Could Compartment Coaches Work Again?

[whhistle]

I know this seems like a stupid idea, and it's not about "getting the crayons" out as some poeple like to say. Plus, there would be a lot of ifs and buts.

However... could they make a return?

If each compartment wasn't as big as the old style, could a compartment coach carry as many people as a MK3? Bearing in mind you have three people to a bench seat and two benches per compartment.

Groups would be able to sit together in a more private area. Would be great if services were reservation only so everyone knows they have a seat. If they were reservation only, those who are travelling from Edinburgh to London could all sit together, and thus wouldn't be disturbed by people getting their bags, or whatever.

Minus, what happens if you're stuck with someone that doesn't look very nice, or smelly. If you're a male put with laods of females or vice versa, may feel intimidating.

Yes, I know it probably wouldn't work, but with a bit of thought, could it?

 

[NSEFAN]

A general rule for the UK railways right now is to pack in as many people as possible, because the demand is high. The attraction of a bookable compartment is outweighed by the reduction in seats that this causes. Some intercity services could possibly be justified in having a few compartments, but given stock tends to interwork on various routes (for example, a Leeds-King's Cross train might work a departure to Aberdeen) then the stock needs to be fairly standardised.

Perhaps if there's a massive downturn in passenger numbers like there was in the 20th century, we might see compartments being added to trains as a way of improving the comfort to attract passengers.

 

[Joe Paxton]

For some reason when I read the title I thought of non-corridor compartment coaches, which of course will never be making a comeback.

 

[AM9]

... If each compartment wasn't as big as the old style, could a compartment coach carry as many people as a MK3? Bearing in mind you have three people to a bench seat and two benches per compartment.

Presuming that you are talking about standard class seating then that would be a 25% reduction in capacity over normal seating. There wouldn't be any scope for reduction of the longitudinal length of a compartment over open open car seating bays because:

a) people's legs and feet are if anything bigger than days of yore
b) access to the window seats would involve stepping over three sets of feet (i.e. even worse than the case of 3+2 seating) which would preclude any reduction of floorspace
c) the corridor would not be compliant with accessibility legislation​

Given current 'self-entitlement' behaviour traits of rail passengers (particularly regulars), there would be much abuse of the space within compartments on which is after all 'public' transport. As passenger levels approach the maximums that the infrastructure and rolling stock can carry, creating exclusive space would be at the expense of others, something that is already leading to the reduction of 1st class space allocations. That would also not be sanctioned on a part publically funded transport system. ...[/QUOTE]

 

[route101]

Not a fan of them , i can see why they are useful for groups . I find them claustrophobic and in some places was jammed in facing someone .

 

[theironroad]

In standard class, no way will compartments come back anytime soon. Very unlikely in first class too as pressure to reduce 1st class on intercity services. 1st is where they could possibly make a case for it and it would be sold at a premium to allow for small meetings to be held on board, especially if discussing sensitive information. I think some continental trains offer this service.

 

[AM9]

Not a fan of them , i can see why they are useful for groups . I find them claustrophobic and in some places was jammed in facing someone .

They became much loved by commuters who boarded at the trains' origins and treated them like their own personal space, glaring at anyone passing along the corridor who even thought of occupying vacant seats in 'their' compartment. Once the evening peak traffic slowed, they were regarded as sleeping booths, once again for first boarding regulars. Even those days ('60s & '70s) they were devisive. Today with today's self-importance attitudesthey would be especially problematic for on-board staff to manage.
If they became a privilege to the highest bidder, they would exacerbate the overcrowding problem.

 

[Mag_seven]

They still have limited compartments on DB ICE's - I had a whole compartment to myself from Hamburg to Mannheim a couple of years ago. But generally I can't see them making a comeback in the UK sadly.

 

[underbank]

Presuming that you are talking about standard class seating then that would be a 25% reduction in capacity over normal seating.

Not necessarily. From what I remember, the arm rests sank comfortably into the back, so you could fairly easily sit 4 "normal" sized people on each side. True, not good being squashed against people you don't know (although still better than being stuck as 1 of the 3 in a modern 3-2 configuration). But acceptable for those travelling with children (i.e. 2 adults and 2/3 children on one "bench") or for groups travelling together where you could happily seat 8 in a compartment. So I don't think capacity reduction is as bad as 25%.

 

[underbank]

For some reason when I read the title I thought of non-corridor compartment coaches, which of course will never be making a comeback.

Whilst I agree, I think that's a shame. Obviously, not suitable for long distances, but for short/commuter runs, I'd say it would be better than having to stand in overcrowded aisles. If there's no corridor, you could get probably 5/6 people to a "bench", so you could seat more people. But, current trends for the overcrowded/commuter runs is to reduce seating to allow more room for standing, so compartments won't be returning any time soon.

 

[Mikey C]

I much prefer open saloons. Apart from anything else, it's harder to see out of the window on the corridor side.

Where would luggage racks go, as the old way of putting them above the seats is I assume no longer allowed?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The fundamental problem with compartments (other than the personal safety one) is that people like a unit of seating for themselves/their travel group, and the train will feel crowded if that is not available. So, as most people are travelling alone or in a two, the train feels crowded once it is at best 2/6 occupied. Whereas, if you have an open coach with 2+2 airline seating, that will occur somewhere between 1/2 and 100% loading.

You can get some of the benefits of compartments by using doors at thirds rather than end doors - which is one reason why I'm surprised people hate that arrangement so much. This splits the coach into three smaller, less noisy compartments which feel a little more personal but not uncomfortably so.

 

[A0]

No - because they would be a nightmare for access - the corridor down the side was always very narrow so anyone with a pushchair or wheel chair struggled.

They also are highly space ineffiicient. The 'privacy' gain is off set by the problem of the compartments being misused - with the open plan a guard / ticket inspector has a full view of the carriage as they enter it.

They're nice on a heritage line, but not for day to day use.

 

[TheSeeker]

I commuted Brussels-Den Haag for a couple of years and was lucky enough to get first class some of the time. The international train has three or four compartments in first class and it is a better way to travel. Thalys has "the meeting room" compartment which I think can be booked for six. Even carriage 18 on Eurostar was divided with a door and partitions (no corridor though), I'd always go and sit in there if possible. The best experience had to be the "Jean Monet" from Brussels to Basel which my wife and I often took to Luxembourg. The train was entirely corridors with compartments. After the ticket check you could close the door and turn the lights off. Possibly the most romantic thing we've ever done. I think in the UK it would only make sense on long distance trains or sleepers.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Using the "old" Southern as an example, commuter capacity was always a problem and 5 or 6-a-side compartments were commonplace in rolling stock up to the 1960s. Since then, as carriages were refurbished, compartments gradually reduced in number.

The downside (hence their gradual removal) was the attraction of unruly behaviour, drink and drugs, sleeping, bunking fares and violent crime. A murder in an EPB compartment (unit 5115 from memory) hastened the elimination of (full) compartment stock on the Southern Region

I can't see full compartments ever coming back again. I think the 442's were the last side corridor compartment stock to be built (at least for the former Southern Region).

Maybe plastic/glass screens could be fitted to 375/377 stock - analogous to the screens fitted in EPBs to segregate smoking from non-smoking or to divide a full-carriage saloon into two "half or semi-saloons". This would not use any seating space and might give pax some sense of privacy in an otherwise all-open carriage

 

[AM9]

Whilst I agree, I think that's a shame. Obviously, not suitable for long distances, but for short/commuter runs, I'd say it would be better than having to stand in overcrowded aisles. If there's no corridor, you could get probably 5/6 people to a "bench", so you could seat more people. But, current trends for the overcrowded/commuter runs is to reduce seating to allow more room for standing, so compartments won't be returning any time soon.

I used to commute on what was a standard configuration on the GEML, i.e. 6-a-side non corridor compartments. I also travelled in the 4-a-side corridor compartments (on the class309s and MKI LHCS). Of course, if they only had up to 4 passengers, it was quite comfortable but when they had their designed complement of 8 passengers it was tight, stuffy, and had poor visibility outside if you weren't sitting right next to the window (and that was only on one side of course). The non-corridor compartments were known to have carried up to 30 passengers, - 12 seated and 18 standing, but they were akin to some of the Indian railway sardine tin loads, i.e. there was no room for 60 feet on the fllor and a lurch on points or braking could result in standees either falling onto the seated or treading on their feet, - not acceptable in these times of an enlightened safety culture. The corridor cars weren't much better, as nobody seemed to stand inside the compartments but the corridor was often dangerously overcrowded. Also there would be considerable difficulties designing in adequate grab handles that didn't at the same time obstruct free passage along the corridor.
The suggestion of compartment stock merely for the convenience of families and groups is incompatible with modern rolling stock deployment practice. Even if the railway could afford a sizeable proportion of specialised accomodation for seasonal or occasional passengers, it would be quite unsuitable for general use and there aren't the miles of unused sidings available for long-term stabling any more, (nor the acres of railway land on which they were laid).

 

[Joe Paxton]

For some reason when I read the title I thought of non-corridor compartment coaches, which of course will never be making a comeback.

Whilst I agree, I think that's a shame. Obviously, not suitable for long distances, but for short/commuter runs, I'd say it would be better than having to stand in overcrowded aisles. If there's no corridor, you could get probably 5/6 people to a "bench", so you could seat more people. But, current trends for the overcrowded/commuter runs is to reduce seating to allow more room for standing, so compartments won't be returning any time soon.

The murder in 1988 of a 26 year old woman on an Orpington to Victoria train with closed compartments (a 4EPB) suggests otherwise.

Closed compartment stock was already on the way out but after this 1988 murder BR/NSE limited its use to as few workings as possible during the peaks, and a red cantrail stripe was added to denote the position of closed compartments for those who wanted to avoid them.

The murder remains unsolved.

BBC News article from 2013 - Debbie Linsley murder: Reward offer over 1988 train death
Evening Standard article from 2002 - Yard reopens 1988 train murder case


[Edit - I see robert7111a has already mentioned this murder in his post upthread]

 

[yorksrob]

Not necessarily. From what I remember, the arm rests sank comfortably into the back, so you could fairly easily sit 4 "normal" sized people on each side. True, not good being squashed against people you don't know (although still better than being stuck as 1 of the 3 in a modern 3-2 configuration). But acceptable for those travelling with children (i.e. 2 adults and 2/3 children on one "bench") or for groups travelling together where you could happily seat 8 in a compartment. So I don't think capacity reduction is as bad as 25%.

On the CIG's, HAP's and VEP's etc the 1st class compartments had the moveable arm rests, so could be three or four a side. The standard class was four a side without arm rests.

The CEP's were refurbished with seats with rigid armrests, so could only fit three a side in either class.

 

[30907]

.On the CIG's, HAP's and VEP's etc the 1st class compartments had the moveable arm rests, so could be three or four a side. The standard class was four a side without arm rests.

The CEP's were refurbished with seats with rigid armrests, so could only fit three a side in either class.

4-a-side in second was SR practice from steam days (in full-width stock anyway).
The refurbushed CEPs had IIRC only one second class compartment, in the former TCK which became a TBCK, so I presume it wasn't worth the bother.

Going back on topic, I can't think of anywhere in Western/Central Europe where new second class compartment stock has been built anytime recently, and even first class compartments are becoming rare (Railjet stock has Business Class 4-seaters at a premium above first, and various ICEs have odd compartments...).

 

[AY1975]

The murder in 1988 of a 26 year old woman on an Orpington to Victoria train with closed compartments (a 4EPB) suggests otherwise.

Closed compartment stock was already on the way out but after this 1988 murder BR/NSE limited its use to as few workings as possible during the peaks, and a red cantrail stripe was added to denote the position of closed compartments for those who wanted to avoid them.

The murder remains unsolved.

BBC News article from 2013 - Debbie Linsley murder: Reward offer over 1988 train death
Evening Standard article from 2002 - Yard reopens 1988 train murder case


[Edit - I see robert7111a has already mentioned this murder in his post upthread]

There's also a separate thread on this murder at https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ended-the-compartment-carriages-on-sr.162277/

 

[randyrippley]

compartments need partitions, which means extra weight.
No chance.

 

[DarloRich]

Could Compartment coaches work again - no.

The requirement to carry more people than ever before means space is at a premium.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Could Compartment coaches work again - no.

The requirement to carry more people than ever before means space is at a premium.

Though interestingly a number of new designs of stock (the 700s being the big exception) have gone for very low-density seating arrangements, most notably the Class 800 and all three new TPE designs as well as all GTR Southern Electrostars except the 3+2 ones.

 

[DarloRich]

Though interestingly a number of new designs of stock (the 700s being the big exception) have gone for very low-density seating arrangements, most notably the Class 800 and all three new TPE designs as well as all GTR Southern Electrostars except the 3+2 ones.

But that is to ensure maximum occupancy

 

[mallard]

Compartment stock is still common on the continent, although mostly on reservation-compulsory long-distance routes. The Czech stock is particularly nice in my experience, being comfortable as well as having modern features like USB power sockets and LED lighting. The more generous loading guage is useful there; it's actually possible for two normal-sized people to pass each other in the corridor even with 4-seats-per-bench layout.

However, I'm old enough to remember Mk1 EMUs with compartments (you don't have to be that old to remember them, of course, they were in use until 2005 or 2010 on limited services) and while it was nice to find the standard-class compartment unoccupied, it wasn't all that pleasent on crowded trains (although having a door per compartment on those trains did make that bearable at least). If a train is expected to have standing passengers an open layout is really the only thing that's practical.

 

[AM9]

But that is to ensure maximum occupancy

[PEDANT MODE]Maybe better expressed as 'greater capacity'. Occupancy is really determined by passenger density.[/PEDANT MODE]

 

[AM9]

Compartment stock is still common on the continent, although mostly on reservation-compulsory long-distance routes. The Czech stock is particularly nice in my experience, being comfortable as well as having modern features like USB power sockets and LED lighting. The more generous loading guage is useful there; it's actually possible for two normal-sized people to pass each other in the corridor even with 4-seats-per-bench layout.

However, I'm old enough to remember Mk1 EMUs with compartments and while it was nice to find the standard-class compartment unoccupied, it wasn't all that pleasent on crowded trains (although having a door per compartment on those trains did make that bearable at least). If a train is expected to have standing passengers an open layout is really the only thing that's practical.

I fully agree with that. The 3+2 seating in the semi-gangwayed stock (the ones with the luggage racks over the seat backs were much better for standing. Similarly the TSOs on corridored stock were by far better to stand in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But that is to ensure maximum occupancy

It's not. Removing the third seat of 3+2 on the 700s to have narrow seats in 2+2 formation is, but not the extremely generous legroom[1] and seats with armrests found on the Class 800/802, all the new TPE stock and the Class 387 and earlier all-tables Electrostars. Those have generous seating layouts for no reason other than passenger comfort, because the layouts do not increase capacity, they reduce it.

[1] On the 80x all seats have a spacing similar to Pendolino *priority seats*. I don't like the seats themselves, but the spacing is VERY generous.

 

[route:oxford]

They became much loved by commuters who boarded at the trains' origins and treated them like their own personal space, glaring at anyone passing along the corridor who even thought of occupying vacant seats in 'their' compartment. Once the evening peak traffic slowed, they were regarded as sleeping booths, once again for first boarding regulars. Even those days ('60s & '70s) they were devisive. Today with today's self-importance attitudesthey would be especially problematic for on-board staff to manage.
If they became a privilege to the highest bidder, they would exacerbate the overcrowding problem.

Can't read that without thinking of "Galloping Foxley"

 

[greyman42]

Modern compartment stock would be more expensive to build than open stock.