My memory of the early days (so might not be totally accurate) was of flimsy shelves with a few chick-lit novels held in place by loose wire straps which had a tendency to snag on luggage as people walked past. The idea of stocking non-food items was a good one in theory, but not in the way they did it. Grand Central managed to do much the same thing (minus the paperbacks, because it wasn't 1998 any more) using the tried and tested 1970s buffet counter.
That definitely sounds more like a Pendolino than a Voyager.
Apologies for getting it wrong, I just knew they disappeared from basically all services, and may have made some assumptions.....
No worries. The Virgin branded East Coast service, actually operated by Stagecoach, did hand back the keys due to financal issues.
Could well be that I've confused two memories of travelling with Virgin then. Certainly the shop as built on the Voyagers was in my opinion inappropriate for low-density 4-5 car units- though they did seemingly avoid some of the annoying elements seen on the Pendolinos.
That's probably where I got mixed up. Thinking it was all services and not just one.
And a rougher ride.Well said! Couldn't agree more on that!
80x aren't revolutionary really, we are still doing 125 just like the old trains! But the only difference now is we have a less comfy seat to sit in!
True!
They were used on the ECML so that would qualify them.
You can blame the DfT for much of that as they set the spec and agreed the contract for the majority of them.
I disagree with that. The seats are subjective and changeable so I try not to base too much of my opinion on them. I do find the ride on them horrendous. Kind of get used to the rocking and swaying on other trains I work, but the way that the 800s throw you side to side is ridiculous.
Well considering GWR refurbished the mk3s to modern standards, and are still using class 43s on short sets, it begs the question: why not just make a bi mode loco, amd have it haul refurbished mk3 and mk4 coaches? Or even mk5 coaches in the case of TPE.
In the general case, loco haulage is harder on the infrastructure than distributed traction, and they also tend to be less energy efficient. What might have been a better idea is the Flirt model where the power generation is concentrated but the tractive effort is spread out.
Well, it would be a compromise, but the current model isn't exactly brilliant.....
Where is the like button?
But not at "high speed" - they were limited to 110mph on the ECML.
It only goes 100mph.
On the topic of speeds, I classed HS1 as part of the UK networks, which gives the Eurostar trains a pass. I agree that 110mph is not high speed. However, the 397 gets a pass becuase it can actually achieve 125mph, and also becuase they have been on 'express' services. I could have included the class 67, but no current or future service uses them in the express role, and they have also recently been limited to 110mph.
For the UK, anything over 100mph is high speed, IMO.
But those trains are only used on stopping services, not high speed express services.
How the train is used has little to do with what it's capable of, or of the passenger experience it provides.
