grahame
|
|
« on: February 15, 2023, 22:54:45 » |
|
From The MirrorA mum was left fuming and asking why just one person would decide to sit at a table on a train after recently travelling with her two kids. The woman had been getting on a train with her children and spotted a nice table for them to sit at when she noticed just one person was sitting there already.
The other passenger began to stare at the family and seemed far from happy at the prospect of sitting at a table with the family of three.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
Trowres
|
|
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2023, 23:34:33 » |
|
I generally prefer seating at a table, although seat/window alignment is sometimes the deciding factor.
Generally happy to share a table with a family, and have sometimes offered to move so that people can sit together. Never a problem in the days of Mk1 TSOs▸ as all seats had tables!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
Posts: 5450
There are some who call me... Tim
|
|
« Reply #2 on: February 16, 2023, 00:03:14 » |
|
Given a totally free choice, I’d go for a compartment every time. Mk 1’s, with seats you could sink into - remember when train seats were comfortable? If someone joined you, you could spark up an interesting conversation, or keep yourself to yourself if you preferred. Happy days…
|
|
|
Logged
|
Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #3 on: February 16, 2023, 04:49:06 » |
|
My preference is for a table if travelling in a group. If I’m on my own or with one other person I prefer airline style seats unless I can almost guarantee I will have the table to myself.
I’d rather stand than risk having to share a table with a family.
So, the layout of most modern trains is just about ideal for my preferences.
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/
|
|
|
CyclingSid
|
|
« Reply #4 on: February 16, 2023, 06:49:03 » |
|
My preference is for somewhere I can keep an eye on the bike (Brompton). Rear seat on Voyagers large luggage area where you can tuck the bike behind. Sliding the bike under a table is problematical, as you end up effectively taking two seats, which is not immediately obvious to others wanting the space. On IETs▸ usually stand in the bike space.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #5 on: February 16, 2023, 08:42:53 » |
|
Talking to Mumsnet, the woman, who remained anonymous, explained: "Just got on a train with my two kids - we joined a lady on her own at a table, she looks daggers at me.
"I realise it's not fun sharing a table with two young kids but why then sit at a table on your own? You are so much more likely to be joined by a family group!" In answer to the woman, I can tell her that sitting at a table rather than in an airline seat allows a (lone) traveller that much more space for a laptop or papers, plus a sandwich and drink (or equivalent). The clue is in "table" rather than collapsible shelf. Also more foot room if no-one happens to sit opposite. As an aside, how many tickets had Ms Anon bought? I read "young kids" as likely to be under 5, and travelling free of charge. So chances are that her gaggle of three is paying the same as the lady on her own. I could start to ask some extreme questions as to why public transport allows the most disruptive of travellers (those in the "terrible twos") to travel free of charge, steps up to half fares as they get a bit better behaved, and then charges even more when we are considered (and usually are) fully responsible. Why not turn it round the other way?
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
broadgage
|
|
« Reply #6 on: February 16, 2023, 09:34:42 » |
|
On a mainline service, preferred seat is with a proper table, not a collapsing tray affixed to the seat in front. Aligned with a window for the view. Ideally not on an IET▸ as the seats are hard.
On the preserved WSR, a table is less important though still nice to have. My usual seat is one of the corner ones, that USED to have a table, but this has been removed. Most coaches have 16 such seats, the former table seats at each corner of the coach. On a WSR DMU▸ , I go for the former first class area which has better seats, now used for second class.
Most WSR trains are second class only, but I select first or Pullman when available as is sometimes the case for special events.
|
|
|
Logged
|
A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard. It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc. A 5 car DMU▸ is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
|
|
|
Mark A
|
|
« Reply #7 on: February 16, 2023, 09:43:52 » |
|
On an IEP▸ , the driver's seat is by far the most comfortable, if you can get to it first.
Mark
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
eightonedee
|
|
« Reply #8 on: February 16, 2023, 10:01:39 » |
|
Given a totally free choice, I’d go for a compartment every time. Mk 1’s, with seats you could sink into - remember when train seats were comfortable? If someone joined you, you could spark up an interesting conversation, or keep yourself to yourself if you preferred. Happy days…
As I have done before, can I put the case against Mk1 compartment stock, having been stuck with such stock most mornings during my first 2 and a half years' commuting in the early/mid 1980s? You start the experience with a sliding door that often did not slide particularly well, set in an unnecessary internal partition wall that took up space and added to the weight of the vehicle. If it was busy, it would look and feel full with 6 occupants (3 a side) when it was meant to seat 8 (4 a side). Much as I don't favour 5 across because getting into that middle seat of 3 on the 3 side is seldom easy or pleasant, it was worse trying to get into the last of 4 on one side of a Mk1 compartment. Yes you could sink into the seats, but often made unwelcome contact with the springs inside, and if they were not a good condition there was a lumpy experience to be had. Moving onto the heating, there was the rotary heater control which enabled you to choose between roast or freeze. If some else had chosen roast, and you were close enough to try opening the sliding ventilator in the top of the window, it would resist all attempts to move until you reached the point of overcoming the friction, when it would shoot open well beyond the marks on the frame indicating where (in theory) you could open to without causing a draught. But if you were stuck in that draught, or sensitive to those who had selected the "roast" option on the heater control, they would absolutely refuse to budge back into the "no draught" zone however hard you pushed them. The ride was often poor, with hunting from side to side frequent. To cap it all, they were inefficient, with only 64 seats (nominal - actually more like 48 - see above!) in a (by the standards of the time) long wheelbase coach. The only good thing was the fenestration (if you were lucky enough to be on the window rather than the corridor side, of course, the latter being hopeless). But at least the windows were of good size and aligned (necessarily) with the seating. Only fit for short trips on heritage railways in my view! If this was 40 years ago, I would be voting for an open Mk 2 anytime, please. And I found conversations easier to start and acquaintances easier to make as a Turbo commuter when I resumed rail commuting in the 2000s - but this might have been "fellow sufferer" syndrome!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
broadgage
|
|
« Reply #9 on: February 16, 2023, 10:37:00 » |
|
despite the above shortcomings, I would still prefer an early type of BR▸ coach to an IET▸ .
|
|
|
Logged
|
A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard. It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc. A 5 car DMU▸ is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
|
|
|
PhilWakely
|
|
« Reply #10 on: February 16, 2023, 10:46:16 » |
|
If I am travelling alone, it depends on the purpose of the trip. If it is just a means of getting from A to B, I'll just sit wherever I can. If it is a leisure trip, I will look for a window seat facing forward and do not worry whether the seat is at a table or not.
I recall a trip to London many moons ago with my wife and daughter when I managed to get cheap 1st Class Advances in both directions between Pinhoe and Waterloo. No such thing as specified seats, so we just sat at the first available table on boarding at Waterloo. A short while after boarding, with the 1st Class section relatively sparcely populated, a 'City Gent type' boarded and approached us. "Excuse me, but this is my seat. I always sit here." Incredulous at the comment, I said there were plenty of other seats and these seats were not reserved, but he would have none of it. Thankfully, another passenger stepped in and just asked him to sit in another seat. With a grunt, he did so!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bmblbzzz
|
|
« Reply #11 on: February 16, 2023, 12:15:18 » |
|
Red Squirrel writes in praise of compartments but he doesn't mention one of their best attributes: the corridor. A neutral space which can be used to hold private one-on-one conversations or to escape the conversations others are holding, to be alone or in company, to enjoy the view from the other side, to stand rather than sit, to walk (or maybe run, if you're small) up and down, to eat in peace or to escape the smell and sight of what others are eating, or just for a change of atmosphere. All this and offering overflow seating!
Red Squirrel highlights conversation in compartments. I've had interesting (and awful) conversations with strangers in compartments and at tables, but never in side-by-side seating. Which leads me to wonder what is it about compartments and table seating which encourages us to talk to strangers? It can't be the table itself, as compartments usually only a vestigial flap of table, just large enough for a sandwich and a cup of coffee, and even that only accessible to two of the compartments four, six or eight seats. I would have said it was sitting face-to-face – except that clearly doesn't encourage conversation on the underground! So I think perhaps it's the sense of being in an enclosed, but accessible, space. This is obvious with a compartment and a group of seats around a table replicates this in a way, with all the seats having a common focus. Table seating also, of course, replicates a cafe, pub or restaurant arrangement.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
|
|
|
Bob_Blakey
|
|
« Reply #12 on: February 16, 2023, 13:17:53 » |
|
If possible I generally choose a Window 'Airline' seat when travelling alone and with SWTSMBO▸ we always try and get a Window / Aisle 'Airline' combo. Except when travelling LNER» 1st Class where the single seats are favoured.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
Posts: 5450
There are some who call me... Tim
|
|
« Reply #13 on: February 16, 2023, 13:57:09 » |
|
Given a totally free choice, I’d go for a compartment every time. Mk 1’s, with seats you could sink into - remember when train seats were comfortable? If someone joined you, you could spark up an interesting conversation, or keep yourself to yourself if you preferred. Happy days…
As I have done before, can I put the case against Mk1 compartment stock, having been stuck with such stock most mornings during my first 2 and a half years' commuting in the early/mid 1980s? You start the experience with a sliding door that often did not slide particularly well, set in an unnecessary internal partition wall that took up space and added to the weight of the vehicle. If it was busy, it would look and feel full with 6 occupants (3 a side) when it was meant to seat 8 (4 a side). Much as I don't favour 5 across because getting into that middle seat of 3 on the 3 side is seldom easy or pleasant, it was worse trying to get into the last of 4 on one side of a Mk1 compartment. Yes you could sink into the seats, but often made unwelcome contact with the springs inside, and if they were not a good condition there was a lumpy experience to be had. Moving onto the heating, there was the rotary heater control which enabled you to choose between roast or freeze. If some else had chosen roast, and you were close enough to try opening the sliding ventilator in the top of the window, it would resist all attempts to move until you reached the point of overcoming the friction, when it would shoot open well beyond the marks on the frame indicating where (in theory) you could open to without causing a draught. But if you were stuck in that draught, or sensitive to those who had selected the "roast" option on the heater control, they would absolutely refuse to budge back into the "no draught" zone however hard you pushed them. The ride was often poor, with hunting from side to side frequent. To cap it all, they were inefficient, with only 64 seats (nominal - actually more like 48 - see above!) in a (by the standards of the time) long wheelbase coach. The only good thing was the fenestration (if you were lucky enough to be on the window rather than the corridor side, of course, the latter being hopeless). But at least the windows were of good size and aligned (necessarily) with the seating. Only fit for short trips on heritage railways in my view! If this was 40 years ago, I would be voting for an open Mk 2 anytime, please. And I found conversations easier to start and acquaintances easier to make as a Turbo commuter when I resumed rail commuting in the 2000s - but this might have been "fellow sufferer" syndrome! You make a number of good points, eightonedee. My memories are mostly of leisure trips on fairly lightly-loaded cross-country trains (Bristol - Southampton, or up to Holyhead) where often you could have a compartment to yourself. One abiding memory is a trip from Inverness to Wick/Thurso in which we strung our soaking wet tent between the luggage racks to dry it out. With the steam and electric heat on full whack, and the windows open, it dried out perfectly. No-one complained! You do remind me though of how grumpy people could get when the trains were more crowded and you had to ask them to budge up. In my recollection, compartment stock was often in mixed rakes with open carriages though. So you could generally choose according what suited you best. I can remember some dodgy springs on Mk 1's, but I don't remember having to get up and walk around to relieve the pain as you do after 45 minutes on a Class 800!
|
|
|
Logged
|
Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
|
|
|
Oxonhutch
|
|
« Reply #14 on: February 16, 2023, 14:45:37 » |
|
Travelling north from Oxford in the late 70's on a cross-country train usually with a class 50 on the front. First class tended to be towards the front which is where I headed with my bike as there was always a BSK▸ at the very front with some isolated, and often completely empty, standard class compartments whilst the rest of the train could be packed solid in standard. Change at Birmingham New Street where I got to know the subterranean ramps and passageways for the BRUTEs▸ and postals. Could often make a connection there on the bike that would be missed by those on foot via the stairs. Ramps all gone now, last time I looked, but what a dingy miserable place it still is today.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|