Class 43 HST cascade fate

[batteur]

My heart always falls in dismay when I see yet another poxy four carriage Voyager unit round the corner into the platform, knowing how busy it will inevitably already be, but unfortunately such units make up the greater part of Crosscountry's fleet and it's worrying that, with ever increasing passenger numbers, this will probably continue to be the norm for another five years at least.

(Hello everyone!)

Yes I agree with this, I've nothing in particular against XC or Voyagers but it's frustrating that this situation does not seem to have been acknowledged.

I use XC fairly regularly and on the whole, I find it to be fairly good - if increasingly evident that more money is needed in maintaining trains to a decent standard. It's true that the Voyagers need an extra carriage or two, and are in a shoddy state.

I was naively hoping that the next franchise award would amend this. In my opinion, it's what the tendering of the franchises is supposed to achieve. If it's not happening, I find that somewhat disappointing.

 

[sprinterguy]

I was naively hoping that the next franchise award would amend this. In my opinion, it's what the tendering of the franchises is supposed to achieve. If it's not happening, I find that somewhat disappointing.

Direct awards tend to be a bit different in that they tend to more or less maintain the status quo compared to the dramatic changes that you might expect from a full franchise award; as such, as we've both said, the likely lack of change during the XC direct award and inevitably into the first couple of years of the new franchise is a concern.

Welcome to the forum, by the way.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You can change "may" to "will"! My use of the words "power doors" was chosen to cover the fact that the ScotRail fleet will get sliding doors rather than the plug doors used by Chiltern. If XC went the same way, they would get the same modifications.

*Sliding* doors? That is an interesting option - surely they will be quite recessed.

 

[43096]

*Sliding* doors? That is an interesting option - surely they will be quite recessed.

They'd be a bit like a 156 I would think. The problem is that the Mark 3s are not all identical, being built to 1970s tolerances, so it is very costly and difficult to fit plug doors. By using sliding doors you can make the doors long enough to cover even the worst cases of differing door aperture. The pockets for the doors go where the luggage stack and toilets are at each end - major work is needed on the toilets anyway to fit retention tanks (which in itself can only be done at one end due to lack of space for the tank underneath).

 

[batteur]

Thanks

 

[Mordac]

Thanks

 

[BestWestern]

You're certainly not the only one to have noticed that. Me and a few others have mentioned that, although perhaps it's just Stockholm Syndrome on our part from having to use them so often.

I think Virgin give them more TLC.

XC appear to give theirs zero TLC! They're no doubt utilised as hard as any fleet anywhere, which presumably leaves little if any time for worrying about the ambience. That said, they're also supposed to be one of the most reliable fleets going aren't they? I do often wonder whether the absence of a refurbishment for far too long is simply because they can't find the opportunity to release them, rather than through penny pinching?

 

[Mordac]

XC appear to give theirs zero TLC! They're no doubt utilised as hard as any fleet anywhere, which presumably leaves little if any time for worrying about the ambience. That said, they're also supposed to be one of the most reliable fleets going aren't they? I do often wonder whether the absence of a refurbishment for far too long is simply because they can't find the opportunity to release them, rather than through penny pinching?

It's true that XC's operate a a much more varied stopping pattern, while Virgin's stick to mostly IC style running--but Virgin's run with tilt enabled, which adds to the maintenance burden, so it can't be just that!

 

[AnonymousUser1]

Slam doors on Mark 3s are not the issue with PRM compliance, as I posted above!

I would be interested to see a solution that was compliant in terms of allowing a wheel chair or walking aid user to be access such stock without pre-booked staff assistance, also opening the doors fro mthe inisde whilr ALARP for 'door incidents' ...

 

[RobShipway]

I would be interested to see a solution that was compliant in terms of allowing a wheel chair or walking aid user to be access such stock without pre-booked staff assistance, also opening the doors from the inside whilr ALARP for 'door incidents' ...

This is a concern that I brought up earlier in this thread as I suspect that even when the MK3 carriages of the HST units move to Scotland that they will have to be Chilternised in some form which is not easy task as each carriage although built the same has different strengths and weaknesses from what I have been told by an engineer friend of mine who has inspected a few MK3 carriages in his time.

A just as difficult job would be to modify the class 442 units to be able to work with class 43 power cars, plus the fact that for me the end doors on the class 442 coaches are not wide enough I believe for a wheelchair unlike the Chiltern MK3 coaches. The only answer for me would be to change the guards entrance and widen it if possible, but this would take a lot of work for carriages that are probably only going to be used for a further 10 - 15 years at most.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

plus the fact that for me the end doors on the class 442 coaches are not wide enough I believe for a wheelchair unlike the Chiltern MK3 coaches

http://www.southernelectric.org.uk/features/rolling-stock/442/sn442news_i.html

If you scroll down that page you'll see the wheelchair space, i'm fairly sure they always had a wheelchair space during their days at SWT

 

[RobShipway]

http://www.southernelectric.org.uk/features/rolling-stock/442/sn442news_i.html

If you scroll down that page you'll see the wheelchair space, i'm fairly sure they always had a wheelchair space during their days at SWT

Thank you SpacePhoenix for pointing out the wheelchair space, but you still need help from station staff due to the width of the doors as mph1977 indicated in his post for a wheelchair user to access the train. Whereas a class 319, 377, 387 all a wheelchair user needs to do is make sure that they access the disabled carriage of the train.

 

[D365]

Thank you SpacePhoenix for pointing out the wheelchair space, but you still need help from station staff due to the width of the doors as mph1977 indicated in his post for a wheelchair user to access the train. Whereas a class 319, 377, 387 all a wheelchair user needs to do is make sure that they access the disabled carriage of the train.

Surely station staff are needed anyway in order to provide the ramp equipment.

 

[RobShipway]

Surely station staff are needed anyway in order to provide the ramp equipment.

That depends on the height of the floor of the train in comparison to the platform edge.

I am an able bodied person, but with a couple of friends who are wheelchair bound I hired a wheelchair for the day and we all got on the disable coach of a class 450 unit without any help from station staff who were not around to be seen anyway. We also successfully got off the class 450 unit at London Waterloo again without any help from station staff.

In the day and age that we live in people in wheelchairs should not have to rely on assistance from station staff so that they can get on a train. You look at other countries round Europe and wheelchair users can get on trains without any assistance, so why should they need it in this country?

 

[edwin_m]

That depends on the height of the floor of the train in comparison to the platform edge.

I am an able bodied person, but with a couple of friends who are wheelchair bound I hired a wheelchair for the day and we all got on the disable coach of a class 450 unit without any help from station staff who were not around to be seen anyway. We also successfully got off the class 450 unit at London Waterloo again without any help from station staff.

In the day and age that we live in people in wheelchairs should not have to rely on assistance from station staff so that they can get on a train. You look at other countries round Europe and wheelchair users can get on trains without any assistance, so why should they need it in this country?

Some wheelchair users may be able to get on and off some trains unaided, but the stepping distance to every train on the national network exceeds the limits for wheelchair access laid down in the TSI, so ramps and assistance must be provided. The only exceptions are a few stations round London where freight trains don't need to pass and the platform can then be built up level with the train floor.

Unassisted wheelchair boarding in other countries usually involves having a lower section of floor which is level with the local platform height. This would be more difficult in the UK because our loading gauge requires the floor to be significantly narrower if it is lower than normal. The floor is then likely to be too far horizontally from the platform for wheelchair or indeed other passengers to board safely.

 

[Master29]

(Hello everyone!)

Yes I agree with this, I've nothing in particular against XC or Voyagers but it's frustrating that this situation does not seem to have been acknowledged.

I use XC fairly regularly and on the whole, I find it to be fairly good - if increasingly evident that more money is needed in maintaining trains to a decent standard. It's true that the Voyagers need an extra carriage or two, and are in a shoddy state.

I was naively hoping that the next franchise award would amend this. In my opinion, it's what the tendering of the franchises is supposed to achieve. If it's not happening, I find that somewhat disappointing.

Have you tried Realtime trains as they will usually tell you whether an HST is pathed or not...Most of the time anyway.

 

[CosherB]

A just as difficult job would be to modify the class 442 units to be able to work with class 43 power cars, plus the fact that for me the end doors on the class 442 coaches are not wide enough I believe for a wheelchair unlike the Chiltern MK3 coaches. The only answer for me would be to change the guards entrance and widen it if possible, but this would take a lot of work for carriages that are probably only going to be used for a further 10 - 15 years at most.

Well no need to worry about that as it will never happen.

 

[D365]

You look at other countries round Europe and wheelchair users can get on trains without any assistance, so why should they need it in this country?

Not necessarily so, the variance in platform height in some regions is even greater than here.

 

[jopsuk]

You look at other countries round Europe and wheelchair users can get on trains without any assistance, so why should they need it in this country?

When I used train in Belgium in June the stations had portable ramp structures that needed to be used if a wheelchair user wanted to get on or off a train, as the high floor trains served very low platforms

 

[SpacePhoenix]

On HST Mk3s is the wheelchair ramp located in the same vestibule as the "wheelchair door"?

 

[Clansman]

On HST Mk3s is the wheelchair ramp located in the same vestibule as the "wheelchair door"?

Its located in the cupboard used to access the mechanics of the disabled toilet, or the wall adjacent to the window opposite the disabled toilet.

 

[BestWestern]

Its located in the cupboard used to access the mechanics of the disabled toilet, or the wall adjacent to the window opposite the disabled toilet.

Or, very occasionally, nowhere near :-/ Which is a bummer.