I appreciate the improved reliability and faster journey times that the Voyagers have brought to the Crosscountry network, but where the option is there I will choose an HST every time, for the more comfortable seating, smoother ride and reduced chance of overcrowding. The 16:03 off Birmingham on a weekday is often popular with XC staff heading towards the East Midlands and North for this reason.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Whilst there is no doubt that the HST offers a lot more capacity over a single Voyager the very fact that I don't travel without a seat reservation means that capacity is irrelevant.
Even with a seat reservation (and I generally don't have one, so capacity is important to me), I find that sitting shoulder to shoulder to leg of the person stood adjacent in the aisle on an overcrowded train rather mars the travelling experience. Plus, I have travelled on Crosscountry services so busy that it was simply not possible to get anywhere near my reserved seat, or for that matter anywhere beyond the vestibule.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It's one of many aspects of the modern railway that have pushed fares up (as well as making journeys less enjoyable). It is our problem.
I personally don't think that fuel usage will have had any bearing on the increase in price of rail tickets. The prices would have risen by the same percentage year on year regardless of what traction is used on the service.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And yet with its distributed traction a Voyager would surely always get you home even if one of the engines failed and you might even keep time.
Indeed; it's not an irregular occurrence for a Voyager to be running on 3 out 5 engines and still keep time, although generally Bombardier will want to make sure that that unit ends up at Central Rivers at the next convenient opportunity (set swap at New Street or end of day usually).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
If you look at the number of stops on a typical Cross Country service and how quickly a Voyager accelerates it's very hard to see how a HST could stick to a Voyager timetable. Surely if a Voyager is running behind time its acceleration will help it make up time thanksto its distributed traction.
The HSTs are used on the services on the North East - South West axis that make more frequent stops and the timings, depending on which service you look at, are very close or identical.
However, Virgin ran its' HSTs in 2+5 formation in their final year of operation in order to keep to Voyager timings, so this might have something to do with the long layovers that are afforded to these services at the likes of Birmingham, Sheffield and York.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Voyagers have an advantage over HSTs as on some routes (mentioned in another thread), if one HST power car has failed then the service has to be cancelled
That's in a limited number of cases such as the Highland Main line and, possibly, the Devon banks (at one time I believe that HSTs on a single power car had to be assisted over the banks at Rattery and Dainton, I don't know whether this regulation still holds). In general an HST on a single power car will be permitted to struggle on.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Comparing HST's and Voyagers is a little unfair as the HST's are used less frequently, meaning that they are less dirty have more time for maintance and most people are comparing a full train (some with people standing) with trains which are generally less lightly loaded.
Crosscountry's HSTs are diagrammed on those services that see the highest peak loadings at some point in their journey, so that only serves to highlight that the Voyagers are far too short and unsuited to a seemingly ever-growing passenger demand.
