IEP seating - comfortable seating please, unlike Voyagers!

[TomJ93]

It is an important issue on Intercity trains, people could be doing King's Cross to Inverness on this train. I don't like the look of the 395 seats or the back of the seat tables, nor the tables. Thats an important consideration too, the 390s have really good tables, but the back of the seat tables are pretty dire, compared to say IC70s large tables.

 

[junglejames]

There's also a difference between 'comfortable' and 'good for you'. I find Voyagers/Pendos 'uncomfortable', but I do appreciate that they are good for my lower back, unlike EC Mallard, for example.

Really. I always end up with a painful back when i get off a voyager/ pendo if onboard for any more than an hour.

As for whether passengers really care. Well yes, a lot will care. But often they have no choice, so just suffer in silence. Myself, i do have a choice. I have a comfortable car sitting in the driveway which is only to happy to gallop up the M6 to Scotland or wherever.
I will suffer the pendo/ voyager in short doses, but would never do a long journey on them. If im going to Scotland, I have to go ECML, or take the car. It really is a case of having to, because I really darent find out what those seats will do to me for 4+ hrs. My back would be screaming because it cant sit in a comfortable position, and the bones in my backside would have probably decided enough was enough.

As for the 395 seats which have been mentioned. For some reason (i dont know why) i just cant get comfortable in them.

As mentioned though, its all personal choice. Oh, and for those of you that are wanting to take the pendos up the aisle (mainly those with pics of Bombardier plastic), will you please stop going off on one everytime you think pendos are (rightly) being slagged off. As it is, they arent. They are just being used as a point of reference regarding seats.
Its getting a bit tiring how everytime the words pendo and bad are mentioned in the same paragraph, you go off on how railways are not run for enthusiasts, and how enthusiasts dont realise it.

I think you dont realise that there is no harm in discussing things here. This is what the forum is for. You bring the same point up everytime. It rarely has anything to do with the topic, and is always boring.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It is an important issue on Intercity trains, people could be doing King's Cross to Inverness on this train. I don't like the look of the 395 seats or the back of the seat tables, nor the tables. Thats an important consideration too, the 390s have really good tables, but the back of the seat tables are pretty dire, compared to say IC70s large tables.

Thats a good point that, which rarely gets mentioned. Seat back tables nowadays are dire. They introduce WIFI on trains, but unless you are sat round a table, you cant easily use your laptop. At least with IC70 seats you have a fighting chance of doing so.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

And the outcome of that 'investigation'? IIRC, experts in ergonomics concluded there was nothing wrong with the seats.

The trouble with ergonomic seats is that they are designed for the average person, and the average person simply does not exist.

 

[WillPS]

Lets face it, whatever seats these units have, they'll not suit some enthusiasts, they'll be too soft/hard/laid=back/upright etc... The arm rests will be too big/too small, the carpet will be the wrong colour.

The fact that we can't agree on what we like (from existing seats) should tell us this

Most like Meridian seating, and I haven't seen many complaints about Grammar seating either?

 

[Daimler]

Thats a good point that, which rarely gets mentioned. Seat back tables nowadays are dire. They introduce WIFI on trains, but unless you are sat round a table, you cant easily use your laptop. At least with IC70 seats you have a fighting chance of doing so.

I feel as though I can jump to the defence of EMT's and FGW's refurbished (Grammar) seats here - yes, the tables are small, but rather thoughtfully are fitted 'extensions' for the use of laptops.

That said, I'm not sure why the 'wraparound' table of the IC70s was not more widely copied. Whatever anyone may think about comfort levels when it comes to IC70s (and I am the first to admit that they are simply far too low for my liking), the design of fold-down table was excellent - as the hinges were attached to the outside of the seat, the table was actually wider than the seatback!

In case anyone doesn't know quite what I mean, there's a photo here.

 

[LE Greys]

I feel as though I can jump to the defence of EMT's and FGW's refurbished (Grammar) seats here - yes, the tables are small, but rather thoughtfully are fitted 'extensions' for the use of laptops.

That said, I'm not sure why the 'wraparound' table of the IC70s was not more widely copied. Whatever anyone may think about comfort levels when it comes to IC70s (and I am the first to admit that they are simply far too low for my liking), the design of fold-down table was excellent - as the hinges were attached to the outside of the seat, the table was actually wider than the seatback!

In case anyone doesn't know quite what I mean, there's a photo here.

I quite like IC70s, but then I am 5ft 9. The folding tray design was a bit clunky, but it just about worked, and you could fit both a laptop and a cup of tea, so excellent.

However, I still say the best seats on any service train I ever travelled on belonged to a 4-CIG.

 

[asylumxl]

Oh, and for those of you that are wanting to take the pendos up the aisle (mainly those with pics of Bombardier plastic), will you please stop going off on one everytime you think pendos are (rightly) being slagged off. As it is, they arent. They are just being used as a point of reference regarding seats.
Its getting a bit tiring how everytime the words pendo and bad are mentioned in the same paragraph, you go off on how railways are not run for enthusiasts, and how enthusiasts dont realise it.

I think you dont realise that there is no harm in discussing things here. This is what the forum is for. You bring the same point up everytime. It rarely has anything to do with the topic, and is always boring.

How is a topic about how IC70 seats are so awesome every second day not boring? How is it even worth discussion?

You talk about "plastic" like it was never used in BR days. It most definetly was, not just in the interiors. Enthusiasts beloved HSTs have Glass reinforced plastic nose cones.

 

[LE Greys]

How is a topic about how IC70 seats are so awesome every second day not boring? How is it even worth discussion?

You talk about "plastic" like it was never used in BR days. It most definetly was, not just in the interiors. Enthusiasts beloved HSTs have Glass reinforced plastic nose cones.

... that fare very well in low-speed collisions with Class 47s.

Seriously, later MkIs had melamine panelling.

 

[junglejames]

Most like Meridian seating, and I haven't seen many complaints about Grammar seating either?

Meridians are average. Possibly a little too upright. Could do with more padding. Better than most seats nowadays though.
Grammar. On the whole far too hard and upright, oh and too tall. Makes the train seem claustrophobic. FGWs on the HSTs are absolutely disgraceful. Id have brought back the death penalty for that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

How is a topic about how IC70 seats are so awesome every second day not boring? How is it even worth discussion?

You talk about "plastic" like it was never used in BR days. It most definetly was, not just in the interiors. Enthusiasts beloved HSTs have Glass reinforced plastic nose cones.

The main difference is the fact everytime somebody puts pendos in the same paragraph as the word 'bad', you keep coming up with how railways arent run for enthusiasts. If somebody slags off IC70s, I just get on with life. Its peoples different opinions. However anyone dare call pendos bad, and you are straight on the band wagon. Are you sure i start topics every other day about IC70s? I could be wrong, but i dont think i have. So ive said a couple of times that for me they are one of the most comfortable around.

I never once said BR never used plastics. I know they did. But in your arguments, please use like for like. GRP is different. It doesnt look as tacky or cheap as plastic. Also, I have no problem with plastic. Just the amount now used.

 

[route101]

im on the 2115 edinburgh to glasgow xc hst now ( just passing carstairs ) and the seating is too upright and legroom a wee bit tight . And the lights are too bright . Is still an hst from the outside at least

 

[Zoe]

Why do people want table seats? I much prefer an airline seat, a don't want to be a long journey with someone opposite staring at me. The only thing I don't like is facing backwards to the direction of travel and so long as there is a reasonable split of the seats by direction this is not an issue.

When I have sat in a table seat on some trains, some people have decided to sit opposite even when they have a coach full of empty seats they could go and sit in.

 

[TomJ93]

I love table seats. Needless to say they are nicer when you have it too yourself, but I've met many nice people opposite me on a table

 

[junglejames]

Why do people want table seats? I much prefer an airline seat, a don't want to be a long journey with someone opposite staring at me. The only thing I don't like is facing backwards to the direction of travel and so long as there is a reasonable split of the seats by direction this is not an issue.

When I have sat in a table seat on some trains, some people have decided to sit opposite even when they have a coach full of empty seats they could go and sit in.

I prefer table seats, as I can usually (except on busy trains) spread out more. If the train is busy i dont really have a preference.

As for those sitting opposite you when there is plenty of space. I guess they have just taken a fancy to you!!
A few years back a girl did the same with me. Sat opposite me, instead of taking an airline seat. This time however, it was so she could sit and study in more comfort. As good a reason as any.
Certainly wont catch me complaining about it at all. Inverness to Perth flew by, 2 hrs of none stop chatter (apparently talking to me was better than revising, she must have been mad!!). One of the best journeys Ive ever taken, and thats all down to the company. The only complaint i have, is regarding myself. I never had the guts to ask for her number!!

Its all personal preference, but table seats can be good for numerous reasons.

 

[Daimler]

Why do people want table seats? I much prefer an airline seat, a don't want to be a long journey with someone opposite staring at me. The only thing I don't like is facing backwards to the direction of travel and so long as there is a reasonable split of the seats by direction this is not an issue.

When I have sat in a table seat on some trains, some people have decided to sit opposite even when they have a coach full of empty seats they could go and sit in.

It is interesting, isn't it? Myself, I only really like a table seat if I can have it to myself/my party. I think most people just find them more 'civilised' than airline seats - it's certainly nice to sit round a table

 

[Zoe]

It is interesting, isn't it? Myself, I only really like a table seat if I can have it to myself/my party. I think most people just find them more 'civilised' than airline seats - it's certainly nice to sit round a table

If there is a group of four travelling then you have a point but I'd rather not have to sit at a table with three other people I don't know.

 

[Daimler]

If there are a group of four travelling then you have a point but I'd rather not have to sit at a table with three other people I don't know.

I quite agree! Most people, however, seem to prefer tables even if they don't know those they're sitting with, for whatever reason (perhaps they like having a large fixed surface to put their stuff on or something...?).

 

[Class 33]

im on the 2115 edinburgh to glasgow xc hst now ( just passing carstairs ) and the seating is too upright and legroom a wee bit tight . And the lights are too bright . Is still an hst from the outside at least

I myself find the seating of XC HST's very comfortable myself. Just a shame the few XC HST's that are about don't run at times that suit me!

Regarding the lighting though. I agree, the carriage lighting in modern trains is far too bright. They're so bright it's like an office, and you can barely see a thing out of the windows when it's dark outside, you just get the reflection of the people in the carriage! Far too bright. It would be useful if the carriage lighting of these new trains is a little more dimmer. That's what the old trains/carriages used to be like, and nobody had any problems with that!

Whilst I'm more of a train person, than a coach person. One of the things I prefer about coach travel at night compared to train travel at night, is how the lights are dimmed, with optional individual reading lights for those that want them. Makes it much more comfortable for those who want to sleep or just relax and watch the passing scenery. Perhaps a good idea for the new IEP trains? Though of course with trains people have to walk up and down the carriage for the buffet, toilets, and getting on and off the train. So obviously the carriage lighting can't be as dim as what coach lighting is like, they'd have to be adequately lit. The lighting as featured in my avatar photo I would describe as adequately lit.

 

[WatcherZero]

Leg room, I dont mind sitting with strangers as long as my knees arent poking into my chin which is why I will always choose facing seats or tabled seats if given a opportunity.

 

[j0hn0]

You dont get much leg room if someone is sitting opposite you though.
As someone who uses the pendos every day, a have developed really bad back pain that just wont go away. THe seat angle and height is just wrong. Having taken a pretendalino home one night, that is exaxtly how wide seats should be. THey also have more padding and the pitch is just right. SHame they dont tilt really, are mk 4s just as wide as mk3s?

 

[LE Greys]

You dont get much leg room if someone is sitting opposite you though.
As someone who uses the pendos every day, a have developed really bad back pain that just wont go away. THe seat angle and height is just wrong. Having taken a pretendalino home one night, that is exaxtly how wide seats should be. THey also have more padding and the pitch is just right. SHame they dont tilt really, are mk 4s just as wide as mk3s?

With a bit of adjustment, it is possible to stagger you legs with the people opposite (both moving right or left) so that you both can stretch out. Certainly happens in compartments, and I'm sure it's possible with tables.

 

[route101]

I myself find the seating of XC HST's very comfortable myself. Just a shame the few XC HST's that are about don't run at times that suit me!

Regarding the lighting though. I agree, the carriage lighting in modern trains is far too bright. They're so bright it's like an office, and you can barely see a thing out of the windows when it's dark outside, you just get the reflection of the people in the carriage! Far too bright. It would be useful if the carriage lighting of these new trains is a little more dimmer. That's what the old trains/carriages used to be like, and nobody had any problems with that!

Whilst I'm more of a train person, than a coach person. One of the things I prefer about coach travel at night compared to train travel at night, is how the lights are dimmed, with optional individual reading lights for those that want them. Makes it much more comfortable for those who want to sleep or just relax and watch the passing scenery. Perhaps a good idea for the new IEP trains? Though of course with trains people have to walk up and down the carriage for the buffet, toilets, and getting on and off the train. So obviously the carriage lighting can't be as dim as what coach lighting is like, they'd have to be adequately lit. The lighting as featured in my avatar photo I would describe as adequately lit.

I agree , way too bright . Even the FSR 158s /170s are a bit better .
Yeah coaches are good in that respect though esp in England the motorways are lit.
I always go for an Airline seat and hate when my reserved seat in in a table of 4. Its not plesant facing stangers to me.
Once in 2006 i had a cheap 1st advance on Virgin Trains and was put in a table with a couple opposite as you can imagine is not too comfortable when you are eating etc.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Why do people want table seats? I much prefer an airline seat, a don't want to be a long journey with someone opposite staring at me. The only thing I don't like is facing backwards to the direction of travel and so long as there is a reasonable split of the seats by direction this is not an issue.

When I have sat in a table seat on some trains, some people have decided to sit opposite even when they have a coach full of empty seats they could go and sit in.

One reason is that table seats give space adjacent for luggage between seat backs.

Research shows that about one-third of passengers prefer table seats, one-third airlines and one-third do not care. More seats can be fitted in airline-style but then luggage stacks may have to be provided. Which suggests that seats need to be about 50% of each type.

A decent seat-back entertainment system like the Volo would add to the appeal of airline style seating. Something like an Android tablet computer. You could have on-screen windows with travel information, the driver's eye view and a few entertainment channels as standard, then charge extra for web browsing, etc.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

26 metre coaches don't forget.

That means they will have to be reduced width so no chance of decently wide seats. The basic specification for these trains was misconceived. The widest possible trains in Britain are 2.82 metres but this has to be reduced unless the vehicles are less than 20 metres long.

Incidentally Bombardier do a train 3.5 metres wide which allows decent 2+3 seating like this.

 

[starrymarkb]

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That means they will have to be reduced width so no chance of decently wide seats. The basic specification for these trains was misconceived. The widest possible trains in Britain are 2.82 metres but this has to be reduced unless the vehicles are less than 20 metres long.

Incidentally Bombardier do a train 3.5 metres wide which allows decent 2+3 seating like this.

Part of the contract is to increase clearances for 26m 2.8m wide stock.

It may surprise you as to where 165 and 166 units have been despite being similarly 'wide bodied'

 

[Zoe]

It may surprise you as to where 165 and 166 units have been despite being similarly 'wide bodied'

They are not cleared West of Bristol or Castle Cary though so won't be heading for the Westcountry. That said if they go on the Cardiff to Portsmouth route then this should allow 158s to return to the Westcountry, in turn allowing 150s to be cascaded north to allow pacers to be withdrawn.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Part of the contract is to increase clearances for 26m 2.8m wide stock.

It may surprise you as to where 165 and 166 units have been despite being similarly 'wide bodied'

RSSB has conducted a study to discover route availability of all stock. Class 165/166 is surprisingly limited.

It sounds as if the IEP will be very restricted initially.