What's the obsession with changing seats? Do the ironing board seats allow more space? Seems unnecessary expenditure otherwise.
-
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!
Northern Unit Refurbishments and depot allocations.
- Thread starter darloscott
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
The seat roadshow exercise was just a typical early days PR stunt which meant absolutely nothing because a decision had already been made. After it all went quiet for a year or so after the events we were informed through internal communication that no winner was clear and the seat would be a design mixture of the 3 on display. Obviously this didn’t happen and a bog standard sub standard design was chosen. I think the powers that be hope that nobody remembers the seat roadshow.
I recently travelled Leeds to Carlisle on one of the refurbished 158’s and I would say they certainly have more leg room. With regards to changing the seats I would imagine it is to bring the interior upto more modern standards and give a similar looks and feel to the new 195/331’s.
So presumably a case of same number if seats but more space as they're slimmer, like the new Ryanair seats?
The Sprinter seats have usually been comfortable but the legroom is rubbish, the 195 seats are quite hard. Hard seats are a gripe I have with the newer trains coming in (though the FLIRT's are notably comfier than the GA regional trains being replaced).
Wasn't the ironing board one of the 3 seats in the roadshow
superkev
Established Member
Theres an excellent feature in this months Modern Railways by Ian W with a picture from the road show. The public all chose the one at the front and Northern chose the el cheapo at the back.
K
Yes. The other 2 choices were vastly superior compared to the budget one they chose.
Be interesting to know what the price difference per seat was.
Let's say the seat has a projected life of 10 years, and the unit works 300 days per year, with an average ten journeys per day (which is something of an underestimate I know), with only one passenger using it per journey (again an underestimate, especially for cross city traffic), that equates to 30,000 journeys. So if the cost of purchasing a seat increased by £300, that would add less than 1p to the cost of a journey, and probably significantly less - perhaps nearer 0.1p.
Doesn't this show that penny-pinching on cost of seats to be complete madness, given that so much of the passenger experience is via the seat on which the passengers is sitting.
modernrail
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,462
The whole Northern refubishment programme is a joke. Poor design choices, poor build quality, lies about customer preference on seat choice, not dealing with historic problems such as acute lack of legroom on some train types, taking absolutely ages, stupid use of flat cloth, dreadful gibberish PIS, trains dirty very quickly, bad cleaning regime meaning refubished sets look naff already.
Merseyrail were able to do a vastly superior job with an older fleet and SWT/Southern stock from the same era looks and feels much better from a refurb undertaken many years ago now. That stock is about to be replaced.
It would be nice to think the remainder of the programme could be improved if the franchise is taken in house. There will be loads of suitable seats coming from ex SWT and Merseyrail services soon that would be an upgrade on the seats on most of the Northern fleet. They should just use those to save cash whilst delivering something that is actually objectively better.
Merseyrail were able to do a vastly superior job with an older fleet and SWT/Southern stock from the same era looks and feels much better from a refurb undertaken many years ago now. That stock is about to be replaced.
It would be nice to think the remainder of the programme could be improved if the franchise is taken in house. There will be loads of suitable seats coming from ex SWT and Merseyrail services soon that would be an upgrade on the seats on most of the Northern fleet. They should just use those to save cash whilst delivering something that is actually objectively better.
Nymanic
Member
I certainly wouldn't object to all those SWR Class 455 seats being fitted to Northern's 150 fleet (heck, transplant the entire internal layout as-is), but wouldn't safety regulations prevent it? I don't think those 455 seats meet to most up-to-date crashworthiness standards, even if they are newer than what they'd replace.
With the franchise on its way out, though, I don't expect such an ambitious refit to happen.
With the franchise on its way out, though, I don't expect such an ambitious refit to happen.
modernrail
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,462
Well if those crash regulations come from the EU maybe a cheeky derogation might be in order. Might as well get a more comfortable seat to watch the general shambles that ....I will stop there.
I would be slightly surprised if they do fail for such low speed services though bearing in mind they don't look that different to what is in the 185s that run faster.
Nymanic
Member
UK regulations are much stricter than EU ones, for reasons that evade me. If only the regs "came from the EU" - it would open up the market, rather than limit us to just one or two compliant yet deeply polarising designs...
185 and SWR 455 seats (both Grammer?) were compliant at the time they were fitted, but I don't think they are now (unless someone can correct me).
modernrail
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,462
Why gold plate the seat when you can gold plate the regulation! Much more comfortable.
This must be one of those advantages that have been talked about, where we can now impose higher standards, except of course we already could.
This must be one of those advantages that have been talked about, where we can now impose higher standards, except of course we already could.
py_megapixel
Established Member
I don't understand why you would replace the 158 seats and leave the ones on the 150s. I personally find the 158 ones far more comfortable. As for legroom, 150s are some of the only stock I've been on where there are seats which I can't sit in due to leg length.
Wasn't that one of the first 333s to be done, and had a different seat cover compared to later units?
py_megapixel
Established Member
Exactly. To be completely honest, I'd be happier if the entire Sprinter fleet (except possibly the 158s) went, given some of the relatively modern stock being replaced elsewhere in the country. It still baffles me that Sprinters, at around 40 years old, are running for the foreseeable future with a mediocre refurb, while a replacement was ordered for the 185s while they are still relatively new, and the 707s before they even were introduced!
IamTrainsYT
Member
No it won’t
It was the first 333 to be done and it did have different seat covers, I only noticed this change yesterday
I know but its never had the same style seats as the other 333s throughout which was what I noticed yesterday when I saw it parked up at BDQ
superkev
Established Member
Booked path Fri 31st only NL to Crewe. See if it's used.
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/84991/2020-01-31/detailed
K
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/84991/2020-01-31/detailed
K
Probably a 158 going for refurbishment, all 170s are now complete
superkev
Established Member
It's running. Anyone know unit, number.
K
Last edited:
simon7929
Member
It's on the move. The last 158/9 for full refurb. Number 907?
158790.
59CosG95
Established Member
Must be for its refurb; it's already had its PRM mods.
simon7929
Member
Are 158 906/10 still at Crewe?