reading to Swindon last week which was only 40 miles). The other awkward thing is that if there are more than four of you in a group it is difficult communicating across the aisle to one's travelling companions as the 'airline' style seats don't properly align with the bays.  Logically of course if a couple of people are travelling together they will clearly wish to use the bays (unless they're not on speaking terms!) so bays of 4 seats often seem to be taken up by two people because the bays for two have been considerably reduced in number on each set.

[wombatofludham]

...so bays of 4 seats often seem to be taken up by two people because the bays for two have been considerably reduced in number on each set.

 

Bays for two?  Not in standard class...

[The Stationmaster]

Bays for two?  Not in standard class...

 

Well no, did I suggest it was?