The worst train today?

[Richard Scott]

The Aventras may be bad.

I don't see what's wrong with the FLIRTs though? They are the only trains in Britain that really rival their counterparts in continental Europe.

That's the exact problem, almost every modern unit I've been on in continental Europe isn't up to much.

 

[Peter0124]

Not been on a 720 before however looking at the interior, that airline 3+2 seating is actual hell, looks a lot like an airplane cabin and trains are not planes.

 

[DustyBin]

Used to hate them before they were refurbished and still had those horrible low-backed seats as per the PEP-derived classes. I'd always change at Surbiton for a slammer rather than ride all the way from Hampton Court on the 455s. Unless I had by bike with me of course.
Once they were upgraded they were more tolerable, but we're going back the best part of 20 years, so I don't know if they've aged particularly gracefully!

Personally I think they've aged quite well; they're clean, bright and relatively comfortable. They're obviously long in the tooth but it's only the lack of aircon that lets them down IMO. (It doesn't actually bother me but I accept it may be an issue for some).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not been on a 720 before however looking at the interior, that airline 3+2 seating is actual hell, looks a lot like an airplane cabin and trains are not planes.

It's truly awful.

 

[Anonymous10]

Are we being asked to rate trains as a passenger or as a member of train crew? I used 155s a far bit on the Calder Valley line and didn't find anything much to complain about. As for 153s, they would be fine provided they run coupled to a compliant 150 or 156.

or a tfw 153

 

[reduke]

The Aventras may be bad.

I don't see what's wrong with the FLIRTs though? They seem to be solidly built units which offer a smooth quiet journey with all the mod cons (air conditioning, charging, a decent PIS etc.) and the best disabled accessibility in the country. They are the only trains in Britain that really rival their counterparts in continental Europe.

I would describe them as a wannabe IET (and that's not a good aim).

Yes I was spoiled with the 90's and I'm sure that's clouding my vision to a certain extent, but to sum up my thoughts:

Raised seats are stupid - you feel like you are swaying on curves.
They are plain and soulless.
The seat shape is not comfortable at all - nothing to do with padding just the shape. Even the IET seats are better and that's quite a feat.


The only reason the IET didn't make my list is the Pullman dining option.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Raised seats are stupid - you feel like you are swaying on curves.

That's because they are low floor. Given the choice of wheelchair users being able to board without assistance (which so often goes wrong), pretty much everything else falls by the wayside as it's such a big gain.

Low floor buses are similar. A high floor bus/coach is easier to get a decent seat layout, but easy boarding is such a gain.

 

[reduke]

That's because they are low floor. Given the choice of wheelchair users being able to board without assistance (which so often goes wrong), pretty much everything else falls by the wayside as it's such a big gain.

Low floor buses are similar. A high floor bus/coach is easier to get a decent seat layout, but easy boarding is such a gain.

I'm not arguing that's not the reason, but it doesn't have to make me like the effect it causes. The question was the opposite of your favourite train, not what was the least advanced.
I'm sure someone could have found a solution that didn't cause this, but I digress.

Completely OT: how many lines can't take Flirts due to Harrington humps?

 

[Parallel]

I think the XC 170s are quite poor just due to the legroom alone. I’m 6’1” yet literally can barely get my legs in the airline seats? Much better if you can get a table or a vacant priority seat but these are often occupied from my experience.

I also don’t like the Voyagers - I find the seats uncomfortable and the vestibules still smell like toilets. They are OK other than that though.

I like the 180s based on comfort and overall passenger experience, but they’re a poor train based on their reliability record alone.

There are other trains that are a bit dated like 150s and 153s, but I find it is often more down to the routes they operate. I find 153s perfectly fine on the Heart of Wales, and 150s adequate for the Valleys, Devon/Cornwall branches or Exmouth to Paignton services. They however aren’t adequate when they substitute on Cardiff - Manchester (and when they used to substitute on Cardiff - Portsmouth/Brighton runs).

 

[MaidaVale]

I think the XC 170s are quite poor just due to the legroom alone. I’m 6’1” yet literally can barely get my legs in the airline seats? Much better if you can get a table or a vacant priority seat but these are often occupied from my experience.

I also don’t like the Voyagers - I find the seats uncomfortable and the vestibules still smell like toilets. They are OK other than that though.

I like the 180s based on comfort and overall passenger experience, but they’re a poor train based on their reliability record alone.

There are other trains that are a bit dated like 150s and 153s, but I find it is often more down to the routes they operate. I find 153s perfectly fine on the Heart of Wales, and 150s adequate for the Valleys, Devon/Cornwall branches or Exmouth to Paignton services. They however aren’t adequate when they substitute on Cardiff - Manchester (and when they used to substitute on Cardiff - Portsmouth/Brighton runs).

I think you hit the nail right on the head with that point about 150(/2)s, They're actually somewhat of a delight on smaller lines, particularly the refurbished GWR examples and the TfW ones aren't bad, although it's when they're stuck on longer routes like TfWs Manchester to South Wales runs or Penzance to Bristol where they become a contender for a really bad unit. (even the shorter Penzance - Plymouth runs with them are a bit tedious)

Their usage in the North is a completely different story however as I find Northerns 150s (of all sub-classes) to be a tiresome and unpleasant experience no matter what route they're deployed on.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not arguing that's not the reason, but it doesn't have to make me like the effect it causes. The question was the opposite of your favourite train, not what was the least advanced.
I'm sure someone could have found a solution that didn't cause this, but I digress.

Completely OT: how many lines can't take Flirts due to Harrington humps?

None whatsoever, because the Harrington hump is used to raise very low rural platforms to 915mm, not higher (except Thameslink, but those ones are only about 20m long, so would only mean one or at most two doors would have a step down).