• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Rolling stock whose capacity has been superseded by increased demand over time.

Status
Not open for further replies.

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,715
Location
Glasgow
Was discussing how things used to be and came upon the Pendolinos as new. When first introduced, as I'm sure many people know, the sets were all 8-car. This was the orginal plan for the 53 units as new but it was later decided to extend them to 9-car and so only the first 31 entered service as 8-car.

With present passenger levels as they are, if the Pendolinos were all 8-car overcrowding would be pretty likely and so this wouldn't be acceptable now.

So...what other examples of rolling stock were adequate (or near enough) at either time of introduction or planning but which are now inadequate or had to be modified to remain acceptable for use now.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Cardiff123

Established Member
Joined
10 Mar 2013
Messages
1,318
Pacers were barely adequate at the time, and haven't been adequate for a very long time.

170s on XC, 175s on ATW and now TfW, both plagued by overcrowding.
Class 800s in 5 car formation are completely inadequate.
 

MarlowDonkey

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2013
Messages
1,094
So...what other examples of rolling stock were adequate (or near enough) at either time of introduction or planning but which are now inadequate or had to be modified to remain acceptable for use now.

The 165/166 units in two and three car sets operating out of Marylebone and Paddington. On peak hour services into and out of Paddington, replaced by 12 car 387s.

Prior to their introduction, Marylebone had 4 and 2*4 116 units and Paddington 3 car and 2*3 + 1 117 units plus loco hauled on Oxford and peak services.
 

LUYMun

Member
Joined
15 Jul 2018
Messages
776
Location
Somewhere
I guess many Southern Region slam-door stock could count as one. They were good at first in 1960s because people were used to slam-doors, but later on they were past H&S regulations well into the 21st century.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,715
Location
Glasgow
Pacers were barely adequate at the time, and haven't been adequate for a very long time.

Very true, much of that being from them being used on all manner of services as well as higher passenger numbers.

170s on XC, 175s on ATW and now TfW, both plagued by overcrowding.

Very true, a parallel could be drawn between that and ScotRail going from 5/6-coach loco-hauled to 2-car 156/158s.

Class 800s in 5 car formation are completely inadequate.

That I think depends on the service to an extent. Certainly on longer-distance InterCity services on 125mph corridors you probably want them as 10-car; for something like the Cotswolds detaching 5-cars at Oxford off-peak to go forwards is probably alright.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,715
Location
Glasgow
The 165/166 units in two and three car sets operating out of Marylebone and Paddington. On peak hour services into and out of Paddington, replaced by 12 car 387s.

Which I think highlights how supply can often lag behind demand, thankfully now redressed with new longer trains.

I guess many Southern Region slam-door stock could count as one. They were good at first in 1960s because people were used to slam-doors, but later on they were past H&S regulations well into the 21st century.

Yeah, full of character but no perhaps the thing for the modern railway as it were.
 

Mag_seven

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
1 Sep 2014
Messages
9,994
Location
here to eternity
Class 800s in 5 car formation are completely inadequate.

Depends on the service - they are perfectly adequate for off-peak Padd - Oxford, Padd-Bedwyn and Pad-Cheltenham services. They should be adequate for the new half hourly Padd-Bristol fast services certainly in the off-peak, when they are introduced.
 

Cardiff123

Established Member
Joined
10 Mar 2013
Messages
1,318
Depends on the service - they are perfectly adequate for off-peak Padd - Oxford, Padd-Bedwyn and Pad-Cheltenham services. They should be adequate for the new half hourly Padd-Bristol fast services certainly in the off-peak, when they are introduced.
All too often 5 car formations turn up on London to South Wales services though, or even worse, a 10 car formation will run but with 5 cars locked out due to lack of enough train crew, which infuriates passengers even more.
 

Mag_seven

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
1 Sep 2014
Messages
9,994
Location
here to eternity
All too often 5 car formations turn up on London to South Wales services though, or even worse, a 10 car formation will run but with 5 cars locked out due to lack of enough train crew, which infuriates passengers even more.

Yes I know - and in those cases a 5 car is inadequate!
 

darloscott

Member
Joined
12 Dec 2013
Messages
772
Location
Stockton
185s anyone?
Blocked by govt from being extended to 4 car units and lack of capacity found out as a result on TPE services due to passenger growth. About to be replaced by 5 car trains that will again face the same problem a few years down the line.
 

LUYMun

Member
Joined
15 Jul 2018
Messages
776
Location
Somewhere
185s anyone?
Blocked by govt from being extended to 4 car units ... Replaced by 5 car trains that will face the same problem a few years down the line.
I guess the government really has to stop telling TOCs what to do with their rolling stock if the railways are privatised. For example, the Desiro family (Class 700/707/717) were designed to the government's specifications rather than letting Thameslink's/South West Trains'/Greater Northern's.
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,461
Location
Sheffield
Voyagers were never adequate on Cross Country. Not only too short, but also a woeful lack of luggage provision on the very routes on which many passengers will be making long journeys with luggage.

The similar Meridians for EMT are little better - the 7 coach sets might have been OK if they hadn't decided that having 3 First Class coaches was a good idea.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,715
Location
Glasgow
185s anyone?

Yes, especially as so few operate as doubles! The new stock will hopefully sort all that.

The similar Meridians for EMT are little better - the 7 coach sets might have been OK if they hadn't decided that having 3 First Class coaches was a good idea.

That dates from when they were either 4 or 9-car. The four-car had pretty much the same seating as the present 4-cars the 9-car had two extra Motor Standards a rather better balance to First Class.
 

KevinTurvey

Member
Joined
9 Oct 2016
Messages
205
Class 150s on the Trans Pennine services between Scarborough and Liverpool/North Wales. Although they didn't last long, replaced 2 years later by 156's and 2 years after that by 158's.

Class 156's on the Hope Valley route also seemed overwhelmed from day one at peak times from 1988. (Think this was only an hourly service back then)

Agreed on the Pendolinos as well when new - 4 lower capacity coaches compared with the 5 Mk 3 or 6 Mk2 for standard class was ridiculous, about 130 fewer seats I seem to recall. The 11 car sets seem to cope OK now.
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,558
So...what other examples of rolling stock were adequate (or near enough) at either time of introduction or planning but which are now inadequate or had to be modified to remain acceptable for use now.
Just about everything built during the era of "2 for 3 replacement".
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
185s anyone?
Blocked by govt from being extended to 4 car units and lack of capacity found out as a result on TPE services due to passenger growth. About to be replaced by 5 car trains that will again face the same problem a few years down the line.

As they replaced 3-car 158s with more seats, this was never going to work. And from day one (before any growth had chance to happen), it didn't.

Then the Government made them waste some running to Scotland.

The whole thing was shocking.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
As they replaced 3-car 158s with more seats, this was never going to work.

I remember saying that at the time, as the 3-car 158s were overrun by the end. It wouldn't have happened that way in London.

The 220s/221s were almost as clear cut. On paper an hourly 7-coach HST replaced with two 220s should have worked, but people don't travel on paper. Same as with the Pendolinos, Virgin went too far towards the airline attitude that people will travel when they're told to.
 

Grannyjoans

Member
Joined
29 Mar 2017
Messages
403
150's.
They might (or might not!?) have acceptable in the 1980's ?
But now they're seriously out dated even refurbishing them is like polishing a turd
 

stj

Member
Joined
15 Apr 2019
Messages
314
All too often 5 car formations turn up on London to South Wales services though, or even worse, a 10 car formation will run but with 5 cars locked out due to lack of enough train crew, which infuriates passengers even more.
Last week when cricket was on a 5 car came in from Swansea and left Cardiff packed and standing.Would have been better for all 800s to be 9/10 cars.Maybe a conversion in future?
 

Matt_pool

Member
Joined
9 Nov 2016
Messages
371
The new Merseyrail 777's haven't even entered service yet. They are going to be four carriages long but with the same number of seats as the current three carriage 507/508's and with more standing room. And they still won't have toilets!
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
Last week when cricket was on a 5 car came in from Swansea and left Cardiff packed and standing.Would have been better for all 800s to be 9/10 cars.

It's not needed for the outer reaches of the network, though.

The problem with running 2x5 car is that it's easy to short-form if something goes wrong.
It is also more labour-intensive, making it tempting to TOCs to deliberately short form to save on overtime. But the idea of portion working actually makes sense when you consider the plan was to portion work to allow direct trains to smaller destimations.
 

70014IronDuke

Established Member
Joined
13 Jun 2015
Messages
3,686
Am I the only one to find the OP's question somewhat vacuuous, asking, in effect, about a truism?

If some new rolling stock is inadequate from the off, so be it.

But whatever you introduce, in whatever field of human endeavour, it will become inadequate sooner or later. Locomotion Number 1 was 'adequate' when introduced. So was the Midland Compound.
And Mk 1 carriages (well, pity about the bogies).
And 2-Nols and Deltics.
And today?
 

Grannyjoans

Member
Joined
29 Mar 2017
Messages
403
I'm surprised no one has yet to mention the 142 ???

Oh yes it's because they were not even adequate when they were built
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
Last week when cricket was on a 5 car came in from Swansea and left Cardiff packed and standing.Would have been better for all 800s to be 9/10 cars.Maybe a conversion in future?
So maybe they should have a few extra 9-car units sitting in stabling roads ready for cricket fans. Get real, peak demand will inevitably involve full or overloading at times, - unless you think that fares should be raised to pay for under-utilised stock.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
I guess the government really has to stop telling TOCs what to do with their rolling stock if the railways are privatised. For example, the Desiro family (Class 700/707/717) were designed to the government's specifications rather than letting Thameslink's/South West Trains'/Greater Northern's.
I can't speak for class 707s or 717s, but the 700s were designed to handle the massive Thameslink demand in the peaks, which they generally do quite well. Apart from when local politicians interfere causing the reduction of some 12-cars to 8-cars, and the set-back tables addition irrelevance, they should be able to cope with the rise in demand over the next 30 years.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
I'm surprised no one has yet to mention the 142 ???

Oh yes it's because they were not even adequate when they were built
That's not strictly true. In the '80s, demand for travel by rail was falling in some areas. The call by some for regular 'anywhere to anywhere' direct services meant that a train that could be afforded to run them was the only alternative to complete withdrawl of some routes. Since then, demand has risen again, so in the latter years of their life, pacers (and 150s/156s/ etc.), provisioned on that basis have been shown to need replacement.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
Am I the only one to find the OP's question somewhat vacuuous, asking, in effect, about a truism?

If some new rolling stock is inadequate from the off, so be it.

But whatever you introduce, in whatever field of human endeavour, it will become inadequate sooner or later. Locomotion Number 1 was 'adequate' when introduced. So was the Midland Compound.
And Mk 1 carriages (well, pity about the bogies).
And 2-Nols and Deltics.
And today?
This is so right. It is naïve to think that a train can be a perfect fit from introduction in a significantly changing travel environment. There are some designs that survived for a long time though, - for example the standard 9/10 compartment suburban stock was introduced in 1915 by the LB&SC for use on 25Hz ac lines. That basic design survived right through the SR's 4-SUB designs and BR's EPB types (and BR's ac variants on the GE and LMR networks) into the '90s. Even if the murder hadn't happened, they would have been withdrawn by now, (as were all slam-door stock) owing to improving H&S standards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top