Voyager Capacity

[Fyldeboy]

It is widely commented that XC Voyagers do not have as good capacity as other similar trains. Living in part of the country that doesn't see 'em, why is this? Any why has nothing been done?

With one or two AWC seets possibly going for scrap, could seats from them be transferred? I'm Thinking....

• Reduce legroom - 12-16 extra seats
• Remove tables throughout = 20 seats on 5 car
• Remove 1 each luggage and bike rack coach C/D - 6 seats

And, less likely,

• Remove a std toilet on 5 car - 12 extra seats
• go Std only -26 1st +36/40 Std
• Make all 4 cars 5 cars

I appreciate these are all negatives, but when you are stood for 2 hours on a crush-loaded service, you're not too worried about the legroom.

 

[Bartsimho]

It is widely commented that XC Voyagers do not have as good capacity as other similar trains. Living in part of the country that doesn't see 'em, why is this? Any why has nothing been done?

With one or two AWC seets possibly going for scrap, could seats from them be transferred? I'm Thinking....

• Reduce legroom - 12-16 extra seats
• Remove tables throughout = 20 seats on 5 car
• Remove 1 each luggage and bike rack coach C/D - 6 seats

And, less likely,

• Remove a std toilet on 5 car - 12 extra seats
• go Std only -26 1st +36/40 Std
• Make all 4 cars 5 cars

I appreciate these are all negatives, but when you are stood for 2 hours on a crush-loaded service, you're not too worried about the legroom.

Part of the issue is the routes are quite busy but there is too much of a focus on pure London based travel which XC are set to specifically avoid. They were built in the shape of the tilting trains but then they don't really tilt so they are narrower than many other IC trains. Also the Class 220's are 4 car sets which is quite odd and shorter than other IC sets which are at least 5 car sets like the 221's.

What I'd like to see is the Class 222's cascaded over when the 810's arrive as they can be of the same family of trains and there would be 27 more sets (although maybe EMR want to keep some of them and you can't use the Class 222's with the 221's or 220's due to the electronics).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Reduce legroom - 12-16 extra seats

I assume you're growth-stunted or a child. Voyagers already have incredibly tight legroom, arguably unsuitable for an InterCity train.

It would I suppose be possible to replace the seats with a thin-backed design to add a few more in though. The new seats on the Avanti Pendolinos add about 2" of legroom at the same spacing, and there are thinner designs than those like the Fainsa Sophia (ugh) or the Fainsa Comrail "ironing board".

XC have if I recall already reduced the number of tables.

Really XC just needs more stock; the Avanti 221s would be a good start.

 

[Bartsimho]

I assume you're growth-stunted or a child. Voyagers already have incredibly tight legroom, arguably unsuitable for an InterCity train.

It would I suppose be possible to replace the seats with a thin-backed design to add a few more in though. The new seats on the Avanti Pendolinos add about 2" of legroom at the same spacing, and there are thinner designs than those like the Fainsa Sophia (ugh) or the Fainsa Comrail "ironing board".

XC have if I recall already reduced the number of tables.

Really XC just needs more stock; the Avanti 221s would be a good start.

Could that Stock be 222's with 810's replacing a chunk of them for EMR freeing them up?

Edit: Completely forgot about the 805's Avanti are getting

 

[HSTEd]

It is widely commented that XC Voyagers do not have as good capacity as other similar trains. Living in part of the country that doesn't see 'em, why is this? Any why has nothing been done?

The limitations are fundamental to the design of the trains.

Ultimately they are too short meaning they lose huge amounts of space to the ends of the train and to the desire for internal fixed facilities like "shops" and food prep areas.
They are also overspecced in terms of toilets, allegedly due to a desire by Beardy Branson to run a three-class layout (like his beloved planes).

They were also the first true 125mph DMU, and noone had really worked out how to build such a thing yet.

In my own view, better to just order a stack of 5-car IEPs and send them all for razorblades. Might cost more in the short term but the railway could really do with being shot of them.

 

[swt_passenger]

Didn't the XC versions already go through a process of removing luggage stacks, and fitting a few more seats, in about 2008/9 or so? Bikes and luggage space were concentrated in the former shop area, as that has no windows, previously there were more luggage racks up and down the trains.

 

[MattRat]

The limitations are fundamental to the design of the trains.

Ultimately they are too short meaning they lose huge amounts of space to the ends of the train and to the desire for internal fixed facilities like "shops" and food prep areas.
They are also overspecced in terms of toilets, allegedly due to a desire by Beardy Branson to run a three-class layout (like his beloved planes).

They were also the first true 125mph DMU, and noone had really worked out how to build such a thing yet.

In my own view, better to just order a stack of 5-car IEPs and send them all for razorblades. Might cost more in the short term but the railway could really do with being shot of them.

Apparently, it's too expensive to order new trains nowadays. If we do see new trains, they'll be the cheapest available, so not IETs, and more likely a bi-mode 397 Civity.

 

[Tetchytyke]

• Reduce legroom - 12-16 extra seats
• Remove tables throughout = 20 seats on 5 car
• Remove 1 each luggage and bike rack coach C/D - 6 seats

I can tell you don’t see them! Arriva did all they could to densify them, and they’re even worse than under Virgin days. The seat pitch is tiny. There are no luggage racks- that’s why the shop was ripped out, to provide somewhere to store bags.

I don’t think the toilets or the ex-shop can be removed to increase seating space, either, as the body shells can’t be amended to put more windows in (I’m unsure if this is a structural can’t or simply a “Bombardier asked for too much” can’t).

The only solution is more trains, starting with the Avanti 221s.

 

[Trainbike46]

I can tell you don’t see them! Arriva did all they could to densify them, and they’re even worse than under Virgin days. The seat pitch is tiny. There are no luggage racks- that’s why the shop was ripped out, to provide somewhere to store bags.

I don’t think the toilets or the ex-shop can be removed to increase seating space, either, as the body shells can’t be amended to put more windows in (I’m unsure if this is a structural can’t or simply a “Bombardier asked for too much” can’t).

The only solution is more trains, starting with the Avanti 221s.

or longer trains (reforming 22x into longer sets, for example)
or better trains (at least for capacity, 80x are miles better, and if a 200 km/h FLIRT would have similar capacity to a 745, they would be even better)

But yes, XC should absolutely take the 22x as they become available to boost capacity and make up for the HSTs being retired

 

[HSTEd]

I don’t think the toilets or the ex-shop can be removed to increase seating space, either, as the body shells can’t be amended to put more windows in (I’m unsure if this is a structural can’t or simply a “Bombardier asked for too much” can’t)

Do they need windows to be put in?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Apr 2023 ==

Apparently, it's too expensive to order new trains nowadays. If we do see new trains, they'll be the cheapest available, so not IETs, and more likely a bi-mode 397 Civity.

No such product exists, the mobilisation costs for such a thing would easily swamp the cost of just buying IEP.

Right now there are just arguments between government and supplier because the suppliers wants some more subsidy in exchange for maintaining the fiction of UK train manufacturing

 

[Trainbike46]

Do they need windows to be put in?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Apr 2023 ==


No such product exists, the mobilisation costs for such a thing would easily swamp the cost of just buying IEP.

Right now there are just arguments between government and supplier because the suppliers wants some more subsidy in exchange for maintaining the fiction of UK train manufacturing

A 200 km/h bimode FLIRT does exist though, and stadler offered something bimode (a FLIRT/SMILE mix I think?) to EMR.

Though whether they'll be cheaper than another 80x remains to be seen