Poor Design Examples....

[greyman42]

The external door which is just about visible on the right.

Ah yes. I did not realise it was the vestibule.

 

[py_megapixel]

The nasty units fitted to most PRM-retrofitted stock which make the sounds on door release. "Screeeeech.... screeeeech.... screeeeech.... screeeeech.... screeeeech". On some trains it drowns out the automated announcement, depending on which volume level TrainFX has randomly chosen that day. They also sound even if the door in question is locked out!
The PRM-TSI actually specifies a two-tone sounder for door release, which is what new-builds have all had starting with the first Aventras, and it's much less unpleasant.

The seating layout on class 150s. From most seats you have to awkwardly lean forward if you want a decent view out of the window.

The very dim lighting in the small toilets on Desiros. If there's anywhere you want bright lighting to make it feel clean, it's the toilet!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Oct 2022 ==

The Fainsa Sophia. Promised to be a good seat, shaped similarly to and with similar firmness to the Grammer E3000 Desiro seat, but some idiot decided it should have a base frame with a step in it* and a thin cushion which means you can feel the base through it after about 20 minutes. Awful thing that needn't have been so bad if the base frame had been a flat metal plate.

The main problem seems to be the cheap cushioning materials. Particularly on the IETs where a lot of the cushions seem to have somehow broken and it pretty much just feels like perching on the luggage rack, albeit covered with a bit of cloth.

Here's an interesting one from the class 397. Where is the vestibule door open button? Right behind the handrail! I circled it in the picture; you really have to know it's there. On that journey, I watched passenger after passenger press the big green button to the right in an attempt to get through. Not only is the button invisible, it is sufficiently obscured to make it physically difficult to press anyway.

Some people press the toilet door open button when they want to get off the train.

Sliding interconnecting doors do seem to be a common source of problems.

I find the worst are on 165s and 166s - if you go through a pair of doors either side of a connecting gangway, there is a disconcerting delay between the near one and far ones opening, making it feel like you're about to be trapped in the gangway.

Close second would be all the ones with bad buttons. Alstom in the early 2000s seemed to like putting toilet door buttons right next to vestibule doors, with predictably ensuing confusion; meanwhile Siemens have those stupid touch sensitive ones that don't even register you've pressed them half the time.

 

[Ken H]

@fgwrich Wasn't the problem with BR dmu hand driers the fact they got the hand drier heat from the engine coolant rather than a electric element?

 

[talldave]

The announcement on Thameslink as you're rolling into a station of "Doors will open automatically at the next station" when actually mean "this station".

Information screens at Overground managed stations that don't mention the scheduled train time. In fact, everything about those screens is crap.

 

[xotGD]

Any train where the top of the heating duct is sloped, so that you cannot rest your foot on top of it.

The fixed armrest in the middle of the original Mark 3 seats.

Door open buttons that don't work if you depress before they are lit and keep depressed. Press and hold should result in instant opening when activated.

Not having a standard coupling system so that all trains can couple to each other.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The PEP and Mk3 20m DMUs and EMUs in original layout. It must have taken a true anti-passenger attitude to design a train with no seats properly aligned to a window (or 8 per unit in the case of 321s).

 

[Mikey C]

The PEP and Mk3 20m DMUs and EMUs in original layout. It must have taken a true anti-passenger attitude to design a train with no seats properly aligned to a window (or 8 per unit in the case of 321s).

Especially with the awful original low backed seats on the PEPs and 455s, with the detachable cushions!

 

[Bikeman78]

The good news is that the PRM-TSI standardises this:

The bad news is that you have to wait for all the trains with the wrong pattern to be replaced or upgraded for it to be totally fixed.

When did this take effect? The 317s had the open button at the top most of their lives. The 27 with PRM mods had them swapped over. I struggled with it having previously pressed the top button without looking. Completely pointless change that caused confusion.

 

[Deepgreen]

Destination indicators on many modern stock types, especially the 700 series - dim and illegible in anything but dusk to night conditions (and only then from close up). Pointless.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Oct 2022 ==

Redhill platform 0 - poor design with simple-to-correct details ignored, such as the absence of GWR stopping marks, leaving NDL trains mostly beyond the canopy and unnecessarily far from the exit. Feeble design failure perpetuated by inertia from Southern/NR.

 

[JD2168]

Internal doors on 158s not closing at times.
Internal destination blinds on 170s - on Northern versions instead of destination & via points scrolling Class 170 Turbostar.
Tables where the bar is right where you want to get out of the seat making it awkward on certain versions.
Facing seats on class 150s, no adults could sit opposite someone else in comfort.
3x2 seating, seats too small for someone to sit comfortably.
Class 185 - at most stations the door is not level with the platform meaning an awkward step up or down for elderly & disabled passengers.

 

[pdeaves]

Some people press the toilet door open button when they want to get off the train.

Yes, that as well. Rolling stock designers please note: in future, think about how the normal person expects to see button layout/position and how they will use them!

Tables where the bar is right where you want to get out of the seat making it awkward on certain versions.

Tables where the leg is exactly lined up with the hip joint of a normal person seated, meaning a journey sat awkwardly twisted. Woe betide you if you put the offending limb on the outside of the table leg, you trip passing passengers or get your toes stepped on.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

The armrests next to the windows on IETs are pointless. The design is such that there is panelling above the armrest that makes it physically impossible to place your arm on the armrest.

Does it? I've never had a problem using these?

 

[AlastairFraser]

The Fainsa Sophia. Promised to be a good seat, shaped similarly to and with similar firmness to the Grammer E3000 Desiro seat, but some idiot decided it should have a base frame with a step in it* and a thin cushion which means you can feel the base through it after about 20 minutes. Awful thing that needn't have been so bad if the base frame had been a flat metal plate.

Furthermore, TOCs (Thameslink, ScotRail, LNR 730s) who think this abomination of a seat is suitable for First Class! The ScotRail staff when I tried the 385 mockup were not impressed when I told them Standard was considerably more comfortable.

* I think the *idea* is that your weight goes into the deeper part and you need less cushion under your upper thigh, but unfortunately that's designing it for only one shape of person. It might even have worked if the step wasn't as, er, stepped.

Agreed, half an inch or so more soft cushion on the back would have made a difference too. If you think that is bad, try the plug sockets for passengers on 195s/331s which CAF obviously sourced from Wish as half of them are really bad installed and aren't made of robust materials to start with.
Plus the 185 non-disabled toilets are way, way too small. Someone who is more than 5 foot will feel cramped in those.

 

[Bikeman78]

Destination indicators on many modern stock types, especially the 700 series - dim and illegible in anything but dusk to night conditions (and only then from close up). Pointless.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Oct 2022 ==

Redhill platform 0 - poor design with simple-to-correct details ignored, such as the absence of GWR stopping marks, leaving NDL trains mostly beyond the canopy and unnecessarily far from the exit. Feeble design failure perpetuated by inertia from Southern/NR.

The whole platform 0 project should be used as a case study on how not to do things. It's done little to increase capacity but means people often have to walk further to change trains. Trains are rerouted from platform 2 to platform 0 with no warning. The PIS is oblivious and the signallers don't seem to talk to the staff on the station. Then they wonder why people run on the station!

 

[ComUtoR]

leaving NDL trains

NDL ?

Cheers in advance

 

[hexagon789]

NDL

North Downs Line presumably, from the context of GWR & Redhill

 

[ComUtoR]

cheers my six sided, polygolonical, consecutive numbered, compadre.

 

[hexagon789]

cheers my six sided, polygolonical, consecutive numbered, compadre.

I like the description!

 

[fgwrich]

The armrests next to the windows on IETs are pointless. The design is such that there is panelling above the armrest that makes it physically impossible to place your arm on the armrest.

I don’t get this fixation with fixed armest against train walls - the 158, 159 and IET being particularly irritating examples (unless your lucky enough to find a “broken” one where someone has forced it upwards). But the worst and most uncomfortable offender I’ve found at this by far is the seated coaches in the CAF Mk5s on the Caledonian Sleeper. Covered in thin moquette and fixed, coupled with the rather annoying footrest, made for an uncomfortable nights sleep recently.

However, one for the bizarre design choices - the small briefcase / newspaper rack between the seat and the walls on the ScotRail 170s. Why?

Speaking of Scotland - referencing my earlier post about the terrible seat spacing on the Corkerhill 158s…

 

[hexagon789]

However, one for the bizarre design choices - the small briefcase / newspaper rack between the seat and the walls on the ScotRail 170s. Why?

Presumably when NatEx specced the 170s internal layout options they wanted, they felt it was a good feature to have for some reason, unless it was a standard feature with the mid-level quality First Class? It's certainly touted as a feature in the promotional video made in 1999 for the ScotRail Turbostars.

Any one know if any other Class 170s' First Class have the briefcase shelves?

(Obviously it's a bit subjective as Midland Mainline had the basic level only originally (with 2+2 seating), Anglia and Hull Trains had the higher quality level, ScotRail went for the middle level choice.)

 

[Railcar]

Poor design? Those 'squealing' inverters on Siemens-designed trains. Yes, I'm thinking about Platforms 5 and 6 at London Bridge when two Thameslink 700s arrive together.
Talking of 700s, many of them do not have drop-down tables for the 'airline' seats.
And talking of 700s, those 'firm' seats . . ..

 

[fgwrich]

Presumably when NatEx specced the 170s internal layout options they wanted, they felt it was a good feature to have for some reason, unless it was a standard feature with the mid-level quality First Class? It's certainly touted as a feature in the promotional video made in 1999 for the ScotRail Turbostars.

Any one know if any other Class 170s' First Class have the briefcase shelves?

(Obviously it's a bit subjective as Midland Mainline had the basic level only originally (with 2+2 seating), Anglia and Hull Trains had the higher quality level, ScotRail went for the middle level choice.)

I hadn’t realised how much of a big deal ScotRail had made of those features until you mentioned it last night. Watching the launch video on YouTube again, there’s definitely some unusual features and some features ahead of their time - eg Plug Sockets. The oddest feature though seems to be the top up seats half way down the coach!

 

[hexagon789]

I hadn’t realised how much of a big deal ScotRail had made of those features until you mentioned it last night. Watching the launch video on YouTube again, there’s definitely some unusual features and some features ahead of their time - eg Plug Sockets. The oddest feature though seems to be the top up seats half way down the coach!

I suppose it was trying to sell a product and an investment, and to be fair to National Express they did achieve quite a lot of positive changes during their tenure. Each successive operator seems to have accomplished less and generally been worse than their predecessor.

Collapsible folding seats I believe the term is for those seats, tip-up being the traditional spring-loaded ones by the doors and disabled toilets.

Impressively, as built the MOS centre vehicle seated 84 through all these additions, officially now it's only 76 seats.

 

[Goldfish62]

The inter-unit gangways on Class 458s. The initial telescopic ones were completely useless, being unsuitable for passenger use and could only be deployed in depots. The replacement conventional gangways are almost as useless. The closed-off cab area is so cramped that guards open it up and therefore need to lock the gangway out of passenger use.

Talking of 458s, the wheel-revolutions based triggering of the PIS is another poor design element.

 

[Recessio]

Poor design? Those 'squealing' inverters on Siemens-designed trains. Yes, I'm thinking about Platforms 5 and 6 at London Bridge when two Thameslink 700s arrive together.

I used to live right next to a Thameslink station in 3rd-rail territory. Genuinely astonished those inverters don't breach some sort of noise regulations. It's ridiculous when other manufacturers have got solutions that are far quieter...

 

[antharro]

IIRC, the 442s had proper hand dryers in them. The kind that actual put out decent heat and enough air to dry your hands. Before those were fitted, I remember them having cloth towel-on-a-roll, the kind where the whole roll is swapped out for washing at the end of the day or whenever.

 

[Rick1984]

The loco hauled Greater Anglia Mkiii carriages had those roller driers

The oddest feature though seems to be the top up seats half way down the coach!

Extra luggage space?

 

[Bevan Price]

The absence of enough grab-rails near the doorways of Classes 195 and 331.

The door positions of Class 195 when they use Platform 4 at Earlestown (on the south to east curve). The gap between platform and some train doors is dangerously large for anyone who is not very agile.

 

[InkyScrolls]

The absence of enough grab-rails near the doorways of Classes 195 and 331.

The door positions of Class 195 when they use Platform 4 at Earlestown (on the south to east curve). The gap between platform and some train doors is dangerously large for anyone who is not very agile.

Ditto with 331s at Shipley platform five.

 

[Dr Hoo]

The absence of enough grab-rails near the doorways of Classes 195 and 331.

What do you mean by 'enough'? There is a grab rail in each door pillar. I hold onto them several times per week.