Were Bombardier Voyagers a mistake?

[yorksrob]

I know exactly what the cause would've been. Lack of maintenance.

Indeed.

There's a subtle difference between a poor passenger experience due to poor design and a poor passenger experience due to the equipment being knackered and at the end of its maintenance regime.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Indeed.

There's a subtle difference between a poor passenger experience due to poor design and a poor passenger experience due to the equipment being knackered and at the end of its maintenance regime.

And in the hands of a TOC who were really wanting to make their new trains look good.

 

[ExRes]

Indeed. The simpler, the better for me, as far as loo's are concerned. EMT HST's are the current best for this IMO.

There's nothing as simple as a loo that deposits its potentially smelly contents on the track of course

 

[Haydn1971]

Unless you work on the track !

 

[DarloRich]

No - Voyagers weren’t a mistake. I think they are, in themselves, mechanically sound, reliable, fast modern trains. The mistake was using them on long distance services and in specifying an interior that is frankly terrible and buying them in 4 and 5 car configurations which offer insufficient passenger capacity

Using them on intermediate distance trains would be fine - a journey from Edinburgh to Exeter is torture. A journey form Edinburgh to Newcastle or York may be just about tolerable.

 

[yorksrob]

There's nothing as simple as a loo that deposits its potentially smelly contents on the track of course

Well, it does mean the smelly contents aren't. hanging around stinking up the train. But that isn't the key thing. The 158's still dumped onto the track until recently, yet they were fitted with all sorts of hi-tec shenanigans, including hand dryers which are weak as water, sliding doors that stick half way through unless you give them a tug, and door controls where you're never quite confident that they've locked properly.

It's a relief to use a toilet with a simple door lock, paper towels etc.

 

[DarloRich]

Perhaps the lovers of the gravity toilet ought to be exposed to the brown cloud on a regular basis

 

[fowler9]

I was a regular passenger on the Edinburgh-Oxford route. As well as a daily traveller on the Oxford-Reading route.

The Edinburgh route became a standing joke with myself and other expat colleagues. With the dreadful performance of the 47s & Mk2s you were near enough guaranteed some form of refund in rail travel vouchers for the journey. At one point I managed 6 consecutive return trips out of a single purchase due to refunds.

The morning services to Reading were fairly reliable as they were early in the day. But by the time of the evening return, it wasn't worthwhile even considering planning on going for a timetabled service.

Mate the Northern Rail services from Manchester Oxford Road to Liverpool are a joke in the evening peak when it comes to timekeeping and it isn't the type of rolling stock that is the problem, Northern throw pretty much whatever stock they have on it. It is how much of it there is. In my personal opinion Voyagers are not better than Mk 2's to travel on. The fact the Mk 2's you traveled on were late wasn't because they were Mk 2's it was poor management.

 

[thealexweb]

Having used Virgin's 221s on several occasions, between Edinburgh and Wigan North Western, I agree with those who criticise them. The interior is cramped and the windows are tiny. The tilt is nauseating and yields virtually no journey time benefits (vs a TPE 350 over the same route) for all its trouble.

Edit: The tiny window remark should only be directed at the 390s, my mistake. The cramped interior comment stands however. I do agree with the seat alignment comments, perhaps that is what is muddling my memory.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The windows are not tiny, they are massive! The problem is seat alignment.

 

[fowler9]

I generally don't see anything better or worse from the Voyagers because we just don't have cross country style trains in Liverpool any more. The frequency of the London Midland service we now have to use is countered by the fact we have to change trains and the fact they perform better is countered by the fact they have to stop at more stations than the old 47's/86's and Mk 2's. It is all swings and roundabouts.

 

[CC 72100]

No - Voyagers weren’t a mistake. I think they are, in themselves, mechanically sound, reliable, fast modern trains. The mistake was using them on long distance services and in specifying an interior that is frankly terrible and buying them in 4 and 5 car configurations which offer insufficient passenger capacity
.

I agree. But also, this) https://www.flickr.com/photos/rowan826/5448724366/

is so much nicer than this) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Beeston_railway_station_MMB_25_221129.jpg

I just find the voyager interiors cramped, and very rattly. The XC examples could do with a deep clean as well. They also seem quite dim inside.

Note that I didn't talk about the underfloor engines - as much as I prefer travelling on HSTs, I can tolerate an underfloor engine, providing that it doesn't cause every single interior component to vibrate at different frequencies.

 

[387star]

Have crosscountry branded the window blinds... Looked that way from the outside

 

[6Gman]

Just an observation but the Mk IIc's were incredibly noisy on cwr track at speed. Far worse than the engine noise on a Voyager.

 

[fowler9]

Just an observation but the Mk IIc's were incredibly noisy on cwr track at speed. Far worse than the engine noise on a Voyager.

Any figures for this? Which Mk 2's?

 

[edwin_m]

Any figures for this? Which Mk 2's?

If it's Mk2cs these were the last ones with opening windows in the saloon and no aircon. The howl at 100mph on a corrugated rail on a hot day with the windows open was something to behold. But not used on the CrossCountry network since sometime in the 80s.

 

[yorksrob]

If it's Mk2cs these were the last ones with opening windows in the saloon and no aircon. The howl at 100mph on a corrugated rail on a hot day with the windows open was something to behold. But not used on the CrossCountry network since sometime in the 80s.

Ah well, the Mk 2's I was used to were the later ones without opening windows. That said, after twenty five years of glorious Mk1 travel on the Southern Region, I didn't find such sounds remotely troubling.

 

[fowler9]

Ah well, the Mk 2's I was used to were the later ones without opening windows. That said, after twenty five years of glorious Mk1 travel on the Southern Region, I didn't find such sounds remotely troubling.

The D's, E's and F's were quite quiet though. Then they stuck an engine under out bum.

 

[Rick1984]

not sure which class it is; but in the toilet, once the door has slid close you turn a physical handle to lock the toilet door. So some designer has obviously given that some thought. much more reassuring.

 

[kermit]

If it's Mk2cs these were the last ones with opening windows in the saloon and no aircon. The howl at 100mph on a corrugated rail on a hot day with the windows open was something to behold. But not used on the CrossCountry network since sometime in the 80s.

My Great Uncle swore by the acoustic and ride properties of a good wooden-framed coach. I'm guessing a wooden-framed Voyager would have been out of the question.........

 

[cf111]

not sure which class it is; but in the toilet, once the door has slid close you turn a physical handle to lock the toilet door. So some designer has obviously given that some thought. much more reassuring.

I think the class 380s are like this.

 

[thenorthern]

When I started this thread I didn't expect it to get this many replies.

By the looks of it Voyagers are a bit of a Marmite train.

 

[fowler9]

not sure which class it is; but in the toilet, once the door has slid close you turn a physical handle to lock the toilet door. So some designer has obviously given that some thought. much more reassuring.

The Desiros are all like that aren't they? I'm sure the 350's and 185's are.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Desiros are all like that aren't they? I'm sure the 350's and 185's are.

Not LM's, but I think some other ones are - 185s possibly.

Neil

 

[sprinterguy]

not sure which class it is; but in the toilet, once the door has slid close you turn a physical handle to lock the toilet door. So some designer has obviously given that some thought. much more reassuring.

This is a feature on Bombardier's 172s as well as the examples above.

 

[fowler9]

Not LM's, but I think some other ones are - 185s possibly.

Neil

It's deffo one of those two because I use them all the time from South Parkway to Lime Street and it deffo isn't the East Midland 158's. Watch me be hopelessly wrong here. Ha ha

 

[hassaanhc]

It's deffo one of those two because I use them all the time from South Parkway to Lime Street and it deffo isn't the East Midland 158's. Watch me be hopelessly wrong here. Ha ha

Seen them on 450s, but not 444s.

 

[dgl]

They have handles on the 444's just not on the accessible toilet.

 

[ag51ruk]

It's easy to forget what the Voyagers replaced. For example, remember the afternoon York-Poole? On arrival at New Street the 47 had to run-round, taking up lots of capacity on the approaches. The average late-arrival at Oxford was about 20 minutes. Then of course when it got to Reading the loco had to run-round again!

Wasn't Bombardier's original proposal for Cross Country based on fixed-rake loco hauled sets with a driving van at the other end? Might have made it easier to add additional capacity at a later stage, would have made the coaches quieter and potentially given more room (e.g. the toilet retention tanks could have gone under the floor if the engines weren't there).

 

[sprinterguy]

Wasn't Bombardier's original proposal for Cross Country based on fixed-rake loco hauled sets with a driving van at the other end?

Single ended class 67s and seated driving trailers at the other end, yes - I mentioned it on page nine. I'm not sure we would have had any more luck getting the trains lengthened retrospectively than we have had with the Voyagers, but the other benefits that you mentioned might well have applied.