Favorite UK High Speed train

[shaun]

HST, namely FGW ones. First reason being they're HSTs, second they're amazingly comfortable and offer more legroom than any other UK trains.

Class 91s i've not travelled on so much although i have no problem with them, ditto class 373s. Class 390s i have serious problems with. They may look nice and modern but internally they are rattly, uncomfortable, cramped, claustrophobic and smelly. Also they make me feel a bit sea sick when tilting. The Class 180s are about the best DMUs around for travelling in, and i'm looking forward to trying a Class 395 shortly.

 

[Justin Smith]

I have to say I can`t understand anyone voting for a Pendolino...
OK they`re fast, and it`s fairly exciting, the first few times anyway, when they start tilting.
BUT, they must have been designed by aircraft engineers because they`re the only people who would ever consider the size of the windows to be acceptable. The first time I went on one I was shocked at how claustophobic they were. I did a bit of research (for Wikipedia, wielding a tape measure whilst the trains were stood at Birmingham NS !) comparing the total window area on a Pendolino with that on the "old" APT.
The APT had 19.0 sqm per coach, the Pendolino only 10.1. The latter figure is an absolute disgrace.
I`m only grateful they don`t operate from Sheffield......

 

[ukrob]

Maybe, just maybe, not everyone has the same opinion as you?

 

[Justin Smith]

Maybe, just maybe, not everyone has the same opinion as you?

You are right that wishing to look out at the world is a subjective feeling, though I can`t see how anyone would regard lack of opportunity to do so as anything but a negative. I cannot for the life of me imagine what was going through the minds of the designers when they first started wielding their pens (or should that be computers) designing those coaches. I`m also at a loss to understand how Chris Green, usually so in tune with what`s needed on the railways, signed the design off......

But, being a bloke, I`m always more comfortable with objective facts, and the figures for window area (19.0sqm and 10.1sqm) are objective facts. I`d like to see Sir Richard Branson, with all his media savvy ways, explain away those bald figures....

 

[Phoenix]

hock: hock: hock:

*thump*

I have actually just died, what on Earth are you on about??????? MTU better than a Valenta???????

Although I think the HST is the best, I've gone for the 180 because notwithstanding the unreliability, they look awesome and I love the thunder of the engines

I know this is going to be controversial but MTU's technically are better than Valenta's considering the reduction in miles per casualty and the reduction in emmisions and finally the reduction in noise pollution.

The best statement for this argument is "It wasn't broke so why did they fix it"

 

[ChrisTheRef]

You are right that wishing to look out at the world is a subjective feeling, though I can`t see how anyone would regard lack of opportunity to do so as anything but a negative. I cannot for the life of me imagine what was going through the minds of the designers when they first started wielding their pens (or should that be computers) designing those coaches. I`m also at a loss to understand how Chris Green, usually so in tune with what`s needed on the railways, signed the design off......

But, being a bloke, I`m always more comfortable with objective facts, and the figures for window area (19.0sqm and 10.1sqm) are objective facts. I`d like to see Sir Richard Branson, with all his media savvy ways, explain away those bald figures....

Another fact is that the big pillars which obstruct your view may well be the same pillars which save your life

 

[asylumxl]

Another fact is that the big pillars which obstruct your view may well be the same pillars which save your life

Agreed. And all trains designed to the EU regulations are going to continue to have thick pillars. I'm sure we'll hear a lot more moaning on here as new stock is built .

 

[Justin Smith]

Another fact is that the big pillars which obstruct your view may well be the same pillars which save your life

Well that`s an interesting point isn`t it ?
But where`s the balance ?
How far do you go ?
Mk3 coaches haven`t got such restrictive pillars and they`re acknowledged as being extremely safe.
On the other hand, if safety is your absolute priority over everything else, why not get rid of windows altogether ?
I`m in the groove now, also make rear facing seats compulsory, together with 5 point harnesses, oh yes and restrict all trains to 60mph as well. Then you could almost guarantee no one would ever be killed in a train crash.
The only thing is that it`d persuade more people to go back to their cars, and even more people would get killed that way....

The thing is trains are already by far the safest form of land travel. In fact when Keith Duckworth came up with his famous list to illustrate his theory of "risk numbers" train travel (without extra thick window pillars) was the safest thing he could think of.......

 

[WillPS]

Meridians. You've made the mistake of grouping them with Voyagers.

 

[ukrob]

Well that`s an interesting point isn`t it ?
But where`s the balance ?
How far do you go ?
Mk3 coaches haven`t got such restrictive pillars and they`re acknowledged as being extremely safe.
On the other hand, if safety is your absolute priority over everything else, why not get rid of windows altogether ?
I`m in the groove now, also make rear facing seats compulsory, together with 5 point harnesses, oh yes and restrict all trains to 60mph as well. Then you could almost guarantee no one would ever be killed in a train crash.
The only thing is that it`d persuade more people to go back to their cars, and even more people would get killed that way....

The thing is trains are already by far the safest form of land travel. In fact when Keith Duckworth came up with his famous list to illustrate his theory of "risk numbers" train travel (without extra thick window pillars) was the safest thing he could think of.......

Are you being daft deliberately just because someone disagreed with your opinion?

 

[MCR247]

Justin: I wouldnt say a mark 3 is extremely safe, I'd say a pendolino is extremely safe, with a mark 3 safe

 

[Justin Smith]

Are you being daft deliberately just because someone disagreed with your opinion?

Which bit of my opinion did they disagree with ?
Did anyone actually say they thought it was no problem that half the passengers on a Pendolino have a restricted view, and a third have a very restricted view ? I can remeber going on one of those things and from my seat I could barely see anything out of any of the windows. I was, and remain, shocked by the design.

Anyway, I`m not being daft at all.
I`m simply using exaggeration to pose the question, "how far do you go ?"
The thing is, if you`d gone back 20 years and proposed having a coach with only 10sqm of windows "to make it safer", people would have thought that was daft......


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Justin: I wouldnt say a mark 3 is extremely safe, I'd say a pendolino is extremely safe, with a mark 3 safe

I can only say that there have been some pretty severe crashes involving Mk3 coaches, and I`ve been amazed at how few people actually got killed in them. Back in the 50s and 60s (Harrow for instance) the death toll would have been 3 or 4 times as high ?
I`d be interested to know the fatalities per million miles travelled, in Mk3 coaches. I`ll bet you`d have to travel to the moon and back several times to stand any chance of being killed in a Mk3.

How safe do you want it ? And would you feel the same way if you had to travel 2 or 3 hours in a coach which you could hardly see out of.....

 

[MCR247]

I`ll bet you`d have to travel to the moon and back several times to stand any chance of being killed in a Mk3.

So what about the 7 people in Ufton Nervet?
What about the 7 in Southall?
What about the 31 in Ladbroke Grove?

 

[Justin Smith]

So what about the 7 people in Ufton Nervet?
What about the 7 in Southall?
What about the 31 in Ladbroke Grove?

Two points.

1 One cannot know how many of those killed in those accidents would have been killed if a Pendolino had been involved. If those accidents had happened in the 50s (pre Mk1 coaches), or even the 60s/early 70s (Mk1 coaches), I think it`s a safe bet that far more people would have been killed.

2 The point is statistically speaking train travel (esp in Mk3s/Mk4s) is exceptionally safe. Like I said above, Keith Duckworth used a 100mile journey by train as the safest of his risk numbers.
How safe do you want train travel to be ? And more to the point, what are you prepared to sacrifice in order to make it even safer ?

 

[SouthEastern-465]

Just cannot see why anyone would vote for a 390 over a 395. Have these people even been on one?!

To be honest I nick name them "Horses" as the shape of the front is quite simular.

 

[The 158 Man]

It's gotta be the 91s!

I feel lucky to see (and hear) them everyday.

 

[Justin Smith]

Two points.

1 One cannot know how many of those killed in those accidents would have been killed if a Pendolino had been involved. If those accidents had happened in the 50s (pre Mk1 coaches), or even the 60s/early 70s (Mk1 coaches), I think it`s a safe bet that far more people would have been killed.

2 The point is statistically speaking train travel (esp in Mk3s/Mk4s) is exceptionally safe. Like I said above, Keith Duckworth used a 100mile journey by train as the safest of his risk numbers.
How safe do you want train travel to be ? And more to the point, what are you prepared to sacrifice in order to make it even safer ?

Here`s an interesting point about convenience and pleasant travelling ambience v safety. I remember reading somewhere that it`s much safer to travel with your seat facing backwards, for obvious reasons. In fact I think military aircraft have their seats facing to the rear.
But how many of those who think that having minute windows is acceptable if it makes the train marginally safer actually choose to travel facing backwards......

 

[CallySleeperKid]

Class 43, there is nothing that comes close.

 

[Justin Smith]

You could argue that HSTs should be split into "as built", and `refurbished`.
As built they are my favouite train (to travel on), but the refurbished ones aren`t. They`re claustrophobic and lacking in leg room.......

 

[The 158 Man]

You could argue that HSTs should be split into "as built", and `refurbished`.
As built they are my favouite train (to travel on), but the refurbished ones aren`t. They`re claustrophobic and lacking in leg room.......

Surely the Grand Central ones have plenty of leg room? I'd hardly call those claustrophobic!

 

[Swift-Deere]

It's gotta be the 91s!

I feel lucky to see (and hear) them everyday.

Your so lucky lol

Gotta love the 91's

 

[The 158 Man]

Oh yes!

I work at the NRM and one's just gone by now, bellowing that powerful sound and blasting that wonderful horn (Must be some P-Way staff about!)

 

[Justin Smith]

Surely the Grand Central ones have plenty of leg room? I'd hardly call those claustrophobic!

You`re absolutely right there. Grand Central must be the only Train Operating Company (I so hate that phrase.....) to take seats out and increase the leg room when they refurbish their stock.
I was very impressed when I travelled from York to Sunderland with them.
It`s a pity they don`t operate from Sheffield.

 

[The 158 Man]

Yes they are great. The staff are always pleasant too.

TOC is a crap phrase, but ATOC is even worse!

 

[MCR247]

Two points.

1 One cannot know how many of those killed in those accidents would have been killed if a Pendolino had been involved. If those accidents had happened in the 50s (pre Mk1 coaches), or even the 60s/early 70s (Mk1 coaches), I think it`s a safe bet that far more people would have been killed.

But I wasnt saying that, I was quoting the fact that you said 'you'd have a go to the moon and back sveral times to get killed in a mark 3'

 

[Justin Smith]

But I wasnt saying that, I was quoting the fact that you said 'you'd have a go to the moon and back sveral times to get killed in a mark 3'

I was guessing how far (statistically speaking) you`d have to travel in a Mk3 coach to stand a significant chance of death. Does anyone know the correct figures ?

 

[ukrob]

I was guessing how far (statistically speaking) you`d have to travel in a Mk3 coach to stand a significant chance of death. Does anyone know the correct figures ?

Probably not as far as you would have to travel in a Pendolino

 

[Chafford1]

Definitely the HST - the train that saved British Rail??

It was a tremendous advance in terms of speed in the late 70s when compared with the 47s, 52s and 55s of the time - indeed the HST schedules were the fastest in Europe at the time and only second to the Japanese. The Mk3 carriages were also very comfortable.

They may be limited to 125mph now, but there are many accounts of 140mph speeds on the GWML to account for late running.

In historical terms, I'd say probably the best train to run on British railways.

 

[Wyvern]

It all depends what happens during the incident.

At Greyrigg the train moved in a straight line except for the first two coaches and they didn't hit anything else.

 

[Justin Smith]

Definitely the HST - the train that saved British Rail??

It was a tremendous advance in terms of speed in the late 70s when compared with the 47s, 52s and 55s of the time - indeed the HST schedules were the fastest in Europe at the time and only second to the Japanese. The Mk3 carriages were also very comfortable.

They may be limited to 125mph now, but there are many accounts of 140mph speeds on the GWML to account for late running.

In historical terms, I'd say probably the best train to run on British railways.

Apparently when they were first introduced on The Great Western (with only 7 coaches don`t forget) the drivers had a 140mph club for those who`d managed to get to this speed. The fun was put a stop to with a device to cut out the power (on the rear power car I seem to remember) until speed dropped below 120mph or something.