Probably doesn't have to be free. As long as it is available I guess. Not that I've ever travelled from Reading to Waterloo.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Latest Which? passenger satisfaction survey released
- Thread starter hassaanhc
- Start date
- Status
Probably doesn't have to be free. As long as it is available I guess. Not that I've ever travelled from Reading to Waterloo.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
PG
Established Member
Quick comparison between Coach C (2 non accessible toilets) on HSTs of Grand Central and East Coast shows:
GC 64 seats / EC 76 seats although EC (8) only has one less table then GC (9) -
IIRC the difference in seating is because GC have all their seats arranged so that they line up with the windows ie no looking at a pillar!
GC seat plan http://www.grandcentralrail.com/media/57344/HST seating plan.pdf
EC seat plan http://static.eastcoastcdn.co.uk/cdn-1cc207289a594e9/documents/pdfs/seat maps/hst-main2011.pdf
As for free WiFi - ScotRail have it for one, not sure about other TOCs.
And the Desiro fleet only comes out as having very high reliability rather than the highest in the country like the 158s/159s and 458sThough of course SWTs Desiro fleet is maintained by Siemens rather than SWT themsevles
I believe Chiltern also have free wifi.
FHT is an open access operator, as is Grand Central, which probably why they were both not included.
WelshBluebird
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,599
I'd like to echo some comments about how the fairness and accuracy of the national surveys. I have been asked to complete them 4 times. Every one of those times my journey was fine. And it seemed the TOC's involved make a specific effort to provide better service than normal. And as these surveys ask about your journey on that day, it really doesn't give a far reflection.
As an example of what I mean by TOC's providing better service, on the ATW valley lines routes, it is very rare for every station to be announced on approach (presumably due to the number of stations, how close the stops are and the fact the guard still has to sell tickets). Two of the surveys I have filled in were on ATW valley lines services. Both times the guard announced every single station while another sold tickets. Yet for all the other years I have used rail services in that area, I have only heard every station announced 3 other times. Take your own conclusions.
As an example of what I mean by TOC's providing better service, on the ATW valley lines routes, it is very rare for every station to be announced on approach (presumably due to the number of stations, how close the stops are and the fact the guard still has to sell tickets). Two of the surveys I have filled in were on ATW valley lines services. Both times the guard announced every single station while another sold tickets. Yet for all the other years I have used rail services in that area, I have only heard every station announced 3 other times. Take your own conclusions.
Last edited:
sprinterguy
Veteran Member
Yeah, purely from a "how many airline seat rows does a table bay take up" perspective it's not a great comparison, as the Grand Central sets have such a low density layout:
As built, the Intercity 125s seated 72 per carriage in standard class, with 16 (IIRC) table bays and 4 rows of airline seats per carriage. The first refurbishment in the mid eighties increased the seating capacity to 76, using the same Intercity 70 seating, with 10 table bays and 18 rows of airline seats if other sources on the internet are to be believed.
I got given a survey to fill out last year, can't remember who for (might have been the national one) as it was around mid-late spring time and one of the sections was asking me about the facilities of the station I boarded - However I had got on at Dovey Junction 
I would question about how accurate the questions are and the ecological validity of the surveys, because the lack of facilities is fine for Dovey Junction/rural/isolated stations but not so for most. It's also about how they interpret the responses!
I would question about how accurate the questions are and the ecological validity of the surveys, because the lack of facilities is fine for Dovey Junction/rural/isolated stations but not so for most. It's also about how they interpret the responses!
Sleepy
Established Member
Shows how skewed the results are !
(In)famously, Merseyrail scores quite well for on train toilet provision!
Sleepy
Established Member
Seem to remember something about FCC and their guards - all DOO services ?
To be fair, an RPI could be mistaken for a guard. But then on merseyside, I suppose you could mistake a gangway for a toilet :roll:
On train catering was highly commended too :cry:
3141
Established Member
I’ve been a member of Which for many years. It used to concentrate on testing goods and services and worked hard to report accurately and objectively. Now it relies increasingly on surveys of its members and sometimes other people too. Many of the questions it asks are subjective, and it accepts what people tell it even if they are wrong. It shows a lack of understanding about how things operate and therefore has unrealistic expectations about what can be done. In some cases its choice of a subject to report on reflects a problem that one of its staff happens to have had recently.
For example, “Do you think the TOC you regularly travel with provides value for money?” What are my criteria for answering that question? I travel from Overton to Waterloo, mostly at off-peak times, and I have a railcard. I almost always get a seat, even on the return journey in the rush hour, because I walk through to the front of the train till I find one. The journey takes just under an hour for 56 miles.
But if I was travelling daily in the peak, on a stopping train taking 40 minutes for under 20 miles, paying full price and often could not get a seat, my perception might be different. If I was asked to complete a survey soon after a day when there had been serious delays, even if it wasn’t the TOC’s fault, my answers might amount to a form of revenge for the problems I’d experienced. The fact that my season ticket gave me at least as good a discount on the full fare as a railcard-holder is something I might not even be aware of.
In their survey last year (or maybe it was 2012) Which quoted a respondent who had complimented Merseyrail on their new trains. The refurbishment must have been good! Which obviously didn’t know how old the class 507s are and accepted the respondent’s comment as if it was accurate.
In this year’s survey they quote someone who complained about the quality of the “ancient trains” used by Greater Anglia. True, the 315s are over 30 years old, so are some of the 317s, and the 321s are about 25 years old. I guess the mark 3 coaches are getting on, too. But trains can last a lot longer than that if they are looked after. Are HSTs ancient? By publishing the adjective “ancient” Which gives the impression that the respondent is right. Actually his comment is more relevant to the standard of internal maintenance.
Which puts TOCs in to three categories: Commuter, Long Distance, and Regional. Commuter services “all serve London stations and carry more commuters than leisure passengers” it says. It puts Chiltern in the Regional category. EMT is in the long distance category. FGW is also in the long distance category, where it comes last. Which doesn’t acknowledge, and maybe doesn’t understand, that one reason for FGW’s position may be due to perceptions of its commuter and regional services. Merseyrail, Scotrail and ATW are all regional, despite their substantial commuter traffic into Liverpool, Glasgow and Cardiff respectively. Commuters into anywhere apart from London don’t count.
Which has a picture to illustrate “What do passengers really want…?” One item, it says is “seats for all”. Yes, there are some off-peak services on which longer trains would definitely be desirable – e.g. many of Cross Country’s services through the West Midlands. But does Which understand the implications of “seats for all” on commuter services? A class 450 has 270 seats, which means 810 in a 12-coach train. I suspect that some services in and out of Waterloo carry up to 2000 passengers. To achieve Which’s dream would require trains with 30 coaches or an increase of 2.5 times in the number of trains being operated.
My opinion of Which – known as Whinge in our household – is that too much of what it does tends towards inaccuracy and sensationalism. If I was running a TOC I’d be strongly tempted to tell them where to go – with a one-way ticket
For example, “Do you think the TOC you regularly travel with provides value for money?” What are my criteria for answering that question? I travel from Overton to Waterloo, mostly at off-peak times, and I have a railcard. I almost always get a seat, even on the return journey in the rush hour, because I walk through to the front of the train till I find one. The journey takes just under an hour for 56 miles.
But if I was travelling daily in the peak, on a stopping train taking 40 minutes for under 20 miles, paying full price and often could not get a seat, my perception might be different. If I was asked to complete a survey soon after a day when there had been serious delays, even if it wasn’t the TOC’s fault, my answers might amount to a form of revenge for the problems I’d experienced. The fact that my season ticket gave me at least as good a discount on the full fare as a railcard-holder is something I might not even be aware of.
In their survey last year (or maybe it was 2012) Which quoted a respondent who had complimented Merseyrail on their new trains. The refurbishment must have been good! Which obviously didn’t know how old the class 507s are and accepted the respondent’s comment as if it was accurate.
In this year’s survey they quote someone who complained about the quality of the “ancient trains” used by Greater Anglia. True, the 315s are over 30 years old, so are some of the 317s, and the 321s are about 25 years old. I guess the mark 3 coaches are getting on, too. But trains can last a lot longer than that if they are looked after. Are HSTs ancient? By publishing the adjective “ancient” Which gives the impression that the respondent is right. Actually his comment is more relevant to the standard of internal maintenance.
Which puts TOCs in to three categories: Commuter, Long Distance, and Regional. Commuter services “all serve London stations and carry more commuters than leisure passengers” it says. It puts Chiltern in the Regional category. EMT is in the long distance category. FGW is also in the long distance category, where it comes last. Which doesn’t acknowledge, and maybe doesn’t understand, that one reason for FGW’s position may be due to perceptions of its commuter and regional services. Merseyrail, Scotrail and ATW are all regional, despite their substantial commuter traffic into Liverpool, Glasgow and Cardiff respectively. Commuters into anywhere apart from London don’t count.
Which has a picture to illustrate “What do passengers really want…?” One item, it says is “seats for all”. Yes, there are some off-peak services on which longer trains would definitely be desirable – e.g. many of Cross Country’s services through the West Midlands. But does Which understand the implications of “seats for all” on commuter services? A class 450 has 270 seats, which means 810 in a 12-coach train. I suspect that some services in and out of Waterloo carry up to 2000 passengers. To achieve Which’s dream would require trains with 30 coaches or an increase of 2.5 times in the number of trains being operated.
My opinion of Which – known as Whinge in our household – is that too much of what it does tends towards inaccuracy and sensationalism. If I was running a TOC I’d be strongly tempted to tell them where to go – with a one-way ticket
Which is increasingly losing subscribers and has begun to offer more and more free stuff of late, which it has to pitch like anyone else to get attention (and try desperately to attract paying subs). Good use of SEO, controversial headlines, sensationalism, and 'shocking' results are all standard these days for most sites.
I knew someone who worked there (covering tech) and things were being run on a shoestring budget by the time he left.
One good thing though; they've always refused freebies. Products tested are purchased by themselves to avoid bias and possible manipulation. Ironically, this can't help their financial situation compared to other sites that get all review products for free.
I knew someone who worked there (covering tech) and things were being run on a shoestring budget by the time he left.
One good thing though; they've always refused freebies. Products tested are purchased by themselves to avoid bias and possible manipulation. Ironically, this can't help their financial situation compared to other sites that get all review products for free.
306024
Established Member
The News Quiz on BBC Radio 4 (available on i-player) did an amusing take on the Southeastern response to the witch hunt survey. Towards the end of the programme.
One interesting outcome from the survey is that some passengers would be prepared to pay more, if they were guaranteed a seat.
This suggests that the survey was heavily skewed towards commuters and the more affluent ones in particular!
Perhaps what is needed is a sort of 'economy plus' class, not First class but a half way house, haven't Chiltern launched a 'business class' along these lines?
Notwithstanding the practical problems of managing such a set-up, I wonder if some of the Commuter TOCs could be tempted to try something on the longer commuter lines?
This suggests that the survey was heavily skewed towards commuters and the more affluent ones in particular!
Perhaps what is needed is a sort of 'economy plus' class, not First class but a half way house, haven't Chiltern launched a 'business class' along these lines?
Notwithstanding the practical problems of managing such a set-up, I wonder if some of the Commuter TOCs could be tempted to try something on the longer commuter lines?
Are these the same people that said they'd pay higher income tax for better services? The people who probably don't mean it, and wouldn't actually pay more to travel to get a seat if push came to shove.
After all, most people complain they're paying too much as it is. Unless they're hoping to pay a nominal amount to somehow get a seat at the expense of someone else, which isn't going to happen.
After all, most people complain they're paying too much as it is. Unless they're hoping to pay a nominal amount to somehow get a seat at the expense of someone else, which isn't going to happen.
I couldn't agree more.
I was a subscriber for over 25 years before finally losing patience and cancelling last year.
Every time they reviewed a product that I actually knew something about, I was shocked by their inept approach, the overly simplistic approach to how they decided what consumers want out of a product, and their condescending presentation of results.
Members own reviews on the Which? website frequently lambast products Which? gave a Best Buy too, usually on the grounds the product was great for a month and then fell to pieces.
kieron
Established Member
It's fair by selecting the sample in a fair way, the same as any other survey. Not that I'm suggesting that anyone has conducted a fair survey of rail users' views.
But the less ppl you survey the less accurate the results. I don't think 7000 is even 1% of the regular passengers on the railways.
GatwickDepress
Established Member
To my limited knowledge of surveys, it's not so much the number of people involved, as having a fairly diverse and fair set of demographics.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
It isn't, but it is about choosing the correct demographics. YouGov don't poll more than 1000 people on their political polls, but the results are often reasonably accurate because they poll a spread of people across that 1000 people.
The numbers polled are far less interesting than what they were asked.
I was given a Passenger Focus poll at Leeds at the weekend, and it was interesting. The questions were almost inviting one to provide a positive response about the journey, so it isn't a wonder passenger Focus surveys get such high satisfaction scores. I'm sure Which asked negative-leading questions too.
I think people have low expectations of the railways, so are "satisfied" with less than what they would be in other areas of life. Ditto NHS, for that matter. Also where there is a subsidy, this has an impact. If people were paying the full price (or in the case of the NHS, paying at the point of use), they might have a different opinion.
I became less satisfied with UK railways after having used railways in Japan/Taiwan. But it does work both ways. I remember some French students going on how great they thought the London Undergound is compared with the Paris Metro. The main reason seemed to be they found it much cleaner (which I think it is).
I became less satisfied with UK railways after having used railways in Japan/Taiwan. But it does work both ways. I remember some French students going on how great they thought the London Undergound is compared with the Paris Metro. The main reason seemed to be they found it much cleaner (which I think it is).
- Status