The railways in 1963 vs 2023 - what would you prefer?

[AM9]

Most peoples' sofas are cheap mass-produced ones from the likes of DFS, so yes, I do mean most sofas.

If you spend a fortune I'm sure you can get ones that encourage a good posture, but most people don't.

Personally I replaced mine, as mentioned above, with some 150 quid Ikea Poang chairs, which are a bit like a railway first class seat in size and shape, just a bit bouncier, and do promote good posture (as I have back issues).

Yes many of the Ikea lounge furniture items do have a healthy posture, and the POANG chairs are frequently recommended by GPs and Physiotherapists. It is not necessary to spend thousands on what looks comfortable but really isnt.

 

[yorksrob]

The EPBs were similar to the MK1 ac EMUs of the '60s, - lively suspension with deep sprung seats and a poor posture. Clearly some here think that a perception of comfort trumps a healthy posture.

I don't agree with your point about posture. Mk1 seat backs of the era were typically built up at the base to provide support for the back.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't agree with your point about posture. Mk1 seat backs of the era were typically built up at the base to provide support for the back.

To me they were a rather odd shape that didn't encourage good posture, a bit like cheap sofas.

 

[yorksrob]

To me they were a rather odd shape that didn't encourage good posture, a bit like cheap sofas.

I tend to find sofas worse because the distance from the front of the seat to the seat back is often far too far for my short legs, whereas train seats tend to be the right depth.

As for the curve on a mk1 seat back (Certainly the Southern Region MU's), I find it makes it easy for me to sit upright properly. Maybe it's to do with personal height as well.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As for the curve on a mk1 seat back (Certainly the Southern Region MU's), I find it makes it easy for me to sit upright properly. Maybe it's to do with personal height as well.

One of the dangers of shaping a seat like that is that it does mean only people with the right back shape will like it. See also protruding headrests at a specific height like those on the Merseyrail 777s and the new cushions on the Avanti 1st seats.

 

[Falcon1200]

Nor about "safety" - in general, yes - but in the railway context - no, not even then with the "unsafe" railway we had, it was still by far the safest way to travel

I care very much about safety, not only for passengers but for staff too; The statistics for BR staff killed and injured at work in the past are absolutely horrifying. That is one area at least where the 2023 railway is massively better than at any other time.

Being just 4 in 1963 I cannot comment on the travelling experience then, 1973 would be a valid comparison for me, and on many routes the frequency of service now bears no resemblance to then; For example, this year I went to the Severn Valley Railway using the first train from Oxford to Worcester, at 0652; In my 1972 timetable the earliest train is 0925, and the next after that not until 1221!

 

[Ashley Hill]

1963 when it was a railwayman’s railway. I’d happily kick this modern world into the long grass!

 

[yorksrob]

One of the dangers of shaping a seat like that is that it does mean only people with the right back shape will like it. See also protruding headrests at a specific height like those on the Merseyrail 777s and the new cushions on the Avanti 1st seats.

Fortunately on the Mk1 MU's the headrests didn't protrude very far.

A lot of modern train seats also have a curve into the back presumably for the same reason (thinking of the Northern 195's), however they lack the cushioned base to stop one's rear end going to sleep.

 

[Intercity110]

1963 for leisure, 2023 for commuting. For instance, if I were to leave Northampton at 07:00, I'd get there around 10:00 in 1963 (or at least, I think. I'll have to consult my 1963 timetable), whereas today to get to London at 10:00 I'd need to leave at around half eight. aside from the times, I'd probably have to pick 1963, sue to the fact that there was a non-electrified WCML, and lots of locomotives. however 2023 has more trains per day, and the 350s are on the whole very nice units. With the stations, they would mostly be under refurbishment.

 

[Magdalia]

I care very much about safety, not only for passengers but for staff too; The statistics for BR staff killed and injured at work in the past are absolutely horrifying. That is one area at least where the 2023 railway is massively better than at any other time.

Though 1963 has many advantages, I agree 100% on this.

I have researched the British Railways Board minutes of the period. Almost every meeting starts with the agreement of ex gratia payments to widows of railwaymen killed on duty since the previous meeting.

 

[AM9]

I don't agree with your point about posture. Mk1 seat backs of the era were typically built up at the base to provide support for the back.

I've commmented on this in other threads but to repeat it, the MK1 seats when just refurbished were generally reasonably comfortable (for me and most of those that I travelled with). Within 3-6 months, the straw or other padding and the steel springs would compress/sag and the posture would get progressively worse until at times it was sometimes better to stand for up to 30 mins. Compare that with modern seats that although they might have less padding from the outset, the posture is always correct and a on well worn seat it might just be a little hard. That can be uncomfortable, but unlikely to cause spinal or other damage.

 

[yorksrob]

I've commmented on this in other threads but to repeat it, the MK1 seats when just refurbished were generally reasonably comfortable (for me and most of those that I travelled with). Within 3-6 months, the straw or other padding and the steel springs would compress/sag and the posture would get progressively worse until at times it was sometimes better to stand for up to 30 mins. Compare that with modern seats that although they might have less padding from the outset, the posture is always correct and a on well worn seat it might just be a little hard. That can be uncomfortable, but unlikely to cause spinal or other damage.

Well, I spent many years travelling in mk1 EMU's and haven't encountered back problems then or in the sixteen or so years since they left the network.

I've not seen any statistics to suggest that such train seating caused, or even exacerbated back problems to any great degree. You are, of course free to choose your own preferred year according to your own priorities.

 

[AM9]

Well, I spent many years travelling in mk1 EMU's and haven't encountered back problems then or in the sixteen or so years since they left the network.

I've not seen any statistics to suggest that such train seating caused, or even exacerbated back problems to any great degree. You are, of course free to choose your own preferred year according to your own priorities.

I travelled extensively on MK1 stock throughout the '70s when I was in my '20s. I was then a lot fitter than now (I do have moderate back issues but I can't attribute that entirely to MK1 seat deficiencies), but even then i would get a stiff back when I alighted from a seat in the condition that was typical after heavy GEML use for a few months. Some of the seat padding on the Thameslink class 700s is pretty compressed when nearing the next refurb, but even with a much compromised back, I don't get the same problems that I did in my younger years.
And it's not just the 700s' seats, - on 5 hour journeys from Paddington to St Erth, the 80xs' seats are better than the HST's MK111 seats were, despite their being criticised by a few here.
[/QUOTE]

 

[Grumpy]

Given a choice between a late build MK1 FK running on Commonwealth or B4 bogies with (working) steam heating, to anything built by CAF, I would prefer to travel on the former.

 

[QJ]

How can it not be 1963! The adventures of diesel hydraulic hauled trains running through floods and stormy weather, getting snowed in for days on end in the middle of nowhere. Additional trains, overnight sleeper and mail trains with passenger accommodation allowing day trips to far flung places without needing three days and expensive hotels for two nights.

Only thing wrong with 1963 is the line that passed the bottom of the house I was born in closed in 1962. Bowled!

 

[Bald Rick]

2023.

Why anyone would want to go back to a less safe, slower, less frequent, less accessible, dirtier railway is beyond me.

Given the option, I’d prefer 2083.

 

[AM9]

How can it not be 1963!

Quite easily, not everybody wants to trade modern day health and safety standards for the environmental and health hazards od 60 years ago.*
It's fine carving out a niche situation of enthusiasts delights an a particular batch of Mk1 rolling stock for an interest in experience. But facing daily travel on a barely functional train with much higher failure rates running under a signalling system that requires continuous attention from everybody using it is a very different experience.
* In 1963, most mk1s had leaky steam heating, asbestos insulation, toilets that dropped sewage on tracks, even in stations, no airconditioning so iron brake shoe dust wafted in the windows, dim tungsten lights that made it impossible to read anything less than 18pt text in a newspaper, potentially dangerous slam doors that sometimes jammed closed or sometimes flew open ... etc..

 

[yorksrob]

2023.

Why anyone would want to go back to a less safe, slower, less frequent, less accessible, dirtier railway is beyond me.

Given the option, I’d prefer 2083.

Yes, why would anyone want to swap this earthly paradise, where it's a lottery whether your Northern or TPE turns up, and you have days on end where barely anything runs at all, and the seats are like planks of wood, and it costs an arm and a leg unless you book twelve weeks in advance etc.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Nov 2023 ==

But facing daily travel on a barely functional train with much higher failure

Many of the MU's on the Southern were renowned for their reliability.

 

[Bald Rick]

and you have days on end where barely anything runs at all

?

 

[yorksrob]

?

You've missed the year + industrial action then ?

 

[Bald Rick]

You've missed the year + industrial action then ?

You‘ve missed the coldest winter of the century, evidently!

Winter 1963

The winter of 1962–1963, known as the Big Freeze of 1963, was one of the coldest winters (defined as the months of December, January and February) on record in the United Kingdom.[2] Temperatures plummeted and lakes and rivers began to freeze over.

 

[Dr Hoo]

You‘ve missed the coldest winter of the century, evidently!

Winter 1963

Don't worry! Dr Beeching took it all in his stride. It's amazing to think that the British Transport Commission finally came to an end on 31 December 1962 and 'British Railways' as many of us remember it was literally born into a snowdrift under the Doctor's continuing leadership.

 

[yorksrob]

You‘ve missed the coldest winter of the century, evidently!

Winter 1963

I admit I'm a harsh critic, but even I wouldn't blame British Railways for the coldest winter of the century.

The majority of the 2023 railways problems are due to human, not natural factors.

 

[uglymonkey]

I wouldn't fancy sitting in a compartment on a full train, with everyone smoking incessantly. ( yes I know there were non smoking compartments, or I could stand in the corridor), but its rush hour and I couldnt get a seat.
It would be nice to get a hot meal on a train.
Even though I was brought up on it until I was 9, I would hate to go back to £sd for money. "Sorry, I've only got a 10/- note".

 

[Bald Rick]

I admit I'm a harsh critic, but even I wouldn't blame British Railways for the coldest winter of the century.

The majority of the 2023 railways problems are due to human, not natural factors.

But the point being - the trains were pretty unreliable in the first couple of months!

 

[yorksrob]

But the point being - the trains were pretty unreliable in the first couple of months!

As they are in 2023 during extreme weather.

However I'm excluding factors that are beyond anyone's control.

 

[Mat17]

Although 1963 was long before my time, but I'd happily go back to then. I've always loved first gen DMUs.

Trips to Manchester via Woodhead instead of the meandering Hope Valley backwater.

 

[AM9]

I think part of the problem with the discussion here is that nostalgia is driving posters to prefer the halcyon days of 1963, along with a fair help of more recent experience through heritage or main line steam specials. The two are completely different, and distort any comparison. The last Mk1 coach that I travelled in was on the Cathedrals Express from St Albans to Carlisle via Settle. Even though we travelled in a spotless FO with Pullman dining, it was clear that the standard Mk1 CKS and TSOs were just as well turned out. I presume that all the running gear was also up to 100mph main line standards so for comparison purposes, there was little environmental similarity to a Mk1 EMU or even a regional class 31 pulling a 6-car rake of average condition mk1s for 60 to 100 miles. Then add into this mental comparison the lack of steam motive power today and the much less interesting operational issues, it isn't surprising that the improvements in safety and comfort are taken for granted and the rose coloured specs are well in favour here on a railway enthusiast's forum.

 

[Mat17]

I think part of the problem with the discussion here is that nostalgia is driving posters to prefer the halcyon days of 1963, along with a fair help of more recent experience through heritage or main line steam specials. The two are completely different, and distort any comparison. The last Mk1 coach that I travelled in was on the Cathedrals Express from St Albans to Carlisle via Settle. Even though we travelled in a spotless FO with Pullman dining, it was clear that the standard Mk1 CKS and TSOs were just as well turned out. I presume that all the running gear was also up to 100mph main line standards so for comparison purposes, there was little environmental similarity to a Mk1 EMU or even a regional class 31 pulling a 6-car rake of average condition mk1s for 60 to 100 miles. Then add into this mental comparison the lack of steam motive power today and the much less interesting operational issues, it isn't surprising that the improvements in safety and comfort are taken for granted and the rose coloured specs are well in favour here on a railway enthusiast's forum.

True, but that said my memories of first gen DMUs were in their final rundown. Scruffy, chewing gum stuck in the seats and left in the old ash trays, a layer of dust and grime that puts most Sprinters to shame. But for all that they had character and the seats were comfy. I enjoyed travelling on them.

I don't enjoy travelling on any modern train, they just get me from A to B, preferably as quickly as possible. It's a lacklustre experience. The scenery from the window is the highlight.

 

[yorksrob]

I think part of the problem with the discussion here is that nostalgia is driving posters to prefer the halcyon days of 1963, along with a fair help of more recent experience through heritage or main line steam specials. The two are completely different, and distort any comparison. The last Mk1 coach that I travelled in was on the Cathedrals Express from St Albans to Carlisle via Settle. Even though we travelled in a spotless FO with Pullman dining, it was clear that the standard Mk1 CKS and TSOs were just as well turned out. I presume that all the running gear was also up to 100mph main line standards so for comparison purposes, there was little environmental similarity to a Mk1 EMU or even a regional class 31 pulling a 6-car rake of average condition mk1s for 60 to 100 miles. Then add into this mental comparison the lack of steam motive power today and the much less interesting operational issues, it isn't surprising that the improvements in safety and comfort are taken for granted and the rose coloured specs are well in favour here on a railway enthusiast's forum.

There seems to be a lot of discussion around cleanliness.

I don't for one moment doubt that there were a lot of grotty carriages around in 1963, however there are plenty around today. This seems to be a fairly ephemeral issue.