The worst train today?

[bramling]

I disagree with that approach. The GWR150s might have better seats but they still have the failings of the class, poor ride, atrocious noise and poor ventilation, which in my experience, show themselves up when on the long stretches up and down the main line in Cornwall. They were introduced for suburban services where there was no immediate chance of electrification. Claiming that some are better because they have nicer seats, (a very subjective measure as always), is like praising a polished t*rd, they are still inadequate trains for many of the duties that they are deployed on.

It isn’t so much the type of seats, as the way the seats are laid out. No 2+3, and in particular no 2+3 airline. The flip side of this coin is the seating capacity if these units is quite significantly reduced.

I’d certainly agree with the general view that the GWR 150s aren’t too bad. To be fair, I also don’t mind the ex FNW 150/1s which retain the facing layout.

 

[py_megapixel]

It isn’t so much the type of seats, as the way the seats are laid out. No 2+3, and in particular no 2+3 airline. The flip side of this coin is the seating capacity if these units is quite significantly reduced.

But it is the type of seats. @Bletchleyite's statement about sitting on the floor is definitely an over-exaggeration, but the seats still are far too low down and rather unsupportive.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But it is the type of seats. @Bletchleyite's statement about sitting on the floor is definitely an over-exaggeration, but the seats still are far too low down and rather unsupportive.

If you're 6' 4" and long in the leg you might as well be on the floor! It's the same problem as with the original 158 seats.

The day First North Western decided to bin all the Ashbournes and replace with Chapmans (very dated-looking now, but also still very comfortable) was a good day. It's a shame some are still out there, e.g. the Turbo fleet.

The GWR 150s are certainly "least worst" (demonstrating that, to some extent, it is possible to polish a turd), but the 150 is just out of date and is in dire need of replacement. Polluting 1980s engines, rattly, noisy, cold in winter, hot in summer, generally bad seating layout and so on. Super-modern when introduced, but now almost 40 years old they are as outdated as the 101s were in the late 1990s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Mar 2022 ==

I agree they were quicker, but we went from 1 x 6/7 coach LH per hour to 3 x 2 coach sprinters per hour, less of a wait but no real capacity improvement on a busy route and a definite comfort downgrade. Lets be honest 1st gen Sprinters and Pacers were about operating costs not comfort, speed etc.

Yes, agreed. I don't know what BR were thinking when they thought 3+2 seating was suitable for long distance services like these. The 150 is a reasonable (if not great) 101 replacement, but it is not a long distance unit.

Of course the Class 156 came along later, and while now very dated indeed these probably do provide an improvement on rotting Mk1s. The 150s destined for TPE should have been this type of design from the start, or even, dare I say it, a Wessie DMU.

 

[Ken H]

I agree they were quicker, but we went from 1 x 6/7 coach LH per hour to 3 x 2 coach sprinters per hour, less of a wait but no real capacity improvement on a busy route and a definite comfort downgrade. Lets be honest 1st gen Sprinters and Pacers were about operating costs not comfort, speed etc.

They say that HST saved the inter city business. I would argue the early sprinters saved much of the then regional railways.

 

[quantinghome]

I would have to go for any 22x.

Narrow trains due to the tilt profile meaning limited overhead storage and a cramped feel, smelly toilets, inadequate luggage space, loud vibrating underfloor engines. To think that these were a successor to MK3 coaches makes me sad every time I use them.

They are also in a petty poor condition now with the 222s standar class being especially poor for an Intercity service to London. Whilst they are also often inadequate for the services operated with people standing for long periods .

A decent refurb and some new stock would solve the last two points but even with this I will never love the 22x trains and would not mourn their passing to Booths.

I would go further and narrow it down to the Class 220. The Class 221 is slightly redeemed by its capacity; the class 222 more so as it took on some lessons learned from its older siblings.

So yes, I present to the forum the Class 220...

Let us consider this train. Intended to function as the main workhorse of the cross-country network from Aberdeen to Penzance covering the large majority of our nation's great cities. Yet it has a grand total of 200 seats. Fewer than a 3-car class 158.

It drinks fuel.

It whirrs. It buzzes. It beeps. No one knows why.

It has windows. Somewhere.

The seats were designed by an alien with only a rudimentary understanding of the human anatomy.

An alien who also thought that toilets were very, very important. So important that a large amount of space should be devoted to them, and that everyone in the train should know what they smell like. All. The. Time.

There is nowhere to put luggage thicker than a ring binder.

And by all accounts they are incredibly expensive to run.

Other trains may be older, even less comfortable, but they aren't designed for passengers to be in for several hours at a time.

All in all, after a few hours on one I can't help but think of Agent Smith's speech in The Matrix:

I hate this place. This zoo. This prison. This reality, whatever you want to call it, I can't stand it any longer. It's the smell, if there is such a thing. I feel saturated by it. I can taste its stink, and every time I do I fear that I have somehow been infected by it. It's repulsive! Isn't it? I must get out of here. I must get free.

 

[yoyothehobo]

It has windows. Somewhere.

Probably the best post on this forum.

 

[mmh]

The GWR 150s are certainly "least worst" (demonstrating that, to some extent, it is possible to polish a turd)

A GWR 150 a few years ago was one of the few trains to ever genuinely surprise me to the point of honestly thinking "how on earth could anyone have thought that was a good idea?" I'd never seen airline 3+2 before, other than on 1st gen DMUs. An awful idea!

 

[Bletchleyite]

A GWR 150 a few years ago was one of the few trains to ever genuinely surprise me to the point of honestly thinking "how on earth could anyone have thought that was a good idea?" I'd never seen airline 3+2 before, other than on 1st gen DMUs. An awful idea!

They have been refurbished since that particular piece of awful design, which was BR's stupid idea and allowed the addition of a grand total of four (4) seats per coach, and not even nice ones either, just narrow side-facing ones.

 

[mmh]

Time for one of my periodic "Voyagers aren't terrible even though they replaced hauled stock" posts. As ever, those who think they're the the worst current train have clearly never travelled in coach D on a Virgin / Avanti Voyager, otherwise they'd know Voyagers can also have one of the best standard class layouts of any train currently in use.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Time for one of my periodic "Voyagers aren't terrible even though they replaced hauled stock" posts. As ever, those who think they're the the worst current train have clearly never travelled in coach D on a Virgin / Avanti Voyager, otherwise they'd know Voyagers can also have one of the best standard class layouts of any train currently in use.

Coach D is fairly nice, I'll give you, but 52 seats in a 23m vehicle is utterly pathetic. There is so much wasted space in the things.

With modern seats and a sensible mixed layout like the 158, it should be possible to get 72 in even with a small buffet counter, with plenty of legroom. Look at the 444.

 

[MattRat]

I would go further and narrow it down to the Class 220. The Class 221 is slightly redeemed by its capacity; the class 222 more so as it took on some lessons learned from its older siblings.

So yes, I present to the forum the Class 220...

Let us consider this train. Intended to function as the main workhorse of the cross-country network from Aberdeen to Penzance covering the large majority of our nation's great cities. Yet it has a grand total of 200 seats. Fewer than a 3-car class 158.

It drinks fuel.

It whirrs. It buzzes. It beeps. No one knows why.

It has windows. Somewhere.

The seats were designed by an alien with only a rudimentary understanding of the human anatomy.

An alien who also thought that toilets were very, very important. So important that a large amount of space should be devoted to them, and that everyone in the train should know what they smell like. All. The. Time.

There is nowhere to put luggage thicker than a ring binder.

And by all accounts they are incredibly expensive to run.

Other trains may be older, even less comfortable, but they aren't designed for passengers to be in for several hours at a time.

All in all, after a few hours on one I can't help but think of Agent Smith's speech in The Matrix:

This very much captured the essence of what I was looking for, even more than my own OP. I hope people take notes from this.

However, the fact most people can't tell the difference between 22x suggests they are all still pretty terrible. It's like comparing bird poo with dog poo. Bird poo is worse by the way, not that many people would notice.

 

[bramling]

But it is the type of seats. @Bletchleyite's statement about sitting on the floor is definitely an over-exaggeration, but the seats still are far too low down and rather unsupportive.

Can’t really claim to have ever had this issue personally. I’m fairly tall, but my only gripe with the original seats is they’re very slightly low relative to the window view.

My bigger issue with 150s is the way so few seats have a good window view. With the 150/2s with the original layout, there’s only a very small handful of seats with a decent view, especially if one wishes to face forwards. Pre PRM some of these seats were rather undesirably situated right outside the toilet door, and post PRM the toilet area has reduced the seating still further.

The 150 concept, especially the 150/2s, was about squeezing as much as possible into a 40-metre train. Same with all Sprinters really, hence why none of them are great in terms of legroom as built.

Having said all this, a 150 with a good interior layout is - IMO - quite okay. The noise doesn’t bother me - in fact I’m quite happy to have it drowning out people talking.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My bigger issue with 150s is the way so few seats have a good window view

As I said, it takes a particularly vindictive (or negligent) designer to design a unit on which no seat has an acceptable window view - not one on the original /1 layout. Same with PEPs.

 

[bramling]

As I said, it takes a particularly vindictive (or negligent) designer to design a unit on which no seat has an acceptable window view - not one on the original /1 layout. Same with PEPs.

I can live with the original layout. It’s the 150/2 layout I find more of a problem.

That said, something like the Turbo (or Networker) is miles ahead.

 

[MattRat]

Having said all this, a 150 with a good interior layout is - IMO - quite okay. The noise doesn’t bother me - in fact I’m quite happy to have it drowning out people talking.

People talk to probably take their mind off how bad the train is. I can't be the only one who notices that people are quieter on a train that is more relaxing to ride on.

 

[urpert]

I can live with the original layout. It’s the 150/2 layout I find more of a problem.

That said, something like the Turbo (or Networker) is miles ahead.

Amusingly enough the Networkers that have had the PRM mods done ended up with a row of 2+3 airline seating...

 

[notadriver]

The Class 150 is the worst in my experience, although some are better than others. Short-distances on the Welsh 150s are bearable but Northern's are vile even after refurbishment. They are cramped, usually far too small for the routes on which they operate and share the same deeply unpleasant interior style and seating as other classes of similar vintage.

Talking of which, the worst EMU has to be the Class 319. An EMU which barely improves upon the performance of the diesels it replaced on Northern metals is an embarrassment, added to the fact they never received anything approaching the promised 'like new' refurbishment. Worst of all are the seats, ludicrously low to the ground and no good on a tall person's back at all. Travelling on their first day in service with Northern, I remember thinking that other than the fact they are much quieter, it is difficult to argue they are a step up over the 156s common to the Airport express at all. In some ways, they were a step down.

The 319s are night and day compared with the 323s which really did offer a demonstrable improvement with far pleasanter interiors and the rapid acceleration expected of an electric service. The new CAF classes have their well-documented drawbacks, but they are a colossal improvement on rubbish like 150s and 319s.

Sorry if the above comes across as too serious for a light-hearted thread, but let's just say I avoid these trains like the plague wherever possible!

When the 319s were introduced I remember them being very quick - in fact one was I’m sure used on a London to Brighton record run. An 8 car class 375 formation struggles to keep up with a pair of 319s when they race between Swanley and St Mary Cray. And that’s on DC third rail. They are faster on AC.

So why are they so bad up north compared to Sprinters etc which are slow ? Are the 319s knackered ?

 

[bramling]

When the 319s were introduced I remember them being very quick - in fact one was I’m sure used on a London to Brighton record run. An 8 car class 375 formation struggles to keep up with a pair of 319s when they race between Swanley and St Mary Cray. And that’s on DC third rail. They are faster on AC.

So why are they so bad up north compared to Sprinters etc which are slow ? Are the 319s knackered ?

It does seem to be the case that they were thrashed on Thameslink, and have never really had much love either on Thameslink or since.

321s would have been better, but weren’t available at the required time. Northern has done well with 323s though, they are very nice IMO. 365s would have been even better.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It does seem to be the case that they were thrashed on Thameslink, and have never really had much love either on Thameslink or since.

321s would have been better, but weren’t available at the required time. Northern has done well with 323s though, they are very nice IMO. 365s would have been even better.

They are sluggish on LNR as well. AIUI they are underpowered compared to 321s. They can do 100mph but take a long time to get there.

 

[mike57]

So yes, I present to the forum the Class 220...

I dont disagree...

However a bit of speculation, if the interior was completely stripped most of those issues could be corrected. How much would it cost? Is there enough life left in them to make it worthwhile? Would a potential user prefer to use something else anyway? Might not happen but could it happen?

 

[bramling]

They are sluggish on LNR as well. AIUI they are underpowered compared to 321s. They can do 100mph but take a long time to get there.

Same with 317/321. On GN a 317 could reach 90mph by Alexandra Palace, but would take until Welham Green to finally reach 100. 321s were similar although more variable.

By contrast, a 365 will be doing 95 mph at Alexandra Palace, and what happened next would depend more on how the driver handled the neutral section, but generally a 365 would first see 100 at Oakleigh Park.

387 and 700 seem to be even more impacted by the neutral section, but will generally reach 100 mph by Barnet Tunnel.

Never done the journey in a 319 unfortunately!

 

[Mat17]

153

I just wish I could make the font about size 100 to express my contempt for them. I hope every single one is scrapped, there should be no survivors.

The Merseyrail 142 holds the title though for being even worse. I'd rather walk.

 

[Bletchleyite]

153

I just wish I could make the font about size 100 to express my contempt for them. I hope every single one is scrapped, there should be no survivors.

The Merseyrail 142 holds the title though for being even worse. I'd rather walk.

That was indeed an amazing exercise in making a bad train even worse.

 

[jfollows]

Are the 319s knackered ?

Yes, essentially, I think.
They're fine when they're working, but they're essentially clapped out I think. Just generally unreliable compared to the other things. More 323s will be an improvement because they're more reliable - whether or not they're more comfortable they're still better than no train at all.
I"ve never had a 323 fail on me, of course it happens, but had a 319 with door problems which required isolation which caused delay, which all seemed par for the course.

 

[py_megapixel]

If you're 6' 4" and long in the leg you might as well be on the floor!

As it happens my height is roughly that and I have long legs. However, I'd still take the Ashbourne over sitting on the floor. I would take standing in the doorway over the Ashbourne though unless the journey is longer than 20 mins or so!

The day First North Western decided to bin all the Ashbournes and replace with Chapmans (very dated-looking now, but also still very comfortable) was a good day. It's a shame some are still out there, e.g. the Turbo fleet.

There are also still plenty with Northern, as the Arriva "Northern Spirit" ones had a cheaper refurb that kept the old seats, as did the LM and GW ones that came up north in the earlier days of the current Northern incarnation.

The Turbos have different seats which, while still not brilliant, are hugely preferable to the rubbish in the Mk3-based stuff.

 

[quantinghome]

I dont disagree...

However a bit of speculation, if the interior was completely stripped most of those issues could be corrected. How much would it cost? Is there enough life left in them to make it worthwhile? Would a potential user prefer to use something else anyway? Might not happen but could it happen?

I've no specific knowledge of the units other than using them as a passenger. But certainly major refurbishment like that has been successful in the past - the 'Mallard' overhaul of the IC225s is a good example. Or Scotrail with the 'Inter7city' trains.

The question is whether it's worthwhile - how much life is left in the units? They were introduced in 2001 so just over 20 years old. You've got to think they have at least 10 years left, probably more. But I don't really know. If they are very expensive to maintain and operate and are getting knackered then operators might decide to ditch them and go for a new build or a cascaded nearly new bi-mode.

 

[mike57]

I've no specific knowledge of the units other than using them as a passenger. But certainly major refurbishment like that has been successful in the past - the 'Mallard' overhaul of the IC225s is a good example. Or Scotrail with the 'Inter7city' trains.

The question is whether it's worthwhile - how much life is left in the units? They were introduced in 2001 so just over 20 years old. You've got to think they have at least 10 years left, probably more. But I don't really know. If they are very expensive to maintain and operate and are getting knackered then operators might decide to ditch them and go for a new build or a cascaded nearly new bi-mode.

Yes, it boils down to costs and potential future use. We are close to getting 50 years out the HSTs, but they are a bit like the 100 year old broom thats had 4 new handles and 5 new heads...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, it boils down to costs and potential future use. We are close to getting 50 years out the HSTs, but they are a bit like the 100 year old broom thats had 4 new handles and 5 new heads...

The other thing about 22x is that they're DMUs (well, DEMUs). I don't think, if the views on carbon emissions and fuels was the same as in say 2005, we would even be debating whether they should have a heavy refurb for another 20 years, and would maybe just be debating if they should be getting Fainsa Sophias or Grammer IC3000s. But the world has changed, and the future has a pantograph, and so they are prematurely outmoded.

 

[QSK19]

Class 700 for me. Not for any mechanical or operational reason, more an emotional one. It brings back raw memories of Bombardier losing the Thameslink contract to Siemens. I was working for Bombardier at the time and I’ve never experienced a more depressed atmosphere in a office - and that was the HR department, never mind the shop floor and project teams. I still resent 700s whenever I catch them to travel south from STP.

 

[43096]

Class 700 for me. Not for any mechanical or operational reason, more an emotional one. It brings back raw memories of Bombardier losing the Thameslink contract to Siemens. I was working for Bombardier at the time and I’ve never experienced a more depressed atmosphere in a office - and that was the HR department, never mind the shop floor and project teams. I still resent 700s whenever I catch them to travel south from STP.

Bombardier didn’t deserve to win the contract. The toys-out-of-the-pram afterwards rather underlined the point. The fact that Bombardier Transportation no longer exists rather underscores what an utterly rotten organisation it was.