Are interior lights on some new/refurbished trains too bright? If so, what could be done?

This topic has been touched on in various previous threads, but figured it deserved one of its own.

In my opinion, many trains in the UK have overly bright interior lights, including the newly refurbished voyagers, and most CAF and Hitachi trains.

I find the worst to be the class 197s. I have mild light sensitivity, and find myself with a migraine if I’ve been on a 197 for too long, and know other people who find this too.

It’s one thing saying that interior lights need to be bright for safety reasons, but surely they don’t need to be this bright?! Especially in the case of TfW, who have been running overcrowded 2 car 197s with no air-con, which presents a much bigger safety risk, in my opinion, than if the lights were a little dimmer.

I find GWR's IETs intolerable. It was actually the experience of using those trains regularly for a period that helped me realise I reacted to light: at first I thought it was just a coincidence that I felt nauseous and started getting a migraine when I was travelling back to Devon. Once I started bringing a blindfold, the problem was solved.

I prefer Voyagers when I can now, which sounds in isolation like the height of eccentricity. The warmer and gentler lighting more than compensates for the smell, however.

amahy said:

This topic has been touched on in various previous threads, but figured it deserved one of its own.

In my opinion, many trains in the UK have overly bright interior lights, including the newly refurbished voyagers, and most CAF and Hitachi trains.

I find the worst to be the class 197s. I have mild light sensitivity, and find myself with a migraine if I’ve been on a 197 for too long, and know other people who find this too.

It’s one thing saying that interior lights need to be bright for safety reasons, but surely they don’t need to be this bright?! Especially in the case of TfW, who have been running overcrowded 2 car 197s with no air-con, which presents a much bigger safety risk, in my opinion, than if the lights were a little dimmer.

Click to expand...

Yes agree, it’s one of a number of things which contributes to making rail travel unpleasant.

I remember making a journey on a preserved class 205 a few years ago, which still retained its 1990s-style strip lighting, and noticed immediately how much more calming and pleasant the atmosphere was - and that’s bare strip lighting, so hardly anything special.

For any evening journey on certain types of train I find it desirable to wear blue light blocking glasses, especially if sleeping soon afterwards.

Kilopylae said:

I find GWR's IETs intolerable. It was actually the experience of using those trains regularly for a period that helped me realise I reacted to light: at first I thought it was just a coincidence that I felt nauseous and started getting a migraine when I was travelling back to Devon. Once I started bringing a blindfold, the problem was solved.

Click to expand...

I really don't mind the IET lighting, it's indirect rather than direct which does make it more pleasant even if bright. I agree on the 195, 197 and indeed 700 which have direct LED lighting which is very harsh. One thing that may cause some people issues with the IET lighting is that there is a slight, barely perceptible flicker as there is with some cheaper LED lighting which may cause issues for some.

It would be possible to do better and stick within brightness requirements, though. The lighting setup in the Class 196 and 397 is rather better, with indirect "tubes" and direct spots which I think makes it quite classy.

I do however think most UK FLIRTs are worse than the 800s, the lighting is mostly direct and is way too bright, you don't need both the downlighters and the uplighters, one of those would do. The 777 is particularly bad.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Aug 2026 ==

bramling said:

I remember making a journey on a preserved class 205 a few years ago, which still retained its 1990s-style strip lighting, and noticed immediately how much more calming and pleasant the atmosphere was - and that’s bare strip lighting, so hardly anything special.

Click to expand...

Bare fluorescents were horrid, so I'm not with you there. The worst of all was the Mk3, though. So horribly bright (and a nasty fag-stained type colour) that as a kid I used to go round switching them to "dim" mode, which I think turned every third tube off? Indirect lighting (i.e. bounce it off the ceiling) to me improves it a lot even if it's too bright.

Returning home from Glasgow at night after a long day on a class 380 is not a pleasant experience, these trains are pretty good for modern ones, apart from the lighting. I can tolerate bright lights during the day, but at night especially if I want to rest my eyes, it’s not pleasant at all.

Bletchleyite said:

Indirect lighting (i.e. bounce it off the ceiling) to me improves it a lot even if it's too bright.

Click to expand...

I'd never thought about this - I'll have to look out next time I'm on a train at night and see if the light's direct or indirect.

I wish that the interior of Chiltern Class 165s were brighter - I can have trouble reading in tunnels - but then I am getting old.

Route115? said:

I wish that the interior of Chiltern Class 165s were brighter - I can have trouble reading in tunnels - but then I am getting old.

Click to expand...

I believe your wish is likely to come true. They are a bit dingy.

Some sort of dim mode, that's light enough to see everything but gentle enough to have a snooze would be preferable

I seem to recall that the technical solution to general lighting being perceived as too bright is to install reading lights above the seats: if I remember correctly, the lighting regulations permit a 1/3 lower level of general lighting above the seats if reading lights are fitted. That also allows passengers some level of control.

The light levels are/were specifically specified in seating areas and at both waist and floor height in the aisles. The lights need to be bright enough to provide enough illumination at all of these points.

The Voyagers use central spotlights to highlight the aisle and have reading lamps, plus lamps under the luggage racks next to the window pillars, so their general central strip lighting can be much softer than, say, the IETs; many trains including the IETs use two ceiling strips to provide all the light so are probably brighter than technically required in some areas in order to meet the brightness requirements at all measurement points.

Devonian said:

The Voyagers use central spotlights to highlight the aisle and have reading lamps, plus lamps under the luggage racks next to the window pillars, so their general central strip lighting can be much softer than, say, the IETs; many trains including the IETs use two ceiling strips to provide all the light so are probably brighter than technically required in some areas in order to meet the brightness requirements at all measurement points.

Click to expand...

This makes a lot of sense and probably accounts for why I prefer Voyagers to IETs - especially at night.

Kilopylae said:

This makes a lot of sense and probably accounts for why I prefer Voyagers to IETs - especially at night.

Click to expand...

196s and 397s have this sort of tubes-and-spots arrangement and it does work well, though not reading lights.

Interesting to compare the slightly unpleasant Class 700 lighting on Thameslink with the S stock, which seems to get it exactly right, with a warm yellow colour.

I wonder if railways will take a leaf out of the B787's book and have mood lighting which becomes brighter and cooler when approaching major stations...