XC Voyagers

[brel york]

You could call it... the Advanced Passenger Train

Lol good idea

 

[MG11]

You mean the cleaners that are out and about all day every day?

A family member of mine knew someone who was based at Birmingham and said the cleaners were being scaled back, I am talking about the Birmingham-Derby section here, there could still be cleaners on other ends of the route but I haven't been beyond that area recently.

 

[MG11]

Eeww. Hopefully not fresh?

Oops! Well one typo in a post that size ain't bad!

 

[AndrewE]

It was said earlier that Voyagers couldn't be split to provide extra carriages for strengthening the remainder because it would result in a surfeit of surplus driving cars which would be of little or no use.

Couldn't two driving cars be re-configured as one trailer by losing the cabs and joining the inner halves in a sort of cut and shut arrangement?
I'm sure it wouldn't be beyond the capability of Wabtec or the like.

I think we have been told in another thread that the driving cars [currently] have no compressors, so a significant engineering job would be needed. I guess if they are just rebuilt into trailer cars then it's possible that there might be room for them, alternatively they could depend on the rest of the train (like now.)

Voyagers brought about an increase in passenger numbers on XC, and so they now can't cope on the busiest trains.

I think it was the timetable improvement that built the traffic, because they couldn't cope from day 1 and the whole thing collapsed because of overcrowding. Doubling the NE SW service frequency (with shorter trains than the previous hourly service) did exactly the same as happened a few years earlier when the trans Pennine service went from hourly L/H to small DMUs 3 or 4 times an hour

 

[1e10]

Seeing quite a few of these on Journey Check lately.

"Facilities on the 20:00 Bristol Temple Meads to Birmingham New Street due 21:37.
Disabled toilet facilities are reduced.
Further Information
The accessible toilet in coach F is out of use. Should you require an accessible toilet on your journey please ask to be boarded in coach A where one is available."
​

Anybody know what is causing this on so many units? It's always coach F.

 

[superalbs]

Seeing quite a few of these on Journey Check lately.

"Facilities on the 20:00 Bristol Temple Meads to Birmingham New Street due 21:37.
Disabled toilet facilities are reduced.
Further Information
The accessible toilet in coach F is out of use. Should you require an accessible toilet on your journey please ask to be boarded in coach A where one is available."
​

Anybody know what is causing this on so many units? It's always coach F.

Isn't F adjacent to the carriage without a toilet, meaning two carriages worth of people will go to that one?

 

[1e10]

Isn't F adjacent to the carriage without a toilet, meaning two carriages worth of people will go to that one?

That's right - that could explain it. It does seem to be more common on services later in the day.

Though I can see this morning a message was issued for the 0935 Penzance - Manchester, which starts its day at 0600 from Plymouth.

How often do XC empty the CET tanks?

 

[swt_passenger]

I think we have been told in another thread that the driving cars [currently] have no compressors, so a significant engineering job would be needed.

Driving cars not having compressors is what prevents them operating alone, however it doesn't logically follow on that all 22x trailer cars have (or need) compressors.

 

[221129]

A family member of mine knew someone who was based at Birmingham and said the cleaners were being scaled back, I am talking about the Birmingham-Derby section here, there could still be cleaners on other ends of the route but I haven't been beyond that area recently.

They were wrong then.

 

[221129]

That's right - that could explain it. It does seem to be more common on services later in the day.

Though I can see this morning a message was issued for the 0935 Penzance - Manchester, which starts its day at 0600 from Plymouth.

How often do XC empty the CET tanks?

You only hear about the toilets in coach F and Coach A as they are the 2 toilets that matter for wheelchair users. The tanks are emptied as often as possible.

 

[AndrewE]

Driving cars not having compressors is what prevents them operating alone, however it doesn't logically follow on that all 22x trailer cars have (or need) compressors.

... which is why I said

if they are just rebuilt into trailer cars ...they could depend on the rest of the train (like now.)

 

[1e10]

You only hear about the toilets in coach F and Coach A as they are the 2 toilets that matter for wheelchair users. The tanks are emptied as often as possible.

I’m sure they are - are all depots/stabling points capable of emptying them?

Are there indicators on the exterior of the train showing if the CETs are full?

 

[MCR247]

I want to say there are but I'm not certain. I'm thinking of the red status bar kinda looking things, but I can't find a relevant picture showing them (everyone takes photos of the front not the side!)

 

[mark-h]

I think they have a light on the side that warns that the tank is over a certain percentage full. I don't know if it gives any more information (such as whether the tank is completely full or the toilet is out of service).

 

[cjmillsnun]

Um. Don't kill me here, but I wish voyagers or meridians would replace 159s on WofE line Services to Exeter,

I'll kill you now. The 159s are far superior both in terms of passenger comfort and (more importantly for SWR) passenger density.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Q2) Voyagers can couple.

Q3) They rarely run 9 car sets anyway, it always seems to be 6. But where they currently run 9 car sets you could use 10 or 12 car formations, although platform extensions may be required.

They can couple, but unlike 158/9s they don't have a corridor connection.

The 10 or 12 car formation will probably only have similar seating to a 9 or 10 car 158/159 combi, and they use the existing infrastructure. What will be needed in time is a new DMU that can match the 158/9 in terms of capacity and fuel economy.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Pretty sure they're part of the bodyshell, and cannot be removed even if they wanted to, which is why I think Voyagers are doomed to be bad no matter what.

Really? 222s have the same shell and have a far more sensible interior layout.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I'll kill you now.

Lovely!

 

[cjmillsnun]

Lovely!

I'm glad you took it with the humour intended

 

[ainsworth74]

If members could refrain from murdering each other and instead focus on discussion that would be appreciated

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

If members could refrain from murdering each other and instead focus on discussion that would be appreciated

Haha

 

[Intercity Exec]

I think that even the biggest fans of the voyager understand that they are not perfect in a number of ways, my own observations are the seat cushions being so flat that anything more than a short journey becomes decidedly uncomfortable, the limited access to the overhead luggage racks making them less than useful, the body profile making the window seat feel claustrophobic, the fact they do not have enough carriages...and they are just some examples, but it must be remembered that there are positives too, they are generally reliable, very fast accelerating for a diesel powered train (although this does make them thirsty). I do not expect any of these trains to be scrapped due to their cost to procure, their age and the fact that there is nothing suitable to replace them. If something does come along then most likely the sets would be cascaded to other duties, although what is somewhat limited due to the costs of both hire and operation. I have been clear on other threads of my thoughts on Project Thor, as for reforming the carriages it seems unlikely due to costs and voyagers do not really like being reformed and can throw up a lot of faults if attempted. Driving cars would be difficult to convert into intermediate vehicles anyway as the area behind the cab is a crumple zone (hence no passenger area between the internal cab door and first passenger access door), this would need to be addressed and if the only solution is to add steel this will further increase the weight of the carriage. Compressors could be addressed although it wouldn't necessarily be required, longer Meridians have an intermediate carriage without a compressor and multiple compressors do not operate simultaneously anyway. Regarding the toilets the external indicator confirms when the waste tank is 75% full (or water tank 25% full) and illuminates accordingly. The TMS gives more information including when the tank is full and a toilet out of operation as a result.

 

[superalbs]

Really? 222s have the same shell and have a far more sensible interior layout.

Huge toilets that take up so much space, one of the biggest shortcomings really.

 

[Mugby]

Huge toilets that take up so much space, one of the biggest shortcomings really.

I agree but I don't see any other option to the rotating door type toilet, If a toilet is required to accommodate a wheelchair, a door which opened inwards or outwards would be out of the question wouldn't it?

 

[superalbs]

I agree but I don't see any other option to the rotating door type toilet, If a toilet is required to accommodate a wheelchair, a door which opened inwards or outwards would be out of the question wouldn't it?

Class 222s manage fine.

 

[sprinterguy]

I agree but I don't see any other option to the rotating door type toilet, If a toilet is required to accommodate a wheelchair, a door which opened inwards or outwards would be out of the question wouldn't it?

The newer design of disabled compliant toilet module, as is being fitted to refurbished Northern units probably amongst others, seems to have a much smaller footprint than those fitted to Voyagers, and as noted, you don't need a disabled toilet in almost every carriage. I'd also be surprised (though always willing to be so) if the toilet modules themselves are unable to be removed, though what I have noticed is that the vestibules of Voyagers have more opening panels than an advent calendar: I'm not familiar with what's behind these, but if they hide equipment critical to the train then I would have thought that this would be the limiting factor, more than the toilets themselves, in reducing the size of the vestibules.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No. The Virgin West Coast Voyagers were modified.

There were no VTWC dedicated Voyagers in Virgin XC days (the 4-car 221s were meant to be, but were not necessarily used that way). They are all compatible hence the Alstom TMS rather than the Bombardier one that is the default and supplied with the 222s. Unless XC have done something to theirs that makes them incompatible.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Really? 222s have the same shell and have a far more sensible interior layout.

It's similar, but not quite the same, the 222s have a smaller vestibule area. You'll notice the 222s have an extra half-size window where the toilet is on the 220/221.

Taking out the disabled toilet wouldn't really add anything. You couldn't put seats there. It'd help with luggage, I guess, but then (as with the big pointless racks in the old shop) who'd use a rack that they cannot see?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Removing the disabled bog and replacing it with a conventional one would at least mean the chance of one being working in the whole set being reasonable. Would also add about 6 people to the standing capacity.

As for the vestibule racks, one option would be to point a CCTV camera at it and show the image on a screen on the coach end.

 

[jw]

When First Group won the West Coast competition in 2012, cancelled shortly thereafter, I'm sure they had promised to refurbish the Voyagers with new seats. Does anyone have any details on the full scope of the proposed improvements? They probably got agreement from the leasing company so the plans might be sitting on a shelf ready to go for the next WC/XC franchise.