Great Western Coffee Shop

Just returned from three weeks travelling on Northern European rail systems. Arrived back at Paddington yesterday morning from Brussels and had a shock - I'd forgotten how awful the new seats are on FGW's HSTs. You sit down and 50cm in front of your eyes there's a slab of grey plastic with (to add insult to injury) a FGW logo button in the middle of it.

A lot of the point and pleasure of rail travel is the ability to watch the world go by, but these new seats totally negate that opportunity. Look left and right - all you can see (except for the lucky third of passengers who can sit by a window) are similar slabs of grey plastic. You can't even see other passengers or the train staff (so no chance of nipping into the bog on their approach!), and you can't see whether there are vacant seats without peering at each one. If carriages had video displays (has anyone thought of that?) they would be invisible.

No other train we went on in the whole (5000+ km) trip (Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany and Eurostar) had such high seat backs. Neither did Spanish trains on an earlier trip (smug smug).

I assume that at some point in the redesign process some callow young designer came up with this whizzy idea and that the FGW manager in charge of approving the whole thing either went along with the CYD's whizzy idea or didn't notice. They must have cost more than seats with the top at eye height as well. Was there a rationale behind the decision? Maybe this topic has been aired elsewhere but I've not seen it so apologies if so.

I'd love to know who was responsible for taking a bit of pleasure out of the rail experience. Anyone able to divulge? I promise not to take any action but there is an accountability issue here.

Health & Safety  ::)

Health and safety which does not apply to GNER!

Suerly H&S would have also wanted seat belts, and arguably for 125mph ( :D) harnesses!

As I understand it that is only true for new seats. They could have refurbished the old ones but than couldn't cram so many people in.

I think it's barking that H&S worry about seat height when so many people are left standing!  ???

FGW replaced the old seats as the plastic was dangerous and shatters into many thousands of shards in crashes. Historically FGW have a very good safety record. Not to say I'm overly fond of the new seats, especially when they seem to be designed for people who are 6" when the national average is about 5"4 for women and 5"10 for men  ???

Is there any documented proof about the shattering of the plastic? Besides, if it was that seriously bad - I highly doubt HMRI/NR/ORR/WHOEVER would allow the low level refresh of the GC HSTs.

Besides being a few inches smaller than the design, the seats are VERY uncomfortable. They are too hard and put your back into a bad position (too far forward).

I don't care if the newer style seats are officially "better for your back" (how, I don't know)- on a train journey I want comfort.

Has anybody here managed to doze off on the new HSTs? If I could, I would fall forward, because you can't lean back enough.

----------

Why are all these H&S points needed? How often do HSTs crash? Once in a blue moon!

Prefer the seating thats going into the West fleet myself. Much better padded, especially the 158 type seat. 8)

Apparently, the 158s are less likely to crash as they go at 90 mph max (even though HSTs spend more time below 90 mph, than at the "danger 125 mph speed").

This means that H&S moan less.

You have more chance of jackknifing on points the faster you're going if they're not secure .... see Grayrigg, Potters Bar, etc...

Ah.... But the 158's haven't got the safety benefit of the big speedometer with the LED's round the edge have they?

 8)

Which doesnt work on any unit operated lines in the West apart from Bath-Bristol ;)

I think that there's a tendency to blame H&S (the agency? individual officers?) for a lot of bad decisions in general that were made by unthinking idiots, or callow young designers with whizzy ideas.

There is a lot right about the new HST seats (notably the folding armrests - why did no-one think of them back in 1975?) and I don't think anyone would dispute the need for replacing the old ones, but the excessive height of them is the main issue.

Was it really H&S? Does anyone actually know? I accept that there may have been a bit of nervousness after Ufton Nervet, Southall and Paddington, and with people clamouring for seat-belts (!) but no-one has said that someone (named or un-named) in the H&S Agency or any other agency specifically instructed the design team or FGW to increase the seat height to this unpleasant and ugly dimension.

NXEC's seats, for example, are just as new and are good to sit in and see out of. Why FGW?

It's more the interpretation of HSE rules, than HSE itself.

Evening

I've picked out BTlines message, as it is one I
agree with the most.  I'm a bit over 6ft tall and
took a refurblished FGW HST set from Truro to
Newton Abbot last Saturday.  By the time I had
reached Totnes I was beggining to feel uncomfortable
and by Newton Abbot I had virtually no feeling in my
backside whatsoever; I felt more like I had slept on
a plank of wood than a seat!   After Newton Abbot I
cought a Voyager to Dawlish and even that was more
comfortable than the HST!  On the way back another
refurb HST from Plymouth to Truro, this seat felt
worse than the previous one, so I decided to stand
by the door from Bodmin, freash air and working blood
circulation.

Agree with seats BTlines mentioned, in fact I brought
this up in a previous topic, if the seats are more
forward than the older, there is more chance of been
thrown out of your seat if anything happens.  They
need more padding and that isn't H&S, thats doing it
on the cheap.  Its the main structure and shape of
the structure that is more to do with H&S than the
padding (which should be non-flamable), isn't the
crucial point so why isn't there more?  The fact the
arm rests move is the only improvement.  To be honest
however I must admit I'm not overally fused about the
height although I can see peoples point.

If H&S are barking over Paddington, Uften Nevett e.t.c
(excuse my spellings), they were all human error or
where the fault of a human action and not the HST.

I hope that the refurb power cars have kept the nameplates
of the driver's, as a mark of respect, memory and loyal
service.

Could I ask a QS?  Does anyone else on this forum think
its a bit of a waste using HST power cars and coaches
on "Network Rail" test trains, when there are ample
locos and MRKI and MRK2 coaches at "RTC Derby"?

Regards

Karl.

They are Mk3s mainly because they would be otherwise unable to get a path on fast lines on the GWML and WCML for instance. Likewise, they would not be able to get a decent path at all on the ECML.

I have to admit, I have travelled on Vomiters a lot recently, and the seats are nicer than FGW HSTs with the SAME H&S regulations!!!! No excuse.

I travelled on a Chiltern 168 refurb recently, and did not like the top of the seat. Again, obviously designed for a six footer, as the neck support was sticking out where my head was.

Of course, Chiltern had not decided to give its passengers DVT, and the seat was padded (unlike FGW HSTs).


H&S are a group of people with clipboards, who go around and change everything because they think that the human race cannot think for themselves, nor take responsibility for thier actions.

Oh - I forgot, thanks to the spread of the US compensation culture - we can't!

"Beware of the sign"

???

Sign Not In Use?

Quite ;)

Afternoon

Now on the subject of head rests being at the
correct height, I remember quite a few years back
travelling on loco hauled stock and I'm sure that
once I travelled on one that had a retractable head
rest.  Basically it is a extra padded peice on front
of the seat, that had two soft flat straps and could
move up and down a slight distance with a pull.
Can't exacually remember all details, but it could of
been a MRK 2, possibly an F series and prehaps a First
class?  Now there's a solution for FGW on that!

But considering the real prototype HST was "The Blue
Pullman", or if your an ex MR man "Midland Pullman",
had seats that 'you' could pull a handle and the whole
back would retract to your desired level, a handle that
'you' can move your seat backwards or fowards for the
correct leg distance and a blind (unlike the Voyagers),
would only cover your bit of window and these just didn't
go and down, 'you' could alter the degree of the blades
makes todays train travel sometimes cheap and not very
chearfull.

Shame that none survided into preservation.

Regards

Karl.

Qoute from BTLines

I travelled on a Chiltern 168 refurb recently, and
did not like the top of the seat. Again, obviously
designed for a six footer, as the neck support was
sticking out where my head was.

The Network Rail New Measurement Train was updated during a time in which the 22x series DEMU's were making their presence felt and there were surplus HST powercars and trailers available to form the basis of the NMT. The Mk2F track recording coach is also capable of being marshalled in such a formation. The requirements of a a track measurement train were thus met by Network Rail buying HST vehicles from the ROSCO's, which it was able to suitably modify for the purpose. It will be recalled that First Group also bought a number of HST vehicles at the same time, 12 powercars and several trailers from memory that form part of FGW's HST fleet. The ROSCO's were only too glad to sell, bearing in mind the demand anticipated at that time versus the cost of warm storage.

The NMT has to go about it's work on routes all over the UK and has to fit in amongst scheduled services that run at speeds of up to 125mph. Therefore it has to be capable of working at that speed. Apart from possibly some of the class 67's there are no locomotives capable of running at that speed. The NMT has to traverse a number of routes therefore it will require to reverse at various locations, not all of which are capable of having locomotives run round the train. It also needs twin power units for reliability and self recovery purposes. The HST powercars are considerably lighter than most existing locomotives and have a far better route availability.

In short, ancient locomotives and Mk1/2 stock would be a very poor substitute and possibly worsen Network Rail's ability to monitor the condition of the infrastructure to the required extent.

Sorry but i find the seating perfectly adequate and as for the height i for one dont want to be looking at some beer swilling nose picking oik when i am on a train so they suit me fine.
You will have a hard job to sit in a refresh HST Set and stare at a big lump of plastic as they are made of steel !!!!!..think they were made by Grammar of Germany and meet modern crash worthyness regulations.
This being a requirement of increasing seating capacity.
if you still had the original low seats even more people would be standing than they do now so its a bit of a no win situation really

Well, any visit to a furniture store will confirm that there is a very wide variety of personal preferences for seating style - everything from upright Shaker to recumbent futon!

However, I agree with dog box on the new HST seats: as I've posted elsewhere,


Chris  ;)

Evening

Well to be honest with you The Sprinter Meister
(and prehaps I should of worded my message better),
does it have to test at 125mph?  Can't it be done
at night where it is less of an intrusion to other
services?

As you mentioned c67's are 125mph locos, plus the
fact that only 005/6 and 029 do anything much these
days anyway, the other's only pushing freight trains
around along with the odd charter periodolicly.
Arn't some of these already in store?  Some could be
put to far better use than they are, such as using
them to do tests.  As regards to running around,
top and tail them, but that might not be necessary
now, as NR have a MRK2 DBSO (which were used with c86
and c90 on Norwich services as a driving end trailers),
which 'if my memory serves me correct' are 100mph
capable.  I think its still on test but would eliminate
that problem.  MRK 1 on either B4/5 or Commonwealth
bogies are also 100mph cabable and some MRK 2's 'I think'
are 110mph capable (and did faster than that when behind
Deltics!).  If c67s and c37s cover for the NMT HST when
not available with no aparent problems, why not just use
those instead?

Also for electric sections WCML and ECML, there were
c86 and c87 locos going spare, they could be geared
up for 110mph (some were before they went).  Not 100%
ideal as not everywhere is 25kv, plus I can't remember
now if I saw a line going east of Derby that had 25kv
the last time I passed?  Thats playing with the grey
matter now!

But the main reason I commented is that HSTs are going
to be around for a considerable while, until they get
this HST2 project going.  With some TOC's now having
to look at MRK3 hauled stock, scrounging around for
odd spare power cars here and there, or hire ins (as
the 220/221 DEMUs e.t.c which you rightly said were
meant to replace HST's but are not up to the job).
It begs another question if NR have to obtain HST power
cars, then why do they need have as much as they already
got on their books?

Some people may disagree with me, but I think this whole
220/1 and HST sets being cast away to NR was a badly dealt
with.  But thats only my humble opinion.

Sorry for the slightly long winded version!

Regards

Karl.  

Morning

Well Dog Box and Chris, you must (unlike me), way
absolutely nothing then if you found them comfy,
becuase most find them rock hard!  The main issue
was the padding and design, although others have
commented on height of seats e.t.c.  To be honest
they could of put more padding/springing in them and
still acheive their objectives.  To be frank and please
don't think I having an attack at either of you, but
I would much rather have a seat with softer cusioning
and designed for passenger comfort than a better posture
position!

Don't think anyones commented on the refurbs leg room
yet?  Plus if anyone had a table to themselves and train
was getting busy, I would doubt if anyone else would
ingnore the three seats spare, nor would the other person
get away with hoging it for themsleves refurb or not!

Regards

Karl.

you are right the seats are harder than those in some 158s but i wonder if after a few years use they may retain a degree of comfort whereby a softer seat has totally collapsed.
A lot has been written about leg room before and i took a tape measure to an HST and voyager and in a non priority seat you have more room on HST.
Incidentaly if you are near Exeter try out a refresh 142.......am i the only person who thinks the refreshed seating is quite comfy on these Pacers

Very comfy apart from the limited legroom and lack of upper back support.

Afternoon

Does your tape measure have a safety case???!!! LOL.
What did the Train Manager say???!!!  Whats next?

Regards

Karl.

quote author = dog box

A lot has been written about leg room before and i
took a tape measure to an HST and voyager and in a
non priority seat you have more room.

How many more inches are there on a FGW refurb HST than a vomiter?

In many cases the NMT has to go about its buisness on days simply because of the fact so much of the rail network closes after (in some cases before) the last service train. Taunton -  Exeter shuts down quite early and the up / down sleepers goes through under SLW or more infrequently diverts via Yeovil. The High output ballast cleaner and track renewal train are working on that section. And thats just one example. There are numerous other bits of the UK simarlarly affected.

Testing has to take place at 125mph on certain routes simply to keep clear of other trains and if you think about it the logical speed at which to test the ride parameters is the speed of the fastest train that uses the route. The class 37 hauled test train supplements the NMT on routes where the speed is lower and which can support the axle weight of locomotive hauled trains. On branch lines the class 150/1 based track recording unit is used. The class 37 hauled train is rather less comprehensive in the range of tests it does if I remember correctly.

The class 67 locomotive has a very high RA due to weighing 90 tons spread over four axles. The design speed was 125mph, but you will find that none of them are now cleared to run at that speed. This is due to the very high track forces that a 22.5 ton axleloading running at 125mph would generate. The HST powercar has a far lower track force (69 tons over four axles). It would indeed be rather ironic to use 67's at 125mph to find they are damaging the very track they are hauling test trains over. 67's are cleared for 110mph. Most of the class 67's are now in use, new operators such as the new Wrexham operator and GC spot hires spring to mind.

The Network Rail DBSO's are being converted from their previous use and are being fitted out for controlling diesel locomotives fitted with 'Blue Square' multiple unit equipment. This is compatible with the DRS locomotives by means of an adaptor plug as although the pin configuration is different the functions of the 27 wires remain the same. The 'Blue Square' MU system is completely incompatible with the GM loco classes such as 59/66/67, all of which use the Association of American Railroads (AAR) control system. Therefore a class 67 cannot operate in conjunction with a NR DBSO. The DBSO's will now no longer be able to control AC electric locomotives either.

As the HST NMT is run as a semi permanent set, it is possible to fit equipment such as forward facing high defenition cameras to the power cars for video surveying etc. You will recall that evidence from these cameras was used in the ongoing enquiry into the fatal Grayrigg derailment. This is rather more complex to arrange where a locomotive which is more readily detacheable (and possibly hired in from a third party) is involved.

The large number of power cars in the NMT pool is required I guess to ensure there are enough servicable power cars to cover the NMT duties. I seem to remember there was talk of forming up a second NMT to assist in the considerable workload. I don't think the TOC's spot hire powercars much nowadays, certainly not Grand Central who run a minus availability figure most of the time.

It seems on the face of it a waste of HST rolling stock, however the ability for Network Rail to properly survey its assets without fouling up the passenger service or the overnight maintainance is in my view probably to the greater good than two less than complete HST rakes. Unless somebody is prepared to sell them a couple of Voyagers. And pick up the tab for reverse engineering the NMT trailers (most of which are ex buffet cars) into passenger stock.

A very comprehensive answer.

I would just add that when there was around a quarter of the HST fleet lying idle it seemed a very sensible use of stock which was otherwise (as was seen to be the case) going to rot. So we are where we are.

The point here is that we are now short of 125mph diesel stock (assuming as seems likely the bidding for the Adelantes will be oversubscribed.) Surely, given even the government is now in favour of electrification the answer is to find a route over which such stock runs, and which happens to be totally under the wires, and then build electric trains for that route. So add around 10 x 7 car pendolinos to the existing order, and replace the Voyagers on the Birmingham - Scotland route. By the time they are built there will be an even greater shortage of capacity on routes appropriate for Voyagers.

Oh yes, and electrifying Newark to the newly resignalled Lincoln (only 16 miles) would enable the new NXEC service to be an electric service as well, instead of each train running 120 miles of the 136 mile journey under the wires.

Oops, just noticed the topic. We've all gone a bit off topic haven't we. Sorry.       

Seeing as I haven't seen the actual answer posted. I will post the following 2 names.

Michael Rodber and Mike Muldoon.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/NewsItem.aspx?id=414

I guess you can't please everyone....
The trouble is, because of the lack of stock + the amount of people on the services provided = very crowded trains, FGW did what they could, and there are more seats now.  I have trouble with leg room everywhere, on buses, in cars, and especially on the turbos.. but the new seats give me ample.  I do understand what people mean about leaning back though, i'm 6 foot and i still don't feel all that comfortable doing so, but i don't sit there thinking how awful the seat feels, nor do i worry about it after.. the one big negative i have to point out is the lighting.  It's bad enough in the day to look out of the window, but from dusk onwards, you got no chance!
I was travelling on one from Oxford to Paddington yesturday and until it had reached Reading, it wasn't exactly heaving, though this was at half twelve in the afternoon.  I think, for the length of journey it is, at this time of day, a 2+3car turbo would be adequate, as 2 more Padd-Oxf services passed me that weren't exactly busy.  I know it can get bad during mornings and evenings so i understand the use of them at those times. 
I was sat thinking on my way in how it's quite a shame that the purpose of these trains aren't really what they used to be for... i'd hardly call Oxford - Paddingon intercity.. just seems a waste for an intercity HST to be on a 55minute journey.  Guess they've just got to use what they've got.  I'm not complaining, cause i don't mind them myself.  Just a shame about the adelante's because they were good for this type of route, in my opinion.

Paddington - Oxford 2+7 HST with less than an hours journey.

Penzance -Dundee 4 or 5 coaches for about 12 hours!

That's the 21st century railway for you!

Oxford and London are two major cities, so should really have a decent high speed 'intercity' link. The Voyager plan was just short sighted!! The submission of Virgin by planning on bringing back HSTs proves what a silly mistake they made.

I agree. Adelantes are pretty much ideal for off-peak services, providing the quality of seating and the capacity to cope easily. Many services off the Cotswold Line need to be HST's though as they get very busy from Oxford/Reading/Slough otherwise, but even a couple of those are better suited to Adelantes.

I also agree with the seating on the HST's - I've never had a problem with legroom and I'm 6' 3" - most Voyager seats are decidedly more cramped unless you're lucky enough to get the few at the ends of the carriage which are really spacious. As for lighting, there's a little switch by the top of the internal vestibule doors that will switch that coach from full to half lighting - many Train Managers already do this at night as otherwise they're so bright you feel like you're getting a tan! I wouldn't hesitate to operate the switch if it's getting dark and they're still on full (or at least ask a member of staff to do it!). When on half lighting they are still brighter than the old design, but are far better than when on full.

Oh yeh, i don't dispute that.  I used to travel regularly from Charlbury to London every sunday and always found it appauling that the only fast Oxford to Paddington service on a sunday were ones from the cotswold line and, quite often, being ran by Turbos! even an adelante was crammed full. 

I agree with your point Deven_metro, they are indeed two major cities, but the turbos can move quite fast, and when substituted, which happens an awful lot, they don't really lose time, the only downfall is, they're looking very tired!!

Now blame H & S for the awful high seat backs on FGW HST's.

BUT....

H & S is a European wide Issue so IF there is an H & S ruling to have High Seat backs, then it applies across all European menber states or is it the RSSB pushing it's weight around?

I have a sneaking suspicion that health and safety have nothing to do with the chosen height of the FGW seat backs.

Call me cynical, but I seem to remember the high backs started appearing around the same time as the Volo (I think it was) experimental television screens in carriages, and they have been intentionally designed that high to enable screens and /or advertising to be affixed to them in future. The odd looking FGW logo in the middle or "plug" serves to feed cables to said screens, which would be held into position using the bracket which is currently being used to hold the safety cards.

I know this sounds a bit like a crazy conspiracy theory, but in my mind it all seemed to made sense as I dozed off on the trip back from Bristol the other day!

I expect that the Volo TV idea was to trial high back all airline seats!

the most comfortable trains i have been on recently are the swt class 159's comfortable seats clean there not a quiet as the hst's well we all know why but i have fell asleep on one of these units, only bad thing i have noticed.... that stupid flimsy door between standard and first class... why??? why spoil such a good refurb? it rattles no door handles so its covered in hand prints people never open it first time and it doesnt even work i saw so many people just walk threw and sit down and oh no they did not pay for first class!! ( relocated to standard 10 mins later) also i have never seen one of these units with people standing up? i have seen a platform full at exeter central all get onto the 9 car unit and there were still a couple of seats, to be honest half the time this train is 3-6 carriges and isnt that busy.... why does southwest trains get really nice rolling stock when the exmouth line has 1 million passengers a year and is always packed out get pacers?

Because the 159s go to Waterloo...

oh really i thought they stopped at feniton?  :-\

The most comfortable FGW standard carriage is the the refurbished Night Rivera