• 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!

Why can’t modern rolling stock be as spacious and comfortable as Mk 1 coaches?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mogz

Member
Joined
20 May 2019
Messages
445
Went for a ride on the Gloucs. & Warwks. with the family today.

They have BR Mk 1 rolling stock of several varieties, refurbished to a very high standard.

The seating was very comfortable and spacious. Well upholstered, plenty of leg room, aligned with windows. The train had both saloon and compartment style seating. The latter was very handy with two small children as it stopped them escaping and minimised noise for other passengers.

Can anyone explain to me why a mere 60 odd years later it is not possible for our rail network to have stock that is as spacious and comfortable?

Where’s the progress?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

F Great Eastern

Established Member
Joined
2 Apr 2009
Messages
3,580
Location
East Anglia
Can anyone explain to me why a mere 60 odd years later it is not possible for our rail network to have stock that is as spacious and comfortable?

High passenger numbers and spacious doesn't go together very well unless you want to drive huge amounts of people back to their cars or leave them stranded on the platforms because they cannot get on.

And as someone who has stood on the continent on compartment stock, believe me it's far less comfortable standing in an overcrowded narrow corridor to the side of the compartments than it is an open plan carriage.

Comparing a heritage railway with miniscule demand to an urban railway that has to transport huge numbers of people is stupid.
 

RailWonderer

Established Member
Joined
25 Jul 2018
Messages
1,588
Location
All around the network
PRM TSI compliance. The seats need to be a certain composition to be fireproof and safe, lights needs to be a certain brightness, there are many regulations. Seating density is normally given under a DfT imperative as well. Every compartment train would be full and standing if it were to re-enter passenger service, even in the quietest times of day. Good riddance they're gone. Some seats are comfortable and some trains are still spacious, it is a subjective thing.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
As far as I'm concerned a Mark 3 coach is superior to a Mark 1 in just about every way -

Seats
Ride quality
Sound levels
Heating
Is air-conditioned

Asides from the safety factor. If anything the Mark 1s should've been relegated to purely heritage railways much sooner than they were in actuality.
 

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,063
As far as I'm concerned a Mark 3 coach is superior to a Mark 1 in just about every way -

Seats
Ride quality
Sound levels
Heating
Is air-conditioned

Asides from the safety factor. If anything the Mark 1s should've been relegated to purely heritage railways much sooner than they were in actuality.
I have to disagree with you on all counts, other than the safety issue.

Travelling in a Mark 1 is a vastly superior experience.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
I have to disagree with you on all counts, other than the safety issue.

Travelling in a Mark 1 is a vastly superior experience.

Draughty, squashy seats, cold, draughty, noisy, poor lighting, lumpy ride.

But then I am of the age that I never experienced Mk1s in general traffic, but I get the impression they would've generally been in more worn condition in BR service than with a heritage line so...
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,630
Mark 1s ride terribly in my experience.
And have a great deal of interior noise.
 

Mogz

Member
Joined
20 May 2019
Messages
445
I am old enough to have travelled in Mk1 stock (specifically: 37 hauled North Wales Coast, Class 101 DMUs in the North West and EMUs “south of the Thames” towards the very end.

Despite their worn out appearance (though not always) I found them more comfortable and spacious.

When these carriages were introduced, photographs from the era also suggest many trains were a lot longer than today. Sometimes 12-14 coaches.

Again, why can we not have trains of such length today?

I should add that this is not a plea for the return of Mk 1 stock (opening windows, no air-con etc)- just for stock that has seating that was as comfortable!
 

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,063
Draughty, squashy seats, cold, draughty, noisy, poor lighting, lumpy ride.

But then I am of the age that I never experienced Mk1s in general traffic, but I get the impression they would've generally been in more worn condition in BR service than with a heritage line so...
Comfort, space, fresh air and a feeling of cosiness.

Plus of course you can enjoy the sound of what's on the front.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
Mark 1s ride terribly in my experience.
And have a great deal of interior noise.

Agree on both counts. My thinking was if they ride that roughly at only 20-25mph, what on earth are they like at 90-100mph?
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
Comfort, space, fresh air and a feeling of cosiness.

Plus of course you can enjoy the sound of what's on the front.

Mk3s are very comfortable imho
And perfectly spacious as well as being light and airy
The air-conditioning is perfectly fine and to me preferable to fighting unwanted or wanted draughts from the windows of a 156
And I'd rather have a sealed Mk3 than a draughty Mark 1.

The very last thing is about the only appeal, but to myself that's somewhat marginal. I'd rather hear the engine of a train passing from the lineside than from the train itself, but that's just me.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
Commonwealth bogies improved the ride (to a degree), depending on track conditions etc.

Now EPB-style deep, sprung bouncy cushions in a Class 700 would be, erm, interesting....

Many Mk1s got B4s, and I still think they are rough at even a 1/4 of mainline speed. I think it's all figurative anyway. To me comfort levels go up with each carriage "Mark", Mk2e/fs are quite comfortable, but a Mk3 is a cut above and indeed I think a Mk3 trumps a Mk4 - just ;)
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
Oddly enough, I've just ridden in a Mark 1 too, and I came to the exact opposite conclusion. Grim, gloomy, poorly designed and completely unsuitable for modern traffic.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
Oddly enough, I've just ridden in a Mark 1 too, and I came to the exact opposite conclusion. Grim, gloomy, poorly designed and completely unsuitable for modern traffic.

My feelings precisely, but I'm sure for as many people I agree with or who agree with me, there will be those with differing views.

As it's coming up the New Year how about we all agree to disagree on the comfort of Mk1s? :)
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,555
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Mk1 compartment stock was 4-a-side without armrests on the Western and Southern Regions, not my idea of comfort or privacy.
3-a-side with armrests on London Midland and Eastern Regions, much better. I never understood why there was a regional difference.
Most of it was steam heated, vacuum-braked and without aircon, was very noisy with single glazing and opening windows, and rode badly at speed.
The seats might have aligned with a window, but you could only peer out of a restricted view unless you had a window seat.
Only the window seats had any kind of table to put things on (a tiny central shelf).
The windows froze up in the winter and always misted up and had condensation running down them in cold/wet weather.
Fine if there were only 2 of you, but 6 (or 8) made it intolerable for long journeys.
Open stock, then Mk2 and Mk3 were miles better - aircon/double glazing (Mk2d onwards) made a huge difference.
I was fond of Mk2e/f which I thought had better seating (and décor) than the later Mk3/HSTs with their fixed armrests and plastic feel.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
I think that those who remember fondly them in mainline use 40-50 years ago are bathing in a cosy bath of nostalgia. A few of them running what was the norm for expresses in those days (80-90 mph) were in good enough condition to give a reasonable ride on the best lines. The rest were tatty, smelly, dusty, too cold/too hot, stuffy and handled average track very poorly. I regularly travelled on the class 309s which were 100mph 25kV EMUs, They comprised standard MKI bodies (obviously modified with cab ends and pantograph wells - and double-glazed windows) and a recently shopped train looked and smelt reasonable. They had Commonwealth bogies with the specially profiled wheels that prevented hunting, (the normal behaviour of MKIs) yet in the '70s they became much like lots of the MKI LHCS, see above descriptions especially when their power still enabled them to charge along at 100mph. Even quite old modern stock like class 321s at 100 mph over the same routes run smoother and quieter, are cleaner, and generally more comfortable despite their outer-suburban style.
Werre this not a forum rail enthusiasts, and populated with 'normal' passengers, I don't think this 'golden age of coaching design' praise would come from those who had to travel on them, - after all trains are primarily transport vehicles, not museum pieces to have a daily 'experience' in for leisure.
 

Sad Sprinter

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2017
Messages
1,800
Location
Way on down South London town
As someone born in the 90s, I only have travelled in MK3s. However on the Southern Region slam doors I would travel on in school summer holidays I don’t remember the noise being particularly bothersome. Then again, I was a child.

This thread raises a good question. Why are the 1972 Bakerloo Line tube stock such a pleasure to sit on, but the 2009 Victoria Line stock hard and unwelcoming? Why are modern EMUs so garish and the seats so hard? I wish they could build trains’ interiors like how they used to.
 

physics34

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2013
Messages
3,681
Agree on both counts. My thinking was if they ride that roughly at only 20-25mph, what on earth are they like at 90-100mph?
To be honest mk1 MU stock rode pretty well at 90mph. Remember the sprung seats were a secondary suspension as without them it would be a pretty rough ride
 

physics34

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2013
Messages
3,681
From a nostalgia point of view mk1s are a great experience. Fresh air on warmer days and 'character' but yes a mk3 is the king of coaches IMO
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
To be honest mk1 MU stock rode pretty well at 90mph. Remember the sprung seats were a secondary suspension as without them it would be a pretty rough ride

Thinking back to the Southern Region EMUs I’d agree with this. I don’t recall any of them riding noticeably badly, with one exception. If anything Electrostars are worse as they’re very prone to sudden and violent sideways lurching.

The one exception was of course the DEMUs if unlucky, or lucky dependant upon viewpoint, to be riding in the motor car. There were a couple of locations on the Uckfield line where it felt the train was derailing, and a fast run from Oxted to East Croydon was quite an experience if the train was doing full speed.

Would I go back to Mk1s? Yes definitely, but perhaps with a more crashworthy form of construction. I’m sure some peoples impression of Mk1s is clouded by the poor state some fell into by the end through lack of care and maintenance - Connex units in particular! Likewise track was generally in worse condition then.
 

Welly

Member
Joined
15 Nov 2013
Messages
498
I enjoyed riding both mark 1s and mark 3 coaches during the 1980s!
 

BigB

Member
Joined
20 Dec 2018
Messages
266
Location
Scotland
Mk1 coaches in preservation fall into 2 camps, those main line certified and those used only on the preserved line itself. Non-main line coaches may only need to be maintained for 15mph running, so may be bouncy, and the track will rarely be to NR standards.
Last year (first chance to say that) I travelled from Scotland to Llandudno in a Mk1 FO (First Open - 2+1 seating for those unacquainted) via the WCML and north Wales coast top and tailed with 67s so no slouch... These are well maintained (I must come clean I do have an interest there...) on commonwealth bogies with good springs and the ride was very good certainly along the Welsh coast at 60. The WCML and ECML can be a bit hit or miss but these are approved for 100mph running and that is perfectly acceptable apart from certain stretches where everything rides roughly.

The airy nature of the Mk1 coaches and the comfy seats was just the thing. Any newer stock would have not have felt as special for my family, and certainly eating a three course meal with wine would have been harder.

It takes a lot of work though to maintain crash worthiness on Mk1s as the steel body frames require a lot of wall and panel removal just to check them. It doesn't make them bad coaches, and I very much doubt the BR designers intended them to have a 60 year life on the main line when they though of required access!

We had the pleasure of the prototype HST and Mk3 coaches at our gala a couple of years ago and although I love Mk3s, it's a different experience. They are perfectly designed for getting you from A to B (where A is a long way from B) and you just want to get there comfortably and admire the view. To be honest you wouldn't know what was on the front. They did this phenomenally well for 40 years and it's amazing to think that the leap from the last Mk1 coach to the first Mk3 was only 9 years. I've yet to travel on a Mk5 but I'm not expecting anything like the step change.

Would the blue and grey Mk3 set make a good commercial railtour basis form non-enthusiast tours? I'm not so sure as nostalgia is a great selling point, and there is only so much to be made from 125 fans. Although who would not want to see that out on a regular basis???
 

B&W

Member
Joined
12 Aug 2013
Messages
78
Thinking back to the Southern Region EMUs I’d agree with this. I don’t recall any of them riding noticeably badly, with one exception. If anything Electrostars are worse as they’re very prone to sudden and violent sideways lurching.

The one exception was of course the DEMUs if unlucky, or lucky dependant upon viewpoint, to be riding in the motor car. There were a couple of locations on the Uckfield line where it felt the train was derailing, and a fast run from Oxted to East Croydon was quite an experience if the train was doing full speed.

Would I go back to Mk1s? Yes definitely, but perhaps with a more crashworthy form of construction. I’m sure some peoples impression of Mk1s is clouded by the poor state some fell into by the end through lack of care and maintenance - Connex units in particular! Likewise track was generally in worse condition then.
DEMU were very 'exciting' on poor track, when the Saturday Brighton Exeters were Hastings units the ride was very rough on the sections with 45' track and when their 75mph speed limit was exceeded. A BIG ex works was far better than a 377 or 700 is today purely from ride and seating aspect. I was reminded of that only yesterday when I caught the Brighton Bristol Parkway 158 unit to Chichester instead of a 377 or 313. The 377 gives a very rough ride in places but the 158 glided over the same track going faster and the comfort of the seats was far better. As for 700s beyond comment that a train in this day and age should have such ****e seats when aircraft have far better for example, so the argument that a modern seat has to be hard to meet fire or weight requirements is so much bull****. People remember the Mk1s EMUs when they had been allowed to go to seed but I would have a BIG from the South Coast any day rather than ironing board 377s or 700s.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,623
Location
Another planet...
Many Mk1s got B4s, and I still think they are rough at even a 1/4 of mainline speed. I think it's all figurative anyway. To me comfort levels go up with each carriage "Mark", Mk2e/fs are quite comfortable, but a Mk3 is a cut above and indeed I think a Mk3 trumps a Mk4 - just ;)
Your last part amuses me no end... a Mk3 beats a mk4 by a country mile and then some: mk4s have always struck me as a backwards step in terms of ride quality, particularly at speed.

Never had an issue with the ride quality of Southern Region slammers in their twilight years, but I probably subconsciously expected less of them because of their age. Also being a train geek means nostalgia can cloud your judgement: that's the only logical explanation for my rose-tinted view of 141s anyway!
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
High passenger numbers and spacious doesn't go together very well unless you want to drive huge amounts of people back to their cars or leave them stranded on the platforms because they cannot get on.

And as someone who has stood on the continent on compartment stock, believe me it's far less comfortable standing in an overcrowded narrow corridor to the side of the compartments than it is an open plan carriage.

Comparing a heritage railway with miniscule demand to an urban railway that has to transport huge numbers of people is stupid.
to some extent you are conflating Mk1 suburban stock with modern suburban stock vs mk 1 intercity stock with modern inter city stock. Mk1 or EPB type suburban stock is not really, in my view more comfortable than modern equivalent - apart from softness of cushions maybe.
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
Draughty, squashy seats, cold, draughty, noisy, poor lighting, lumpy ride.

But then I am of the age that I never experienced Mk1s in general traffic, but I get the impression they would've generally been in more worn condition in BR service than with a heritage line so...
I regularly used Mk1 hauled and emu stock in the 1970s. Generally pretty smart and kept clean, so not worn condition. Admittedly some issues in compartments with vandalism commensurate with the general increase in vandalism in the public realm during the 70s I would say. Obv plenty of Mk1 stock was not compartment.
 
Last edited:

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
6,996
Mk1 coaches in preservation fall into 2 camps, those main line certified and those used only on the preserved line itself. Non-main line coaches may only need to be maintained for 15mph running, so may be bouncy, and the track will rarely be to NR standards.
Last year (first chance to say that) I travelled from Scotland to Llandudno in a Mk1 FO (First Open - 2+1 seating for those unacquainted) via the WCML and north Wales coast top and tailed with 67s so no slouch... These are well maintained (I must come clean I do have an interest there...) on commonwealth bogies with good springs and the ride was very good certainly along the Welsh coast at 60. The WCML and ECML can be a bit hit or miss but these are approved for 100mph running and that is perfectly acceptable apart from certain stretches where everything rides roughly.

The airy nature of the Mk1 coaches and the comfy seats was just the thing. Any newer stock would have not have felt as special for my family, and certainly eating a three course meal with wine would have been harder.

It takes a lot of work though to maintain crash worthiness on Mk1s as the steel body frames require a lot of wall and panel removal just to check them. It doesn't make them bad coaches, and I very much doubt the BR designers intended them to have a 60 year life on the main line when they though of required access!

We had the pleasure of the prototype HST and Mk3 coaches at our gala a couple of years ago and although I love Mk3s, it's a different experience. They are perfectly designed for getting you from A to B (where A is a long way from B) and you just want to get there comfortably and admire the view. To be honest you wouldn't know what was on the front. They did this phenomenally well for 40 years and it's amazing to think that the leap from the last Mk1 coach to the first Mk3 was only 9 years. I've yet to travel on a Mk5 but I'm not expecting anything like the step change.

Would the blue and grey Mk3 set make a good commercial railtour basis form non-enthusiast tours? I'm not so sure as nostalgia is a great selling point, and there is only so much to be made from 125 fans. Although who would not want to see that out on a regular basis???
great points well made!
 
Joined
4 Mar 2018
Messages
31
Location
Wirral
I am old enough to have travelled in Mk1 stock (specifically: 37 hauled North Wales Coast, Class 101 DMUs in the North West and EMUs “south of the Thames” towards the very end.

Despite their worn out appearance (though not always) I found them more comfortable and spacious.

When these carriages were introduced, photographs from the era also suggest many trains were a lot longer than today. Sometimes 12-14 coaches.

Again, why can we not have trains of such length today?

I should add that this is not a plea for the return of Mk 1 stock (opening windows, no air-con etc)- just for stock that has seating that was as comfortable!
The main reason for length is because Mk1s were generally a lot shorter, being between 17m and 19m long. Compare that to a modern intercity train which is usually between 23m and 26m. For example, an 11 coach 390 is 26m longer than a 14 coach set of Mk1s, and a 9 coach 80x is only 4m shorter.
 

lordbusiness

Member
Joined
17 Dec 2014
Messages
187
Agree on both counts. My thinking was if they ride that roughly at only 20-25mph, what on earth are they like at 90-100mph?
I remember going on a Merrymaker from Huntingdon to Edinburgh back in the 70's. Waiting on the platform at Huntingdon for expected FP 47 when a LA 46 (4600?) with Mk1's turns up. To cut a long story short, we got held up somewhere between PBO and DON for quite a while which the crew tried to make up for the rest of the journey and I swear we were doing in excess of a ton at times. We were in the last coach which at times which seemed quite hair raising at times and to be almost floating. Eventually got into Waverly about 60 late.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top