Virgin pendolino trains - awful things

[tangerinedream]

Indeed. The Mark 4 is the best coach in mainline service anywhere on the railway today - it seats a lot of people in good comfort - and they are all more than twenty years old now. Everything in coaching stock terms that has happened since has been a let-down, with the possible exception of the class 378's (which are at least interesting to ride on).

And to deliberately commission something that wasn't compatible with the last set of designs just seems wrong headed, indulgent and wasteful.

 

[agricola]

I've had a brief look at google to see if I can find a comparison in train times between Glasgow and london in 1990s and now. I can't. Anyone know how much quicker the journey actually is? I know when you go to Glasgow from Lancaster you can get a transpennine express and it's not that much slower and that doesn't tilt or have streamlined pseudo bullet train styling.

Chester to London used to be 2 hrs 20 minutes on a HST, and its now a shade over 2 hours.

 

[agricola]

And to deliberately commission something that wasn't compatible with the last set of designs just seems wrong headed, indulgent and wasteful.

Of course, those three adjectives could easily be applied to rail privatization as a whole. Getting rid of BREL probably cost this country billions, both in terms of us having to buy inferior trains from abroad as well as the lost overseas orders.

 

[tangerinedream]

Chester to London used to be 2 hrs 20 minutes on a HST, and its now a shade over 2 hours.

That sounds about for the journeys I'm thinking of. Wigan to London drawn by a 90 or 87/6 being similar distance and maybe about 10/15 minutes quicker now. Which leaves you thinking, surely such saving in times could be achieved by gradual incremental upgrading of rolling stock and motive power, which would surely be more cost effective.

 

[agricola]

That sounds about for the journeys I'm thinking of. Wigan to London drawn by a 90 or 87/6 being similar distance and maybe about 10/15 minutes quicker now. Which leaves you thinking, surely such saving in times could be achieved by gradual incremental upgrading of rolling stock and motive power, which would surely be more cost effective.

TBH I think that if we had both the investment in the WCML that Virgin have benefitted from, and twenty more years of BR and associated development of rolling stock, journey times would be quicker than they are now and the travelling experience would be better. It would probably be considerably cheaper as well.

 

[Bungle73]

Indeed. The Mark 4 is the best coach in mainline service anywhere on the railway today - it seats a lot of people in good comfort - and they are all more than twenty years old now. Everything in coaching stock terms that has happened since has been a let-down, with the possible exception of the class 378s (which are at least interesting to ride on).

But 225s have a DVT which means they can run in both directions. And the interiors aren't 20 years old, they're (more or less) brand new.

The reason loco hauled trains were done away with is because they are such a hassle to operate. You need multiple locomotives just to run one train. Multiple units are much more flexible.

Most trains have space, of one sort or another, for bikes, and as for pushchairs why the hell can't people fold them up before getting on train like everyone would have done years ago, instead of blocking the aisle?

Trains prices go up because of government policy, and because the improvements need to be paid for.

 

[tangerinedream]

TBH I think that if we had both the investment in the WCML that Virgin have benefitted from, and twenty more years of BR and associated development of rolling stock, journey times would be quicker than they are now and the travelling experience would be better. It would probably be considerably cheaper as well.

Yep. It's an absolute fucking joke that no political party has anything to say worth listening to on an issue that has a direct effect on the lives of literally millions and millions on a daily basis and that to nationalise the railways and run it such a way as you advocate would be seen as 'a loony backward step' by the media and therefore no one in a position to do so would advocate it.

 

[Bungle73]

That sounds about for the journeys I'm thinking of. Wigan to London drawn by a 90 or 87/6 being similar distance and maybe about 10/15 minutes quicker now. Which leaves you thinking, surely such saving in times could be achieved by gradual incremental upgrading of rolling stock and motive power, which would surely be more cost effective.

TBH I think that if we had both the investment in the WCML that Virgin have benefitted from, and twenty more years of BR and associated development of rolling stock, journey times would be quicker than they are now and the travelling experience would be better. It would probably be considerably cheaper as well.

Um, no. The WCML wouldn't support higher speeds, not without tilting trains, which is why the APT was in development, and why we have tilting Pendolinos and Voyagers now.

 

[tangerinedream]

But 225s have a DVT which means they can run in both directions. And the interiors aren't 20 years old, they're (more or less) brand new.

The reason loco hauled trains were done away with is because they are such a hassle to operate. You need multiple locomotives just to run one train. Multiple units are much more flexible.

Most trains have space, of one sort or another, for bikes, and as for pushchairs why the hell can't people fold them up before getting on train like everyone would have done years ago, instead of blocking the aisle?

Trains prices go up because of government policy, and because the improvements need to be paid for.

Try folding the pushchair on a busy platform with a disobedient child or two in tow and you'll find out why. Do you know what the capacity of a vigin train is for bikes on the Glasgow to London route? (or at least was last time I tried to take my bike)

 

[agricola]

But 225s have a DVT which means they can run in both directions. And the interiors aren't 20 years old, they're (more or less) brand new.

The reason loco hauled trains were done away with is because they are such a hassle to operate. You need multiple locomotives just to run one train. Multiple units are much more flexible.

Most trains have space, of one sort or another, for bikes, and as for pushchairs why the hell can't people fold them up before getting on train like everyone would have done years ago, instead of blocking the aisle?

Trains prices go up because of government policy, and because the improvements need to be paid for.

Not really. Only in accountancy terms - time "wasted" whilst a train switches ends, "empty space" (such as the luggage area in DVTs) hauled around the country etc - did it make sense to get rid of loco-hauled trains. They were also considerably more flexible than fixed multiple units because you could add more coaches at times of peak demand, though admittedly this cost more than making people stand as Virgin have done in the past.

 

[tangerinedream]

Um, no. The WCML wouldn't support higher speeds, not without tilting trains, which is why the APT was in development, and why we have tilting Pendolinos and Voyagers now.

Ok, if that is the case, do you think the cost of investment is worth the comparatively minute savings in time? It's not like journey times have been halved is it? The cost has risen far beyond the impact, whether or not we quibble about improved straight line speed, greater power/acceleration and better braking capabilities making trains quicker on existing lines.

 

[tangerinedream]

Not really. Only in accountancy terms - time "wasted" whilst a train switches ends, "empty space" (such as the luggage area in DVTs) hauled around the country etc - did it make sense to get rid of loco-hauled trains. They were also considerably more flexible than fixed multiple units because you could add more coaches at times of peak demand, though admittedly this cost more than making people stand as Virgin have done in the past.

Exactly, the 'inefficiency' of loco hauled trains is only inefficient to the service provider, the end user gets a better deal as the travel experience is potentially far better.

 

[Bungle73]

Of course, those three adjectives could easily be applied to rail privatization as a whole. Getting rid of BREL probably cost this country billions, both in terms of us having to buy inferior trains from abroad as well as the lost overseas orders.

Some (most?) of the pendolinos were built in the UK. In fact pendolinos use technology from the APT.

Try folding the pushchair on a busy platform with a disobedient child or two in tow and you'll find out why. Do you know what the capacity of a vigin train is for bikes on the Glasgow to London route? (or at least was last time I tried to take my bike)

There is space for 4 bikes.

Why is it ok for someone to inconvenience other passengers because they can't control their offspring? In the old days it was standard practice for mothers to fold their pushchairs, nowadays NO ONE does and they feel they have the right to take up space on buses, trains, where ever. I've had to clamber of some woman's pushchair on a 395 because it was blocking the aisle. This is a safety concern too.

 

[agricola]

Um, no. The WCML wouldn't support higher speeds, not without tilting trains, which is why the APT was in development, and why we have tilting Pendolinos and Voyagers now.

... and why we would have had InterCity 250 in the late 1990s.

 

[Bungle73]

Ok, if that is the case, do you think the cost of investment is worth the comparatively minute savings in time? It's not like journey times have been halved is it? The cost has risen far beyond the impact, whether or not we quibble about improved straight line speed, greater power/acceleration and better braking capabilities making trains quicker on existing lines.

The trains were old and needed replacing, of that there is no doubt. Why not replace them with the current state-of-the-art. Why do it on the cheap? We had enough of that under BR.

Exactly, the 'inefficiency' of loco hauled trains is only inefficient to the service provider, the end user gets a better deal as the travel experience is potentially far better.

Loco hauled trains is a red herring. It makes absolutely no difference to the passenger. There is no reason why a multiple unit carriage cannot be as comfortable as a loco hauled one.

 

[agricola]

In fact pendolinos use technology from the APT.

Which is the point - BREL was many years ahead of its competitors when it was killed off. That it was killed off was a scandal, and we have been paying for it ever since.

 

[Bungle73]

Which is the point - BREL was many years ahead of its competitors when it was killed off. That it was killed off was a scandal, and we have been paying for it ever since.

The APT was axed long, long before BREL was made defunct. And for that you can blame the media, and the "guys in charge" at the time.

 

[agricola]

There is no reason why a multiple unit carriage cannot be as comfortable as a loco hauled one.

Not really - if you have excess passengers on a loco-hauled train you can just add another carriage; if its a fixed set then you either pack them all in or turf some of them off.

 

[tangerinedream]

Some (most?) of the pendolinos were built in the UK. In fact pendolinos use technology from the APT.

There is space for 4 bikes.

Why is it ok for someone to inconvenience other passengers because they can't control their offspring? In the old days it was standard practice for mothers to fold their pushchairs, nowadays NO ONE does and they feel they have the right to take up space on buses, trains, where ever. I've had to clamber of some woman's pushchair on a 395 because it was blocking the aisle. This is a safety concern too.

Have you ever met a child? My partner won't travel on the train when it's remotely busy (which is a problem for her as she doesn't drive) because of a combination of attitudes like you display and the appalling design of trains. :ast time she did so, she folded the pushchair and the boy fell down between the platform and the step and got wedged because she had the temerity to have a bag of shopping, and a WELL BEHAVED two year old who was doing his best to to step off a height to big for him and a folded pushchair in a crowded carraige exit - She's not to good with balance and stuff and was doing her best not to hit anyone with the pushchair. Still, better not to get on the train so you don't have to be inconvenienced. God forbid anyone has two kids or perhaps is going on holiday and so has kids plus luggage. (maybe people shouldn't go on holiday with luggage or on the train?)

You think space for 4 bikes is enough? We are supposed to be aiming for an integrated transport system. A train that travels 400 miles and stops at 15 stations can't cope with more than 4 people with a bike? Last train I tried to get with a bike (I think it was a voyager) I was told I couldn't get on and when I asked why, I was told because there were already 2 bikes on board. To me, the DVT concept is justified entirely by the luggage space. It might be economically inefficient but for every other reason, being able to take more bikes, free up aisles from large luggage, it's a better design than two power units or using the space for seating.

 

[agricola]

The APT was axed long, long before BREL was made defunct. And for that you can blame the media, and the "guys in charge" at the time.

True, but the lessons learnt from the APT were implemented in the Class 91 / Mark 4 development, and would have been implemented in the Class 93 / Mark 5. Instead we ended up with the Pendolino.

 

[Bungle73]

Not really - if you have excess passengers on a loco-hauled train you can just add another carriage; if its a fixed set then you either pack them all in or turf some of them off.

You don't just add another carriage just like that. They extended the Pendolinos didn't they?

Have you ever met a child? My partner won't travel on the train when it's remotely busy (which is a problem for her as she doesn't drive) because of a combination of attitudes like you display and the appalling design of trains. :ast time she did so, she folded the pushchair and the boy fell down between the platform and the step and got wedged because she had the temerity to have a bag of shopping, and a WELL BEHAVED two year old who was doing his best to to step off a height to big for him and a folded pushchair in a crowded carraige exit - She's not to good with balance and stuff and was doing her best not to hit anyone with the pushchair. Still, better not to get on the train so you don't have to be inconvenienced. God forbid anyone has two kids or perhaps is going on holiday and so has kids plus luggage

"Attitudes" like mine? God forbid I might object to having a dozen pushcairs taking up space and causing a dangerous situation. Isn't amazing how everyone used to cope in the past when people FOLDED pushchairs. People are too lazy these days.

You think space for 4 bikes is enough? We are supposed to be aiming for an integrated transport system. Last train I tried to get with a bike (I think it was a voyager) I was told I couldn't get on and when I asked why, I was told because there were already 2 bikes on board. To me, the DVT concept is justified entirely by the luggage space. It might be economically inefficient but for every other reason, being able to take more bikes, free up aisles from large luggage, it's a better design than two power units or using the space for seating.

How much space would be enough for you? 5? 6? 7? You have to draw a line somewhere.

Explain to me why you couldn't take the luggage space of a DVT and apply it to multiple unit? Like I said, loco hauled trains are a red herring.

 

[Bungle73]

As a matter of fact the only reason the 225s have DVTs is because of the regulations at the time, and that was under BR.

 

[agricola]

Explain to me why you couldn't take the luggage space of a DVT and apply it to multiple unit? Like I said, loco hauled trains are a red herring.

So why dont they?

 

[Badgers]

Trainline ^

 

[tangerinedream]

"Attitudes" like mine? God forbid I might object to having a dozen pushcairs taking up space and causing a dangerous situation. Isn't amazing how everyone used to cope in the past when people FOLDED pushchairs. People are too lazy these days.

So my partner should repeat the actions that led to the toddler falling off the train? I've outlined in clear detail the consequence of trying to exit a virgin pendalino train on a busy station with a well behaved small child whilst trying to be socially considerate. You have ignored it and continued to outline some bizarre situation where every train has 12 pushchairs on it, a situation I don't think I've ever seen.

The train I travelled on today had dangerous amounts of luggage in the bike rack. There was therefore no space for a bike or a pushchair. Anyone with a pushchair would had to carry it throughout the journey. This makes it difficult to control a small child, which is a physical task up to a certain age, however strict you are. It makes it impossible to hold two children's hands. I didn't see ANYONE behaving impolitely or inconsiderately - I saw a lot of people looking fed up and miserable and doing there best to shuffle round in a crowded compartment.

I had my boy with me and I carried him and played some silly word games because he was frightened when people kept needing to get past and also because he wanted to press buttons and I, as a responsible, considerate person didn't want him leaning accross people to do so. Had I had his pushchair, I wouldn't have been able to carry him and would have had to shout at him or just grip him tightly by the wrist whilst he flailed and whined. He'd have cried ultimately, which would also have made the journey unpleasant for others.

How would you like me, or anyone else to cope with this? Folding the pushchair isn't the point ffs!

How would you suggest someone who needed to cycle from or to the station react to the fact there is no space for a single bike? - perhaps someone who couldn't drive for medical reasons, or maybe economic reasons? - Lets assume they aren't so selfish as to simply choose to cycle heaven forbid! Maybe they were someone going to work who didn't have the option of waiting for the next train? What's your advice here?

This train is like this EVERY TIME. I'm not outlining an exceptional situation. It's like this everytime and for the duration of its journey. Yet every time a fixed three car unit turns up. I accept that hypothetically a longer and better designed multiple unit could be fine, but it's exactly the type of medium distance service that would once (in the fairly recent past) have been loco hauled and now is replaced by a woefully inadequate multiple unit.

What I don't understand is - why defend badly designed cramped trains run for greed with some spurious pseudo sociological bullshit about selfish mothers or 'the good old days' and then when a reasoned argument is placed against yours, do it again!

 

[Bungle73]

So why dont they?

Because someone has made a decision that the space is better utilized to accommodate more passengers. People were complaining about over-crowding only a few posts ago. There are more passengers using the trains today than have done since the '20s, or something like that.

Oh, and those ICE trains everyone's wanking over in the other thread, they're multiple units not loco hauled, so what does that tell you?

 

[tangerinedream]

Because someone has made a decision that the space is better utilized to accommodate more passengers. People were complaining about over-crowding only a few posts ago. There are more passengers using the trains today than have done since the '20s, or something like that.?

That's a fair point - what I'd like to know is how does the number of seats available through rolling stock compare? Like, there were a LOT more trains in my dads old trainspotting books from the 50s than there are now. Has there been a commensurate increase in rolling stock and specifically carraiges (whether part of multiple units or loco hauled coaching stock) - basically, are there more or less seats available on the network than 20 years ago or 30 years ago? I don't know, it's just an interesting question.

 

[Bungle73]

So my partner should repeat the actions that led to the toddler falling off the train? I've outlined in clear detail the consequence of trying to exit a virgin pendalino train on a busy station with a well behaved small child whilst trying to be socially considerate. You have ignored it and continued to outline some bizarre situation where every train has 12 pushchairs on it, a situation I don't think I've ever seen.

The train I travelled on today had dangerous amounts of luggage in the bike rack. There was therefore no space for a bike or a pushchair. Anyone with a pushchair would had to carry it throughout the journey. This makes it difficult to control a small child, which is a physical task up to a certain age, however strict you are. It makes it impossible to hold two children's hands. I didn't see ANYONE behaving impolitely or inconsiderately - I saw a lot of people looking fed up and miserable and doing there best to shuffle round in a crowded compartment.

I had my boy with me and I carried him and played some silly word games because he was frightened when people kept needing to get past and also because he wanted to press buttons and I, as a responsible, considerate person didn't want him leaning accross people to do so. Had I had his pushchair, I wouldn't have been able to carry him and would have had to shout at him or just grip him tightly by the wrist whilst he flailed and whined. He'd have cried ultimately, which would also have made the journey unpleasant for others.

How would you like me, or anyone else to cope with this? Folding the pushchair isn't the point ffs!

So why do you want to take space away from passengers and give it to few people with bicycles?

And it is the point.

How would you suggest someone who needed to cycle from or to the station react to the fact there is no space for a single bike? - perhaps someone who couldn't drive for medical reasons, or maybe economic reasons? - Lets assume they aren't so selfish as to simply choose to cycle heaven forbid! Maybe they were someone going to work who didn't have the option of waiting for the next train? What's your advice here?

This train is like this EVERY TIME. I'm not outlining an exceptional situation. It's like this everytime and for the duration of its journey. Yet every time a fixed three car unit turns up. I accept that hypothetically a longer and better designed multiple unit could be fine, but it's exactly the type of medium distance service that would once (in the fairly recent past) have been loco hauled and now is replaced by a woefully inadequate multiple unit.

If you're so concerned about getting your bike on the train why don't you place a reservation, like you're asked to do? Too easy? Intercity services are busy routes, it's a bit ridiculous to expect to turn up at any time and get on any train with a large bicycle.

What I don't understand is - why defend badly designed cramped trains run for greed with some spurious pseudo sociological bullshit about selfish mothers or 'the good old days' and then when a reasoned argument is placed against yours, do it again!

Was there a reasoned argument? I haven't seen one. All I've seen is a load of old cobblers about how loco hauled trains are "better", and how the old trains were "better" while at the same time going on about difficulties boarding when that was infintly more difficult on older trains that everyone is wanking over here.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Sure.

If you think that train services should be optimised for the profit of the train company rather than the convenience of the general public.

 

[Bungle73]

That's a fair point - what I'd like to know is how does the number of seats available through rolling stock compare? Like, there were a LOT more trains in my dads old trainspotting books from the 50s than there are now. Has there been a commensurate increase in rolling stock and specifically carraiges (whether part of multiple units or loco hauled coaching stock) - basically, are there more or less seats available on the network than 20 years ago or 30 years ago? I don't know, it's just an interesting question.

I don't have the answer to that question, but I know who will: http://www.railforums.co.uk/