If coaches were fully or partly "first class" would you use them over rail?

[Howardh]

Thinking journeys of 100 - 300 miles.

Watched a video about a coach company in Latvia?Lithuania which divides the coach into two, 2x2 seating at the front, and a curtained-off "first class/premium" 2x1 seating with more legroom at the rear. Add free hot/soft drinks + toilet and the journey looks most agreeable.

What puts me off National Express/Megabus is the cramped conditions inside and the chance of being in long..long motorway queues.

Here's the video >

the coach part starts at 4.44

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would consider using coach if I could guarantee a single seat with ample legroom for a reasonable* price, yes. The only reason I do not generally use long distance coach travel is that it is too cramped.

* Cheaper than Standard class Advance rail, taking into account it being much slower and usually less frequent.

 

[Howardh]

I would consider using coach if I could guarantee a single seat with ample legroom for a reasonable* price, yes. The only reason I do not generally use long distance coach travel is that it is too cramped.

* Cheaper than Standard class Advance rail, taking into account it being much slower and usually less frequent.

I've no idea if any general coach firms do have that...I never see it advertised/publicised. If not, surely it's worth an experiment, like you it's the cramped nature and legroom and I'd certainly pay a premium for better. Add to that there's still the risk of covid-spreading so having fewer on a coach may help?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I've no idea if any general coach firms do have that...I never see it advertised/publicised. If not, surely it's worth an experiment, like you it's the cramped nature and legroom and I'd certainly pay a premium for better. Add to that there's still the risk of covid-spreading so having fewer on a coach may help?

Didn't the experiment take place already when First did their Greyhound operations from Hampshire and Wales? They were ex NatEx machines, down-seated to 41 seaters. Even with the rather poor promotion from First, not certain that coach travel would justify such a premium. Pay extra...might as well get the train.

 

[Howardh]

Didn't the experiment take place already when First did their Greyhound operations from Hampshire and Wales? They were ex NatEx machines, down-seated to 41 seaters. Even with the rather poor promotion from First, not certain that coach travel would justify such a premium. Pay extra...might as well get the train.

I suppose it depends on what route is covered and the options. Examples where a coach could be not much slower and sometimes faster than a train; Heathrow - Gatwick, Manchester - Cardiff (even thought there's a "direct" rail link) etc. With the latter I think the coach currently (one way) is something like £30 in advance, so £50 for First Class would be affordable, whereas a standard class rail ticket for a week today is £36 and those trains are 2x2 and can be packed and have limited luggage space....standard class. The motorways would have to be clear for a coach to do it in the same time - 3hr15 (train). Google (Omio site) gives 3hr11 (coach) as quickest journey.

 

[Jordan Adam]

At least for Citylink it's not the vehicles that's the issue (aside from Parks frequently using unsuitable vehicles) but the lack of convenience. Anyone else who's had to queue for a Citylink vehicle at Union Square Bus Station in Aberdeen will know how much of a hellish experience it is, there's nowhere to queue and you always have people jumping ahead. Timetables could also do with a good increase, especially the Inverness services during the summer.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I suppose it depends on what route is covered and the options. Examples where a coach could be not much slower and sometimes faster than a train; Heathrow - Gatwick, Manchester - Cardiff (even thought there's a "direct" rail link) etc. With the latter I think the coach currently (one way) is something like £30 in advance, so £50 for First Class would be affordable, whereas a standard class rail ticket for a week today is £36 and those trains are 2x2 and can be packed and have limited luggage space....standard class. The motorways would have to be clear for a coach to do it in the same time - 3hr15 (train). Google (Omio site) gives 3hr11 (coach) as quickest journey.

Well, coaches (and buses) tend to do better where there is no direct rail link anyway. However, it's probably telling that the one experiment didn't really work, and that the entrants into the market have sought to undercut NX (i.e. Flixbus, Megabus).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Didn't the experiment take place already when First did their Greyhound operations from Hampshire and Wales? They were ex NatEx machines, down-seated to 41 seaters. Even with the rather poor promotion from First, not certain that coach travel would justify such a premium. Pay extra...might as well get the train.

They weren't 2+1. And it was a typical FirstGroup half-job.

 

[Howardh]

They weren't 2+1. And it was a typical FirstGroup half-job.

Yes, for any upgrade the seats must be 2 + 1, just extra legroom doesn't cut it much. I much prefer a seat on my own.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, for any upgrade the seats must be 2 + 1, just extra legroom doesn't cut it much. I much prefer a seat on my own.

The other option is to sell a double seat for a slight upgrade, then you've got somewhere to put stuff. Trouble with that is that you don't make as much money as filling it.

 

[route101]

The other option is to sell a double seat for a slight upgrade, then you've got somewhere to put stuff. Trouble with that is that you don't make as much money as filling it.

Flixbus do that, you can pay for the seat next to you. Its a big incentive for me to use their services. On the three Flixbus services I have used, not many people make use of it.

 

[Megafuss]

I tried Citylink Gold once from Inverness to Glasgow and I really enjoyed it. The complementary food and drink equated to a kiddies size sandwich and mini bottle of Irn Bru, but I though it was worth the extra money compared to the normal coach and relatively limited train.

Having 2 + 1 seating would have been the only suggestion i would have made

 

[Glasgowbusguy]

At least for Citylink it's not the vehicles that's the issue (aside from Parks frequently using unsuitable vehicles) but the lack of convenience. Anyone else who's had to queue for a Citylink vehicle at Union Square Bus Station in Aberdeen will know how much of a hellish experience it is, there's nowhere to queue and you always have people jumping ahead. Timetables could also do with a good increase, especially the Inverness services during the summer.

Union Square bus station is completely unfit for purpose

 

[stuu]

I have been on similar coaches in South East Asia on long overnight runs. You get a standard sized bus with 2+1 seats which recline to nearly flat, I think they only have 28 seats or something. Far more comfortable than any coach I have been on, and got plenty of sleep.

The issue is that something like that is going to be a lot more expensive to run, and hence use. They will never compete with a train for time, so the market is people who can afford to pay more than a normal coach fare, aren't worried about timings and don't want to go by train. Which isn't huge

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

They weren't 2+1. And it was a typical FirstGroup half-job.

You didn't say 2+1; you said ample legroom. Or did you mean a single seat being 2+1?

I would consider using coach if I could guarantee a single seat with ample legroom for a reasonable* price, yes. The only reason I do not generally use long distance coach travel is that it is too cramped.

The fact is that if you want both legroom AND a single seat, then a 49 seat coach is going to end up being a 31/32 seater. You may consider paying 35% more for a seat but in general, the demographic for coach travel is a lot more price sensitive. As @stuu rightly says...

The issue is that something like that is going to be a lot more expensive to run, and hence use. They will never compete with a train for time, so the market is people who can afford to pay more than a normal coach fare, aren't worried about timings and don't want to go by train. Which isn't huge

 

[Bletchleyite]

You didn't say 2+1; you said ample legroom. Or did you mean a single seat being 2+1?

Yes, I meant a seat with no seat next to me, implying the 1 side.

That single seat is the whole reason I ever upgrade to 1st on a train.

The fact is that if you want both legroom AND a single seat, then a 49 seat coach is going to end up being a 31/32 seater. You may consider paying 35% more for a seat but in general, the demographic for coach travel is a lot more price sensitive. As @stuu rightly says...

It's about offering options.

 

[superalbs]

Thinking journeys of 100 - 300 miles.

Watched a video about a coach company in Latvia?Lithuania which divides the coach into two, 2x2 seating at the front, and a curtained-off "first class/premium" 2x1 seating with more legroom at the rear. Add free hot/soft drinks + toilet and the journey looks most agreeable.

What puts me off National Express/Megabus is the cramped conditions inside and the chance of being in long..long motorway queues.

Here's the video >

the coach part starts at 4.44

I think the entire reason they bother with a more luxurious bus is because the train service between countries is so poor over there.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think the entire reason they bother with a more luxurious bus is because the train service between countries is so poor over there.

It is true that you get such coach services far more in countries with inadequate rail services. Spain is another place you do.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

It's about offering options.

It's about finances - both corporate and personal.

To run a coach for a day is probably now somewhere around £900 and it's a fixed cost whether you have 32 or 49 passengers. So those seats would need to be sold at a 35% premium for the operator. However, most coach travel is very price sensitive. The type of person who will travel from Sheffield to London and goes for 4 hours on a coach rather than 2 on a train is probably unlikely to pay much extra.

It probably works where there is no rail alternative but think there's a reason why it's not a model that seems to be employed generally.

 

[Howardh]

It's about finances - both corporate and personal.

To run a coach for a day is probably now somewhere around £900 and it's a fixed cost whether you have 32 or 49 passengers. So those seats would need to be sold at a 35% premium for the operator. However, most coach travel is very price sensitive. The type of person who will travel from Sheffield to London and goes for 4 hours on a coach rather than 2 on a train is probably unlikely to pay much extra.

It probably works where there is no rail alternative but think there's a reason why it's not a model that seems to be employed generally.

Watching my example from youtube, looks like 1/3 of the seats are premium and the other 2/3 standard. So the increase of fare needed to make the premium seats profitable wouldn't be as much as if the whole coach had 25% of the seats removed to result in 2 - 1.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I do find the suggestion that people find coaches too cramped a little odd, especially when compared to my own experience.
On a coach you are guaranteed a seat and somewhere to safely store your luggage. That is much more than what can be said for many railway journeys!

The main reasons I don't take the coach more are routes, timetables and fares.
For most of my regular journeys, coaches are either pretty infrequent or don't run when I need to use them, often don't serve the destination and don't offer through fares with a connection I need to make by rail (e.g. down a branch line). Nothing at all to do with the comfort (which for the most part is better than the rail services I use).

 

[Bletchleyite]

I do find the suggestion that people find coaches too cramped a little odd, especially when compared to my own experience.

Objectively, a coach is narrower than a train (2.5m max) and has 2+2 seating, thus the seats are a bit narrower than most long distance trains. Similarly legroom tends to be tighter on coaches, though some trains are worse e.g. some seats on Class 350s.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Objectively, a coach is narrower than a train (2.5m max) and has 2+2 seating, thus the seats are a bit narrower than most long distance trains. Similarly legroom tends to be tighter on coaches, though some trains are worse e.g. some seats on Class 350s.

Many trains have 3 + 2 seating (which means the spacing is no better) or the horrible new style seats (which are much worse than the seats used in modern coaches) and that assumes you can get a seat to begin with (which often you can't - I'd defo say a coach seat is better than standing!).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Many trains have 3 + 2 seating (which means the spacing is no better)

Very few trains on main routes competing with long distance coaches have 3+2 seating.

I wouldn't count LNR's use of 350/2s on the longer distance routes here, as that is a rock bottom budget operation comparable with Megabus's initial use of traditional buses. The main routes from London to Birmingham (Avanti and Chiltern) use 2+2 seated units.

or the horrible new style seats (which are much worse than the seats used in modern coaches)

Whether my knees are pressed into the seat back in front is a priority (for my health, not just comfort, having had two DVTs and related complications) compared with whether the seat is nice and squishy or not.

and that assumes you can get a seat to begin with (which often you can't - I'd defo say a coach seat is better than standing!).

On almost all long-distance trains competing with coaches, you can reserve a seat. On a long distance coach you MUST reserve a seat (standees are not permitted), so walk-up travel cannot be compared, as coaches mostly do not offer it.

 

[gg1]

Yes, for any upgrade the seats must be 2 + 1, just extra legroom doesn't cut it much. I much prefer a seat on my own.

I'm the opposite, extra legroom would be an absolute must for me to consider this, 2+1 seating would just be a nice bonus.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Watching my example from youtube, looks like 1/3 of the seats are premium and the other 2/3 standard. So the increase of fare needed to make the premium seats profitable wouldn't be as much as if the whole coach had 25% of the seats removed to result in 2 - 1.

You could do that but I still contend that the reason it doesn't happen is simply the segmentation of the longer distance market has already taken place, and that the price sensitivity of coach passengers is more pronounced.

And for those rail passengers, unless there's some time saving with a direct coach to an airport, I don't really see much of move to coach with the issues of motorway delays etc (not that trains are delayed)

 

[Bletchleyite]

You could do that but I still contend that the reason it doesn't happen is simply the segmentation of the longer distance market has already taken place, and that the price sensitivity of coach passengers is more pronounced.

Yes, that probably is the reason. Those who can afford more go by train or car.

In countries where car ownership is low (e.g. Asian countries where basic motorcycles are more the norm but wouldn't be preferred for long trips) or where the rail network is inadequate (e.g. Spain) you do get this type of coach. The ALSA Premium interior looks positively opulent.

 

[mmh]

Many coaches don't have seats significantly narrower than some trains - a coach can have a far, far narrower aisle than a train.

 

[route101]

I do find the suggestion that people find coaches too cramped a little odd, especially when compared to my own experience.
On a coach you are guaranteed a seat and somewhere to safely store your luggage. That is much more than what can be said for many railway journeys!

The main reasons I don't take the coach more are routes, timetables and fares.
For most of my regular journeys, coaches are either pretty infrequent or don't run when I need to use them, often don't serve the destination and don't offer through fares with a connection I need to make by rail (e.g. down a branch line). Nothing at all to do with the comfort (which for the most part is better than the rail services I use).

In some ways why I prefer the coach with luggage, I took NX over a Class 444 for that reason. The class 444s only have overhead luggage shelves.

 

[overthewater]

Has anyone seen this clip from America, which is pure first class travel, which includes the “Hoverseats,” which effectively allow you to float above the bumps and dips.