Virgin Voyager Coach VS MK3

[222001]

They have like 3 unused sets every day, don't they?

Probably. I'm not sure. When I went past Cricklewood the other day there were 3 HST sets and a 5 car Meridian stabled there. There was also a couple of Meridians and a full HST set at Derby. So I suppose they do have plenty. Don't know if these are used on peak though?

 

[WillPS]

Probably. I'm not sure. When I went past Cricklewood the other day there were 3 HST sets and a 5 car Meridian stabled there. There was also a couple of Meridians and a full HST set at Derby. So I suppose they do have plenty. Don't know if these are used on peak though?

Guessing that's a weekend, right?

I think it's time East Midlands Trains properly integrated their ex-MML and ex-CT networks, allowing ex-CT to use Meridians somewhere.

 

[222001]

Nope it was weekday. Last Wednesday.

 

[90019]

"oh dear where do we start with this one"

A.The HST doors are easy to open, your arms are just too small/weak

Hmm, I see that you've now had to resort to personal insults to defend your precious, outdated HSTs.

B.Who cares about tilting?

People who want to get to their destinations quicker.

C. WOW congratulations on working that one out but have you noticiced that the Vomit had a engine under each Unit and the HST does not

So?

plus how would you know about acceleration unless you have been in the cab to work out the 0-60, and not only that the HST has more power the unit has all its power distributed to the other units

Because it's known fact that Voyagers accelerate faster than HSTs. Oh, and acceleration is measured in m/s/s, 0-62mph is an industry standard for cars.

the vomit is beter to accelerate because it has nothing to haul the HST has 7 (XC) to 8 (Others) Mk3`s to push-pull.

Yes it does, it has the weight of the unit to haul. Unless engines suddenly have the capability to make things weightless

Also the Vomit is a serious degin flaw as the toilet stuff (whatever its called) is right where the Exhaust is, (hence the bad smell)

It seems that you're the one who needs to get his facts right. This has/had nothing to do with the exhaust. It is/was because of leaky pipes and badly placed vents.

so you cant disturb the drive and ask for a Cab ride or a Horn.

I see that the irony of you saying that has completely passed you by.

and has 542 seats! so youll always find a seat!

Well, lets see, when I went on an HST to London, it was packed, and I did have to stand.

a Vomiter has 4-5 if its a Super Vomit and is always packed

That's odd, when I went on one not that long ago, there were loads of spare seats, and no one was standing.

maybe if you sat down like a normal passenger instead of doing heads out all the time

Oh, the irony!

3. CARRAGE?? dont you mean Unit? a Carrage is what a Mk3 is

The coaches in an HST and a Voyager are both coaches, but the Voyager has an engine. They're both DMUs, class 253/254 and 220/221 respectively.

4. no offence but you should at least learn more infomation before you post

Umm, no; you should.

 

[87015]

"oh dear where do we start with this one"

How about all the other posts rather than picking on the weakest link?

 

[90019]

How about all the other posts rather than picking on the weakest link?

Because his constant bashing of Voyagers and saying that Mk3s are the best is getting annoying.

I don't deny that the mk3s can be good, but they're becoming old and outdated now, and times change. Voyagers may not be the best, but they're a step forward from Mk3s IMO.

 

[Daimler]

Because his constant bashing of Voyagers and saying that Mk3s are the best is getting annoying.

I don't deny that the mk3s can be good, but they're becoming old and outdated now, and times change. Voyagers may not be the best, but they're a step forward from Mk3s IMO.

:???: I wish I could agree, since we're stuck with them for years to come!

 

[devon_metro]

Because his constant bashing of Voyagers and saying that Mk3s are the best is getting annoying.

As is the constant bigging up of Voyagers with little substance in their argument. No mention of names here.

 

[Geezertronic]

Problem is that you can bash the new trains and compare them to the older HSTs etc... as much as you like but they are here for the forseeable future and there's not a lot that can be done about that.

One could suggest that the Class 220/221's were the "MK1" designs for the new DMU's (or DEMU's) and the Class 222's are the "MK2" as I assume that the designers of the Meridians learnt from the mistakes of the Voyager/Super Voyager fleet.

Having not been on a Class 222 I cannot compare the two/three classes myself but I personally do not bash the Voyagers because at the end of the day they are only as good as the people who spec'd, designed and built them.

 

[43034 The Black Horse]

HST Are Rubbish Because the doors are hard to open and they dont tilt and take to long to accelerate were voyagers accelerate quicker

Im sorry, I know we've got 2 pages past this post but i've only just seen it!

It seems people who think Voyagers are better have no sense or good points to back themselves up!

"HSTs Take up a Hole Platform" That has to be the worst Argument case going! It really is pathetic. BTW, should be whole!

 

[87015]

Problem is that you can bash the new trains and compare them to the older HSTs etc... as much as you like but they are here for the forseeable future and there's not a lot that can be done about that.

One could suggest that the Class 220/221's were the "MK1" designs for the new DMU's (or DEMU's) and the Class 222's are the "MK2" as I assume that the designers of the Meridians learnt from the mistakes of the Voyager/Super Voyager fleet.

Having not been on a Class 222 I cannot compare the two/three classes myself but I personally do not bash the Voyagers because at the end of the day they are only as good as the people who spec'd, designed and built them.

The new generation ie 220/390 should be a far better travelling product than what it replaced. In myn, and many others, opinions they quite simply do not represent something that is the result of 30 years progress, in fact they feel like a backwards step in some ways. As with a lot of things in this country they are basically cheap and nasty (IMO).

Privatisation should have brought a trance of world beating, or at least on a par with, new trains to replace the Mk2/Mk3 stock. 220/390 do not compare well with new stock I have experienced in Europe, for example the Portugese Pendos have 2+1 STD seating to get round the crampness from the body profile, why was that not done to ours and built longer from the outset? As I said, cheap and nasty...

 

[222001]

It seems people who think Voyagers are better have no sense or good points to back themselves up!

"HSTs Take up a Hole Platform" That has to be the worst Argument case going! It really is pathetic. BTW, should be whole!

I have to agree thats HSTs take up a whole platform is a bad point had me laughing my head off.

The HST, Voyager and Merdians all have their good and bad points. I like Meridians but they are not perfect. HSTs are good but they are not perfect too. It's personal preference as to which one is best for you. Anyway passengers found the 222 the best intercity train in a recent survey - http://www.transportxtra.com/magazines/transit/news/?ID=16009

 

[Pumbaa]

Nope it was weekday. Last Wednesday.

The 3 HST sets are used in peaks. Not sure why the Meridian was there, possibly forming a later service of 2x5 Meridian.

Sets in Etches Park are maintenance sets, plus 1 spare. EMT are pushed to capacity as it as.

 

[37401]

Hmm, I see that you've now had to resort to personal insults to defend your precious, outdated HSTs.

i know him well, and really anyone who cant open a Mk3 door has ether small arms are are too weak, (or they are trying to open it when the bolt is across)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Because his constant bashing of Voyagers

Nope i dont bash voyagers only locos

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

.
The coaches in an HST and a Voyager are both coaches, but the Voyager has an engine. They're both DMUs, class 253/254 and 220/221 respectively.

he said carrages not coaches

as for the Heads out comment ermm i know what VTF does when hes on a HST and i went down to Plymouth on one do you think id have my head out all they way,infact i didnt do head out at all untill we his the Dawlish Sea wall

 

[43034 The Black Horse]

"

The coaches in an HST and a Voyager are both coaches, but the Voyager has an engine. They're both DMUs, class 253/254 and 220/221 respectively.

Except HSTs are not you know they're not. No engines underneath the coaches and the the PCs do not stay on the Same set
The cab is not joined to the coaches It's a seperate Driving Motor Vehicle. :roll:

 

[jopsuk]

When were HSTs reclassfied from the original DMU numbers (253/254) to being loco-hualed (Class 43 and carriages) officially? They certainly are remarshalled a lot more than a "proper" MU.

 

[generalvegitable]

I think that the system is this: A multiple Unit requires all of its carriages and has a passenger compartment where the engine would be, a loco doesn't require that and has an engine where it should be

 

[90019]

Except HSTs are not you know they're not. No engines underneath the coaches and the the PCs do not stay on the Same set
The cab is not joined to the coaches It's a seperate Driving Motor Vehicle. :roll:

And the leading coach of a voyager could be swapped with another.

HSTs are DMUs, hence the classification as 253/254. One of the main reasons this isn't really used now is because the powercars are changed so often.
An HST powercar cannot couple to anything else without modifying the couplers, using a barrier vehicle or using the towbar, and the rear half of the powercar is classed as a coach.
The Mk3s in an HST are also different, which is why they have to be modified to run as loco hauled, and why loco hauled ones are Mk3a and Mk3b, whereas HST ones are just Mk3.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think that the system is this: A multiple Unit requires all of its carriages and has a passenger compartment where the engine would be, a loco doesn't require that and has an engine where it should be

As mentioned, then rear half of the powercar; where the luggage compartment is, is classified as a coach.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also, the current TOPS system does not allow two classes of locomotive to have the same number, and the class 43 is an old warship class.
And the whole unit is classed under the 4XXXX coaching stock TOPS codes;
DMB - 43XXX
TGS - 44XXX
TSO - 42XXX
TFO - 41XXX
TRSB - 400XX
TRUB - 403XX (later 404XX)
TRUK - 405XX

 

[The Planner]

"HSTs Take up a Hole Platform" That has to be the worst Argument case going! It really is pathetic. BTW, should be whole!

Its not a bad point from my point of view to be honest. You would certainly have fun with New St if everything XC went HST, never mind the re-write of the timetable with slower journeys !!

 

[devon_metro]

HSTs are NOT units. Explain why a 43 can haul a rake of mk3s on the mml or how a class 43 ran light engine on it's own from SPM to Laira. I don't see a Voyager DMS doing that.

 

[43034 The Black Horse]

And the leading coach of a voyager could be swapped with another.

HSTs are DMUs, hence the classification as 253/254. One of the main reasons this isn't really used now is because the powercars are changed so often.
An HST powercar cannot couple to anything else without modifying the couplers, using a barrier vehicle or using the towbar, and the rear half of the powercar is classed as a coach.
The Mk3s in an HST are also different, which is why they have to be modified to run as loco hauled, and why loco hauled ones are Mk3a and Mk3b, whereas HST ones are just Mk3.

All of the above is complete and utter rubbish! Whata re you on about the rear half of a PC is classed as a coach? It blatantly isn't which is FACT! You really do not have a leg to stand on when it comes to this as what you're spurting out is complete twaddle.

My final sentence which I eagerly await your reply to is; If they're classed as DMUs, why can't HSTs use differential DMU speed limits on the Skegness line?:roll:

 

[The Planner]

My final sentence which I eagerly await your reply to is; If they're classed as DMUs, why can't HSTs use differential DMU speed limits on the Skegness line?:roll:

Becuase there arent any DMU speed limits up there. The differential is split for passenger/freight. The issue with HSTs going up there are various structures, such as Bellwater drain which has a 5mph restriction over it for anything but units.

Rulebook module SP isnt very clear about this though as it doesnt state HSTs are DMUs (it doesnt actually say what a DMU is). If you really want to be a pedant, you could say a 185 isnt a DMU, as it cant use MU or DMU differentials because its a bit of a porker.

 

[43034 The Black Horse]

Becuase there arent any DMU speed limits up there. The differential is split for passenger/freight. The issue with HSTs going up there are various structures, such as Bellwater drain which has a 5mph restriction over it for anything but units.

Rulebook module SP isnt very clear about this though as it doesnt state HSTs are DMUs (it doesnt actually say what a DMU is). If you really want to be a pedant, you could say a 185 isnt a DMU, as it cant use MU or DMU differentials because its a bit of a porker.

There bloody well is DMU Limits up there! How comes when the HST Passed the DMU 50 sign it was only doing 30? Because it can't do 50 as it isn't a DMU!

 

[The Planner]

Believe me there are no DMU differentials up the Skegness line. Im looking at the Sectional Appendix. There are special restrictions in place for HSTs and loco hauled stock which are not signed, but no DMU speeds.

 

[Philip Elliott]

Whata re you on about the rear half of a PC is classed as a coach? It blatantly isn't which is FACT!

The early HST PCs were built with Guard / luggage compartments which counts as passenger accomodation. Also look at the liveries...

The West Coast LHCS Mk.3 rakes were formed of TSOs (Tourist Standard Open) and FOs (First Opens) whereas the HSTs are TSO (Trailer Standard Open) & TF (Trailer First).

The 'Class 43s' have always been referred to as power cars, not locos. I've never heard of a Deltic being referred to as a 'power car'!

Voyagers can't use DMU/Sprinter speeds in a number of locations, so are they not DMUs too then?

 

[WillPS]

Not sure if I'm right in saying this, but I was told there is no such thing as a "Sprinter" or "DMU" speed limit, there are just different speeds for different axle loads. The fact that 'SP' limits are relevant to all Sprinters is just a coincidence, hence why Turbostars and Pacers can use them.

So of course the HST can't make use of "DMU Speeds" it's WELL HEAVY at both ends.

I'm also of the impression that it is a multiple unit, they just stopped using its "proper" classification to make it easier to rejig them. Virgin even registered a "Challenger" classification didn't they?

 

[The Planner]

Voyagers can't use DMU/Sprinter speeds in a number of locations, so are they not DMUs too then?

The only place Im aware of that odd situation happening is on the Chilterns, where it is a Sprinter differential that only applies up to class 168 (ie: a 170 would have to use a slower speed). Voyagers are not classed as Sprinters, they fall into the MU/DMU or HST catergories.

HST class 91 locomotive with mark 4 vehicles and DVT,168/170/171/175/180/220/221/222/253/254/373/390 and soon 158.
MU multiple unit trains
DMU diesel multiple units
EMU electric multiple units
SP class 150/153/155/156/158/159/165/166/168/170/171
CS class 67 locomotive

At locations where both HST and SP speeds apply, classes 168/170/171 may run at the higher of the two speeds.

Class 185 trains must not run at any MU or DMU speeds.

 

[37401]

You should travel on more ..

yeah ive travelled on all HST`s apart from GC and NXEC,As i live in Birmingham its the XC HST`s i travel on the most and i have never seen anyone standing up


The thing i hate about the Vomiters is:

Virgin had 7 Car HST sets and Class 47`s (unknowen amount of coaches) on the XC line and they got replaced with 4-5 car Voyagers, yes im aware that a vomiter is faster than a 47 but i see no logic on making the train shorter, wouldnt it of been better if they had the 10 car 222`s?

 

[Jordy]

Please don't get into the are HSTs locos or units argument, it just goes round in circles!

Try and stick with Voyager vs MK3 please

 

[37401]

Please don't get into the are HSTs locos or units argument, it just goes round in circles!

Try and stick with Voyager vs MK3 please

ohhh that dispute will never end for the record all locos are classed 01-99 and units are classed 100-999+.

However the HST has been both, there end of that argument