Pendos are the pits

[andy13]

I went on four different trains to Holyhead and back yesterday.

It went LM 350/2 Desiro, Refurbed Virgin Voyager, ATW 158 and a 390 pendo.

I got on a pendo at New st for the last leg and it was just a joy to be on a proper train.

Desiro - seats uncomfortable and small
Refurbed Voyager - seats are too high off the ground for some reason, I'm 6ft and felt my legs were nearly dangling, cramped interior
ATW 158 - Great air-con but far too noisy and shaky for a long trip, I felt I was still vibrating as I got off at New St.

I understand what people say about the seat alignment but I don't find Pendos cramped. I had good leg room but made sure to get a seat at a window. Pendo seats are much more comfortable than the new Voyager seats, why is this?

Other than seat alignment, all bad experiences I've had on a Pendo have now been fixed it seems. I heard no rattles, no smells and after being on the other trains, the smooth acceleration, the effortless speed and of course the tilting make it the best train in Britain at the moment for me.

They look brilliant tilting through Rugby at high speed but I just wish that they would change the silly yellow smiley face on the front.

but that is like getting off a dirt track onto a road, you appreciate it just because the other was so uncomfortable, yet getting off a hst straight onto a pendo is like stepping out of a jaguar into a mini......

 

[me123]

If the cost of the WCML had been £2bn, fair enough. But for £9bn, I question if those short sections of new line would have been more cost effective and the whole lot more reliable and quicker.

But for £9 billion, a new line may bypass key areas. HS2, for example, will probably only call at big cities along the way. Smaller places could benefit from the WCML in its current form, with the high speed and tilt.

Regarding bypasses, tilting in the South of Scotland is the main reason they chose it. Trust me, bypassing the WCML would be extremely expensive and, at times, impossible. The Southern Uplands are just far too hilly, hence why the tilt is beneficial here.

 

[j0hn0]

but that is like getting off a dirt track onto a road, you appreciate it just because the other was so uncomfortable, yet getting off a hst straight onto a pendo is like stepping out of a jaguar into a mini......

Listen, we're all agreed that the interiors are poorly designed in a pendo, that isn't without doubt. What I'm saying is that there are so many more positives for which we can be thankful. Interiors can be redesigned at the next pendo refit - the refitted voyager I went on to Holyhead had ALL table seats next to windows so I think Virgin may be getting the message, so we can all relax about that. They should just lower the seats a little

In terms of technical efficiencies and engineering capabibilites, the pendo is streets ahead of the HST. You know that, so if the interiors can be changed at the next refit, we'll all be happy.

Yes I would rather an HST than any other intercity diesel train because they keep the engines away from the passengers.

I'm glad the the new IEP diesels will not put the engines under the floor, so perhaps this is the another step in the right direction.

 

[Geezertronic]

I was hoping that when the 4 new Pendolino's get built (including the extra coaches to extend some of the existing Pendolino's), they would consider the issues with the existing stock and make the newer stock with these thoughts in mind. I don't think that will be the case reading the Pendolino Lengthening document which is a shame.

Still great trains though

 

[djw1981]

I can't help thinking that if short 2-10 mile 'cut-offs' were built around the problem curves (Berkhampstead, Leighton Buzzard, Weedon, Polsworth, around Stafford and Colwich, Congleton) could have avoided having tilting trains, which don't suit the UK loading gauge.

Yeah but they tilt a lot in Cumbria and North of The Border, which is how a lot of the 1hr journey time reduction from Glasgow has been achieved.

The inbcrease in mean speed from 75ish to 90ish cuts 1hr off the journey time.

 

[Geezertronic]

I would have thought it was stopping the running of non Birmingham services via Birmingham and down the rebuilt Trent Valley Lines instead that has saved the most time for journies to the North via the WCML?

 

[Metroland]

Yeah but they tilt a lot in Cumbria and North of The Border, which is how a lot of the 1hr journey time reduction from Glasgow has been achieved.

The inbcrease in mean speed from 75ish to 90ish cuts 1hr off the journey time.

I'm aware of that, but its not the core part of the line. Titling maybe could have been saved for just Glasgow services. They are looking at sticking in 135mph though on certain parts of the route, it appears the Trent valley, and Stafford-Weaver junction being possibles.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But for £9 billion, a new line may bypass key areas. HS2, for example, will probably only call at big cities along the way. Smaller places could benefit from the WCML in its current form, with the high speed and tilt.

Regarding bypasses, tilting in the South of Scotland is the main reason they chose it. Trust me, bypassing the WCML would be extremely expensive and, at times, impossible. The Southern Uplands are just far too hilly, hence why the tilt is beneficial here.

I'm not talking about bypassing cities, I was talking about small cuts offs to get around the problem areas as the GWR did in the 1930s. Any high speed line would likely run up the north of York in any case, rather than through the Lakes. Tilt is probably the best solution of the northern WCML however as you say, but it's only a tiny part of the traffic. But as I said, for £9bn, I'm not especially impressed with the improvements and I really do wonder what could have been done better.

 

[rail-britain]

There are savings to be made by SERIOUS route improvements, but these will cost a LOT more and these are probably the ones dumped during the original plans for the scheme

The whole project was to get the destination to destination times down, to achieve this there have been sacrifices
The Glasgow - Euston is now just 4 hours, but it means these trains are almost empty during the week (er, hello that's four days out of six!)
Personally the wrong ones are timed for non-stop, the old Royal Scot times worked well, but these latest ones are of no benefit
The 16:30 Euston - Glasgow works well on a Friday, but that's it
I've been on it four times and each time I get Coach G all to myself after Preston

 

[andy13]

apart from the seats being a bit hard, the 175s are nice to travel on great air con, big windows etc

 

[Metroland]

There are savings to be made by SERIOUS route improvements, but these will cost a LOT more and these are probably the ones dumped during the original plans for the scheme

Not originally.

In November 1990, British Rail announced the InterCity 250 project, which would address the problems on the WCML through improved track, route re-alignments, relaxation of maximum cant on curves to eight degrees, new signalling, improved power supplies and 24 - 40 new trains capable of up to 155 mph (250 km/h) rather than using tilting trains. This would have seen trains starting out at 125 mph, with incremental increases up to the maximum speed by the end of the 1990s.

InterCity 250 came at a time when improvements to the West Coast Mainline were desperately needed. However, the infrastructure on the West Coast Main Line was incapable of supporting the operation of 155mph trains. Consequently the project entailed both the delivery of new rolling stock and the infrastructure changes which would be necessary to support them. This included, for example, adopting new track alignments such as using the trackbed of the former Great Central Railway between London and Rugby and resignalling of the West Coast Main Line as far north as Crewe, together with extensive modifications to the existing OLE - supplied by new 25kV auto-transformers. The project was valued at around 750 million pounds[7] but the impact of the 1990s recession and the impending privatisation of British Rail led to it being cancelled in July 1992.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterCity_250

 

[me123]

I'm not talking about bypassing cities, I was talking about small cuts offs to get around the problem areas as the GWR did in the 1930s. Any high speed line would likely run up the north of York in any case, rather than through the Lakes. Tilt is probably the best solution of the northern WCML however as you say, but it's only a tiny part of the traffic. But as I said, for £9bn, I'm not especially impressed with the improvements and I really do wonder what could have been done better.

I did understand what you mean. However, I think a new High Speed Line would bypass areas currently served by the WCML (and, indeed, the ECML), so enhancements not only benefit all areas now, but also benefit local areas in the future when Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds are on HS2. I don't see, for example, Preston being on this line, and I imagine that some places like Milton Keynes and Coventry could be bypassed to reduce journey times between the bigger cities of London and Birmigham. I'm not sure if these areas will be bypassed, but I imagine many areas won't be served by HS2, so I think it's important to work on the existing line as well to retain competitive rail services in these areas.

 

[Metroland]

Like the BR scheme, I'm just talking about easing curves like Weedon by building new straighter alignments.

 

[Crossover]

I admit the Pendos have flaws: the misaligned seats (which I seem to get assigned ones at pillars every time I get advance tickets...I dunno how they manage it :P), the smelly vestibules (what clot thought putting the air con inlet next/near to the toilet vent outlet was ever a good idea?), the small windows (not too much of an issue when sitting but means you can only see track when standing!) and vibrating when going at top speed (possibly the electronics preventing overspeed as surely at proposed 140mph they would otherwise vibrate more?)

I personally don't have an issue with legroom on these trains, I'm not short but I guess not too long in the leg but understand that taller people have problems - but what trains have provision for this generally?)

As far as luggage space is concerned I don't see the Mk 4 coaches having much more from wat I can recall (one area at each end of the coach) and if any train should be criticised for lack of luggage space is has got to surely be the Class 185's! It isn't uncommon (as there is only ONE luggage rack per car) to see luggage strewn across the aisles, in doorways etc and can recall one driver (having to change ends as we diverted to Piccadilly via Victoria after leaving Huddersfield) having to move baggage to get through.

The seats on the 350's are similar to the 185's, and are firmer than others but not particularly bad. I tend to find the 350's very good for acceleration and a trip recently to London on one (a 2 and a bit hour journey from the Midlands) seemed to fly by (with the Pendo return leaving Euston at 22.00 taking over 2 hours to return, largely due to a 15 min stop at Rugby....the Pendo was rather aptly named Virgin Express!!!!)

Finally, I also agree with the point fireincairo made that the tilting mechanism is a joy as I encountered on an "IC 225" set the other week from Leeds to Kings Cross as everything on the table shifted from one side to the other as we rounded corners and they also generally shuddered a bit - though it did seem worse when the loco was pushing rather than hauling.