Were Bombardier Voyagers a mistake?

[Jonfun]

XC squashed extra seats in, took out the buffet car, and generally don't look after them as well as Virgin do. Given that both Virgin and XC units are maintained by the same people at Central Rivers, I can only assume that XC have gone for the bargain maintenance package. Everything about XC these days is penny-pinching and horrible and the state of their 220/221s is no different.

Why is adding extra seats, luggage space, and providing an at seat service evidence that XC don't look after their fleet?

 

[Geezertronic]

On the subject of the voyagers being too short, Could 221 144 (the two car unit) be used to lengthen any exceptionally overcrowded diagrams?

The middle coaches have already been added to other 221s so from what I understand the two remaining coaches are the two ends with the driver cabs. Plus I don't believe the Voyagers can run as 2 car sets as the compressor is missing (trying to remember the reason given by others in previous threads)?

 

[physics34]

Mk2's, Mk3's and Mk4's are superior to Voyegers but are older so yes that means they are a 'mistake'.

Interiors very disappointing.

 

[BurtonM]

This may confuse some but I've ended up on Voyagers a fair bit of late going to and from uni to Manchester and sometimes London. I haven't noticed the toilet smell all that much (though I seem to be immune for some reason - once travelling with my dad he thought it was me and I had to explain it to him, Voyagers being unfamiliar territory to him).
However, that's about the only positive comment I have for them. They're awfully cramped and just feel generally dirty, both atmospherically and in real terms. Underfloor engines - could be worse, at least they aren't as bad as 185s, but I still don't like them.
They're always a pain to get down the aisle, they don't always have luggage racks, sometimes there's just an empty space, and I often find myself standing in the vestibule for upwards of an hour.
I've only been using them for the past few months, but I don't think I've ever been on a Voyager, XC or VT, that's had a full compliment of working seat reservations either. I've seen screens dotted about not working, entire carriages, entire trains, systems failed to update and showing reservations for previous journeys, and screens saying seats are available when actually they aren't.
I also can't work out if Voyagers have an unreserved section or not - is it coach C?

 

[Julian W]

On my journeys between Cheltenham and Sheffield I often use the Nottingham service as far as Derby. I actually prefer using the Voyagers to the Turbostar services for passenger comfort - far better legroom on a Voyager and I actually prefer the seats for the longer journey as well as plug sockets.

Wonder if i'm the only person who'd pick a Voyager over another type. I do enjoy HST's for the extra carriages but don't think their ride quality is up to much any more compared to newer types.

 

[alexl92]

I'm basing this on a limited experience of Voyagers and HSTs over the past couple of years and plenty of rides on 185s. The last HST I rode, I think an EMT one, was a real pleasure to ride on. I didn't even feel it set off, it was spacious and comfortable and didn't feel cramped. The voyagers I've been on were not a particularly pleasant environment to be honest, always feels cramped and I get far too familiar with my fellow passengers. I'd absolutely hate to be on an overcrowded service.
Didn't notice engine noise but I think that's because I'm so used to 185s - whenever I travel with TPE now, I always sit in either Coach A or C and hope that the driver turns off the engine in that one.

 

[thenorthern]

I was on a voyager today and I did notice it got quite crammed even though it was only a 2:30 departure. I had the almost traditional problem on a voyager of another passenger not being able to read "Reserved from xxxxxxxx to xxxxxxxx" when they sat down and I was an "evil person" for taking my seat.

Some other things that I noticed that were design floors when the voyagers were introduced which have now been sorted include: The seat reservation system used to say "Seat XX is not reserved" when a seat was going to be reserved from a later point in the trains journey so there were many confused passengers, the quiet coach is fine for a 9 or 11 coach pendolino but for a 4 coach voyager using 1/3 of standard class is far too much, the Virgin Shop was far too big for what is a relatively short train so it wasn't making enough, having fixed coach numbers when trains are operating in double formation can and will confuse people and the radios although a good idea were often not switched on and soon became obsolete in a world of mp3 players and tablets.

All these have now been sorted.

 

[Wolfie]

This next post may get me banned by the mods for being a heretic, but here goes-

When I went to the north west earlier this year I went up on a IC225 and back on a couple of Voyagers (change at Birmingham). I found the Voyagers more comfortable to travel in than the Mark 4 coach I was in. Mostly this was down to the extra leg room that there was and the fact I ad two seats to myself the whole way on the Voyagers.

Did I notice the underfloor engines, not really. Was there a smell, not noticeably. Did both trains get me there and back, yes. Which of these three was the most important, the last one.

If you are a heretic I think I have an appointment with Tomas de Torquemada... (and no, I do not think Voyagers are perfect...)

Mk2's, Mk3's and Mk4's are superior to Voyegers but are older so yes that means they are a 'mistake'.

Interiors very disappointing.

Hum, do NOT mistake your (subjective) opinion for fact...

I hated the original seats in Mk3s, the woeful aircon in Mk4s as built - the intake being right next to the brakes - was particularly clever....

Therefore I might say Voyagers were better - please tell me how that is any less valid than your "facts".....

 

[rf_ioliver]

Operation Princess was a victim of it's own success.

Wasn't this the whole idea of shorter trains in that Operation Princess would effectively double frequencies of services and so longer trains wouldn't be needed?

Actually Voyagers and the initial plan for them always reminded me of the way DB use the class 612 unit - a two car tiling, express train - usually found in 2x2 combinations.

In that respect would the Voyagers benefit from, say, a re gearing to 110 or 100mph and running on the longer "secondary" cross country such as Norwich-Liverpool or Cardiff-Portsmouth etc... ? Not, that is going to happen but...

t.

Ian

 

[dk1]

I've said it many times before that they ain't that bad. Any train is uncomfortable when busy & yes, overhead racks that hold bigger bags would be great. I've had more pleasant than otherwise journeys on them & think that those that dislike or hate them make more of an issue about the toilet smell than is really necessary. No doubt this will give is cause for debate for many more years to come.

 

[route:oxford]

There were certainly errors, but not a mistake.

The biggest mistake was for BR not to improve upon the Class 156 and build batch of 30 "Cross Country" 5-car versions with 100mph capability and air conditioning in the early 90s.

Ten years on, they would need to be replaced with Voyager units for the speed increases, but I suspect that they would have driven growth on the CC franchise to such an extent that we wouldn't have seen 4 car Voyagers.

 

[yorksrob]

There were certainly errors, but not a mistake.

The biggest mistake was for BR not to improve upon the Class 156 and build batch of 30 "Cross Country" 5-car versions with 100mph capability and air conditioning in the early 90s.

Ten years on, they would need to be replaced with Voyager units for the speed increases, but I suspect that they would have driven growth on the CC franchise to such an extent that we wouldn't have seen 4 car Voyagers.

Five carriage cross country 156's. Now that would have been good.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Wasn't this the whole idea of shorter trains in that Operation Princess would effectively double frequencies of services and so longer trains wouldn't be needed?

And theoretically, had the number of passengers stayed the same, we wouldn't have the overcrowding we get now. That said, in pre-princess days, the Mk 2 sets could be pretty rammed. Spent a few times times in a Mk2 coridoor between Birmingham and Reading. At least they had a buffet though.

 

[1e10]

such as the interior doors with no pressure sensor

I'm a little amazed that they're allowed to run in that condition. You certainly don't want to get trapped in-between a door closing, they're quite tight.

To be fair, the basic train is alright. I just loathe the smell on board. It makes me want to vom. They also should've been twice as long as they are.

IIRC XC have fitted air fresheners somewhere to try and combat the smell problem. I don't thinkl the problem is as bad as it used to be, some units seem worse than others and it can also depend on where you sit. On a journey the other week I was sat in the middle of the coach and moved to the read seat where there appears to be an AC outlet behind the seat and I could smell it then (not being able to previously).

Why is adding extra seats, luggage space, and providing an at seat service evidence that XC don't look after their fleet?

It does seem the case that XC neglect the Voyagers to some extent. See the toilet buttons below. On this particular occasion the door to the toilet stopped about 4 inches short of actually being shut with the buttons then indicating for me to lock the door.

I also can't work out if Voyagers have an unreserved section or not - is it coach C?

It's coach B. I'm not sure how many normal passengers (sorry, not sure how else to phrase a enthusiast!) know about it, recently on a journey with XC a very enthusiastic TM was kind enough to let everyone know about it. Really helpful to passengers but a slightly aggrievance to those of us who feel we're a minority in the know.

 

[Jonfun]

It does seem the case that XC neglect the Voyagers to some extent. See the toilet buttons below. On this particular occasion the door to the toilet stopped about 4 inches short of actually being shut with the buttons then indicating for me to lock the door.

I'm at a complete loss as to why you've quoted my post, seeing as it has absolutely no relevance to voyager toilets.

Is it accidental or did you read what you thought I'd written rather than what I actually wrote?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Are there many routes/services run by Voyagers atm where two arrive from different places, couple and then carry on to the final destination as a single train?

 

[alexl92]

I'm at a complete loss as to why you've quoted my post, seeing as it has absolutely no relevance to voyager toilets.

Is it accidental or did you read what you thought I'd written rather than what I actually wrote?

Presumably it was a reference to the lack of maintenance you'd mentioned - the fact that the toilet door doesn't work.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Are there many routes/services run by Voyagers atm where two arrive from different places, couple and then carry on to the final destination as a single train?

Chester: one Euston train train attaches and divides from/to Wrexham and Holyhead.
Crewe: a morning train to Euston combines single Voyagers from Lancaster (Blackpool from Monday) and Holyhead.

 

[cjmillsnun]

I'm basing this on a limited experience of Voyagers and HSTs over the past couple of years and plenty of rides on 185s. The last HST I rode, I think an EMT one, was a real pleasure to ride on. I didn't even feel it set off, it was spacious and comfortable and didn't feel cramped. The voyagers I've been on were not a particularly pleasant environment to be honest, always feels cramped and I get far too familiar with my fellow passengers. I'd absolutely hate to be on an overcrowded service.
Didn't notice engine noise but I think that's because I'm so used to 185s - whenever I travel with TPE now, I always sit in either Coach A or C and hope that the driver turns off the engine in that one.

EMT HSTs are a delight IMO. I know they aren't for everyone, but they have been tastefully refreshed, and I find them comfortable and quiet. Bliss.

 

[yorksrob]

EMT HSTs are a delight IMO. I know they aren't for everyone, but they have been tastefully refreshed, and I find them comfortable and quiet. Bliss.

Indeed. my favourite InterCity train around at the moment.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Chester: one Euston train train attaches and divides from/to Wrexham and Holyhead.
Crewe: a morning train to Euston combines single Voyagers from Lancaster (Blackpool from Monday) and Holyhead.

If that's the only two then there's not really much stopping new coaches being built to extend all Voyagers to 10 coaches (apart from cost), for each of the above the busier section could stay being done with Voyagers and the less busy section with something else

 

[Mikey C]

EMT HSTs are a delight IMO. I know they aren't for everyone, but they have been tastefully refreshed, and I find them comfortable and quiet. Bliss.

But then to be fair the EMT 222 Meridians aren't bad either.

I know Voyagers aren't perfect, but coming back from Birmingham to London on a Virgin trains one, in many ways it was preferable to the usual Pendolino

 

[Harbon 1]

I don't mind Voyagers that much, but there are big differences between XCs helping, and the Virgin fleet.

The XC ones just seem tired and worn out whereas the Virgin sets feel in a better condition IMO. The smell is much more prominent on the Cross Country trains but the engine noise isn't something that really bothers me (anything with a Cummins engine usually sends me to sleep anyway - I think they pump the fumes into the carriage)

I've only been on a Class 180 once and it was honestly the best journey. Comfortable, spacious etc.

Older marks of coaching stock may be comfier (not Mk4s they're shocking) but apart from the ridiculous length, they're not that bad

 

[PHILIPE]

I don't mind Voyagers that much, but there are big differences between XCs helping, and the Virgin fleet.

The XC ones just seem tired and worn out whereas the Virgin sets feel in a better condition IMO. The smell is much more prominent on the Cross Country trains but the engine noise isn't something that really bothers me (anything with a Cummins engine usually sends me to sleep anyway - I think they pump the fumes into the carriage)

I've only been on a Class 180 once and it was honestly the best journey. Comfortable, spacious etc.

Older marks of coaching stock may be comfier (not Mk4s they're shocking) but apart from the ridiculous length, they're not that bad

Both the VX and XC fleets are maintained at the same Depot, Central Rivers.

 

[Oswyntail]

.....The XC ones just seem tired and worn out whereas the Virgin sets feel in a better condition IMO.....

I wonder if this is down to the differing work patterns. XC will tend to have longer overall runs, with more frequent stops, while the Virgin ones just belt up and down the WCML.
Voyagers were an improvement on what they replaced, without a doubt. No, I don't like the high seat backs, or the "airliner" feel. But they are generally comfortable, and I don't notice the notorious pong. Mark 3s and mark 4s are also good to travel in, of course, and all three groups vary according to which layout is in use.
Voyagers themselves were not a mistake, not even, necessarily, the length. However, they were conceived to be flexible multiple units for Operation Princess, joining and splitting into smaller trains. The mistake was in not appreciating how much the bottleneck at Birmingham would destroy that approach.

 

[Grumpy]

They should have simply run off some more 159’s. Perhaps building in a few improvements based on emerging experience of operating the 158/159 fleets, and possibly as 4 car or 5 car sets.
A 3 car 159 carries almost the same number of passengers as a 4 car Voyager and in a set weighing 114 tons as opposed to 194 tons. All that weight adds to cost.
With regard to comfort the following quote was made by someone else on the Dawlish thread, comparing the 159’s favourably against the HST “Class 159 with its comfortable facing seats and tables which line up with the windows”

 

[edwin_m]

VT needed a 125mph capability on several routes so more 159s wouldn't have been good enough. And the 159 design probably wasn't compliant with the standards applying in the late 90s.

 

[1e10]

I'm at a complete loss as to why you've quoted my post, seeing as it has absolutely no relevance to voyager toilets.

Is it accidental or did you read what you thought I'd written rather than what I actually wrote?

... I'm at a completely loss as to why you've not used your brain whilst reading my post.

Presumably it was a reference to the lack of maintenance you'd mentioned - the fact that the toilet door doesn't work.

Bravo sir!

Are there many routes/services run by Voyagers atm where two arrive from different places, couple and then carry on to the final destination as a single train?

1V51 and 1S49 couple at Bristol TM and then decouple again at Newcastle where one of the units continues to Dundee and the other returns to Birmingham NS as 1M76.

 

[Grumpy]

VT needed a 125mph capability on several routes so more 159s wouldn't have been good enough. And the 159 design probably wasn't compliant with the standards applying in the late 90s.

125mph capability is of marginal benefit on most of the original Virgin routes where the linespeeds don't allow. For example I cant see much difference in Voyager/Turbostar journey times between Birmingham and Cheltenham, or between Voyagers and 185's twixt Leeds and York.

Three minutes or so saved between York and Darlington is hardly significant.

 

[cjmillsnun]

But then to be fair the EMT 222 Meridians aren't bad either.

Agreed. I have to say I find the Stagecoach TOCs rolling stock is some of the best on the network right now. They are generally clean and well maintained.

 

[satisnek]

Can't stand them myself. Whoever thought that underfloor engines and commuter-style seating density should be applied to long-distance services was just plain wrong in my opinion.