Alstom celebrating 20 years anniversary of Voyager's introduction

[47827]

Awful trains, until you look at some of the stuff built since. They perform A to B but certainly didn't match the travelling environment of anything they replaced (assuming everything was equally well looked after and not being run down in the last final months as per the norm). That said, the shabby oil stained messy looking thing I put my mum onto at Rhyl tonight for a 33 minute journey turned up when it should on its shuttle from Crewe and was 5 carriages so meant she wasn't an in wedged environment as per the Holyhead - Cardiff TFW service in the morning. I chose to make sure she made the 221 for the above reasons as the morning experience stressed her out. All OK except the 5 minute delay departing when the brakes went in by the end of the platform (over carried passenger potentially).

 

[DustyBin]

Thinking on, a 4-REP with a 33 on the end is basically another form of bi-mode...the Southern were way ahead of their time with that setup.

On a related note, how difficult would it have been to have made a Southern DEMU bi-mode? They were after all EMUs with a diesel generator (or two). Obviously such things weren’t considered in the 50s and 60s but it’s an interesting thought.

 

[Bletchleyite]

On a related note, how difficult would it have been to have made a Southern DEMU bi-mode? They were after all EMUs with a diesel generator (or two). Obviously such things weren’t considered in the 50s and 60s but it’s an interesting thought.

Fairly easy, I imagine. Same for a Class 210, had that been seen as useful at the time.

 

[Journeyman]

On a related note, how difficult would it have been to have made a Southern DEMU bi-mode? They were after all EMUs with a diesel generator (or two). Obviously such things weren’t considered in the 50s and 60s but it’s an interesting thought.

It was actually considered when the Hastings units were built, as the line was electrified for some length out of London. Although it was theoretically possible, there was concern about weight and space considerations, and traditional SR EMU resistance based control equipment was seen as incompatible with the DEMU control system of varying the engine speed. This was described in "The Hastings Diesels Story", a book published by the Southern Electric Group in 1986.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It was actually considered when the Hastings units were built, as the line was electrified for some length out of London. Although it was theoretically possible, there was concern about weight and space considerations, and traditional SR EMU resistance based control equipment was seen as incompatible with the DEMU control system of varying the engine speed. This was described in "The Hastings Diesels Story", a book published by the Southern Electric Group in 1986.

I guess you could have had two completely separate power and control systems, one diesel and one electric, and just switched off the one you were not using. But I guess the benefits were not considered to be as great back then.

 

[Journeyman]

I guess you could have had two completely separate power and control systems, one diesel and one electric, and just switched off the one you were not using. But I guess the benefits were not considered to be as great back then.

It was done about ten years later, of course, in the form of the Class 73, although there was a lot more space inside for equipment. I believe they had two master controllers, one for diesel and one for electric.

Given the narrow body and the fact that a large chunk of the motor vehicle was sacrificed to engine rooms, it was probably filed under "too difficult" to put in an electric control system too when the Hastings units were designed. At the time, of course, the Southern were happy to run a lot of steam locos over electrified routes, and this wasn't massively different.

 

[DustyBin]

It was actually considered when the Hastings units were built, as the line was electrified for some length out of London. Although it was theoretically possible, there was concern about weight and space considerations, and traditional SR EMU resistance based control equipment was seen as incompatible with the DEMU control system of varying the engine speed. This was described in "The Hastings Diesels Story", a book published by the Southern Electric Group in 1986.

Interesting, thanks! I’ve read a fair bit about SR DEMUs and found out all kinds of interesting stuff from the early days in particular, but I didn’t know that.

 

[Journeyman]

Interesting, thanks! I’ve read a fair bit about SR DEMUs and found out all kinds of interesting stuff from the early days in particular, but I didn’t know that.

Sadly I don't have a copy of that book anymore, so I'm relying on memory here, but that's the only place I've ever seen it mentioned, and it certainly doesn't seem to be common knowledge.

 

[Irascible]

It was actually considered when the Hastings units were built, as the line was electrified for some length out of London. Although it was theoretically possible, there was concern about weight and space considerations, and traditional SR EMU resistance based control equipment was seen as incompatible with the DEMU control system of varying the engine speed. This was described in "The Hastings Diesels Story", a book published by the Southern Electric Group in 1986.

Mildly surprised they didn't attach a motor to the other end of the generator & resistance-control that...

 

[D365]

It was actually considered when the Hastings units were built, as the line was electrified for some length out of London. Although it was theoretically possible, there was concern about weight and space considerations…

This is exactly the reason why developing a high-speed bi-mode wasn’t possible until the last ten years.

 

[dosxuk]

This is exactly the reason why developing a high-speed bi-mode wasn’t possible until the last ten years.

And what changed in the last ten years, other than demand for such a thing?

Before the Voyagers, there also wasn't a high speed diesel multiple unit (not including the HST as they have power cars). The plans for Thor showed converting the Voyagers to bi-mode was possible with the addition of a transformer/pantograph coach, so surely you can see that if the demand for it was there at the spec stage it could take been done from launch?

The only things revolutionary about the IEP's is the amount of DfT involvement.

 

[Ken H]

And what changed in the last ten years, other than demand for such a thing?

Before the Voyagers, there also wasn't a high speed diesel multiple unit (not including the HST as they have power cars). The plans for Thor showed converting the Voyagers to bi-mode was possible with the addition of a transformer/pantograph coach, so surely you can see that if the demand for it was there at the spec stage it could take been done from launch?

The only things revolutionary about the IEP's is the amount of DfT involvement.

I think power electronics was a game changer. The move to AC motors and static rectifiers and inverters made lots more possible.

 

[hwl]

I think power electronics was a game changer. The move to AC motors and static rectifiers and inverters made lots more possible.

That came in the 1990s, the second key game changer was better computer control of engines (both ECU and interface modules and programming) that was needed to work with the power electronics which wasn't really available at the time of the voyager design and was widely available from 2005 onwards buy not required till the end of that decade to meet Stage IIIA requirements in practice.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Yes, exactly that, and because back then diesel was the clean wonder fuel...how wrong they were!

And Network Rail (John Armitt, now chair of the National Infrastructure Commission) said "electrification is just another interface to go wrong."
The freight TOCs would be all-diesel if they could get away with it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That came in the 1990s, the second key game changer was better computer control of engines (both ECU and interface modules and programming) that was needed to work with the power electronics which wasn't really available at the time of the voyager design and was widely available from 2005 onwards buy not required till the end of that decade to meet Stage IIIA requirements in practice.

That of course would give you a nicely integrated bi-mode like the 80x, but the more "blunt instrument" style of having completely separate diesel and electric drivetrains and control systems on the same unit* would have been possible for pretty much as long as DMUs and EMUs have been a thing.

* I mentioned upthread the theoretical example of inserting a Class 319 power car into a 2-car Class 150 with separate controls for each power source and a clutch arrangement in the diesel driveline to disconnect it when not in use to save wasting energy churning up transmission oil.

 

[david1212]

When introduced to me the main positive of the Voyagers was reliability over the locos and stock they replaced. They are cramped, almost claustrophobic, compared to MK2 & MK3 coaches, I didn't like the seats and or the noise. The roof luggage racks can only take smaller bags. My description always has been ' fun-size ' trains as like the chocolates small and not fun at all. Far too many times have I seen a family or group with their luggage having a bad experience split across non-aligned airline seats instead of at least one table and four seats with luggage space between the seats.

Roll on 20 years and to me a voyager is superior to an IET. In comparison road coaches generally have improved over 20 years yet so many trains are overall worse.

The fundamental error when the XC franchise was re-tendered in 2007 was not specifying significant fleet expansion, logically additional voyager vehicles. Simply not running close to if not beyond capacity and more luggage space would be a significant improvement to the experience.

Hence I am not celebrating!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Roll on 20 years and to me a voyager is superior to an IET.

In what way? Yes, Fainsa Sophias are rubbish seats, but apart from that? I would struggle to think of a single way in which a Voyager is better than an IET other than the seats, and the generous legroom of the IET would probably win that overall too.

 

[LOL The Irony]

They’re not lorry engines (I’m not being a pedant for the sake of it, they’re just not lorry engines).

I thought the QSK19 was originally designed for use in trucks/lorries?

Nope, the K in the denomination means it’s a pure offroad engine by design. Plus, 19 litres is much too big for a truck (the biggest truck engine is the 16 litre Scania V8).

Partially correct, I think!

My understanding is that the QSK19 was originally intended for earth moving equipment and similar rather than for lorries on roads. It's a bit big for that use...!

Actually, they did find their way into Kenworths in Australia, albeit in 606hp guise (So the 770hp Scania DC16 still blows it out the water).

The 222s were much better in that regard.

But the 7 car 222s have a ridiculous 1st to standard class ratio. I'm talking almost 8 car Pendolino levels.

As I said above the poor use of space (which is separate from the over provision of universal toilets) is a fault of the builders.

Wasn't that actually down to the disability laws of the time they were due to enter service not being clear enough, so Virgin decided to play it safe and spec them with UATs only?

 

[Bletchleyite]

It was caused by Virgin's foolish plan for a 3+2 Value class, which was never going to work in such a narrow vehicle.

 

[trebor79]

In what way? Yes, Fainsa Sophias are rubbish seats, but apart from that? I would struggle to think of a single way in which a Voyager is better than an IET other than the seats, and the generous legroom of the IET would probably win that overall too.

Agree with this. The IETs are superb from a passenger POV. I don't even mind the seats all the much, although I do think more comfortable seats should have been fitted. I knew someone who worked on the project at Hitachi, they originally specified different seats and we're horrid when DfT changed the spec to Sophias. But the great legroom, airy and spacious design and plenty of luggage capacity are great.
I'll even forgive the underfloor engines because the sound deadening is so good it can be difficult to know whether they are running or not.
The two worst features are the lowered floor in the non-engine carriages meaning the seats are too low compared to the windows. I never understood why they didn't save cost by having the same floor level throughout and just not putting an engine etc under those carriages.
The second is that some units or carriages suffer from a high pitched whistling from the air conditioning whenever the doors are shut.

 

[antharro]

I've only ever used the XC ones, mostly between Bournemouth and Reading. I absolutely hate the seats in standard class; I find them incredibly uncomfortable. First class however is decent enough and I could certainly travel longer distances in first than I could in standard. My only gripes with them are that I wish they could fix the near constant rattling of the ceiling and lighting panels, and they REALLY need a re-fit now. Let's hope that if they get one they won't remove the nice first class seats and replace them with 2+2 uncomfortable ones.

As for the Voyager vs IET; in standard class I find them to both be quite uncomfortable. In first, the Voyager wins hands down - GWR's IETs are a disgrace in first.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As for the Voyager vs IET; in standard class I find them to both be quite uncomfortable. In first, the Voyager wins hands down - GWR's IETs are a disgrace in first.

With regard to the seating in 1st I completely agree. But you can change seats, so that doesn't make it a bad train overall. It will be interesting to see how views vary with regard to the East Coast Trains sets and indeed the Avanti ones which will have different seats.

 

[hexagon789]

But the 7 car 222s have a ridiculous 1st to standard class ratio. I'm talking almost 8 car Pendolino levels.

The 7-car 222s are like that because they all lost two Motor Standards to extend the 4-car units to 5-car and the amount of First Class seating was not reduced to compensate. As 9-car they had a much more similar balance to the HSTs.

Wasn't that actually down to the disability laws of the time they were due to enter service not being clear enough, so Virgin decided to play it safe and spec them with UATs only?

I seem to remember that it caused problems with the TurboStars - I think Midland Mainline just got its units into service before the deadlines but ScotRail or Anglia didn't and had to make changes(?), I can't remember precisely. I do know that the ten centre cars MM procured in 2001 to extend some of its 170s did have a few changes, externally the most notable change was the alteration of the passenger doors to give more contrast to the bodywork though not as particularly "stand-out" as with later changes to certain liveries to accomplish this.

 

[LOL The Irony]

The 7-car 222s are like that because they all lost two Motor Standards to extend the 4-car units to 5-car and the amount of First Class seating was not reduced to compensate. As 9-car they had a much more similar balance to the HSTs.

I wonder why it crossed nobody's mind that maybe the extra first next to the buffet could've been converted to standard.

 

[hexagon789]

I wonder why it crossed nobody's mind that maybe the extra first next to the buffet could've been converted to standard.

Or even a Composite at least.

Its rather ironic that the trains which started out with reasonable capacity have now switched places with the original 4-car units in having too high a % of First Class.

I think the Voyagers themselves are just about right with one carriage

 

[Mat17]

First class really ought to be abolished.

 

[43055]

I wonder why it crossed nobody's mind that maybe the extra first next to the buffet could've been converted to standard.

Probably because you can fill all three first class coaches on the breakfast trains.

 

[Ianno87]

First class really ought to be abolished.

Why? It's quite common to see it near fully-occupied on XC services throughout the day.

 

[Mat17]

There's never enough second class seats. I've spent many hours rammed in vestibules stood on second, looking through the first class door with it mostly empty. Seems a waste really.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why? It's quite common to see it near fully-occupied on XC services throughout the day.

XC gains first class passengers on false pretences in the manner that TPE used to, i.e. people upgrade because it's that or no seat. I do think it has value as a premium service, but the overcrowding issue does need to be resolved.