The worst train today?

[Energy]

And these short comings are not related to the underlying design concept, a full strip out of the interior and refurb, then either reform into longer units (if thats possible?) with some new units to take up the slack or cascade to less busy routes would address most of the issues. I realise that the cramped feel is due to loading gauge constraints introduced by the need to tilt, and you cant do anything about that, but if the other issues were addressed this would seem less significant.

The XC ones could be greatly improved by a decent refurb, you could fit in more seats by changing them to ones with a thinner back, and by increasing train lengths (e.g 4 car to 5 car, 5 car and HST to 8 car) with the avanti 221s.

Other problems like bad fuel economy, too many disabled toilets (part of the structure) etc. Cant be fixed.

 

[QSK19]

Tried a 720 yet?

Greg Wallace quite liked them on the telly on Monday evening just gone

 

[150249]

150s don't belong anywhere on the modern rail network. Horrible units.

Fit for the times when low costs alternatives were needed, but nobody can honestly say IMO that they are suitable for anything out there at the minute.

I reckon it's important to distinguish between serviceability, suitability, and longevity. They may be serviceable, they may have over 30 years experience on a route - but that does not make them suitable.

The lines between those 3 can often be blurred on here at times by the first and last ones especially.

The thing with 150s is that the quality differs massively throughout the subclasses. 150/1s are very poor but 150/2s are so much better: comfier seats, better layout, more attractive, more durable, diverse and a better overall ride quality

 

[mike57]

Should note those times were prior to OTMR/Data Recorder/big orange box going in the cabs, and at a time when the chap with the old speed gun would come sit in York mess room prior to his 'fishing' trip where he'd tell everyone which pond he was 'fishing' at.

Yes there 'could' have been speeding, but there are some longish sections of 85/90 as opposed to 75 and coming out from Kirkham Abbey westbound I think its 60 rather than 45, so those times could probably have acheived if the full unit performance was used without breaking the limits. I did the run numerous times both on 158s and 185s and the 158 were I think marginally quicker end to end, thats certainly my perception

 

[bramling]

The thing with 150s is that the quality differs massively throughout the subclasses. 150/1s are very poor but 150/2s are so much better: comfier seats, better layout, more attractive, more durable, diverse and a better overall ride quality

For sure there’s a massive difference between different 150s. The GWR units in particular tend to be quite well presented. Likewise FNW’s refurbishment produced a quite decent travelling environment in my opinion.

 

[150249]

For sure there’s a massive difference between different 150s. The GWR units in particular tend to be quite well presented. Likewise FNW’s refurbishment produced a quite decent travelling environment in my opinion.

I've been on many GWR 150s in my time. I was shocked when I tried out 150207 just after it came down from Northern. It was attached to my favourite (150249) at the time. I didn't stay on 207 for long

 

[Bletchleyite]

Greg Wallace quite liked them on the telly on Monday evening just gone

Skinny and short I guess!

The interior colour scheme is quite nice, I'll give it that, and the actual train is fine, it's a box on wheels. But the seating layout is terrible.

Edit: he's apparently 5 foot 8. No surprise there then! Though if he's as podgy as suggested he'd not have had a fun time if the train was fully occupied.

Edit edit: what programme?

 

[QSK19]

Edit edit: what programme?

‘Inside The Factory’, broadcast on BBC2 on Monday 01/08/2022 (9:00pm). Greg went to Litchurch Lane to see how electric trains are built, more specifically the 720.

 

[Bletchleyite]

‘Inside The Factory’, broadcast on BBC2 on Monday 01/08/2022 (9:00pm). Greg went to Litchurch Lane to see how electric trains are built, more specifically the 720.

Ta, just put that on in the background! Interesting to get a glimpse of the structure, which seems to be corrugated aluminium rather than a frame with body panels over it as per the likes of Desiros, which explains (but doesn't justify!) why they have such thick sidewalls, reducing the interior width even further than the longer length would anyway.

Edit: He doesn't sit in the seats, only the one up front which I'm sure is more than acceptable!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Guess what also has that layout (albeit only on a few rows)? Yep, the junk that is the Class 720.

I know you complain that you can’t fit into their seats or aisles but don’t think that’s a fair reason to call them junk. Maybe you could complain that you consider them to be too narrow, but I think for atmosphere the new stock out of Liverpool Street has definitely improved the service quality. Most GEML stock is solidly 10 car now that they have accepted more. Ride quality also appears much better than the 345s and 710s which are admittedly bumpy.

I consider them to be a huge upgrade over 317, 321 and 360. The air conditioning works wonders (317/321 is unbearable in summer) plugs and USBs, brighter atmosphere, better PIS and (admittedly not much) wood panelling make for a nice train, and I personally find the seats to be a very comfortable shape with the well designed headrest.

I’m definitely less comfortable crammed into a 450 3+2 row, my local train, and the same layout on the 360 is what they replace, those and the 317s with the seat cushions falling onto the floor. 321s were looking knackered inside other than the Renatuses, which were too bright and clinical and had hard seats anyway.

Oh, and as a Spurs fan, I can confirm I’ve heard a lot of supporters moaning about “those horrible old trains” turn up whenever a 317 has pulled into the station.

I am sorry that you claim the seats are too small for you but there is no way the 317/321 is a better train, there are just too many improvements that come with the 720.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I know you complain that you can’t fit into their seats or aisles but don’t think that’s a fair reason to call them junk. Maybe you could complain that you consider them to be too narrow, but I think for atmosphere the new stock out of Liverpool Street has definitely improved the service quality. Most GEML stock is solidly 10 car now that they have accepted more. Ride quality also appears much better than the 345s and 710s which are admittedly bumpy.

345s and 710s are the same basic train, so that'll be track quality.

I consider them to be a huge upgrade over 317, 321 and 360. The air conditioning works wonders (317/321 is unbearable in summer) plugs and USBs, brighter atmosphere, better PIS and (admittedly not much) wood panelling make for a nice train, and I personally find the seats to be a very comfortable shape with the well designed headrest.

I’m definitely less comfortable crammed into a 450 3+2 row, my local train, and the same layout on the 360 is what they replace, those and the 317s with the seat cushions falling onto the floor. 321s were looking knackered inside other than the Renatuses, which were too bright and clinical and had hard seats anyway.

360/450 and 350/2 have wider aisles and seats, so I'm surprised you think that. I don't mind 350/2s that much, they have some big upsides such as the excellent legroom in the facing bays, but I'm really not looking forward to the 730s.

 

[MattRat]

Ride quality also appears much better than the 345s and 710s which are admittedly bumpy.

Considering the 345s are riding on brand new track, that's rather worrying. Makes a little more sense now as to why I've heard them described as glorified tube stock.

 

[mightyena]

I consider them to be a huge upgrade over 317, 321 and 360.

Over a 317 or 321, definitely. Over a 360? As they are, they're a little better, but that's mainly because the 360s were knackered by the end of their GA tenure. Give them some new carpets, panelling and trim and it'd be pretty up in the air which was better (until you started moving of course, since the 720s ride like a Bombardier train, and that is not a compliment)

 

[GoneSouth]

The XC ones could be greatly improved by a decent refurb, you could fit in more seats by changing them to ones with a thinner back, and by increasing train lengths (e.g 4 car to 5 car, 5 car and HST to 8 car) with the avanti 221s.

Other problems like bad fuel economy, too many disabled toilets (part of the structure) etc. Cant be fixed.

I always get a bit annoyed by comments like “too many disabled toilets”. How on Earth can there be too many?

No accessible toilets is unacceptable, 1 is not enough, but having all toilets accessible to everyone sounds like a very fair and civilised society to me.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I always get a bit annoyed by comments like “too many disabled toilets”. How on Earth can there be too many?

No accessible toilets is unacceptable, 1 is not enough, but having all toilets accessible to everyone sounds like a very fair and civilised society to me.

It's fairly pointless and a waste of space having an accessible toilet where there isn't a wheelchair space. Wheelchair users can't reach them, and ambulant disabled don't need them.

 

[GoneSouth]

It's fairly pointless and a waste of space having an accessible toilet where there isn't a wheelchair space. Wheelchair users can't reach them, and ambulant disabled don't need them.

Then hopefully as part of the refurb you’ll fix the error if not having wheelchair spaces in every carriage. That does sound fair and more civilised, thank you

 

[Bletchleyite]

Then hopefully as part of the refurb you’ll fix the error if not having wheelchair spaces in every carriage.

Which is a waste of space when you consider how poorly used they are. Remember that not all disabilities involve wheelchairs; more disabled people can walk but only a short distance, and for them more seats are a priority.

 

[betraveler]

Convertible seats is the answer to disabled spaces, no reason why they need to take up more space in the carriage.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Convertible seats is the answer to disabled spaces, no reason why they need to take up more space in the carriage.

No, they're very much not. To reduce conflicts they (and cycle space) should be dedicated, but the number should be proportionate to demand.

 

[NewClee153]

I mean, most modern stock is built to the same or worse standards, so what makes the 195s so special?

Poor build quality, rides like the wheels are boulders. I’ve ridden a lot of the modern stock, the 195 is amongst the worst

 

[GoneSouth]

Which is a waste of space when you consider how poorly used they are. Remember that not all disabilities involve wheelchairs; more disabled people can walk but only a short distance, and for them more seats are a priority.

Well let’s remove most of the seats…

Most people can stand after all. Capacity problem solved instantly.

i am not disabled but honestly I cringe when I read comments that suggest that making “reasonable adjustment” (as defined in law) is too expensive and wasteful. Why is it always about Penny pinching and a race to the bottom. Let’s be a civilised society, set high standards and maybe, just maybe spaces designed for wheelchairs will be better used when disabled people can actually rely on there being space and facilities to accommodate them.

Rant over, no offence intended.

The voyagers definitely need some refurbishing work, lights, blown windows, dirty seats and carpets and a less red colour scheme. They do give a nice smooth ride compared to the 800 series and have much comfier seats so they could be a lot worse

 

[Energy]

Then hopefully as part of the refurb you’ll fix the error if not having wheelchair spaces in every carriage. That does sound fair and more civilised, thank you

XC voyagers have 2 wheelchair spaces, if that is enough then why have 4/5 which takes up space from non disabled passengers. While I agree that <2 disabled toilets and spaces is unfair to someone disabled having loads which are empty isn't fair to other passengers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

i am not disabled but honestly I cringe when I read comments that suggest that making “reasonable adjustment” (as defined in law) is too expensive and wasteful

"Reasonable adjustment" is to have enough spaces on the train that when a disabled person wants to travel they can, and a toilet adjacent to any such space or spaces.

One in every coach is gross overkill. It's incredibly rare to see even one wheelchair user on a bus or train; they quite reasonably, if they can, prefer to drive (or be driven in) their Motability car, as I would too if I were in a wheelchair.

 

[bramling]

Over a 317 or 321, definitely. Over a 360? As they are, they're a little better, but that's mainly because the 360s were knackered by the end of their GA tenure. Give them some new carpets, panelling and trim and it'd be pretty up in the air which was better (until you started moving of course, since the 720s ride like a Bombardier train, and that is not a compliment)

It’s very dubious indeed whether a 720 is an improvement on a 360. They’d certainly not be an improvement on a 360 with a 350/1 interior layout.

 

[NewClee153]

there seems to be a lot of love missing for the 150's. The GWR and Welsh ones i have been on have had a nice internal refit with the 3+2 seats removed and they are perfectly fine local trains.

Completely agree, whilst they’re on their way out and are very old at this point. They work extremely well for the services they’re catered for, I don’t think they’re anywhere near as bad as the thread suggests, personally

The 350/2s are getting replaced by 730s, which have the exact same horrible layout and seat as the 720s...
The /2s aren't bad, fine for Tring and Northampton services. Shame they get put on the wrong services all the time.

My slight disdain comes from this very fact. On Birmingham - Wolves locals, they’re fine, they would suit plenty of Northern routes which currently use inferior stock, but they have no place on the long distance journeys they currently serve

 

[Bletchleyite]

It’s very dubious indeed whether a 720 is an improvement on a 360. They’d certainly not be an improvement on a 360 with a 350/1 interior layout.

To me, having done many miles on 350/2s, the 3+2 Desiro Classic layout (in all its forms) is unrecognisably better than the 720 (wider seats and better facing legroom, with airline legroom no worse and good window alignment), and the actual seats are better too (nowhere near as hard).

A 350/1 is without doubt better than a 720.

To be fair the 2+2 seated 730s may be absolutely fine - the train itself is OK and the colour scheme and lighting pleasant, the 720's seat layout has been designed for small children.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Considering the 345s are riding on brand new track, that's rather worrying. Makes a little more sense now as to why I've heard them described as glorified tube stock.

In fairness I’m referring to my experiences of them
on the GW(E)ML.

 

[181]

No accessible toilets is unacceptable, 1 is not enough, but having all toilets accessible to everyone sounds like a very fair and civilised society to me.

It's fairly pointless and a waste of space having an accessible toilet where there isn't a wheelchair space. Wheelchair users can't reach them, and ambulant disabled don't need them.

There will be a fair few people, some officially disabled and some just less steady on their feet than they used to be, for whom a wheelchair-accessible toilet is significantly more difficult to use on a moving train than a conventional one. A few months ago I was an an LNER train with my aged mother (in the second of those categories), who delayed going to the toilet until the train was slowing down to stop at a station, and came back pleasantly surprised that it had been a small space whose walls you could lean against rather than a large one in which you rattle around (or words to that effect).

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I always get a bit annoyed by comments like “too many disabled toilets”. How on Earth can there be too many?

No accessible toilets is unacceptable, 1 is not enough, but having all toilets accessible to everyone sounds like a very fair and civilised society to me.

In an ideal world, I'd agree. But when space is at a premium compromises must be made. As pointed out by others, there are many disabilities (perhaps the majority, though I don't have the figures to hand) where the large wheelchair-accessible toilets are harder to use.

For me the main issue with modern train toilets is the tanking issue. Having one universal access toilet is all well and good, until the tank gets full and the toilet locks itself out. The move towards accessibility and the move towards not dropping human waste on the tracks, which are both noble aims in themselves, do butt heads with each other a bit. The tanks need emptying more frequently but the facilities to do so are expensive and don't exist at many stabling locations.

 

[tomuk]

Interesting to get a glimpse of the structure, which seems to be corrugated aluminium rather than a frame with body panels over it as per the likes of Desiros, which explains (but doesn't justify!) why they have such thick sidewalls, reducing the interior width even further than the longer length would anyway.

Wrong the desiros are made from very similar aluminium extrusions. Here is a shot of two sections at Siemens, Krefeld.

Siemens Innotrans 2018 preview | DG298627. Assembling bodyshells. Krefeld. Germany. 13.6.18

Paul Bigland Photography

PaulBigland.zenfolio.com