Are the class 220/221 voyagers the worst trains on Britain's rails?

[Domh245]

CC 72100, while I accept Voyagers aren't the quiestest of trains, I never found them noisy. However most journeys on an XC 170 involved an annoying rattle from the overhead racks.

That would be the infamous Derby rattle then! No such issue with the Brugge built stock!

 

[sprinterguy]

Living in Birmingham and travelling regionally quite frequently for both work and leisure, I would hate to think how many miles I must have spent on Voyagers. hock: Crosscountry is often the only realistic option to get me where I want to be, and unfortunately their HSTs are usually travelling in the opposite direction at the times I need to travel!

From an enthusiasts' and personal comfort standpoint, I wish I had been in Birmingham ten years earlier, when I would have been making extensive use of HSTs and loco-hauled formations instead. However in all practical aspects I am very glad for the increased frequency, reliability and speed of the service that has been made possible with Voyagers. And I generally break my journey at York when heading up to the north east these days as I find Voyager seats impossible to remain comfortable in on journeys of two hours or more, so more excuse to visit the York Tap or the Maltings before boarding a proper train (East Coast)!

 

[Cherry_Picker]

The seats lined up with windows thing always bothers me. You line your seats up with the floor space, not the windows. More seats can be fit in the carriage if you actually make the most of the available space.

 

[Haydn1971]

The XC Voyager leases expire next year, along with the current XC franchise. DfT seems in no hurry to re-specify XC for additional stock for its direct award to 2019. The VT Voyager leases expire in 2017 along with the current ICWC franchise.

Is that building a theory that the ICWC 221 fleet may be shuffled to XC with ICWC having to find something else to fill the void ?

 

[The Planner]

If you had a 100mph loco sandwiched rake of cars, I'm sure that the people who write the timetables for the network would love it! a 100mph path on the GWML or ECML would take up 2 or 3 125mph paths on those lines, and the fact that you've got 2 locos pushing/pulling this long rake of carriages would mean that it'd have nowhere near the acceleration of the voyagers.

Indeed, all the suggestions that more HSTs should come in for Voyagers is fine as long you are happy with 2+5 sets or 2+6 at a push, either that or you re-writing their timetable.

 

[Wolfie]

I can't help but see that the bombardier Voyagers Class 220/221 are the biggest fail on Britain's railways.

Your personal, subjective, opinion, I disagree. We both have a right to our views.

Originally they were meant to be like a diesel version of the Pendolinos with tilt mechanism. The 220 body shell was tapered for this resulting in a cramped claustrophobic passenger cabin despite the fact the 220 was never even intended to tilt. The 221 and 222 had tilting systems but on the 221 they have been removed and tilting bars welded shut.

Now I have little choice but to point out the factual inaccuracies with this. 222s were never fitted for tilt. The majority of 221s (those with Virgin) are still fully tilt-capable. Only the small number of 221s with Cross Country had tilt removed.

The introduction of Voyagers by Virgin on the cross country route in 2003 was set with lots of problems from the onset. Loco hauled MK2 stock had to be brought back into service when the Voyagers failed to have the capacity of the HST and loco hauled trains they replaced. Not to mention many voyagers breaking down on the Dawlish seawall when sea water got into badly engineered roof top electronic systems.

Let's carefully ignore the doubling of frequency on many routes shall we. Your comments about issues at Dawlish are valid.

Another problem is that the Delner couplings were incompatible with all UK locomotives unless they had been specially modified to couple up to all but a small number of adapted locos.
The good old HSTs by contrast could be rescued by any locomotive even small class 25s could rescue a failed HST! This could lead to long delays until a suitable loco is found to rescue a failed voyager.

Which is different to other Dellner fitted multiple units (eg Pendolini) how exactly? Perhaps there should never be any progress in technology whatsoever just to ensure backwards compatability to Stevenson's Rocket.....

Putting voyagers on the cross country routes was another fail.
These were the longest UK rail routes from Penzance often as far as Aberdeen.

.... and, as has been said many time on here, how many people travel the length (or even near to it!) of such lines....

1) The passenger cabins are small cramped and claustrophobic designed for tilting which was never even implemented. In any case XC SW to NE routes have so many stops that need to tilt was probably not even necessary unlike on the WC mainline.

So let's have another type just to satisfy you huh....

2) Seats don't always line up with windows meaning some passengers being stuck between windows with no views. Not very nice on a 800 mile journey from Penzance to Scotland!

The seat issue is hardly unique to these trains.. as for the 800mile journey with no view so, if someone was doing that journey, they would be unable to move to another seat for the whole trip huh... frankly rubbish!

3) Underfloor engines lead to a lot of noise and vibration in the carriage unlike the much smoother ride given by loco hauled and HST trains.

Again hardly unique to Voyagers...Adelantes and other DMUs have the same issues... but because you have a preference operators must run uneconomic trains huh...

4) Sewage smells from the sewage tank are often a problem. I remember travelling from Exeter to Newton Abbot last summer on a Glasgow to Plymouth Voyager, in one coach the aircon had failed. It was very unpleasantly hot inside with a strong smell of sewage. Made worse by a hot underfloor engine. How people coped who had been on the train for 7 or 8 hours? 20 mins was enough for me lol! It was so bad that passengers were being given free bottles of water by train crew. On a larger HST passengers could have been move to another coach and the failed coach shut down.

Sadly true at times on 220/221s.. I believe due to the placement of the retention tanks... of course I am sure that the track workers far prefer your precious HSTs dumping sewage both on the tracks they work on and at times all over them....

5) Seat tray tables are often too small for normal sized laptops.

Unique to Voyagers?

The return of a small number of HSTs by XC when they took over Cross country services from Virgin was a godsend and perhaps because XC Realised that the 22X were unsuitable for long journeys. Many passengers far prefer the older trustworthy HST which is more spacious, with a comfortable smooth ride. Sadly less than one fifth of XC services use HSTs.

Evidence for my bold? Completely subjective! In my view the seats on Cross Country HSTs are awful!

I really hope that when FGW stop using HSTs that XC uses the redundant HSTs to replace all their Voyagers.

You are entitled to your view... again I beg to differ...

But ok some will argue that using 1970s trains is not progressive. So my question is why did they not give up on the tilting idea in the first place and develop a train which has the comfort and space of an HST with compatible couplings?

Because Virgin, which was running Cross Country at the time, wanted fleet commonality to simplify logistics etc perhaps....

Any opinions?

I fear that I may have wasted 10 minutes of my life responding to a closed-minded rant with very little factual as opposed to emotive basis....

 

[CosherB]

I fear that I may have wasted 10 minutes of my life responding to a closed-minded rant with very little factual as opposed to emotive basis....

To some, the facts never get in the way of a good moan!

 

[SpacePhoenix]

How long does it take to empty the toilet tanks of a Voyager? Do any of the routes have any viable places where the sewerage could be pumped from the train to an adjacent site to be dealt with?

 

[aylesbury]

I ridden on a Voyager once, Wigan to MK and I enjoyed it comfortable seats,good windows and the tables are adequate ,nuff said

 

[Domh245]

CET pumping kit is only based in depots at the moment. So unless you take a train to a fitted depot between services, no. Whilst it might be feasible to put pumps in place at terminal stations, the problem is not having anywhere to put the tanks to store the waste before it goes off for processing. That and the smell, the cost, the chance of leakage etc.

 

[Haydn1971]

I'm looking forward really to the next XC franchise, hopefully getting the current 220/221's reconfigured into longer units, refurb, fix the loo's, improve interior mobile signal, hopefully roll out technologies to improve seat booking via smart phones or online for season ticket holders. That's the main gripes fixed. Made possible in the early days by released units made possible by the 800/801 fleet, then ultimately replacing the old displaced units with new EMU's on XC's wired routes, gradually redeploying the Voyager fleet as wiring continues.

 

[fowler9]

I'm looking forward really to the next XC franchise, hopefully getting the current 220/221's reconfigured into longer units, refurb, fix the loo's, improve interior mobile signal, hopefully roll out technologies to improve seat booking via smart phones or online for season ticket holders. That's the main gripes fixed. Made possible in the early days by released units made possible by the 800/801 fleet, then ultimately replacing the old displaced units with new EMU's on XC's wired routes, gradually redeploying the Voyager fleet as wiring continues.

Lets face it that isn't what is going to happen. For the service to get better someone would have to spend money.

 

[ag51ruk]

It's perhaps worth mentioning that class 185s manage to stay odour free even right outside a toilet that's been locked out due to a full tank. Sure, they're a few years newer but the same could be said about 170s. Both operate on similar length services (not quite as long as Aberdeen to Penzance, but Newcastle to Liverpool or Cleethorpes to Manchester Airport compare with a large chunk of XC services. Hopefully when the 220/1 fleet is next overhauled the toilet issue will get the attention it needs!

Isn't the main issue with the sewage tanks that there was no space underneath the train for them due to the tilt equipment, so they had to be installed above the carriage floor - that's why the smell is so noticeable. On other units (like the 185s) the tank is well out of the way underneath the floor. Not much that can be done during overhaul about that without a major redesign.

 

[David Goddard]

Voyagers aren't that bad at all - they do a good job of what they were designed for- carrying passengers quickly over long distances.
For me one of the biggest issues is the lining up of the seats versus the windows, and a lot of people share this view.
Not a perfect train by all means, but a good one nonetheless.

 

[The Ham]

Voyagers aren't that bad at all - they do a good job of what they were designed for- carrying passengers quickly over long distances.
For me one of the biggest issues is the lining up of the seats versus the windows, and a lot of people share this view.
Not a perfect train by all means, but a good one nonetheless.

Yet the 444's are loved and are often put forward as a good design which should be replicated even though its windows and seats don't align.

 

[sprinterguy]

Yet the 444's are loved and are often put forward as a good design which should be replicated even though its windows and seats don't align.

The seat backs aren't so high and the window pillars not as wide on a 444 compared to a Voyager, though. The seating is less obtrusive to the view on a 444.

 

[wheelnrail]

From an outer visual standpoint, I hate voyagers. Their look and engine noise are dreadful. There's nothing photogenic about them.

....But ive riden on one and on the inside it changes. Vibration isn't an issue,I had worse in 156s. Little noise, spacious and comfortable, plenty of sockets for electronics....it's actually a pleasant train to be on.

 

[The Ham]

The seat backs aren't so high and the window pillars not as wide on a 444 compared to a Voyager, though. The seating is less obtrusive to the view on a 444.

The point being that seats don't have to align with the windows.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Is that building a theory that the ICWC 221 fleet may be shuffled to XC with ICWC having to find something else to fill the void ?

XC will have to have a new franchise contract within a year.
There are no pointers to what DfT will let them have up to 2019, but retaining their current Voyagers seems the inevitable baseline.
Theoretically they could do a Chiltern on VT and take VT's current Voyagers from 2017, but it doesn't seem likely as there is no alternative for VT.
Unless DfT lets XC acquire new stock, it will all have to wait till the winning ICWC 2017-2026 bidder tells us its rolling stock plans late next year.
If Voyagers are replaced it will then take a couple of years to build something else, so you are up to 2019 on that basis anyway.
So 2019/20 sounds like the next practical opportunity for an XC stock shuffle, taking more 22x from WC or EM.

 

[DarloRich]

I realise that suggesting that any "new" stock is less good than the "old" stock on this forum immediately has you castigated as some kind of small brained luddite but:

Whilst my view on the Voyager is quite clear they aren’t the worst train on the network by any means. So in the interests of fairness:

Good points

Fast
Reliable
Cheaper for the TOC to run (which should reduce our fare but oddly doesn’t)
Ride quality is decent enough
I am told by rolling stock engineers that acceleration, sustained speed performance, brakes, emissions and fuel efficiency are very good on the Voyager & the crash integrity is top notch
Much less dingy internal environment than the Pendolino and in no way claustrophobic
Nice big windows so you can see the world go by (I know that for most modernity slaves a tablet is de rigueur but I like a view!)
Passenger numbers – the layout means lots of people can be crammed into a small space
Ability to support VHF timetables
Ability to tilt
Virgin ones are usually in good internal nick, XC less so.
VT all table/free wifi second class carriage is very nice
EDIT:Good quality air con/heating

Bad points

Rattles – EVERYTHING seems to rattle or vibrate in the bloody things and each item of trim seems to resonate at a different frequency! Why can’t some damping be developed/installed to reduce this issue?
Underfloor engines – They really grate after a fairly short time. I am sure the yoof don’t notice as they have their brains plugged into an anti social I device but I like to read when not working.
Lack of tables makes working quite difficult whilst on the move
Length- far too short for long distance trains
Far too busy and therefore cramped
Sewage smell ( see below) WHY have XC not solved this when Virgin have at least improved the issue?
Comfort. Poor in my view, certainly not as good as the trains they replaced
Catering – I know the sensible passengers purchase before boarding but on a long journey (see below) your supplies can become exhausted and need replenishing. The trolley is not great sadly.
Layout – why are there so many toilets on such a small train?
Frist class – why bother as it is often deserted? Rip it out and make the train all standard
Lack of gangways – double trains mean double crews and double the costs!
Too many views of white plastic land.
Faraday cage effect on board
Poor wifi
Expensive wifi (not limited to XC/VT admittedly)
Leg room seems very stingy
Seats that seemed designed to cut the circulation to your legs off after exactly 90 minutes

I'm not going to go through all your points and why i mostly disagree with them but what i will point out is your disillusion that people get on north of Edinburgh and dont get off until south of Plymouth. The XC NE-SW routes serve many smalling journeys such as Leeds - Sheffield/Birmingham/Newcastle, Birmingham-Bristol, etc. Very few if any passengers take the train all the way unless they're enthusiasts. When travelling such a distance people tend to fly or drive with a break in the middle.

A big part of the equation which a lot of people seem to miss out on is that a lot of journeys on CrossCountry are short hops between neigbouring towns and cities.

As many others have said the amount who travel the full 8+ Hrs from Plymouth to Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dundee/ Aberdeen would be incredibly small.

.... and, as has been said many time on here, how many people travel the length (or even near to it!) of such lines....

This journey distance rubbish again. I have often used XC (or at least I did until it become unbearable) between Edinburgh and Plymouth/Newcastle & Southampton/Bristol. I am not, was not and won’t be the only person who does such long distances. It may surprise you to know there are quite a few undertaking similar length journeys for both business and leisure. I know you all want to minimise this group of passengers and try to suggest that our comments are illegitimate but these trains are awful for long distance travel in second class. They are merely tolerable in first.

I find it funny that supporters try to defend these train on the basis that even though they are used on long journeys they are ok for short ones! Does that not strike you as a failure? Should they not be good for both long and short journeys?

I also find it funny that many people saying the Voyager is fine have said they have only travelled on one once or twice!

Well well well, where do I start
Are you only travelling at peak time? Even slightly outside the peaks and the trains are quite spacious.

Not sure when you go but they are often rammed all day. After about 2000 they tend to empty out away from the core section and be tolerable within the core. They aren't long enough though

Oh great let me just magic some more stock from nothing :roll:

No let’s not! They are useful trains that, in my view, are simply unsuitable for the routes they work. Let’s learn the lesson from these trains and make sure that the next trains are specified to a decent passenger comfort standard and are of a suitable length for long distance services and the current Voyager trains find a use on less long distance services.

I'm looking forward really to the next XC franchise, hopefully getting the current 220/221's reconfigured into longer units, refurb, fix the loo's, improve interior mobile signal, hopefully roll out technologies to improve seat booking via smart phones or online for season ticket holders. That's the main gripes fixed. Made possible in the early days by released units made possible by the 800/801 fleet, then ultimately replacing the old displaced units with new EMU's on XC's wired routes, gradually redeploying the Voyager fleet as wiring continues.

This actually, coupled with a cascade of redundant Voyagers to less long distance routes where their acceleration and speed can be of use.

Also if they hadn't replace loco haul and HSTs

From my view it isn’t that they replaced these things at all, change is a good thing, BUT it is the fact they replaced them with a less good passenger journey experience offered in less comfort which slightly annoys me. It is worth pointing out that there seems to be a qualitative difference between the VT and XC units with the VT ones being much better. Oddly my gripes are with the XC trains NOT the Virgin ones. This is perhaps coloured by the relatively short distance VT travel (MK – London/ MK – Crewe) rather than the long distance XC travel I do.

Finally for all of you lovers of these trains let me present the following evidence for the prosecution:

Birmingham – Darlington, 1730 on a Friday evening. Only space available was standing (well more like pinned) next to the disabled toilet and a bin (with first almost empty!) on a 4 car train breathing in anothers cooked pooh fumes for several hours. All for about £70. You reckon that is a good thing do you? Defend that! That was the final straw for me as far as XC and the Voyager is concerned. No more.

 

[pemma]

Not sure about that. Think I'd rather spend four hours on a well maintained 156.

A 156 is nosier and slower but then I accept some people prefer opening windows to air conditioning. The air conditioning on Voyagers seems to be a lot more reliable than the air conditioning on 158s.

 

[DarloRich]

A 156 is nosier and slower but then I accept some people prefer opening windows to air conditioning. The air conditioning on Voyagers seems to be a lot more reliable than the air conditioning on 158s.

I forgot to add Aircon/heating to my list of good points. I am indebted to the learned gentleman

 

[yorksrob]

A 156 is nosier and slower but then I accept some people prefer opening windows to air conditioning. The air conditioning on Voyagers seems to be a lot more reliable than the air conditioning on 158s.

That's true. The 158's are decent enough, but the air conditioning is an issue and the "hi-tec" toilets are a pain to be honest.

 

[chris89]

Length- far too short for long distance trains
Far too busy and therefore cramped
Sewage smell ( see below) WHY have XC not solved this when Virgin have at least improved the issue?
Comfort. Poor in my view, certainly not as good as the trains they replaced
Catering – I know the sensible passengers purchase before boarding but on a long journey (see below) your supplies can become exhausted and need replenishing. The trolley is not great sadly.

Leg room seems very stingy
Seats that seemed designed to cut the circulation to your legs off after exactly 90 minutes

Agree about length that they are.
Sewage again agree with that about XC ones, Come across that issue more with VT's 390s then there 221s.
Comfort: Depends where about you sit really.
Catering: Only applies to XC. But could be also improved on VT services as well though.
Leg Room/ Seats. I seem to get lucky some of the time with leg room, but do agree it is stingy (Unless Priority seats) Seats also agree to for an extent. One reason i get up and walk down the train a bit.

I find it funny that supporters try to defend these train on the basis that even though they are used on long journeys they are ok for short ones! Does that not strike you as a failure? Should they not be good for both long and short journeys?

Not sure when you go but they are often rammed all day. After about 2000 they tend to empty out away from the core section and be tolerable within the core. They aren't long enough though

No let’s not! They are useful trains that, in my view, are simply unsuitable for the routes they work. Let’s learn the lesson from these trains and make sure that the next trains are specified to a decent passenger comfort standard and are of a suitable length for long distance services and the current Voyager trains find a use on less long distance services.

I would consider traveling between Wolverhampton - Edinburgh or to Glasgow as a long journey, one i do at least once or twice a month. I have also traveled the similar journey with XC and i found that horrible due to the length off it and the trains used.

Going by using for short journeys i go by for what i see myself. Between Crewe - Preston on most services i go on. In which between those it gets extremely busy no matter the time of day.

But yes would consider it to be a failure, but with the time table plans that were to be done with Operation Princess would have rid that partly.

When i travel on them it is mostly Mid-day Fridays or later on Thursdays and seem to get rather busy and 8:52 departure from Edinburgh. Only the latter is ever empty until about Carlisle or Lancaster. The worst ever 221 journey i have had. Is when a 11 Car 390 had to swap over to a 10 car Voyager at Carlisle. With that train nearly being full with Rail replacement bus services two years ago and people with the inability to move down the carriage.

Yes will admit on the services i now use more and more 390s are used which is better for the type of journey though. To London on a 221 is horrible from Birmingham New Street.

I also find it funny that many people saying the Voyager is fine have said they have only travelled on one once or twice!

That happens the other way with people saying they are horrible trains as well though. So not just unique for people saying they are good.

 

[The Ham]

Birmingham – Darlington, 1730 on a Friday evening. Only space available was standing (well more like pinned) next to the disabled toilet and a bin (with first almost empty!) on a 4 car train breathing in anothers cooked pooh fumes for several hours. All for about £70. You reckon that is a good thing do you? Defend that! That was the final straw for me as far as XC and the Voyager is concerned. No more.

I would argue that is more to do with the lack of units and the way the TOC's use them than to do with the train itself. If it had been a 221 rather than a 220 there would have been about 50 more seats (all in standard) which would have improved things (may not have saved everyone from cooked pooh smells but a step in the right direction).

I would argue that lack of units could have been solved a little sooner if the DfT hadn't messed up the franchises. As even with the 2017 end date for the lease agreements ICWC could have sub leased 221's to XC once they had their new trains if the XC franchise which was due to start within the year required extra 22x's.

 

[fowler9]

I think the main problem with them (Apart from the fact they are ugly and smell) isn't the design, its that there aren't enough of them. This is all down to the way the railways have been privatised and also the limitations of multiple units (Whilst they also have advantages).

 

[glbotu]

I think another major non-train related problem with them is the fact that they have to operate as "dual service" trains, much like TPE's 185s. They provide for major inter-city flows, Leeds - Birmingham, Bristol - York etc, but also for what are essentially long-distance commuter routes, Durham/Morpeth - Newcastle, SW England Locals, Sheffield - Leeds.

It seems a genuine problem in a lot of the country that services which should really be local commuter/regional services get lumped in with major inter-city services. For all the shorter routes specified above, something like a 350 would be a more appropriate train, where an HST-type train (IEP/Pendo/HST) should deal with the shorter ones. Unfortunately, that isn't currently feasible, due to lack of track capacity, so XC have to deal with this awkward mix of services.

Which actually leads to why 220s/221s have such perceived failings as trains.

1. They need to cater for a mix of services.
2. They are classed as inter-city services.
3. To not be considered PIXC*, everyone must have a seat.
4. More people want to get on trains for the shorter commuter flows.
5. It costs money to build trains. It costs more money to build longer trains.

Which results in trains with a very high seating density, hence less legroom, very intensive service, no seats line up with windows.

Voyagers!!!!!

* Passengers In eXcess of Capacity

 

[The Planner]

If PIXC was used as a measurement of the quality of trains then everything commuter based is going to fail. PIXC is only solved by either more trains or longer ones, it wouldn't solve the 220/1 issues that people have with them.

 

[quantinghome]

Agree with many of the points made. I would add that the internal layout is very inefficient. The inclusion of accessible toilets in every carriage significantly reduces space. Even with high density seating there are still fewer seats than a Mark 3 carriage. The above-seat luggage racks are not able to carry larger luggage, and there's little space elsewhere.

Overall they are OK, but disappointing for modern stock. I have mostly used XC, but on the few occasions I've been on a meridian it seems lessons were learned.

 

[The Ham]

Agree with many of the points made. I would add that the internal layout is very inefficient. The inclusion of accessible toilets in every carriage significantly reduces space. Even with high density seating there are still fewer seats than a Mark 3 carriage. The above-seat luggage racks are not able to carry larger luggage, and there's little space elsewhere.

Overall they are OK, but disappointing for modern stock. I have mostly used XC, but on the few occasions I've been on a meridian it seems lessons were learned.

Lessons do appear to have been learned as the specification for the trains under IEP could be summed up as "not like a Voyager" for many items.