My guess is the maintenance contract (courtesy of DfT^» (Department for Transport - about)) with Hitachi allows it, either that or GWRs^▸ (Great Western Railway) legal team are not turning up at depot exit with a spirit level and measure, and saying the sag is excessive either side of solid bar.  (Do legal they ever turn up unannounced and actually check work meets maintenance contract standards to the millimetre, if not why not, getting away with only doing about 90% of a job defeats purpose of detailed contract spec, if there is a contract it should be enforced 100%, not they did some of it so it's ok)

Of course if the maintenance contract allows such worn things, what else are they allowing to be worn or unacceptable and not fixed (eg brake pads, faulty thermostats etc).   And yes I am sure I have walked through an IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) and different carriages are different temperatures)

I've also recently encountered this new discomfort feature on the IET^▸ (Intercity Express Train) seats.  Thankfully it wasn't on a particularly long journey but it felt ever present.

Must not laugh...

Must not laugh...

As I think of the stock delivered to ČD over the last couple of years.

Never mind, enjoy the full Super Hitachi Intercity Train experience.

PS The only truly comfortable seat on the whole train is the instructor/assessors seat. I didn't like the drivers seat especially with the random lowering of the height adjuster piston.

Apologies but I don't think so.

More seriously, suspecting that seat comfort is classed as 'Convenience', it would be good if GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) were moved to address this particular defect as the passenger safety issue it surely is.

If anyone has ideas on how to raise this defect's status from 'Inconvenience' to 'Passenger safety issue', I'm all ears.

Mark

Hi Chris. 'Uncomfortable' in relation to seating becomes a passenger safety issue when 'Discomfort' crosses a threshold and the sitter experiences pain, which is the body's way of signalling that it's being damaged, reversibly or irreversibly.

An issue with discomfort progressing to 'Pain when sitting', is that the vulnerable systems involve nerves and also blood circulation, so this gets into 'Deep vein thrombosis' territory among other things. Certain individuals are more vulnerable than others and this is not necessarily related to age.

The IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) seats, once the filling has suffered inelastic deformation, become uncomfortable, but when this has progressed enough to result in the passenger being supported by other structures within the seat that are ill-designed for that purpose, that's become a safety issue.

An aspect of this is that the effect can be cumulative (on the passenger). That's not necessarily good news for someone who uses these trains on a daily basis.

Having received a quick response from GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) on this, the current perception from them is that this is a 'Comfort' issue rather than involving passenger safety, and I'll respond.

Mark

Thanks for raising this, Mark A.

For what it's worth, I find that I can just about tolerate these appalling seats for the time it takes to get from Bristol to London. The bar you refer to directly aligns with what I believe are referred to as my 'sit bones' - the part of the hip that carries the weight - and it is hard to imagine how anything that claims to be a 'seat' could be less comfortable.

A couple of weeks ago I had the misfortune to travel from St Erth to Bristol on an IET^▸ (Intercity Express Train). I had a very thick jumper with me, and by sitting on this and moving it around from time to time I was able to stay in my seat until somewhere around Tiverton Parkway, at which point the discomfort was too much to bear and I had to stand up.

It is plainly possible to make seats which are comfortable and meet safety requirements. Someone made a terrible design choice here. I will be watching this topic with interest!