Great Western Coffee Shop

One thing I have noticed this year on the very busy Penzance/Paddington summer services through Devon and Cornwall are the problems being caused by the sheer size and volume of some passengers luggage. Extended loading and unloading times on some summer Saturday trains in particular mean trains have regularly struggled to keep to time through the two counties with ticket checks nigh on impossible on some busy services as a result.Some of the luggage is so large that it almost blocks vestibules and saloon doors seriously hampering movement as passenger with equally large "trunks" try to board at stations causing log jams and delays.

 What do you think is the answer,has the time come to limit the size of luggage carried or even make a charge as the airlines do?.

Take a look at The National conditions of carriage where it clearly states a fee not exceeding half of the adult fare is payable for any item over 90--70---30cm
also any item can be refused if in the opinion of staff there is not enough room for it, and the handling or un loading of the item would case delays to trains amongst other things.
I really do think everyone should have a copy of this document as ignorance of it is no excuse really

I was on 158959 yesterday on the 1022 Ports - Cardiff.

Luggage strewn all over the seats with no apparent owner whilst people were forced to stand. If I was the guard, the owner would be charged for the use of the seat. In true retaliation I sat in the luggage rack.

;D ;D

Should have done it the proper way, and slept in the luggage rack over the seats!  :P

Thanks for your comments, dog box - and I agree!  ;)

Just so we all have no excuse for not being aware of the terms of the National Rail Conditions of Carriage, FGW have helpfully made them available on their website (link below.)
http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Content.aspx?id=373

The dimensions of the luggage in the conditions of carriage, like too many things on the railway, date from a former age. Those are the sort of suitcases you'd get in 'Brief Encounter'. The only thing that has changed is that the size is now expressed in metric.

The dimension that has changed is thickness. I've just measured our big suitcase (which isn't the largest in its range by any means) and it's 30cm thick. A lot of luggage nowadays will be nearer 40cm thick, well over the condition limit.

Which means that this condition is unenforceable - are you seriously going to start charging "half adult fare" for most of the luggage on a train? One headline in one national daily would be enough to stop that.

But the provision for this luggage has got worse and worse of late. It's all very well producing airline seating on an HST that's doing a commuter run from Oxford to London. But airline seating means there's no behind-the-seat space, and if you try running the same train to Newquay in the summer you must expect luggage. The luggage pen on the Turbos is more generous than a lot of HST space. And I've always assumed that luggage provision on Voyagers was designed around how much stuff R. Branson took with him on a balloon.

That was just a lot of hot air, though?



 ;D

i realise it has been 10-15 years since most trains had a guards area for large luggage and parcels but could this be the cause....you cant tell me that its just because people have started buying bigger suitcases?

the cram as many seats into a carrage dont help eather

I'll get your coat sir...

Hopefully the HST2 will be like IC225s and have not just a guards van, but a DVT guards van!!

(or power cars like FGW).

Do Pendolinos have guards vans?

of course they dont have guards vans after all they are a voyager clone

Yes, but the 180s are Vomiter clones, and they have the bike store!

Bit of an insult to the Alstom design team, who produced a train that in terms of passenger environment, at least, is far superior to a Voyager. Pity the reliability of the running gear isn't to Voyager standards though.

Which in itself isn't really saying much!  ;)

But they do tend to get a bit further between breakdowns!

Technically I was complementing them. ;)

But however better they are - they are still clones!

I don't think they can be described as clones - In terms of design I think that they pre-date Voyagers, or at least were designed at the same time. I know they entered service just after the Voyagers but that was due to the well documented teething troubles that have never really been ironed out!

There are many similarities in terms of length, horsepower, design and top speed though of course.

I would say clones is pushing it after all a Vomiter is a diesel electric and the 180 diesel hydraulic which is a fairly fundamental difference. Also the 180s  were built by Alstrom whereas the Voyagers are from Bombardier.

Granted they both use the Cummins QSK19 engine but that's probably where the similarities end.

Apparently the 175 belongs to same Concordia family of units from Alstrom as the 180.

To claim the Class 180 is a copy of the 220/221 is pure ignorance i am afraid & really BTline you should quit while you are ahead

The Class 175 'Coradia' & the Class 180 'Adelante' ARE the same train, bar the differant nose end bodyshells, interiors & a few technical differances becuase of the differances in there intended operational applications (eg, 175 - Semi-fast train, 180 - Express train).

Originally the 175s are the 180s where both built for First North Western, although changes in requirments beofre they where completed & delivered meant that instead the 180s where sent to the other First Group franchise at the time, First Great Western.

Excuse me, I am quite well aware that the Adelante is a not a copy of the Vomiters!

I have known for a while that both the 180 and 175 are part of the Cordia family (not the Pendalino family) I would drop this "quit while you are ahead attitude. My point is: they look similar, they are similar in layout etc, and that many of the problems/complaints are related. I think that distant clone is a fair point.

However, even if I did not know this, it is still unacceptable to use the word "ignorant." If you read about the purpose of this forum, you will see that it is not a trainspotting club, or just for those who now the difference between a 153 and a 155. It is also for "Joe Bloggs" who uses the train and wants advice, knowledge or to discuss services/timetables.

Therefore the conclusion is that it would be more appropriate to call you "ignorant" as you clearly do not know the purpose of this forum.

Regards, Btline

now now girls

Thanks, Relex. I did think of stepping in myself and saying something similar - but it does seem to be rather a case of "handbags at ten pacers" at the moment (!) and hopefully won't degenerate to the point where Quiet Words Have To Be Spoken.

As it stands at the moment I think both sides are quits and everyone's a winner - not least me, since I genuinely hadn't previously cottoned on to the fact that one's a diesel electric and the other a diesel hydraulic!

:P Hmm... Sorry about that. I got carried away.

There's no need to apologise, mate - but thankyou all the same.

Speaking personally (and not with my moderator hat on!) I'm all for a bit of passion and self belief and arguing one's corner, especially when it's well done (as yours was). There's obviously a mark over which one shouldn't step, but we're a long, long way from reaching that. So, no worries.

Perhaps 'ignorant' was a bit hasty. However, a clone is an identical copy of something [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloning ]. So by that very definition you claiming it is a 'distant clone' is saying that both trains are the same then, surely?!!! Unless the definition of clone has changed recently and i did not realise?? It is even a clone, or it isn't a clone! I have noticed that now you are back tracking slightly (!), but at least you are using a more appropriate word 'Similar'. The trains are indeed similar & have 'similarities', as they are both 125mph capable express Multiple Unit trains.

A quick bit of googling/wikipedia-ing, you will see that the Alstom product was actually designed & constructed prior to the Bombardier project, so in fact you could argue that the 'Voyager' train is actually a so-called 'clone' of the 'Adelante'.

Also, the Class 220/221/222 Voyager/S.Voyager/Meridian/Phioneer trains actually rely on Alstom, using their world renowned 'Onix' traction package.

I am not a 'spotter' nor do i wish to be a member of a so called 'trainspotter club'. I am quite aware that the majority of this forums membership are 'norms' / 'punters'. The reason i am here is that in fact, i am an employee of the very TOC (Train Operating Company) that this site is founded upon, and it is interesting to read the criticisms/questions we receive & the discussion we provoke.

I assure you that my position makes me anything but 'ignorant' sir and i just want to make it clear that i feel you should be corrected more than anyone else because you seem to have this frame of mind, very similar to a certain character by the name of 'Julian Whitby', where by you state something as if it is a fact, but when this is subsequently disproved or criticised, you then go to great lengths to 'talk your way out' of your mistake & change your stance on the subject several times in the process. I call it the 'Whitby effect' and it is highly irritating & also very bad, because you are blabbering on stating 'fact' about things you clearly do not possess full knowledge of, which in turns gives the 'norms'/'punters'/people who do not know otherwise totally the wrong information.

When i correct you, it is not done with any personal spite to you, it is more to ensure that 'Joe Bloggs' & his friends, family & fellow passengers possess all of the right facts.

I am not going to reply to any further posts regarding the subject in this topic as i have no wish to engage in an argument with you, but i  just want to say that by continuing to attempt to somehow prove your point, if you were not being ignorant before, then continuing to jibber now & ignoring my (proven) points is indeed sheer ignorance.

PS.
It's Coradia*

PPS.
It's Pendolino*

PPPS.
On a further note, the Class 180 is a superior product to the Class 220/221. The only things that lets down the Class 180s where due to 'economising' & penny pinching within Alstom at the time, resulting in huge short-cuts being taken during the construction of the Adelantes at Washwood Heath in Brimingham. Various design issues that could have been easily worked out during the 'bedding in' period of the trains where bodged & poorly thought out and the combination of these things  is what has made the 180s the 'liability' they are today & the reason that First Great Western gave them the boot.

Cheers,

Tom

Back to topic...........................................

lol we all regress into children when we belive were correct, im the biggest child of all in that respect .... shame im never correct when i know i am  :-\

Ok.

not wanting to pick sides but.... btlines wins!

*shrugs*  ???

I wasn't aware this was a game....?

Staff vs Passenger...

Its a no brainer, clearly...

To get back to the topic of oversize luggage niether the Vomiters or 180s have enough space for luggage oversize or not, considering they are used on routes where people are likely to have luggage. Also being underfloor engined units they are bound to be far noisier, with added vibration, than a Mark 3 with a loco one or both ends.

EMUS (Pendolino) possibly, underfloor DMUS for longish distances no!

Lets get the wires strung.
 

Are the bike lockers on 180s ever used for luggage?

In exceptional cases (often involving cases!) they are - such as the School Sports championships that happened last weekend in Somerset/Avon. Though you have to keep a clear route available to the traincrew in case of emergency, so there's not as much room as you might imagine. The Power Cars storage space on HST's was also used in some cases for that event.

customers always rite...until they are out of hearing range!!

Having spent far too many years on the operational side of the package holiday industry, it is my personal opinion that many of our problems are down to lack of communication...on both sides.  Whilst it is easy to understand that customers are frustrated by  seemingly pointless delays or last minute platform alterations; it is equally infuriating to be asked for information by a  passenger, only to see the enlightened traveller wander off in the wrong  direction to ask another staff member the same question.

In my admittedly short railway career, I have come across few if any staff who actively dislike the average passenger.  Scrotes, (railway slang for persistent fare dodgers), are universally loathed, but in general,  the attitude is one of pride in running the best possible service for our customers.  This is not always easy, given the nature of the job.

Safety remains paramount, but from the high customer service content of my recent training course, it appears that FGW is aware of these issues. For example, the ticketing course is designed to improve geography and thus ensure that customers receive quality travel and pricing  information/options.  Much stress is also laid on PA announcements and 'visibility' of staff during journeys. 

There will always be niggles, on both sides of the divide, but I have so far found the vast majority of the travelling public to be reasonable and friendly.  I only hope that I come across in the same manner.

And...before the cynics ask if I have been around when something goes badly 'tits up', the answer is a big fat yes.  ;D

The maximum size of luggage, as limited by the National Conditions of Carriage, has now turned up on the CrossCountry website as part of their "Guide to travelling with us over the Easter Holiday". See http://www.crosscountrytrains.co.uk/Find_a_train/Travelling_over_Easter.aspx (http://www.crosscountrytrains.co.uk/Find_a_train/Travelling_over_Easter.aspx). Does this suggest that they're getting worried about luggage volumes? Are they about to copy Ryanair and start charging for excessive luggage?

First's primary expertise is as a bus operator. When they run a coach from London - Devon / Cornwall they provide a huge amount of luggage space due to the nature of their customers.

It would be nice to see then use some of that understanding & expertise on their trains, particularly as they refreshed them not so long ago removing a good amount of luggage space between the seat rows that originally were back to back.

I blame wheels. Before wheels cases and grips had to be carried. This put a natural limit on their size, I nearly always carried a smallish case and a grip - a balanced load.  Now you see cases and grips that would get in everyone's way even walking through Heathrow Terminal 5, and that airport baggage handlers would approach driving a small forklift ;D.

Pax then try to wheel them up the steps into trains, and all the way down the gangway to the vacant seat they've just spotted (which is probably reserved anyway).  Even if there was space between the seats these cases wouldn't go in there, or on the racks.  Where do these people imagine they are going to put them, as they are packing the kitchen sink for the weekend?   Perhaps they think their last journey by modern train was an odd one and next time there will be a few luggage vans in the rake of carriages, as they saw in Brief Encounter (to quote an earlier poster :))...

Paul

The shopless voyagers no longer have luggage stacks inside the carriage. The only luggage storage is where the shop used to be and I don't blame people for not using it for fear of theft.!!

Oh for goodness sake. How can that work?

So not only will their be a crush next to the doors, there will also be two queues of people crushing into the old shop to dump their cases!

How often will that space be full of standing commuters? And how will the trolley fit through?

I thought that H&S said that you must keep your luggage under view at all times!?

How about having a coach with eight bays of eight seats with tables all aligned to windows. With luggage bays at the end, luggage racks and space between the seats of each bay.

Then run them in trains of 10+ with a big box on the front providing power. Preferably a box with a thingy on the roof to suck in the juice
(87s), not pumping out a stream of grey/black smoke (47/8).

Oh dear I've just reinvented the WCML before Pendolinos and XCs before Voyagers

The other carriages on the refurbished voyagers with the shop removed still have luggage stacks in them from what I saw on my recent trip to Birmingham on one that had no shop anymore.  Though there is also the further luggage space created in the old shop area. 

Spot on

Also, contrary to the earlier post there's still a luggage stack at the opposite end of the former shop coach as well. I was fairly sure that the shop area wasn't the only luggage stowage in coach C, but thought I'd keep quiet - and then one actually turned up for a visual check at Southampton today...

Paul

Well maybe there are some, however when I travelled I noticed that the whole coach consisted of airline seats and I didn't notice any luggage racks.

I try to avoid Voyagers like the plague so either travel on a 142/143/HST instead.

In many, many journeys on 180s in the past five years or so, outside the Christmas holiday periods, I really can't remember any problems with luggage - in the aisles or vestibules. They have good-sized luggage racks, right at the entrance to the coaches and with lots of tables, there are lots of seat backs to put cases and bags between as well

I feel that half of the trouble is that the luggage satcks in the main carraiges are just simply not using the space correctly.  i mean they have just one shelf, and do not go to the height of the trains ceiling.

Look at the ones on the FGW HSTS..... thats how tall a luggage stack should be.

Indeed - I've often seen up to four teenagers travelling quite comfortably in those luggage racks on a FGW HST!  ;) :D ;D

The problem would of course be solved if there was a reasonably priced and efficient process to send luggage in advance. The Swiss system is fantastic, basically get your bag put on the preceeding service that you intend to use yourself and it'll be ready to pick up at your destination when you arrive (even including changes). Similar systems are in use elsewhere.

Having unified rolling stock for many markets seems to program the assumption in the existence of this type of system in all markets, hence luggage space is reduced and at a premium.

Lets hope the issue isn't forgotten when the new expresses are finally designed.

Maybe if the HST Powercars where used for luggage, Leave your luggage with the platform staff, who will load them onto the train for you...?? Or is that to efficient?

Only problem is the Platform staff will need a manual handling course which = ^

and such a system would be frowned upon by security...!

Boring!!! ::)

On Easter Monday/Tuesday when people were travelling back up to London, we were having to use the rear Powercars for luggage to Paddington/Reading, as the trains were so busy.  This of course adds dwell time at stations, unless dedicated staff are on hand while the lead dispatcher is closing/checking doors etc, which of course will mean more manpower = ^ = customers probably paying for service.  Then there is the added "I don't want to be away from my baggage crowd", which in this day of bags looking so alike, is understandable.

Of course, if a system was bought in to get bags "checked-in", this would mean customers would need to be on the platform a little earlier than 40 seconds before departure  ;D.... add in the arguments that would ensue due to some passengers refusing to pay and want to take their bags on board for free, and you have yourself quite a pickle  ;)

To implement a service would of course need major station redesign. All the transactions in Switzerland are done within the station building and not on the Platform.

Last year summer weekends they were loading luggage for plymouth and penzance into wheeled cages as people were walking along the platform.

These cages were loaded into the powercars.  AIUI a similar thing will happen again this year.