What does that mean?
Virgin pendolino trains - awful things
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
tangerinedream
Density of Sound
I don't want to take space away from anyone. I think trains should be longer and more capacity available for all passengers, including cyclists, for the social, economic, health and environmental reasons I shouldn't need to explain.
Again, you ignore the lengthy and clearly explained point I make (for the third time). With a FOLDED PUSHCHAIR IT IS STILL A FUCKING NIGHTMARE ON A TRAIN WHEN IT IS BUSY. Because there isn't enough luggage space to put it somewhere. how do you suggest managing this?
Also, had someone reserved a bike on the train I travelled on today, they would not have been able to get it on because the pitiful luggage space was full and the bike rack full of bags because it was a saturday and the train connects with the airport service. So - throw the fare paying passengers off who miss their plane or prevent the person with the bike from accessing the train? - your call.
Yes, government policy is to blame, but so to is the short sightedness of running trains that are too small. Were more loco hauled services still run, older stock that has been sold/scrapped could be utilied to increase capacity. When you switch to multiple units en-masse, that is not an option as far as I know. I've certainly never seen a multiple unit with a mk1/2/3/4 coach in the middle. This is the simple point I make and one of the reasons I think retaining loco hauled services would have been a better option in the 90s/early part of the decade. Better in terms of passenger experience over all. Yes, the doors were rubbish, but over all, they offer more flexible capacity and more coaching stock could have been retained. This is a reasoned argument.
It seems simple enough to me. No one is wanking over old trains, simply remembering a point when it seemed easier to get a seat and there was more luggage space hence doing things like putting a pushchair away was easier and perhaps you could pop your suitcase next to you because the train wasn't running at 120% of its capacity and therefore a person with a bike could fit it in the bike rack or luggage space.
Now, I accept the increase in passengers has something to do with this, but it also seems bizarre to deny that the obvious shortening of train lengths on a number of journeys has also got a large part to play. A lot of voyager services would have been 9/10 coaches plus loco. This is true, I know, I used to travel on them. Are there more people using shorter trains? If so, to defend the cramming in of more seats seems odd when all anyone has said in the recent past on the thread (apart from the comment about the deltic making a nice noise, which wasn't really intended as serious debate I think) is that loco hauled trains offered a better passenger experience in the main.
Despite all of the above, the only thing you can say is 'fold the pushchair up' and 'in't war, everyone just got on wi' it and we were all 'appy'
I
tangerinedream
Density of Sound
I presume it means you defend poor service on the grounds of economic efficiency - you think the trains exist to make a profit as opposed to provide a service.
If you were to discover that the number of passengers has increased at exactly the same rate as the amount of available space, I'd be willing to consider your non folding pushchair, selfish cyclist theory as an explanation of the atrocious conditions on some trains.
Yup. GNER's refurb didn't do them any favours in terms of seat comfort but they're still the nicest coaches out there to ride in - quiet, smooth-riding and spacious. MkIIIs are still good as well, although obviously dated now, with their slam doors.
I'm not looking forward to when they start being phased out in favour of the Intercity Express Programme, since I can't help but think that's going to share the same flaws as most post-privatisation intercity rolling stock - uncomfortable seating, lack of tables, high noise levels and insufficient luggage space.
True, but only with electric multiple units. Diesel ones are inherently less comfortable, because no matter how well insulated the passenger space you still get noise and vibration from the engine.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
Thing is, with locos you've got to have stabling points, pointwork, possibly someone to prep the loco, someone to deal with coupling/uncoupling, and so on.
All of which is a very far cry from the bean counters' wet dream of a terminus station that's a platform with a bus shelter and Retail Opportunities, deserted apart from some Work Programme kids selling chocolate bars, Murdoch newspapers and souvenirs, into which a single-manned train pulls, waits and departs with no more effort than that of the driver walking from one end to the other.
neonwilderness
What would Badgers do?
I've just dug out a copy of the 1997 Great Britain timetable (it's massive but my family used to do a lot of rail travel back then) and found a couple of similar services. Then generally look to be about an hour faster now, but make a few less stops.
Code:
Year 1997 2013
Euston 0835 0830
Crewe 1024 ----
Warrington 1042 1014
Wigan 1054 1025
Preston 1112 1041
Lancaster 1131 1056
Oxenholme 1148 1109
Penrith 1214 ----
Carlisle 1234 1147
Motherwell 1337 ----
Glasgow 1357 1258
Tom A
Goat among sheep
No such luck travelling out of Manchester and the North West, it's all Voyagers hereWon't happen on Cross-Country, though - the routes are too busy and they won't sacrifice the seats. Best thing you can do there is be really sad, find their diagrams online and make sure you travel when it's an HST rather than a shitty Voyager!
tangerinedream
Density of Sound
ah, we'll its a bit faster than I thought now. I make it 24 mins quicker London to Wigan with one less stop, so maybe 18/19 mins quicker overall. Still not exactly stunning but more than I thought.
SikhWarrioR
And the Worms ate into his brain
I can asure that having used First class in pendolinos enough times they are not that much better than in steerage though buying the advance first tickets makes pendolino traval tolerableTravel first class, problem solved
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
Use of the lounge while you wait, peace and quiet, free wifi and coffee, away from the great unwashed.
Works for me
SikhWarrioR
And the Worms ate into his brain
I don't want to take space away from anyone. I think trains should be longer and more capacity available for all passengers, including cyclists, for the social, economic, health and environmental reasons I shouldn't need to explain.
Again, you ignore the lengthy and clearly explained point I make (for the third time). With a FOLDED PUSHCHAIR IT IS STILL A FUCKING NIGHTMARE ON A TRAIN WHEN IT IS BUSY. Because there isn't enough luggage space to put it somewhere. how do you suggest managing this?
Also, had someone reserved a bike on the train I travelled on today, they would not have been able to get it on because the pitiful luggage space was full and the bike rack full of bags because it was a saturday and the train connects with the airport service. So - throw the fare paying passengers off who miss their plane or prevent the person with the bike from accessing the train? - your call.
Yes, government policy is to blame, but so to is the short sightedness of running trains that are too small. Were more loco hauled services still run, older stock that has been sold/scrapped could be utilied to increase capacity. When you switch to multiple units en-masse, that is not an option as far as I know. I've certainly never seen a multiple unit with a mk1/2/3/4 coach in the middle. This is the simple point I make and one of the reasons I think retaining loco hauled services would have been a better option in the 90s/early part of the decade. Better in terms of passenger experience over all. Yes, the doors were rubbish, but over all, they offer more flexible capacity and more coaching stock could have been retained. This is a reasoned argument.
It seems simple enough to me. No one is wanking over old trains, simply remembering a point when it seemed easier to get a seat and there was more luggage space hence doing things like putting a pushchair away was easier and perhaps you could pop your suitcase next to you because the train wasn't running at 120% of its capacity and therefore a person with a bike could fit it in the bike rack or luggage space.
Now, I accept the increase in passengers has something to do with this, but it also seems bizarre to deny that the obvious shortening of train lengths on a number of journeys has also got a large part to play. A lot of voyager services would have been 9/10 coaches plus loco. This is true, I know, I used to travel on them. Are there more people using shorter trains? If so, to defend the cramming in of more seats seems odd when all anyone has said in the recent past on the thread (apart from the comment about the deltic making a nice noise, which wasn't really intended as serious debate I think) is that loco hauled trains offered a better passenger experience in the main.
Despite all of the above, the only thing you can say is 'fold the pushchair up' and 'in't war, everyone just got on wi' it and we were all 'appy'
I
Many long distance trains had a 65 ft or thereabouts over couplers so loads of room for bikes, camping gear etc MK1 BG [Baggage/Guard] in the formation they would at least have a MK1 or MK2 BSO,BSK,BFK,BFO these vehicles had Guards office and half passenger/half luggage accomidation
That and the train was made up with MK2/MK3 coaches or the odd MK1 coach infinately better than the cramped 3/4/5 car dmus you get nowadays
editor
hiraethified
Use of the lounge while you wait, peace and quiet, free wifi and coffee, away from the great unwashed.
Works for me
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
Use of the lounge while you wait, peace and quiet, free wifi and coffee, away from the great unwashed.
Works for me
Do me a favour, you ARE the great unwashed.
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
<non-sequitur drunken rant about that horrible smug corrupt tory cunt snipped>
SikhWarrioR
And the Worms ate into his brain
That is a face that would give you great pleasure in thumping.....Repeatedly
davesgcr
Reading books
Agreed - re the Mk4 sets and GNER did a good refurb job on them and resisted the temptation to whack more seats in at the expense of legroom and window spacing. If Her Majesties Treasury had not blocked the Mk5 sets - the Pendolinos would probably not have appeared ...
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
I think thats a matter of personal preference though, personally I found the standard class Mark IV almost as comfortable as the first class in the Mark IIIs in used on the much lamented WSMR. I find them to be much more comfortable than the equivalent in a Pendolino, or a Voyager.
Also in the loco-hauled vs multiple unit debate, today I had the misfortune to travel on an almost full Voyager that went between (at least, it could easily have been u/s on the trip up as well) Bangor and Euston with one of its four standard class coaches having no working air conditioning. There was no indication at Euston that the set was going to be taken out of service, so whoever was going back to the Welsh coast had a fun journey ahead of them.
SikhWarrioR
And the Worms ate into his brain
I take it that you have nver traveled on any of the 14X four wheel Two and three car units which are Leyland National bus bodies on a four wheel running gear......Very nasty and very unconfortable compared to the first generation DMU's
bi0boy
Power User
I believe they were presaged by the 151 introduced a year earlier. It was a swift decline from comfy seats like these, iirc they had actual springs in them:
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
The Pacers are awful - but the 150 and its ilk did finally kill off the loco-hauled regional services (or at least they did in North Wales), which were of course profoundly comfortable. Arriving at Crewe to find a 37 and four or five coaches going to Chester, instead of a 150 or 142, produced a feeling of elation which is difficult to describe.
davesgcr
Reading books
I agree re comfy seats - but you almost got gassed by the exhaust fuelled paraffin heaters + they had blue asbestos (all ok by 1950's standards ......)
davesgcr
Reading books
Tom A
Goat among sheep
142s are a mainstay of a lot of local and regional routes around Manchester. I rode one to Bolton a few months back when the weather was vile, and it was leaking in about seven places, in the ceiling and through the windows
Used to ride them all the time when I had a job in Oldham and commuted from Manc (this was before the Oldham Loop Line was turned into Metrolink). Noisy, uncomfortable, and should have been scrapped 10 years ago, if not 20. Also they are just as crashworthy as the BR Mark 1 rolling stock which was banned from the mainline unless it has modifications to them. Thankfully most of my train journeys these days are on 150/156 'Sprinters' or the TransPennine 185s.I rode on some classic BR rolling stock when I travelled on the East Lancashire Railway two months ago. The comfort is outstanding (and there was definitely springs in the seats, something I have not felt in many years on a train), we have really taken a step back here, that's progress I guess.
Also on the step into the carriage there I observed that it said "BUILT BR WORKSHOPS", ahh, those were the days, when this country made things, and made things to last... not any more.
Oh don't fall into that old trap. We do make things. Lots of things. A large proportion of the A380 is manufactured here. We have a major aircraft engine manufacturer based here. Those Pendolinos that everyone is moaning about, some of them were made here. And the new trains Hitachi just got a contract to construct are going to built right here in the UK. So it is simply not true to say we don't make anything anymoreahh, those were the days, when this country made things, and made things to last... not any more.
Tom A
Goat among sheep
The train making industry in the UK is still a faint shadow of its former self. Bombadier (the remnant of what BREL became after privatisation) is on the brink, and if the government awards the Crossrail contract to the Germans, it could be the end of the road.
Same here: they do the Hull-Doncaster stopping trains. They're horrible old sheds - noisy, hard-riding, draughty and uncomfortable. Unfortunately, I've not heard that there's any prospect of their being replaced any time soon. And no, they're not at all crashworthy. This is what happened when one missed a signal back in 1999, got onto the West Coast Main Line and was stuffed up the back at 50mph by a northbound express:
Winsford Rail Crash report (pdf)
SikhWarrioR
And the Worms ate into his brain
Same here: they do the Hull-Doncaster stopping trains. They're horrible old sheds - noisy, hard-riding, draughty and uncomfortable. Unfortunately, I've not heard that there's any prospect of their being replaced any time soon. And no, they're not at all crashworthy. This is what happened when one missed a signal back in 1999, got onto the West Coast Main Line and was stuffed up the back at 50mph by a northbound express:
Winsford Rail Crash report (pdf)
The 14X train carbody is basically Leyland National Bus body components and structure clearly unlikely to withstand being rear ended by a locomotive give me a MK1/2/3/4 coach anyday
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
That's probably why we've got them down here, then. Pembroke Dock to Swansea (via Narnia), most of the route (from Tenby to PD) is "one engine in steam", so the only think they're likely to hit is a) a sheep, b) a grockle, c) a hay lorry.
I haven't done the two hour trip from PD to Swansea in one of those things - it must be grim, though.
