XC Voyager Refurbishment

[Doctor Fegg]

Genuine question as l don't get to use XC that often. To what extent is the current toilet provision driven by the length of journey and current depot set-ups?

The current tiolet provision is driven by Virgin's original airline-wannabe intention of having three classes of travel, and (mistakenly) thinking they needed to provide an accessible toilet for each one.

 

[Carlisle]

The overhead racks are integral to most of the other interior panels & wiring unlike older stock like 156s for example so would be costly to swap for a radically different design.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The current tiolet provision is driven by Virgin's original airline-wannabe intention of having three classes of travel, and (mistakenly) thinking they needed to provide an accessible toilet for each one.

Was it incorrect, or was it just that the RVAR (which applied back then) differed from PRM TSI? Most of the TV style modern passenger information displays, for example, comply with PRM TSI but would not comply with RVAR due to the font size.

 

[lachlan]

I like the new colour scheme on the outside. The new interior, while welcome, looks rather grey and boring.

 

[Trainman40083]

Half the time I wonder if the toilets are actually out of order, or contain people with no tickets...

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Was it incorrect, or was it just that the RVAR (which applied back then) differed from PRM TSI? Most of the TV style modern passenger information displays, for example, comply with PRM TSI but would not comply with RVAR due to the font size.

My recollection was from a friend of a friend who worked for Bombardier on the Voyagers. I've just checked RVAR 1998 and the only regulations relating to one-per-class are wheelchair spaces (15.4), not tiolets. RVAR 1998 does however say that "the nearest toilet cubicle to a wheelchair space or wheelchair-compatible sleeping compartment shall comply with the requirements in regulation 14" (20.1), but that could be addressed by putting the wheelchair space for 3rd Class at the front end of a coach, that for 2nd Class at the rear end, and the accessible toilet between them.

 

[sh24]

The interior looks nice and restful BUT I really hope the lighting isn't bright white as per IET.

 

[Alfie1014]

My recollection was from a friend of a friend who worked for Bombardier on the Voyagers. I've just checked RVAR 1998 and the only regulations relating to one-per-class are wheelchair spaces (15.4), not tiolets. RVAR 1998 does however say that "the nearest toilet cubicle to a wheelchair space or wheelchair-compatible sleeping compartment shall comply with the requirements in regulation 14" (20.1), but that could be addressed by putting the wheelchair space for 3rd Class at the front end of a coach, that for 2nd Class at the rear end, and the accessible toilet between them.

Technically possible but having to have a minimum gap between seats pretty much through the whole vehicle for wheelchair access of 850mm would reduce seating capacity (max possible in a Voyager with a width of 2.7m = probably 2+1 in standard and 1+1 in first). In reality with the proposed 3 classes for the trains with only 4 or 5 vehicles per set a single design of accessible toilet for all vehicles was probably chosen to simplify design and keep costs down. In hindsight this didn’t stand the test of time once the original 3 classes of accommodation proposed was abandoned.

Also bear in mind that at the time the Voyagers were ordered RVAR was in its infancy so it was pretty much a learning curve for all involved.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Technically possible but having to have a minimum gap between seats pretty much through the whole vehicle for wheelchair access of 850mm

I think they meant either side of the gangway connection (though it would require that to be wide and unstepped enough too).

 

[Doctor Fegg]

I think they meant either side of the gangway connection (though it would require that to be wide and unstepped enough too).

Indeed, yes.

 

[Mollman]

Can't see confirmation elsewhere in this thread; Alstom will refurbish the Voyagers at Litchurch Lane, starting 2025.

Alstom wins new £60m contract to refurbish Voyager trains

It could mean extra jobs when the work starts next year - just two months after the future of the Derby factory was settled

www.derbytelegraph.co.uk

So is Derby's gain Widnes's loss?

 

[Bornin1980s]

The aim isn't to get rid of toilets, it's to replace at one of the 3 accessible toilets with a non-accessible toilet which could take less than half the room in the cabin. Nobody has figured out a way to store luggage below the sole-bar yet, so presumably the space for 3 toilet tanks will still be there, and the tanking setups at depots would be unchanged.

When the voyagers were new, I thought all accessible toilets would be the new standard. I was shocked when later trains were built with smaller additional toilets.

Like the Class 374 Eurostar units (10 years newer), which only have two accessible toilets for 16 carriages. I don't think they will cope with Paralympic traffic.

Why change the most accessible train we have?

 

[John R]

When the voyagers were new, I thought all accessible toilets would be the new standard. I was shocked when later trains were built with smaller additional toilets.

Like the Class 374 Eurostar units (10 years newer), which only have two accessible toilets for 16 carriages. I don't think they will cope with Paralympic traffic.

Why change the most accessible train we have?

Because they take up a lot more space and thus reduce seating (or luggage) capacity. You don't need to have every toilet accessible, and three in a four car Voyager is overkill.

 

[GoneSouth]

Because they take up a lot more space and thus reduce seating (or luggage) capacity. You don't need to have every toilet accessible, and three in a four car Voyager is overkill.

Disagree, universal accessibility should be the goal, a very civilised addition to the Voyager fleet.

Clearly disabled people cost too much for the rest of you

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Aug 2024 ==

Wait until one day you need an accessible toilet and the only one is bunged up and locked

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Aug 2024 ==

I don't think they will cope with Paralympic traffic.

Why change the most accessible train we have?

Very good points

 

[Bletchleyite]

Disagree, universal accessibility should be the goal, a very civilised addition to the Voyager fleet.

Clearly disabled people cost too much for the rest of you

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Aug 2024 ==

Wait until one day you need an accessible toilet and the only one is bunged up and locked

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Aug 2024 ==


Very good points

The place they're needed is next to the wheelchair spaces. People who can walk can use the normal ones. And toilet urgency is a far more common disability (really should be treated as such) than wheelchair use, and door failures are still common on accessible toilets.

 

[GoneSouth]

The place they're needed is next to the wheelchair spaces. People who can walk can use the normal ones. And toilet urgency is a far more common disability (really should be treated as such) than wheelchair use, and door failures are still common on accessible toilets.

Yup, all for having more wheelchair spaces too. And it’s not just wheelchair users they benefit.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yup, all for having more wheelchair spaces too. And it’s not just wheelchair users they benefit.

Because of their relative unreliability they actively disbenefit those with toilet urgency, one of the most common disabilities as it comes with age. Thus I cannot support the idea of having only accessible toilets in a train.

The newest type with the two leaf doors do seem better in this regard though.

That said, I doubt the cost of the Voyager refurb would allow for either of these modifications so we are where we are.

 

[Ben Anslow]

Because of their relative unreliability they actively disbenefit those with toilet urgency, one of the most common disabilities as it comes with age. Thus I cannot support the idea of having only accessible toilets in a train.

The newest type with the two leaf doors do seem better in this regard though.

Examples of poor specification e.g recently caf stock and 80x so many examples that got slight tweaks and improvements when someone decided they could be bothered to put a little investment in the first place northern perfect example of a poor spec you have seats that are meant for a short journey yet the trains them selves are longer distance specifically ex tpe routes man air - Furness/lakes which needs a commuter layout but intercity standards

 

[181]

Because of their relative unreliability they actively disbenefit those with toilet urgency, one of the most common disabilities as it comes with age. Thus I cannot support the idea of having only accessible toilets in a train.

And there are people like my mother, probably a significant percentage of those in older age groups, who aren't wheelchair-bound but are unsteady on their feet, and much prefer a small space with walls to lean on to a large space to rattle around in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And there are people like my mother, probably a significant percentage of those in older age groups, who aren't wheelchair-bound but are unsteady on their feet, and much prefer a small space with walls to lean on to a large space to rattle around in.

I was also thinking that. (It's the same reason why extra legroom priority seats are actually quite unpopular with people in that position - it's much easier to sit down in a tighter spaced seat because you can hold the seat back in front to do so).

 

[Doomotron]

Disagree, universal accessibility should be the goal, a very civilised addition to the Voyager fleet.

Clearly disabled people cost too much for the rest of you

Wait until one day you need an accessible toilet and the only one is bunged up and locked

Remember that even if one is removed, that still leaves at least two. The same number of toilets would remain, so the possibility of a situation where no toilets are available on a unit will still be unlikely.

And, of course, not all disabled passengers need to use the accessible toilets anyway.

Clearly disabled people cost too much for the rest of you

I think that isn't a helpful thing to say. Most people here do care about accessibility needs, but for most people these will not be the top priority - that's why most people on here and in train enthusiast circles from what I've seen agree with the removal of at least one toilet to aid with the overcrowding on Voyagers, partly caused by the overabundance of accessible toilets.

 

[Russel]

Let's put the toilet issue into perspective, if one accessible toilet per unit was to be changed to a smaller toilet, how many extra seats would this actually generate space for, 2 rows max I'd say.

So a maximum of 8 extra seats.

Now, given how full a lot of XC services are, this extra 8 seats and a small amount of standing room is a drop in the ocean and almost certainly not worth the cost involved.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Let's put the toilet issue into perspective, if one accessible toilet per unit was to be changed to a smaller toilet, how many extra seats would this actually generate space for, 2 rows max I'd say.

So a maximum of 8 extra seats.

Now, given how full a lot of XC services are, this extra 8 seats and a small amount of standing room is a drop in the ocean and almost certainly not worth the cost involved.

8 seats more is 8 less people theoretically left behind.

 

[Russel]

8 seats more is 8 less people theoretically left behind.

We're not just talking ripping the toilet out and bolting a few seats in place, it would need an entire strip out and rebuild including considerable structural changes to move the exhaust pipe that runs up through the wall opposite the toilet and windows to be cut out in the bodyside... For the sake of 8 seats, it's a non-starter.

What needs to happen is to allow XC to take all of the ex Avanti 221's.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Let’s not forget these would also be extra seats in the vestibule, not the saloon. There’d be no window, and a considerably dingier and louder atmosphere than in the already criticised saloons.

 

[Pompey00]

Alstom to refurbish CrossCountry’s Voyager fleet in £60 million upgrade

Iconic fleet to receive both an interior and exterior refresh at Alstom’s Derby facility

www.alstom.com

 

[Anonymous10]

The interior looks nice and restful BUT I really hope the lighting isn't bright white as per IET.

What post is the interior depicted in?

Edit on the note of accessible toilets on trains, I'd agree 1 on for example a 4 or 5 coach train isn't enough but I'd argue you don't need one in every coach. Perhaps 1 in 2 coaches should be accessible?

 

[swt_passenger]

What post is the interior depicted in?

Post #717 (a Twitter link) and now in #747 (Alstom PR). But as far as I can tell it doesn’t really expand much on what was already known back in the original XC video in #65.

 

[Snow1964]

The official Alstom press release confirms 312 vehicles (136 class 220, 176 class 221) or 252 vehicles with cross country and 12 x 5car ex Avanti

The contract, valued at around £60 million (€70 million) will see the trains receive an interior refresh – including new seats and tables – while their exteriors will be repainted in CrossCountry’s new livery.

Additional enhancements will see the trains fitted with new carpets, improved lighting and a new passenger counting system. Sustainability will be at the heart of the refurbishment; the Voyager’s new seats will be at least 95% recyclable and 98% recoverable, while lighter materials used throughout the trains will help reduce fuel and carbon emissions.

Alstom to refurbish CrossCountry’s Voyager fleet in £60 million upgrade

Iconic fleet to receive both an interior and exterior refresh at Alstom’s Derby facility

www.alstom.com

 

[The_Train]

Half the time I wonder if the toilets are actually out of order, or contain people with no tickets...

If anyone can sit in those rancid toilets for the entirety of their journey, they deserve to travel for free