HST v Voyager (Cross Country)

[The Ham]

If the train is less lightly loaded then it is more heavily loaded so it is therefore a valid comparison.

The point I am making isn't how good or bad the Voyagers are, it's more to do with how people perceive them because they are overload and overworked.

If you were to take the new e-pacer use it once or twice a week for a few journeys a day for 5 years and compare it with (say) a 158 which had a similar level of work done to it but use it intensively for 5 years. Then ask people who use it to compare the two with the e-pacer loaded with 40 people and the 158 full and standing on the journeys that people use it on. Guess which people are going to think is the worst train? Yes there will be some who say the ride quality of the pacer but most people will complain about the 158.

The simple reason being that 158 will be dirtier, look more worn out and more people will have used it so they will be able to think of bad experiences that they have had on it.

In the same way, more people use Voyagers than XC's HST's (I have never been on XC's HST's but I have been on their Voyagers quite a few times), therefore you are going to get more people complaining about them.

Yes, it is not helped by the fact that they are too short (so don't have enough seating for everyone) but I do think that the perception of them isn't as fair and balanced as it could be. If they were 6 and 7 coaches long then there would probably be a bit more love for them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Meridian is basically the same train with a slightly different cab end and a different interior - I don't see anywhere near the same hate for those.

 

[tbtc]

The Meridian is basically the same train with a slightly different cab end and a different interior - I don't see anywhere near the same hate for those.

I think that a significant part of the reason for this is that the 222s mainly replaced MM's 170s (plus some HSTs, but mainly 170s), so they were DMUs replacing DMUs (the 170s had previously been introduced on new services, to beef up the half hourly service from St Pancras to the East Midlands, inc extensions to Burton/ Barnsley etc)...

...whereas the 220s/221s replaced such exotic delights as 47s and 86s on the Cross Country network (plus some HSTs), so enthusiasts were always going to dislike them more - they'll compare them to the stock that they replaced.

• Replace a three coach 170s with a four coach 222 and people don't mind.
• Replace a six/ seven* coach rake hauled by a 47 with a four coach Voyager and a five coach Voyager (i.e. double the frequency) and people have a bit of a toy/ pram interface.

Just my theory. Whilst the 222s have seen a handful of tweaks from the original Voyager design (e.g. in terms of where non-passenger equipment is stored), they are essentially the same train, so the enthusiast hatred must be for a reason...

...put Voyagers on the MML and I don't think you'd have seen the same volume of complaints. But put them on the busy XC network and see the complaints escalate - often for the kind of minor thing that people wouldn't notice if a train had sufficient seats - e.g. in a nine coach Voyager you wouldn't be stood with a dozen others in the corridor outside the toilet, so less likely to moan about the smells.. if Voyagers had been nine coaches in the first place then they'd have seen a lot fewer complaints - they are mechanically sound, they are nippy, they are reliable - they just don't have enough seats (and caused some precious 47s/ 86s to be chopped up).

(* - I say "six or seven coaches" - some nostalgists are affected by what I term "Royal Scot Syndrome", where they end up remembering that every loco hauled rake on Cross Country was at least nine or ten coaches long - ignoring the fact that most were shorter, plus you can't really count a half-break as a full coach)

 

[yorksrob]

...whereas the 220s/221s replaced such exotic delights as 47s and 86s on the Cross Country network (plus some HSTs), so enthusiasts were always going to dislike them more - they'll compare them to the stock that they replaced.

• Replace a three coach 170s with a four coach 222 and people don't mind.
• Replace a six/ seven* coach rake hauled by a 47 with a four coach Voyager and a five coach Voyager (i.e. double the frequency) and people have a bit of a toy/ pram interface.

Its not much of a surprise that replacing a shorter train with a longer one is going to be more popular than replacing a longer train with a shorter one.

Also, by the time the Meridians turned up on the MML, it had already had a significant increase in capacity (whereas more frequent shorter trains on XC might not have represented the same increase).

Nevertheless, the Voyager seats do seem rather thinner than those on the Meridians, and it has to be said that the more recent refurb of the HST's has been of a very high quality, so that's going to be a difference felt beyond the world of the enthusiast.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The point I am making isn't how good or bad the Voyagers are, it's more to do with how people perceive them because they are overload and overworked.

If you were to take the new e-pacer use it once or twice a week for a few journeys a day for 5 years and compare it with (say) a 158 which had a similar level of work done to it but use it intensively for 5 years. Then ask people who use it to compare the two with the e-pacer loaded with 40 people and the 158 full and standing on the journeys that people use it on. Guess which people are going to think is the worst train? Yes there will be some who say the ride quality of the pacer but most people will complain about the 158.

The simple reason being that 158 will be dirtier, look more worn out and more people will have used it so they will be able to think of bad experiences that they have had on it.

In the same way, more people use Voyagers than XC's HST's (I have never been on XC's HST's but I have been on their Voyagers quite a few times), therefore you are going to get more people complaining about them.

Yes, it is not helped by the fact that they are too short (so don't have enough seating for everyone) but I do think that the perception of them isn't as fair and balanced as it could be. If they were 6 and 7 coaches long then there would probably be a bit more love for them.

Surely there are lots more Voyagers though. The HST's are out of action for longer, but presumably their diagrams are of a similar length to the Voyagers ?

 

[RichmondCommu]

I've much more frequently been on Voyagers & Adelantes with engines out of use than HSTs!

I can't help but feel that you and 455driver are just unlucky when it comes to rail travel on Cross Country services given that the class 221's won the Golden Spanner award for reliability at the 2015 awards.

As for the Adelantes..... Stating that they have reliability issues is nothing new, in fact I completely agree with you. However they don't operate on Cross Country services.
--- 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.

Well it isn't really. If the fare on a particular rail journey is too expensive travelers simply vote with their feet and then it becomes the problem of the TOC.

Treating fuel as a cost driver I would be interested to know how much increased consumption through thirsty engines has an impact on a TOC's cost base. And given that oil is trading at such a low price at the moment you would expect a TOC's cost base to have been falling for at least the last 12 months. However of course the price of oil is unlikely to stay this cheap for ever!

In terms of a diesel engine under a carriage making journeys less enjoyable well that is down to personal opinion. Clearly we have different opinions on this but I can honestly say that it doesn't bother me at all.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Couldn't you just switch the faulty HST power car for a spare one while you get the faulty one fixed?

You are of course assuming that there will be a spare HST power car belonging to Cross Country which can be swapped. I have no idea how likely that would be.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Voyagers are not easy to work on when servicing them but they are quite well setup for component exchanges, on a HST you just open the roof hatches to get to the important bits, plus you can stand up when working on a HST unlike a voyager.

Many thanks for this, really interesting I must admit I'd assumed that you would be able to repair a Voyager engine from an inspection pit as opposed to having to jack up an entire train. I'm aware that entire Meridians are jacked up at Etches Park for repairs.

I'd also assumed that a HST power car would be a very cramped place to work in and that essentially you would have to remove the power unit in order to carry out repairs. Always learning on this forum

 

[Skipness]

I started this thread at 21:30 yesterday, and 24 hours later it is already on page 3! Obviously there are differing opinions about the relative merits of Voyagers and HSTs.
I have learned through experience that making a seat reservation on Cross Country is 100% a good idea if you are going to have a seat on a Voyager diagram. Travelling from Derby northwards as far as York (and southwards to Plymouth) at "sociable" hours means that I am likely to have encountered over crowding. Just one extra carriage in a Voyager set would make a difference.
I agree that HSTs are not without their problems. Once when travelling from St Pancras in the rear coach of an EMT set I distinctly noticed the feel of being "pushed" by the rear power car. However, for old technology they are very good (with engine replacement and interior refurbishment.

 

[Dave1987]

Funny how some people label others who don't like a train that is very unpopular and badly designed, "enthusiasts".

 

[RichmondCommu]

Funny how some people label others who don't like a train that is very unpopular and badly designed, "enthusiasts".

Who is saying that the Voyagers are very unpopular? Travelers with no interest in trains or...... Oh but wait!

 

[Dave1987]

Who is saying that the Voyagers are very unpopular? Travelers with no interest in trains or...... Oh but wait!

So I'm an enthusiast am I simply because I believe a Voyager is an awful design?

Have you ever asked people standing on a packed Voyager their opinion on them?

 

[cjmillsnun]

Who is saying that the Voyagers are very unpopular? Travelers with no interest in trains or...... Oh but wait!

Lets list two reasons why travellers (note the spelling!) would hate voyagers. You don't need to be an enthusiast to understand these ones.

1. Overcrowding. They are simply far too small, and they don't even use the space efficiently. You can fit more people in a 3 car 159 than you can in a 4 car voyager. People resent having to stand from New Street to Reading. This has happened to me more than once, despite having reserved seats. When I got on at New Street, the train was packed, and I couldn't make it to my seat until Oxford, whereupon I found it occupied. The only solution to this is longer trains. The other issue with overcrowding is that they are narrow inside because of the tilt profile. This really exacerbates the feeling of being crammed in.

2. The smell. There are two unpleasant smells on an overcrowded voyager.

a) Sewage. Not overly common on VT Voyagers as they spend the money masking the smell, but on XC Voyagers, that smell is there almost all the time. This problem is thankfully fixed on Meridians.

b) Sweat. Commuters in the South East know this one as well as it is a common problem on commuter trains and on the tube. Overcrowded spaces tend to get warm. Even where there is air conditioning.

This isn't so bad when you're going to Woking from Waterloo or Reading from Paddington, (although those trains generally don't smell of crap), but being sat (or just as often stood) in a stinky train on a long distance journey is quite unacceptable.

For those two reasons alone many would welcome more HSTs (or other longer trains) on XC.

 

[ainsworth74]

Have you ever asked people standing on a packed Voyager their opinion on them?

I would imagine people standing on a packed HST would also have a poor opinion of them...

 

[cjmillsnun]

I would imagine people standing on a packed HST would also have a poor opinion of them...

They do, then they get off at Reading. That said, what would Thames Valley commuters make of being forced onto voyagers instead of HSTs. I suspect they would be begging for the HSTs back.

 

[mark-h]

The smell

I have been in the "on board shop" (or ex-"on board shop" on CrossCountry) coach and it still did not smell good despite not having a toilet in that carriage.

I suspect that the bad toilet design is made worse by the lack of fresh air and excess air recirculation.

 

[Bungle965]

Voyagers are acceptable form of transport for me when they meet these 3 things.
1) Not horrendously overcrowded.
2) When the bog does not smell.
3) When you don`t end up having a seat that has little or no view of the outside world.
Otherwise the are pretty good trains, I only wish they would have made them longer, and if the e voyager conversion had taken place (but for various reasons they did not) They are bloody quick and if i dare say it, when they accelerate they make quite a good sound.
Sam

 

[The Ham]

Lets list two reasons why travellers (note the spelling!) would hate voyagers. You don't need to be an enthusiast to understand these ones.

1. Overcrowding. They are simply far too small, and they don't even use the space efficiently. You can fit more people in a 3 car 159 than you can in a 4 car voyager. People resent having to stand from New Street to Reading. This has happened to me more than once, despite having reserved seats. When I got on at New Street, the train was packed, and I couldn't make it to my seat until Oxford, whereupon I found it occupied. The only solution to this is longer trains. The other issue with overcrowding is that they are narrow inside because of the tilt profile. This really exacerbates the feeling of being crammed in.

2. The smell. There are two unpleasant smells on an overcrowded voyager.

a) Sewage. Not overly common on VT Voyagers as they spend the money masking the smell, but on XC Voyagers, that smell is there almost all the time. This problem is thankfully fixed on Meridians.

b) Sweat. Commuters in the South East know this one as well as it is a common problem on commuter trains and on the tube. Overcrowded spaces tend to get warm. Even where there is air conditioning.

This isn't so bad when you're going to Woking from Waterloo or Reading from Paddington, (although those trains generally don't smell of crap), but being sat (or just as often stood) in a stinky train on a long distance journey is quite unacceptable.

For those two reasons alone many would welcome more HSTs (or other longer trains) on XC.

No one doubts that the Voyagers are too small for the numbers of travellers who wish to use them, that however doesn't make them a bad train, rater a poor choice of unit to use for the services that they are used on. The problem is they are on a fixed lease, meaning to use something else would mean paying for the Voyager and the extra unit (if there was any spare anyway).

This could be fixed once the Voyagers come off lease and HST's are realised from ECML and GWML, as more HST's and pairs of Voyagers could be used. Although that could lead to problems at the start of 2020 as the new franchise will have only just started and HST's (as they currently stand) wouldn't meet the DDA requirements. Although the potential release of 221's from the WCML could provide to be enough to retire the HST's and for the services to continue until new units can be delivered.

Even just 5 HST's replacing services run by pairs of 220's which when replace services run by 221's which then replace services run by 220's which are then paired up to replace 221's which replaces 220's.

That means that the following replacements (existing/proposed)
5 pairs of 220's (400 seats)/5 HST's (535 seats)
10 sets of 221's (250 seats)/10 pairs of 220's (400 seats)
10 sets of 220's (200 seats)/10 sets of 221's (250 seats)

That is then half the 221 fleet replaced by pairs of 220's and over half the 220 fleet running paired up all the time. Add in more usage of the existing XC HST fleet and capacity could be increased across most of the XC network. Probably not quite enough that there will always be seats but enough to improve matters to make a noticeable difference.

However, not so much that when the HST's (535 seats) can't be used that the WCML 221's couldn't be used in pairs (500 seats) to replace them (assuming that they are all released). Even if they are not all released, it would limit the number of new units that would need to be delivered in a short time before costly changes to the HST's would be needed.

In some areas XC will see some relief from other TOC's running more services.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Voyagers are acceptable form of transport for me when they meet these 3 things.
1) Not horrendously overcrowded.
2) When the bog does not smell.
3) When you don`t end up having a seat that has little or no view of the outside world.
Otherwise the are pretty good trains, I only wish they would have made them longer, and if the e voyager conversion had taken place (but for various reasons they did not) They are bloody quick and if i dare say it, when they accelerate they make quite a good sound.
Sam

I personal think that the Voyagers are here to stay, just after a load of end units are scrapped and have been reformed into a more useful length (say 7 coaches, with circa 380 seats) possiblely with some standard only 3 coach units (circa 145 seats) for crowd busting in the cores. Although with new 9 coach trains forming up the rest of the fleet (possiblely formed of a mix of 222's and new trains, given that not all the 222 fleet would be free for a bit of time until electrification is complete).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Regarding smelly bogs, it's the modern day thing of units being pressure sealed and thus having poorly ventilated vestibules that causes much of that. SBB EW IV bogs absolutely stink, but the window vent is permanently open and there is a lot of air leakage from the UIC gangway.

I think a partial solution might be to have the vestibule at a slightly higher air pressure than the bog, thus meaning the air circulates and leaves via vents in the bog rather than into the vestibule.

Strong extractor fans in the bog should achieve that.

 

[Class 170101]

Treating fuel as a cost driver I would be interested to know how much increased consumption through thirsty engines has an impact on a TOC's cost base. And given that oil is trading at such a low price at the moment you would expect a TOC's cost base to have been falling for at least the last 12 months. However of course the price of oil is unlikely to stay this cheap for ever!

I wouldn't be sure that fuel in use currently was bought at the low price.

Do TOCs not hedge their fuel purchases many months ahead?

 

[cjmillsnun]

Regarding smelly bogs, it's the modern day thing of units being pressure sealed and thus having poorly ventilated vestibules that causes much of that. SBB EW IV bogs absolutely stink, but the window vent is permanently open and there is a lot of air leakage from the UIC gangway.

I think a partial solution might be to have the vestibule at a slightly higher air pressure than the bog, thus meaning the air circulates and leaves via vents in the bog rather than into the vestibule.

Strong extractor fans in the bog should achieve that.

Isn't it also down to the unfortunate placement of the CET vent, the exhaust and the air intake for the air conditioning?

 

[Iskra]

In my experience even normal passengers prefer XC HST's over voyagers.

I've overheard favourable comments about the 'older trains' having more plug sockets and I've had people specifically tell me they catch the HST services because they're nicer. I've also been stood in a toilet vestibule on a voyager, and you could tell other passengers weren't impressed with the smell every time someone left the door open as they closed it pretty quickly!

Personally, I prefer HST services but I will use a Voyager if necessary. The Voyagers do serve a purpose and are a lot more reliable than the trains they replaced. The main problem is capacity issues.

When does the XC franchise expire so we can see what capacity enhancements are planned? Are there any plans for XC to lease any more redundant HST's?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've overheard favourable comments about the 'older trains' having more plug sockets

The irony of which being they are a retrofit. There is no technical reason that Voyagers could not be retrofitted with more sockets. As built they had none at all - who would have needed them when most work was done on paper and even a Sony Walkman with replaceable batteries was the height of technology?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Isn't it also down to the unfortunate placement of the CET vent, the exhaust and the air intake for the air conditioning?

Yes, I believe it is in part, though train toilets always stink giving rise to my other suggestion. Another good idea would be vinyl flooring in the vestibule (if it looks bad use fake wood print on it or something) - then when it leaks (as it will) the carpet doesn't end up smelling of urine.

Mk3s of course have their own aircon intake problem - the amount of brake whiff that comes in.

 

[Mojo]

To be fair neither are the original seats - you could refit a Voyager with either type.

Would the seats on the HSTs actually fit into the Voyagers given their tapered sides?

 

[yorksrob]

The Voyagers are fine, so long as you've got a window seat and enough beer to last the journey.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would the seats on the HSTs actually fit into the Voyagers given their tapered sides?

IC70s no (wouldn't be allowed anyway), but I reckon the ones they currently use would - they are the same frames as the VTEC ones which are fitted to Mk4s which have a similar tilt profile.

 

[FQ]

Voyagers are acceptable form of transport for me when they meet these 3 things.
1) Not horrendously overcrowded.
2) When the bog does not smell.
3) When you don`t end up having a seat that has little or no view of the outside world.
Otherwise the are pretty good trains, I only wish they would have made them longer, and if the e voyager conversion had taken place (but for various reasons they did not) They are bloody quick and if i dare say it, when they accelerate they make quite a good sound.
Sam

I can express my thoughts on this post simply using emotes!

Seriously though, give me a voyager on the last train out of some rural shack in the West Country vice a tram and I'll be on a station bench for the night. Seriously.

 

[E_Reeves]

Personally, I prefer Voyagers. I think they are a much more smooth and comfortable ride.

 

[BestWestern]

I prefer Voyagers for the reasons that they are quicker, have better safety features and the external doors on a HST are a nuisance.

This irks me; why do apparently intelligent people find the concept of slam doors such a challenge?

It bothers me particularly in light of two things; firstly the consideration that these people presumably boarded the train through the doorways, and would have seen the doors, rather large and brightly coloured as they are, swung wide open to allow them to get on; and secondly the fact that stuck to the inside of the door is a notice, carrying both text and pictograms, which begins "TO OPEN DOOR..."

Slam doors - a little unusual nowadays, perhaps. A 'nuisance'? No, not really!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Personally, I prefer Voyagers. I think they are a much more smooth and comfortable ride.

Well, seeing as you list your favourite DMU as Class 150, we can assume that your idea of a 'comfortable ride' is noise and rattling - which would explain a Voyager fetish!!

 

[FQ]

I actually prefer slam door stock and not just because it has slide down windows to get thrash.

 

[Bungle965]

I can express my thoughts on this post simply using emotes!

Seriously though, give me a voyager on the last train out of some rural shack in the West Country vice a tram and I'll be on a station bench for the night. Seriously.

Unfortunately i have had to endure many over crowded voyagers with stinking bogs and it is one of the most unpleasant experiences i have experienced.

Personally, I prefer Voyagers. I think they are a much more smooth and comfortable ride.

Do you enjoy not being able to find a seat, or not being able to go to the toilet because they absolutely reek.
No?
Though not.
Sam

 

[FQ]

I had a very uncomfortable experience involving a 221 yesterday evening. It was horrible...

 

[Bletchleyite]

The nuisance of slamdoors is twofold - having to awkwardly lean out of the window to open them (which sort-of made sense before central locking, but now doesn't) and that people leave them open because train doors normally close themselves.

Neither of those is of course a problem with the UIC slamdoor.