• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

What do you actually want? Fixing one issue then causing another

Status
Not open for further replies.

quarella

Member
Joined
7 Dec 2009
Messages
820
What I am thinking of are those changes made to deal with one issue that just create a different problem. 2 examples I can think of are :-
FGW HST refurbishment. Complaints about the chronic overcrowding so to enable more seats to be fitted most of the tables and the mid carriage bulkheads were removed leading to complaints about the lack of tables.

14X/150 3+2 seating very unpopular so replaced with 2+2 reducing the capacity and leading to overcrowding.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Geezertronic

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2009
Messages
4,124
Location
Birmingham
14X/150 3+2 seating very unpopular so replaced with 2+2 reducing the capacity and leading to overcrowding.

That example doesn't lead to overcrowding as the same amount of people will probably be travelling on the train, it just means more will have to stand than before
 

underbank

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2013
Messages
1,486
Location
North West England
Trouble is you're not "fixing one thing" by those kinds of changes. It's just tinkering around the edges isn't it? A compromise.

If people want more seats and are complaining about overcrowding, the answer is more/longer trains, not faffing around.

That's why people still complain - the problems havn't been "fixed" by the examples you quote.
 

starrymarkb

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
5,985
Location
Exeter
I believe the seat loss on Wessex/W&B 2+2 150s isn't that high thanks to tip up seats in the vestibules. The reason for the change was the long trips 150s could end up on (up to 5 hours) because there were not enough 158s in the fleet

FGW realised that they could offer an extra coach worth of seating per 8 car HST set by re-configuring. I believe the XC HST has a similar layout but with less legroom. Greater Anglia Mk3 sets had their legroom reduced a few years ago allowing a pair of slimline seats (same as class 376) at the coach ends.
 
Last edited:
Joined
13 Apr 2011
Messages
649
Location
Helsby
Trouble is you're not "fixing one thing" by those kinds of changes. It's just tinkering around the edges isn't it? A compromise.

If people want more seats and are complaining about overcrowding, the answer is more/longer trains, not faffing around.

That's why people still complain - the problems havn't been "fixed" by the examples you quote.

Spot on. ATW lengthened the morning peak time trains from my local station from two car units to three and four car units. No more standing. Now, there is still an issue in the evening peak but I suspect that ATW do not have enough stock to lengthen the trains further.
It's a shame that ATW don't have any loco hauled availabilty for the Man Picc to Chester services at the peak.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top