Class 390 or 397

[bramling]

Quite



Don't know. I do recall the Voyagers were "throttled" a bit after initial testing, they used to feel like a plane taking off when new.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Dec 2020 ==



I've had it every single time I've tried to sit in Coach K. Perhaps they have had a talking to and been told to only use that back row which I think is now marked RESERVED STAFF. Though I'd rather they were allocated the back two rows on the 2 side rather than that back single seat which is actually very desirable.

To be fair the issue would be improved if some (perhaps half?)of the tables for 2 in the other 1st coaches were turned around to make more single seats. They're only desirable because there are only 6 (9-car) or 7 (11-car) of them in the whole train, of which 4 are in Coach K.

I’ve only ever done coach K at weekends when there’s no kitchen, and on pretty much every occasion it’s been quite obvious that the catering person wants to try to keep people out if possible. This has varied from nothing said but an obvious atmosphere of displeasure, to not-so-subtle attempts to encourage a move, such as saying “the next coach is more comfortable”.

 

[RailWonderer]

I've sat in coach K twice and didn't do it again. The crew's attitude suddenly changes when you sit in J or further in. It's effectively their messroom, and they are quite defensive of the aisle. I once got up to ask if they had food left, one foot an inch from the aisle of the kitchen and the woman looked at me as if I had commited a henious crime.

 

[Philip]

In fairness to the staff the first class provision on 390s is ample, it's fair for them to have their own quarters to sit down in after they have finished their serving or revenue duties. Coaches G, H and J are good enough for passengers to use without having to go in the 'staff end' of K.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Dec 2020 ==

I find the 397 seating firm but that probably is more healthy for people's backs than soft thick cushions like TPE 158s used to have.

 

[bramling]

In fairness to the staff the first class provision on 390s is ample, it's fair for them to have their own quarters to sit down in after they have finished their serving or revenue duties. Coaches G, H and J are good enough for passengers to use without having to go in the 'staff end' of K.

So coach K is the “one million pound messroom”?

I don’t agree - this space has been provided by the industry for passenger use, there’s no way staff relaxation justifies a complete carriage, especially to the detriment of those potentially paying the highest fares.

They should have a mess facility, but I agree with the view expressed here that it should be segregated, and by that I don’t mean closing off a complete carriage.

 

[Bevan Price]

Class 397 anytime. I find 390s too claustrophobic, and the seats (standard class) are too narrow at shoulder height if the adjacent seat is occupied.

 

[Peter0124]

On Avanti, Coach K is the only first class coach I'd use to be honest seeing as it's the smallest, cosiest, the furthest away from standard and is the driving coach. Had a nice journey in there on the empty 04:28 from Glasgow last year, the staff weren't disencouraging me from sitting in there either. I sat in the seats near the vestibule door. And for standard it's coach A.

Whilst I like the 397s too I think the 390s are far cosier especially when travelling in the night as it's not too bright for sleep.

 

[Philip]

So coach K is the “one million pound messroom”?

I don’t agree - this space has been provided by the industry for passenger use, there’s no way staff relaxation justifies a complete carriage, especially to the detriment of those potentially paying the highest fares.

They should have a mess facility, but I agree with the view expressed here that it should be segregated, and by that I don’t mean closing off a complete carriage.

The problem is some passengers will ignore the segregation and go and sit near the staff. If first class is well filled then the coach shouldn't be closed off to passengers, but if it's just a quarter or half full then I think it's fair to let the staff have their own carriage.

 

[bramling]

The problem is some passengers will ignore the segregation and go and sit near the staff. If first class is well filled then the coach shouldn't be closed off to passengers, but if it's just a quarter or half full then I think it's fair to let the staff have their own carriage.

They wouldn’t be able to ignore it if it was partitioned off, which is what should be the case. I certainly would prefer a private area to take a break.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can't think of a seat that is more undesirable actually (next to all the comings and goings plus chat from the kitchen/galley area)

It's a single seat which has subdued lighting and is window aligned. Suits me, it's basically the First Class equivalent of coach A seat 45 which is undoubtedly the best seat in Standard.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Dec 2020 ==

They wouldn’t be able to ignore it if it was partitioned off, which is what should be the case. I certainly would prefer a private area to take a break.

As I said they should have moved the partition one window bay further along and put a facing set of 8 Standard style seats there in an area not accessible to passengers (i.e. an extension of the kitchen).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Dec 2020 ==

In fairness to the staff the first class provision on 390s is ample, it's fair for them to have their own quarters to sit down in after they have finished their serving or revenue duties. Coaches G, H and J are good enough for passengers to use without having to go in the 'staff end' of K.

As a premium passenger, someone who pays to keep the TOC going far more than anyone in Standard, I am entitled to sit where I wish in the accommodation marked for my use, and the use of any of that accommodation as a messroom is inappropriate.

Could you imagine, on a BA flight, the crew sitting down in Business Class seats and loudly dissing their managers and the passengers?

It is utterly, utterly unacceptable. If I were involved in VT/Avanti management, I would have very firmly stamped on it years ago. Rule 1: no member of on-duty uniformed staff occupies any seat a passenger wants (whatever the reason they want it). Rule 2: no discussion of other members of staff or customers in a public place under any circumstances whatsoever. Both would be serious disciplinary offences on my watch, and both occur in Coach K.

 

[bramling]

It's a single seat which has subdued lighting and is window aligned. Suits me, it's basically the First Class equivalent of coach A seat 45 which is undoubtedly the best seat in Standard.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Dec 2020 ==



As I said they should have moved the partition one window bay further along and put a facing set of 8 Standard style seats there in an area not accessible to passengers (i.e. an extension of the kitchen).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Dec 2020 ==



As a premium passenger, someone who pays to keep the TOC going far more than anyone in Standard, I am entitled to sit where I wish in the accommodation marked for my use, and the use of any of that accommodation as a messroom is inappropriate.

Could you imagine, on a BA flight, the crew sitting down in Business Class seats and loudly dissing their managers and the passengers?

It is utterly, utterly unacceptable. If I were involved in VT/Avanti management, I would have very firmly stamped on it years ago. Rule 1: no member of on-duty uniformed staff occupies any seat a passenger wants (whatever the reason they want it). Rule 2: no discussion of other members of staff or customers in a public place under any circumstances whatsoever. Both would be serious disciplinary offences on my watch.

It can only be that they know there is no proper messroom provision on the trains, and it’s not worth the cost of rectifying that versus peeing off a (relatively) small number of first class passengers, the regulars of which will know to avoid coach K after being burnt once. By rocking the boat they will simply come back to the point that there’s no proper facility.

Not a satisfactory situation. A partition like you suggest would be ideal, though it would benefit from sound proofing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It can only be that they know there is no proper messroom provision on the trains, and it’s not worth the cost of rectifying that versus peeing off a (relatively) small number of first class passengers, the regulars of which will know to avoid coach K after being burnt once. By rocking the boat they will simply come back to the point that there’s no proper facility.

Not a satisfactory situation. A partition like you suggest would be ideal, though it would benefit from sound proofing.

To be fair, marking the back row as "reserved staff" (which is what they did) is probably a pragmatic solution even though it leaves one (in my view) desirable seat not available to passengers.

I wouldn't say that there should be space provided on a train for staff to chat loudly and discuss other staff and passengers. If they want a rest, they should sit quietly in those seats and have a rest, in keeping with the tone of the rest of the First Class accommodation. Go stand in the buffet or vestibule if you want a loud chat. But under no circumstances whatsoever should staff be discussing other staff or passengers (unless required for the safe operation of the train) while on duty, or even while resting in a public place while wearing the TOC's uniform.

 

[gnolife]

I go for 397s if I have my dog with, the cycle area is a good place to put him, and 390s don't have anywhere he can go

390s are my preference if he's not with me

 

[43096]

To be fair, marking the back row as "reserved staff" (which is what they did) is probably a pragmatic solution even though it leaves one (in my view) desirable seat not available to passengers.

I wouldn't say that there should be space provided on a train for staff to chat loudly and discuss other staff and passengers. If they want a rest, they should sit quietly in those seats and have a rest, in keeping with the tone of the rest of the First Class accommodation. Go stand in the buffet or vestibule if you want a loud chat. But under no circumstances whatsoever should staff be discussing other staff or passengers (unless required for the safe operation of the train) while on duty, or even while resting in a public place while wearing the TOC's uniform.

What's in the standard class driving end of a 390 (i.e. where the kitchen is in first)? What did they do in loco-hauled days?

As you've said before, this is really about management and the failure to change staff behaviours.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I go for 397s if I have my dog with, the cycle area is a good place to put him, and 390s don't have anywhere he can go

390s are my preference if he's not with me

That’s interesting, because I typically feel a lot safer with my dog on a train within saloon doors, because I know he can’t bolt out of the train when the external doors open, so if I boarded a 397 I would sit in the saloon at an empty table with him below. But he is a Toy-Poodle so he’s tiny, and I can imagine that’s not ideal with a big labrador

 

[bramling]

What's in the standard class driving end of a 390 (i.e. where the kitchen is in first)? What did they do in loco-hauled days?

As you've said before, this is really about management and the failure to change staff behaviours.

The crew area of coach A has cycle storage and some emergency equipment. There probably is just about space to do something there, but then the staff would probably moan about having to walk the length of the train!

 

[LowLevel]

What's in the standard class driving end of a 390 (i.e. where the kitchen is in first)? What did they do in loco-hauled days?

As you've said before, this is really about management and the failure to change staff behaviours.

The cycle accommodation. See who gets sued first when they drop an open plate of pasta on someone while walking 11 coaches from the kitchen.

Use the bay of seats next to the kitchen in the buffet car.

They are entitled to access to water, to cook food using the train facilities and to make hot drinks.

The alternative is they say "sod off, deal cancelled, book us time off the train for a full personal needs break". This won't happen.

 

[bramling]

The cycle accommodation. See who gets sued first when they drop an open plate of pasta on someone while walking 11 coaches from the kitchen.

Use the bay of seats next to the kitchen in the buffet car.

They are entitled to access to water, to cook food using the train facilities and to make hot drinks.

The alternative is they say "sod off, deal cancelled, book us time off the train for a full personal needs break". This won't happen.

This is exactly what I thought. The TOC is pulling a bit of a fast one by not having a proper arrangement for breaks. Hence the staff antics cannot be managed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What's in the standard class driving end of a 390 (i.e. where the kitchen is in first)?

A van area. Not used for an awful lot, though the problem with having a "messroom" there would be it's at the opposite end to where most of them are working.

What did they do in loco-hauled days?

Hang around the buffet first open, but without the same "protecting it for themselves" thing.

As you've said before, this is really about management and the failure to change staff behaviours.

That it is. Basically, I suspect, an unwillingness to deal with unacceptable behaviour for fear of the unions.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Dec 2020 ==

This is exactly what I thought. The TOC is pulling a bit of a fast one by not having a proper arrangement for breaks. Hence the staff antics cannot be managed.

I don't overly care if they sit in empty 1st seats (there are normally plenty, typically the rows of 2 airline seats), it's saving a coach for themselves I have an issue with, and also the bad-mouthing of other staff, management and passengers which isn't OK anywhere while representing the TOC i.e. in uniform.

 

[py_megapixel]

warm and cozy atmosphere

You say warm and cosy, I say claustrophobic...

From an interior design perspective, I'd say that the 397s are a good concept, but executed "on the cheap" - in contrast, 390s have the concept (the whole "making trains feel like planes" thing) wrong, but have put a lot of effort into executing that wrong concept.

If I could combine the large windows, plenty of legroom and wood panelled effects from the 397, with the refined, "luxury" feel of a Pendo, and the seat design of a 444, that would be my preference.

From a ride quality perspective, the 390s are smoother for sure, but they also feel slow, and the tilt is a bit of an odd sensation, especially if you happen to be looking out of the opposite window.

 

[All Line Rover]

In fairness to the staff the first class provision on 390s is ample, it's fair for them to have their own quarters to sit down in after they have finished their serving or revenue duties. Coaches G, H and J are good enough for passengers to use without having to go in the 'staff end' of K.

You're the same person who advocates the removal of first class seating because - apparently - there isn't enough standard class seating, but you're happy for one of the nine carriages on a long distance train to be dedicated for staff use? Often a single member of staff? Makes sense!

You know, I've always thought that one of the two carriages on class 175s should be set aside for the trolley steward. They deserve that.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Dec 2020 ==

The problem is some passengers will... go and sit near the staff.

Good heavens!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I've yet to ride a 397, but if ever I want to feel as if I'm on board a WW2-era submarine I'll book a trip with Avanti. At least the interiors will hopefully be less garish and tacky once all the Virgin red has been taken out of all of them.

 

[py_megapixel]

You know, I've always thought that one of the two carriages on class 175s should be set aside for the trolley steward. They deserve that.

Sounds like a great idea. And the other carriage must surely be reserved for the conductor to have space to operate the door control panel in a socially distanced manner!

But no, in all seriousness, I don't think an entire carriage for staff use is a good idea. But obviously if their agreement is that they will take their breaks on the train, then they need some space to do that, and if the arrangements of them just sitting in a carriage are unsatisfactory, an area somewhere needs to be designated, even if it's only a couple of window bays sectioned off from the rest of the train.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But no, in all seriousness, I don't think an entire carriage for staff use is a good idea. But obviously if their agreement is that they will take their breaks on the train, then they need some space to do that, and if the arrangements of them just sitting in a carriage are unsatisfactory, an area somewhere needs to be designated, even if it's only a couple of window bays sectioned off from the rest of the train.

One window bay, fitted with 8 Standard seats with tables and sockets, would be fine. It'd be relatively cheap to move the partition in coach K one bay along. (You'd not have to actually move it, just add another one).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Dec 2020 ==

If I could combine the large windows, plenty of legroom and wood panelled effects from the 397, with the refined, "luxury" feel of a Pendo, and the seat design of a 444, that would be my preference.

The 444 itself could easily deliver this with some sticky backed wood effect panelling and new seat covers. After all, that's how it was done on the 185, and a 185 is made of the same components as a 444, just that the doors are in a different place and it's diesel rather than electric.

In essence the 397 is a cheapo "Class 344" - I'd rather a proper one, i.e. an actual Siemens built 444 with a pantograph!

FWIW, I think the 397 would have been better with the interior panelling, lighting etc from the Mk5 coach, which is far higher quality.

 

[HSP 2]

All this talk about the staff and the use of coach K as a messroom is not what the OP asked about, if the staff have to take there PNBs on board the train then they should have a dedicated area.

I like the nice and airy feel to the 379s but the ride can be like all of the CAF units and coaches that i have ridden can leave a lot to be desired, in that its hard and clunky. That apart 6.5./10

The 390s the lightings not as harsh but the cabin is a bit on the claustrophobic side due to inward angle of the sides been built for 140 mph running, the ride quality tend to be good unless the unit is due for shopping. So for a unit that can be coming up to 15+ years old!
Down side all of the noise that goes on in the cabin, the buzz, the tweets and the air conditioning etc. That apart 8/10

 

[43096]

One window bay, fitted with 8 Standard seats with tables and sockets, would be fine. It'd be relatively cheap to move the partition in coach K one bay along. (You'd not have to actually move it, just add another one).

8 seats for staff? Just wow. Four max, I would suggest - how are there even eight catering staff on the train? Buffet/shop/whatever (but that should be staffed at all time), chef or two; does it really need 5 or 6 others. I'd also suggest that breaks should be staggered, like they do in shops and other workplaces, so that there is a customer facing presence at all times.

 

[Jamesrob637]

All this talk about the staff and the use of coach K as a messroom is not what the OP asked about, if the staff have to take there PNBs on board the train then they should have a dedicated area.

I like the nice and airy feel to the 379s but the ride can be like all of the CAF units and coaches that i have ridden can leave a lot to be desired, in that its hard and clunky. That apart 6.5./10

The 390s the lightings not as harsh but the cabin is a bit on the claustrophobic side due to inward angle of the sides been built for 140 mph running, the ride quality tend to be good unless the unit is due for shopping. So for a unit that can be coming up to 15+ years old!
Down side all of the noise that goes on in the cabin, the buzz, the tweets and the air conditioning etc. That apart 8/10

390s are close to 20 years old, as a design at least!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Interestingly people talk of what if a 390 had bigger windows - that's basically a Voyager!

 

[HSP 2]

390s are close to 20 years old, as a design at least!

So using your logic the 397 are 5 years old, but the ride quality is not a 15 year improvement over the 390s.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

You say warm and cosy, I say claustrophobic...

From an interior design perspective, I'd say that the 397s are a good concept, but executed "on the cheap" - in contrast, 390s have the concept (the whole "making trains feel like planes" thing) wrong, but have put a lot of effort into executing that wrong concept.

If I could combine the large windows, plenty of legroom and wood panelled effects from the 397, with the refined, "luxury" feel of a Pendo, and the seat design of a 444, that would be my preference.

From a ride quality perspective, the 390s are smoother for sure, but they also feel slow, and the tilt is a bit of an odd sensation, especially if you happen to be looking out of the opposite window.

I'm very thin and skinny, and therefore I find seats such as that on the 444 as you mention you like, (and I know other members such as Bletchleyite are in favour of these seats too) have very uncomfortably thin backs to them. The thick cushioning of the Antolin-Laire seats that Pendolinos and Voyagers have is very much appreciated by me. The 390s have a small amount of fake wood panelling too at the saloon ends where the PIS is located, most noticeable in the saloon ends under pantographs (C/H), and I think this along with the red seats adds to the cosy feel, not just the small windows and dim lighting that suggest a "claustrophobic" ambience to some people.

Tilt is, of course, a matter of opinion. I happen to love it. I think it adds a great sensation to the journey. Others understandably may find it uncomfortable or even nauseating, which of course could be a contributing factor as to whether they choose to travel with Avanti West Coast or TransPennine Express.

 

[Jamesrob637]

So using your logic the 397 are 5 years old, but the ride quality is not a 15 year improvement over the 390s.

The 390 has amazing ride quality. All Pendolini I have travelled on (that's a fair few) do. The 397 would have to ride like a TGV to be that much ahead.

Which it doesn't. It's hardly bumpy, but only around the same quality.