Great Western Railway: on-board catering, buffets, Travelling Chef, Pullman - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[rogerpatenall]

Just hope that no vandal has left any pins in the seat that you choose . . .

[1st fan]

Yes, for me first class compares very unfavourably.  Standard class is similar with the slightly harder seats being compensated for by extra legroom, more tables, better folding tables, and sun blinds.

So I checked the standard seat padding on my last trip and I have the results here. The seat at the least padded can be seen here.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/190751564@N06/50513865763/in/dateposted-public/

Now that picture needs to be quantified because the pins might be enormous. Well as you can see in this next picture they're not.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/190751564@N06/50513844298/in/dateposted-public/


As you can see the pin is only 3.2/3cm long (to the ball. So take off the 2cm above the seat and at the thinnest point there's only 1.2cm to 1.3cm of padding. It's a metal bar that is sits underneath this area of seat padding. If you're not sitting bolt upright then your arse is sitting over that ridge. No wonder people find it uncomfortable. GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) chose these seats which beggars belief.

GWR didn't, it's all down to the DFT^▸ (Department for Transport). If GWR had their way most of the seating for First Class would have been similar to the outgoing HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train).

Your reply is at odds with a Mr Dan Panes of GWR who said

He dismissed any suggestion that DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) imposed a seat design on GWR, saying the operator had tested the seats with IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)?s other imminent user, East Coast. ?The idea that we?d accept seats considerably worse does us a disservice,? he argued. Panes noted that those passengers who didn?t like the IEP seats had been very vocal about it.

Quote taken from here: https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/from-the-files-are-you-sitting-comfortably

[1st fan]

Just hope that no vandal has left any pins in the seat that you choose . . .

There's no chance I left the pins behind as

1) they're part of my sewing kit and vital.
2) I took them out to photograph them.

But thank you for your concern.

[1st fan]

They encourage good posture.

If they can provide good posture for a passenger of any age/size then they qualify as a miracle.

Actually, I found them surprisingly comfortable (after the initial sit-down impact) ... but then I found the original bus-style seats on Pacers suited me better than many a sculpted seat back.

I preferred the 1st class seats on a Thames Turbo to any of the IET^▸ (Intercity Express Train) seating.

[IndustryInsider]

Your reply is at odds with a Mr Dan Panes of GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) who said

He dismissed any suggestion that DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) imposed a seat design on GWR, saying the operator had tested the seats with IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)?s other imminent user, East Coast. ?The idea that we?d accept seats considerably worse does us a disservice,? he argued. Panes noted that those passengers who didn?t like the IEP seats had been very vocal about it.

I would suggest that was a politically worded statement from Dan, who probably didn't want to risk upsetting the DfT when a direct award extension to the franchise was imminent, as well as admit that the seats on the new trains could have been better*.

* My own opinion is that they are an excellent shape, and I very much appreciate the extra legroom that comes with them, and the moveable arm rests by the window...but a bit more padding on the bum and back would be preferable.

[stuving]

You may remember from last year that, according to the RSSB^▸ (Rail Safety and Standards Board)'s S240 and T1140 research projects, it all comes down to (or onto) your ischial tuberosities. The detailed results of T1140 included test methods, and these include minimum standards of performance.

For seat pads, the minimum thickness is 50 mm. Where thickness varies they say measure it 130 mm out from the back - implying that's where your tuberosities ought to be (don't slouch!). However, I suspect their method may not pick every possible nit, e.g. where the solid base has raised sharp edges. I would also guess what a revised version would say about such shapes: "don't".

On hardness (compressibility), what you need to do is to take a 200 mm diameter circular indenter onto the train, put it centred at 130 mm from the seat back, and apply 1100N downforce to it. The pad should not compress by more than 70% of its thickness. Presumably this should apply everywhere if the thickness varies; again a bit more detail is needed here.

[1st fan]

You may remember from last year that, according to the RSSB^▸ (Rail Safety and Standards Board)'s S240 and T1140 research projects, it all comes down to (or onto) your ischial tuberosities. The detailed results of T1140 included test methods, and these include minimum standards of performance.

For seat pads, the minimum thickness is 50 mm. Where thickness varies they say measure it 130 mm out from the back - implying that's where your tuberosities ought to be (don't slouch!). However, I suspect their method may not pick every possible nit, e.g. where the solid base has raised sharp edges. I would also guess what a revised version would say about such shapes: "don't".

On hardness (compressibility), what you need to do is to take a 200 mm diameter circular indenter onto the train, put it centred at 130 mm from the seat back, and apply 1100N downforce to it. The pad should not compress by more than 70% of its thickness. Presumably this should apply everywhere if the thickness varies; again a bit more detail is needed here.

Yeah well the fact there's so little padding 13mm is a joke. I think I'll just take a cushion in future - which might allow me to get some sleep.

These are great trains that are sadly let down by their interiors.

[1st fan]

Your reply is at odds with a Mr Dan Panes of GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) who said

He dismissed any suggestion that DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) imposed a seat design on GWR, saying the operator had tested the seats with IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)?s other imminent user, East Coast. ?The idea that we?d accept seats considerably worse does us a disservice,? he argued. Panes noted that those passengers who didn?t like the IEP seats had been very vocal about it.

I would suggest that was a politically worded statement from Dan, who probably didn't want to risk upsetting the DfT when a direct award extension to the franchise was imminent, as well as admit that the seats on the new trains could have been better*.

* My own opinion is that they are an excellent shape, and I very much appreciate the extra legroom that comes with them, and the moveable arm rests by the window...but a bit more padding on the bum and back would be preferable.

I would suggest that he put the blame for those seats squarely with GWR. There's no smoke without fire and he's added fuel to that fire.

[WSW Frome]

Perhaps it is time to stop discussing seats, which will indeed be with us for some time to come - WITHIN THE CATERING SECTION!

[broadgage]

Yes, but there is not much catering to discuss !

[1st fan]

Perhaps it is time to stop discussing seats, which will indeed be with us for some time to come - WITHIN THE CATERING SECTION!

Thank you for reminding me what I also meant to include in my original post. On the journey I was given a questionnaire to fill out. One section of the questions was on catering and onboard catering in particular.

They asked was there any catering on my journey?

No

Did I think that the removal of at seat catering (is there any other type on GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)?) was appropriate in the current climate?

Yes.

Would I have purchased from the onboard catering if it had been available.

Yes.

Did I use the station shops etc.

No.

Now actually I was running late for the train and yes I would have bought food onboard. Had there been hot food it would have been a no brainer as I was very hungry. I didn't take a picture of the pages but those from memory were the relevant questions. I'm unsure if the questions were designed to facilitate the removal of catering permanently. It did highlight to me that there wasn't any food or drink and I was famished.

[broadgage]

I presume that the purpose of the survey is to further downgrade the catering on "some" services.
It would not be to bring back buffets, as GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) have already said no way to that.
It would not be to introduce hot food, a brief trial of that produced the expected result that it was not worthwhile.

Prior to the pandemic GWR showed a distinct lack of interest in the trolley service, with no trolley service "at present", trolley in other portion, trolley hiding in first class, trolley static, or no trolley on board at all being frequent.
The logical next step is to remove it entirely from "some" services.

[IndustryInsider]

I'm hearing of a GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) "Eat at your seat" initiative where passengers can order food at their seats.  I do not know any more, other than it is still in its early days of testing, but presumably works via an app of some sort?

[rogerw]

I'm hearing of a GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) "Eat at your seat" initiative where passengers can order food at their seats.  I do not know any more, other than it is still in its early days of testing, but presumably works via an app of some sort?

There was an announcement about this on the train I caught to Plymouth on 3 November.  It was a verbal announcement and I did not catch all the details, but I got the impression that it does require the use of the GWR app

[Surrey 455]

I'm hearing of a GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) "Eat at your seat" initiative where passengers can order food at their seats.  I do not know any more, other than it is still in its early days of testing, but presumably works via an app of some sort?

A quick search brings details of an LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) offering.
from LNER on 29 July 2020

In a first for the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) rail industry, LNER will begin trials of an ?at-seat? catering offer onboard trains this August.

The service will enable customers to order and pay for food and drinks from their phone in the comfort of their own seat, without having to visit the onboard cafe bar.

The digital in-seat app ?Let?s Eat ? At Your Seat? will be available to customers in both Standard and First Class.

The service will also provide a layer of confidence and reassurance to customers who are looking to stay seated for the duration of their journey.

Let?s Eat ? At Your Seat will offer customers on LNER trains a more enhanced, personalised customer service, with the added benefit of being more convenient for those who do not wish to leave their seat and possessions unattended. The ?at-seat? service also addresses the 40 per cent* of UK consumers who want to access digital ordering and payment technology to minimise physical contact and support social distancing measures.

Richard Judge, Head of Catering at LNER said: ?We are always looking for new ways to provide excellence in our customer experience onboard and this new ?at-seat? service will allow us to extend our food and drink offer to customers from the comfort of their own seat

?Customers in both standard and first class will be able to browse the menu in their own time and order at their own convenience, enhancing their onboard experience and improving their journey with us. At Seat Ordering will be in addition to and complement our existing onboard food and beverage services. It will become available, to include our Chef prepared menus, for our First Class customers on completion of successful trials?
continues.....