HS2 going to have 3+2 seating?!

[Camden]

Yes there will be some restrictions, however it is not going to be the width of the seats which will be a concern. Even if the seats are a bit narrower than those on the rest of the service (even though they will be broadly comparable to the existing Virgin seats) they could be booked to be occupied by those with the cheapest advanced tickets, in doing so it provides those who have paid the turn up and go price a marginally better seat (2+2, as it unlikely all the seats would be 3+2 even in standard) than those who have a cheaper ticket. That at least would, to a certain amount, appease those who veiw advanced tickets as unfair (although that if often due to these with advanced tickets having seat reservations while those with turn up and go tickets having to stand, which will also be resolved - at least in the early days).

Oh much better to have a Third Class to carry us plebs in the manner to which we deserve to be accustomed eh? Accompanied by the 1 - 1 seating in First Class for the elite. Tinted windows so us great unwashed can't peer in perhaps?

Of course you would possibly want to provide some form of buggy pick up or dedicated exit via a lounge area for those who have paid the premium to travel in the 1+1 seating, so that they don't have to walk the full length of the train to exit the station.

Heaven forbid their bespoke footwear should be soiled by foul platform be-trodden by us commoners, or that they should have to walk among us.

I also have to assume that you are speaking about yourself when you say "those who veiw advanced tickets as unfair" since I know of no-one who holds such a strange unfathomable viewpoint.

If HS2 turns out the way you picture it, I would sooner travel by donkey.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I also have to assume that you are speaking about yourself when you say "those who veiw advanced tickets as unfair" since I know of no-one who holds such a strange unfathomable viewpoint.

I do think the idea that it is not possible to obtain a reservation on a walk-up fare easily near the time of travel (except on XC) is a bit irritating, but I wouldn't go as far as unfair. But I think that will be solved, and if HS2 is reservation compulsory it will be completely solved (subject to other disadvantages of that approach).

I don't think they should be sold on trains where there are expected to be standing passengers, but that's a commercial vs. passenger comfort thing and isn't fair or unfair.

I see the point about benefits of 3+2 above if it's wide enough, but UIC gauge is only slightly wider than UK gauge (not at all in the case of some 20m vehicles or 323s) and as such it doesn't apply there (HS2 is to be built to UIC gauge, theoretical discussions about a wider gauge are just that, theoretical). It is highly uncomfortable to be pressed up against the sidewall in a contoured seat that is too narrow, whether someone is next to you or not. The only 3+2 on the UK network that really works that is Pacer bench seating which is mostly used as a generous 2+1.

 

[miami]

I see the point about benefits of 3+2 above if it's wide enough, but UIC gauge is only slightly wider than UK gauge (not at all in the case of some 20m vehicles or 323s) and as such it doesn't apply there (HS2 is to be built to UIC gauge, theoretical discussions about a wider gauge are just that, theoretical). It is highly uncomfortable to be pressed up against the sidewall in a contoured seat that is too narrow, whether someone is next to you or not.

I'd rather sit on the inside seat of a 3-2 class 350 with someone in the middle than on an inside seat of a 2-2 pendilino airline with someone next to me. That's on the assumption that 3-2 precludes airline style seats (which make it impossible for me to use a laptop, and I find far more claustrophobic).

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's on the assumption that 3-2 precludes airline style seats

It doesn't. Have you ever been on a Class 150/2, or indeed, umm, an aircraft?

 

[miami]

It doesn't. Have you ever been on a Class 150/2, or indeed, umm, an aircraft?

I don't fly that far back on aircraft

 

[The Ham]

Oh much better to have a Third Class to carry us plebs in the manner to which we deserve to be accustomed eh? Accompanied by the 1 - 1 seating in First Class for the elite. Tinted windows so us great unwashed can't peer in perhaps?


Heaven forbid their bespoke footwear should be soiled by foul platform be-trodden by us commoners, or that they should have to walk among us.

I also have to assume that you are speaking about yourself when you say "those who veiw advanced tickets as unfair" since I know of no-one who holds such a strange unfathomable viewpoint.

If HS2 turns out the way you picture it, I would sooner travel by donkey.

I don't see a problem with selling the advanced tickets for a marginally narrower seat (but probably comparable to the existing 390's) than those that can often pay over double due to having to book last minute. Especially if, at present, those that pay the most can run the risk of not getting a seat.

Likewise I don't gave a problem with charging (those who are willing to pay through the noise for it) a large amount of money to travel in higher levels of comfort. However if we are doing so then I would suggest that they would only be willing to do so if the whole travelling experience is good. Chances are at the station they would transfer to a car with a driver, as such they are less likely to be heading to onwards public transport. Therefore what dies it matter if they go a different route.

Yes they are unlikely to be keen to walk any great distance, and given that most major stations could double up the use of golf buggies fit those with mobility issues, again if they are paying for it then why not have them subsidise the provision for those with mobility issues.

There would be very few 1+1 seats (I has suggested 8), I had also suggested a similar number of 2+1 (first class) seats as 3+2 (cheaper advanced tickets) however the majority of seats would still be 2+2. In doing so those that wanted to travel in a 2+2 seat could pay the walk up ticket price allowing more advanced tickets for those who are willing to accept a lower ticket price.

There will always be those who will only ever want to pay the least, likewise there will be those who want to buy the best. It's up to business to provide what they feel there is a market for. It is not up to people with ideals to determine what should be provided as we don't live in a communist state.

 

[HSTEd]

There's an enormous capacity on the WCML from Manchester to London at peak time, especially in the edge peak (say arriving London 11AM, departing London 1820). The prices are high to extrace maximum revenue from people travelling then, I have no expectation that HS2 will be different.

The capacity is not "enormous" - it is positively puny.
High fares are also required to price people off the ridiculously overcrowded trains. They do not necessarily result in a net revenue increase for the railway since many of the people who cannot travel in peak times will not travel at all or will travel by some other mode of transport.

HS2 has no reason to price people off peak trains because capacity is almost limitless compared to conventional railways.
Therefore the Laffer curve leading to maximum revenue slides over towards the side of simply getting as many people moving as possible - which often requires allowing them to travel when they want to the greatest possible degree.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I
I see the point about benefits of 3+2 above if it's wide enough, but UIC gauge is only slightly wider than UK gauge (not at all in the case of some 20m vehicles or 323s) and as such it doesn't apply there (HS2 is to be built to UIC gauge, theoretical discussions about a wider gauge are just that, theoretical). It is highly uncomfortable to be pressed up against the sidewall in a contoured seat that is too narrow, whether someone is next to you or not. The only 3+2 on the UK network that really works that is Pacer bench seating which is mostly used as a generous 2+1.

A Eurospec ICE3 is apparently 2.95m wide, compared to 2.8m for the Class 450.
So that is 3cm more per seat even though the ICE3 has longer vehicles.

So the 43cm width seats in the 450 become 46cm seats. Which is rather close to the width of a Eurostar standard 2+2 seat [47cm with armrest up].

And noone has yet provided me with a reasonable answer why, when the Chinese and Japanese systems are both building to a far wider gauge, why we are stuck with an unnecessarily narrow gauge on a system that has no need for standard stock inter-running with Europe since it won't happen any time soon (and could use Mini Shinkansen esque boarding 'bridges' if necessary in the future anyway).

The only answer I can come up with is because Brussels commands it.

EDIT:
And just to show - if we embraced sanity and built for the 3.36m Shinkansen width those 43cm seats would become 11cm wider each.
Taking us to around 54cm with the armrest up - which is far from shabby for standard class.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A UIC coach is 2.82m wide, same as some 20m UK stock. ICEs are wider than UK gauge and are not "go anywhere". Whether they can be used on HS2 will depend on precisely what loading gauge is chosen.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As for pricing people off, the WCML does not do this at present - if they did, Sunday evening southbound would be Anytime only, as would Friday evening northbound. What they do is price differentiate, to charge business travellers more. The two concepts are not the same. There is no evidence that HS2 would not also do this.

 

[AM9]

... EDIT:
And just to show - if we embraced sanity and built for the 3.36m Shinkansen width those 43cm seats would become 11cm wider each.
Taking us to around 54cm with the armrest up - which is far from shabby for standard class.

Whose to say that 3+3 wouldn't become the standard if the additional expense of a far-eastern loading gauge was adopted. That would still give 6x450mmm seats and a 50% increase over 2x2 seating for journeys that are shorter than many commutes and most long-distance journeys taken from Paddington.
In the commercial environment, the railways will act just like airlines as far as passenger accommodation is concerned.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In the commercial environment, the railways will act just like airlines as far as passenger accommodation is concerned.

Will they? Standing makes the difference. 2+2 with wide aisles is becoming much more in favour than 3+2.

 

[AM9]

Will they? Standing makes the difference. 2+2 with wide aisles is becoming much more in favour than 3+2.

Yes maybe, - if standing is officially sanctioned then a class 700 style interior would become appropriate (with an even wider standing space).

Ryanrail, - bring it on! ...

 

[HSTEd]

A UIC coach is 2.82m wide, same as some 20m UK stock.

Define UIC gauge. Even the restictive gauge planned for HS2 is the largest one commonly used in Europe - GC.

ICEs are wider than UK gauge and are not "go anywhere". Whether they can be used on HS2 will depend on precisely what loading gauge is chosen.

I assume the gauge on HS2 will be at least as large as HS1 - and ICE3s are considered viable to travel to st Pancras.

As for pricing people off, the WCML does not do this at present - if they did, Sunday evening southbound would be Anytime only, as would Friday evening northbound. What they do is price differentiate, to charge business travellers more. The two concepts are not the same. There is no evidence that HS2 would not also do this.

That would only be the case if the railway was the only way to travel.
Rail fares are now so high that people chose to drive from Manchester to London or even to take planes. Or to case the coach.

Price differentiation is not the same as driving fares so high that you start to lose serious volume.
And why would it need to since it is going to find it very hard to fill any of its trains at all unless it deliberately restrains its capacity.

 

[miami]

The capacity is not "enormous" - it is positively puny.
High fares are also required to price people off the ridiculously overcrowded trains.

Take the 1740 London to Manchester train, cheapest advances get is £110. In my experience loading is well under 60%.

I'm was on the 1840 earlier, cheapest walk up ticket £166. Costs £80 a week in advance. Load in the 3 carriages between me and the shop is 30% (unreserved coach), 40% and 40%.

20 minutes later the train gets so busy I've been forced to sit on the floor in the past as it's the first off peak train, thus costs £41.20, and that's a flexible ticket.

 

[HSTEd]

Well yes, but that's just because the Virgin price structure is rather silly really.
A three time differential between peak and off peak fares with so few fare bands is just stupid.

Really fares should vary from one train to the next if you are going to make a serious push for yield management.

Its probably one of the reasons that leads to ICWC haemorrhaging money in copious quantities.

HS2s business model, given its short journey times and limitless capacity, will produce the highest aggregate returns to society (and thus the state that ultimately pays for everything on the railway) if the railway turns the area around Birmingham International and Manchester Airport (to a lesser extent) into new metro-land.

And it is worth noting that not one journey on the captive component of the system will be over about 100 minutes, and most will be near or under an hour.
If we look around trains terminating an hour from the central london terminal, what seat widths do we see?
This is not like the French TGV were journeys can last hours easily.

 

[miami]

So would you agree with this statement

"High fares on the WCML are there to extract the maximum revenue from each individual passenger, and nothing to do with how crowded the trains are"

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would certainly agree with that statement.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Define UIC gauge. Even the restictive gauge planned for HS2 is the largest one commonly used in Europe - GC.

I referred to standard UIC-X/Eurofima passenger coaches.

The various UIC gauges appear not to differ in width:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loading_gauge#European_standards
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also, you can't blame VT for the price of the Off Peak as this is the regulated fare. They cannot increase it.

 

[The Ham]

I referred to standard UIC-X/Eurofima passenger coaches.

The various UIC gauges appear not to differ in width:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loading_gauge#European_standards

However that link states that TVG's which also meet the UIC standards are 2.9m wide (or about 10cm wider than the 450's).

Assuming that if we take that 10 cm and dividing it by 5 gives you an extra 2cm per seat and no obstructions at foot level, which although isn't luxury would be considerably more comfortable than the current seats.

 

[HSTEd]

So would you agree with this statement

"High fares on the WCML are there to extract the maximum revenue from each individual passenger, and nothing to do with how crowded the trains are"

I would not completely agree with this statement.
As true peak services are cripplingly heavily loaded - edge effects like those mentioned are what happened when you have simplistic peak-off peak splits with enormous fares.

It is also not clear that this pricing schedule is even optimal as it leads to everyone waiting nad travelling on the cheap plane, so the last peak train has very little revenue.

And then we have to consider the political outcry of ridiculously expensive trains that are running almost completely empty on this very expensive railway line that promised massive benefits for the travelling public.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The various UIC gauges appear not to differ in width:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loading_gauge#European_standards

That article is a little confused though - it mentions most of the gauges but then gives dimensions greater than 3m for most of them.

Also, you can't blame VT for the price of the Off Peak as this is the regulated fare. They cannot increase it.

Reducing the peak fare on the last peak train to something intermediate however could conceivably increase total income - as people will be less inclined to wait for the off peak train, knowing how overloaded it will be.

 

[Bletchleyite]

However that link states that TVG's which also meet the UIC standards are 2.9m wide (or about 10cm wider than the 450's).

True, this is because they are short vehicles and articulated - just as 23m vehicles in the UK tend to be narrower than 20m ones.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Reducing the peak fare on the last peak train to something intermediate however could conceivably increase total income - as people will be less inclined to wait for the off peak train, knowing how overloaded it will be.

They do do that sort of thing with Advances, the problem[1] being that Advances don't suit everyone. Doing it with walk-ups would get confusing, though the old "Business Saver" sort of did it.

[1] Less of a problem since the introduction of the SVH. Often, I make journeys where one direction (mostly the outward) is near certain to be on a specific train, but the other (mostly the return) is not. Prior to a single being available at half the return, this meant Advances were never cost effective.

 

[HSTEd]

So I have recieved a response to my FOI request.

HS2 Ltd confirms that no sensitivity analysis was performed in relation to the cross section selected - which was selected simply because it was the one proposed by the TSI regulations promulgated by the EU.

In other words, HS2's capacity is crippled because Brussels commanded it.

 

[higthomas]

So I have recieved a response to my FOI request.

HS2 Ltd confirms that no sensitivity analysis was performed in relation to the cross section selected - which was selected simply because it was the one proposed by the TSI regulations promulgated by the EU.

In other words, HS2's capacity is crippled because Brussels commanded it.

Sounds a bit more like Brussels recommended it and they didn't think it necessary to investigate using anything different.

 

[HSTEd]

Then that just makes HS2 Ltd look uninterested in getting the best deal in Britain. This is a serious lock in issue

 

[deltic]

Then that just makes HS2 Ltd look uninterested in getting the best deal in Britain. This is a serious lock in issue

Any idea what the additional cost would be of building to a larger gauge? How would larger gauge railway cope with classic compatible stock that will be using the line for decades to come, you mention mini-bridges -how do they work?

 

[HSTEd]

Any idea what the additional cost would be of building to a larger gauge? How would larger gauge railway cope with classic compatible stock that will be using the line for decades to come, you mention mini-bridges -how do they work?

Since most tunnels on the route are sized according to aerodynamic concerns then increase tunnel diameters would be minor, if any are required at all.
The slightly larger train would require a slightly larger tunnel to eliminate overpressure concerns but I believe the increases would be on order of inches - and since none of the tunnel drives has started it would be a minor increase in costs.
As to other structural concerns, most parts of the scheme are still early enough in development that increase in costs would be negligible if the changes were made now.

The boarding bridges on Mini-Shinkansen appear to simply be an extension of pop out steps that we will be fitting to Classic COmpatible stock regardless - they simply provide a broader-than-usual step between the body of the train and the platform.

It is hardly likely to be a significant cost given the enormous cost of the project.
EDIT:
I found a rather small, badly annotated (in Englisanyway)

of Mini Shinkansen at a Shinkansen station that demonstrates:

 

[quantinghome]

In other words, HS2's capacity is crippled because Brussels commanded it.

That's not really true, is it. The uk could quite easily use a wider gauge if we wanted to. The EU is a convenient thing to blame, being foreign and bureaucratic. But actually I find The response from HS2 disappointing because it seems no one has bothered to think about it as an option. Maybe 400m double Decker trains will provide enough capacity, but wider trains should at least be looked at.

 

[najaB]

In other words, HS2's capacity is crippled because Brussels commanded it.

Is it really though? Crippled I mean.

 

[Haydn1971]

HS2 Ltd confirms that no sensitivity analysis was performed in relation to the cross section selected - which was selected simply because it was the one proposed by the TSI regulations promulgated by the EU.

So they have simply selected a "standard" cross section that is used across many nations, just the same as eurocodes and many other standards that things are designed to.

In other words, HS2's capacity is crippled because Brussels commanded it.

No, it's built to a recognised standard used by many nations - I'd suggest your statement is simply euro hysteria and nothing else.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So they have simply selected a "standard" cross section that is used across many nations, just the same as eurocodes and many other standards that things are designed to.

The massive advantage of this is that captive rolling stock is completely off the shelf. This will save a fortune.

 

[po8crg]

HS2 Ltd confirms that no sensitivity analysis was performed in relation to the cross section selected - which was selected simply because it was the one proposed by the TSI regulations promulgated by the EU.

In other words, HS2's capacity is crippled because Brussels commanded it.

I don't think that characterisation is accurate.

HS2's capacity is not larger because there was a standard and they followed it without thinking. They could have done something else - ie followed the Shinkansen standard instead - but they didn't think of doing so.

Brussels didn't command them to do that. They were just blind to the possibility. Until you mentioned the idea, no-one else had mentioned it either - not at HS2, at HSUK, here at RailUK. It might have been a silly mistake, but it's one that they shared with a hell of a lot of other people.

Secondly, I think that crippled rather overstates the case. I don't think that the ICE, TGV, Frecce or AVE networks are crippled.

 

[po8crg]

The massive advantage of this is that captive rolling stock is completely off the shelf. This will save a fortune.

To be fair, Shinkansen captive rolling stock would be off the shelf too - just off a different shelf.