East Midlands Trains, their C158s are excellent, but their Meridians absolute c**p ?

[Bungle]

In fact some people who want to work on trains put in strong complaints if their reserved seat has been doubled booked or if the seat reservation has failed meaning they don't get a proper table and they say things like they can't work at a flip down table and they've lost two hours worth of working time.

"Diddums" is the first word that springs to mind.

I wish the designs of seat-back tables were better as much as the next person - one only has to look at some continental trains to see the difference between them and the pathetic little flap you get on most UK stock. "Strong complaints", though? I was under the impression that the primary objective of train travel is transport from one place to another place; the provision of space to double as a mobile office surely must come secondary. And if it's that important, these people should pay the extra and travel in first class, where tables are pretty much always provided.

Yes it's nice to have space to put your laptop, papers etc, but you wouldn't expect it on a bus, coach or aeroplane so why should you have a divine right to it on a train?

(Of course, complaining about double-booking of seats and knackered seat reservation systems I completely understand.)

 

[HITMAN]

It also remains a fact that stating facts in that way is just what the MD of Virgin Trains would like you to do as you're not stating the full facts.

The full facts are:
1. When HSTs were in operation the number of peak time seats on VT were grossly insufficient which led to many people driving to a station further away or taking another operator's service e.g. going across to Sheffield and taking Midland Mainline.
2. HSTs were unreliable with Virgin and were very frequently late or cancelled which led to a reduction in passenger numbers as people didn't want to travel with Virgin unless they had to.
3. Virgin have taken the paths of other operators' local services so more people are travelling on Pendolinos for short distances than was the case when the HSTs were in operation. They've also removed pick-up and set-down restrictions to encourage local passengers to use the Pendolinos.
4. Virgin also took the North Western Trains London paths so are taking passengers from places like Rochdale, Blackpool and Newton-le-Willows who would previously have got a direct service with another operator.
5. The long term WCML engineering works put a lot of people off travelling for a period so a return to normal patronage was seen as an increase in passenger numbers.
6. Virgin reduced the price of advance tickets to get more passengers to travel - reducing the price of train tickets is very rare in the UK.

Also remember that the Pendolinos were brought in to travel at 140mph, but due to the WCML track improvements going over budget they are limited to 125mph. Had the intention been to bring the line speed to 125mph all along it could have been done for non-tilting trains meaning all the reasons about small windows didn't need to apply.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Most of those people would want to be at a proper table not a flip down table and some without a seat reservation actually ask the TM to find them a seat at a proper table on boarding. (The seats around the proper tables are all aligned with the windows and get full view.) In fact some people who want to work on trains put in strong complaints if their reserved seat has been doubled booked or if the seat reservation has failed meaning they don't get a proper table and they say things like they can't work at a flip down table and they've lost two hours worth of working time.

I'm not sure where your comming from about HST's, Virgins main stock before 390's was class 86,87 and 90 locomotives.
You also have to consider that a lot of stops were removed upon the introduction of the new stock, with many passengers being moved onto LM services, so that should roughly cancel out the extra passengers around Manchester.

You have to be having a laugh if you think that a non-tilting train would match the timings achieved by the 390's, when the class 90 is used its slower than a pendo because it can't traverse the corners as fast.

I think people can probably survive it to be honest

 

[Greenback]

"Diddums" is the first word that springs to mind.

I wish the designs of seat-back tables were better as much as the next person - one only has to look at some continental trains to see the difference between them and the pathetic little flap you get on most UK stock. "Strong complaints", though? I was under the impression that the primary objective of train travel is transport from one place to another place; the provision of space to double as a mobile office surely must come secondary. And if it's that important, these people should pay the extra and travel in first class, where tables are pretty much always provided.

Yes it's nice to have space to put your laptop, papers etc, but you wouldn't expect it on a bus, coach or aeroplane so why should you have a divine right to it on a train?

Because until relatively recently people had a view, plenty of room, a table and luggage storage on trains. Incidentally, the last time I flew the chap in front of me wa ssuing his laptop on the pull down table, evidnetly he expected to be able to have a table.

What about the principle of giving your customers what they want, rather than what you tell them they can have? If you take your argument a bit further, why bother having seats or windows at all? We can still transport people from A to B in a windowless truck, just like in the 1800's. After all, the American hobos seem to find it acceptable enough, judgin by Hollywood movies.

 

[yorksrob]

You're not the only one! I use the MML fairly regularly, and I've heard comments on numerous occasions from other passengers (usually commuters in suits) remarking about the half-a*sed refurb. "Tatty" is one word I've heard more than once.

Well, that’s an interesting point, although it’s difficult to love any train when you have to travel on it day in - day out.

My first point is that many of us who travel regularly on the Midland Main Line are actually relieved that the more traditional seating arrangements have been retained. I know I’m not the only one who prefers the Mk3 style seating to other harder, more tombstone like seats (although admittedly having bright red seats is IMO from an aesthetic point of view thoroughly tasteless).

Secondly, if passengers don’t have a divine right to space, why do they have a divine right to new seating? I think passengers should have a right to a certain level of cleanliness, comfort and punctuality - afterall, that’s what they’re paying for, but I don’t think that automatically extends to new kit - at least until the original is life expired (and no, the HST’s are not life expired yet)

"Yes it's nice to have space to put your laptop, papers etc, but you wouldn't expect it on a bus, coach or aeroplane so why should you have a divine right to it on a train?

Well, I suppose they don’t. But bear in mind, long distance routes such as London - Scotland are a very competitive market. Even the Pendelino has difficulty competing with airlines on speed, as well as with road transport on privacy (and in some cases price). A pleasant travelling environment where passengers aren’t wedged in like sardines and have a nice view could potentially be a major selling point for these routes, and space is very important for the business traveller - including those not high up the corperate ladder enough to pay 1st class fares..

 

[Geezertronic]

You have to be having a laugh if you think that a non-tilting train would match the timings achieved by the 390's, when the class 90 is used its slower than a pendo because it can't traverse the corners as fast.

Which is why the Class 90-Mk3-DVT set only ever replaces a Pendolino on the EUS-BHM route

 

[Justin Smith]

The Pendo lines in Italy have a maximum tilt of 6 degrees, the 390 here does 8. The Czech Pendo class also does 8 and has the same design as our 390. So it does require the thick window pillars - there is no escaping that fact. Also remember continental trains build to a larger gauge profile - it doesn't surprise me the seats were more comfortable!!

So why did the original APT have perfectly acceptable size windows/window pillars ?
On the Italian Pendolinos there is a picture of one (ironically in the book "APT A Promise Unfulfilled", on page 97) tilting at 9 degrees.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

An interesting point, and one that to my mind is counter-productive to your argument. I think that the importance of having good, large windows in trains is highlighted better than anywhere else on the Underground - even though most of the time there isn't anything to see out of the windows, the trains are still designed with a lot of large windows - more so even than normal trains!

People like to 'feel' that they can see out - if you read Christian Wolmar's book on the history of the Underground, some of the early tubes didn't have any proper windows as it was felt that they weren't necessary because the trains were underground, and these trains were so off-putting and unpopular with passengers that soon afterwards they were withdrawn/extensively modified so that even though they had no 'overground' portion of their route people could see out.

I genuinely do believe a large glass area is very important in creating a pleasant atmosphere.

Agree with you competely.
Incidentally the original underground trains with the minute windows were so unpopular they became known as "padded cells", see picture here.

 

[Geezertronic]

if you read Christian Wolmar's book on the history of the Underground...

Personally, I think the guy talks out of his rear too much

I genuinely do believe a large glass area is very important in creating a pleasant atmosphere.

Does that apply to planes too?

 

[Pumbaa]

So why did the original APT have perfectly acceptable size windows/window pillars ?
On the Italian Pendolinos there is a picture of one (ironically in the book "APT A Promise Unfulfilled", on page 97) tilting at 9 degrees.

See my correction post - no Pendolino tilts at more than 8 degrees now in Italy, previously they could up to 13.5.

And having looked up the Italian pendos, the pillar widths are the same (within 6cm) as the 390s from ETR460 onwards, and the basic bodyshell is the same as is the construction from the ETR480 onwards, bar the 390 being more circular to fit into our loading guage.

Thus any Pendo you travelled on in Italy has the same pillar width (to within 6cm) as the 390, as the only Pendos left in operation today in Italy have the characteristics outlined above.

Unfortunately I am still unable to find details on exact pillar width.

Source - Alstom Paper: Technological Responses to Tilt; Alstoms approach past and present (2006).

 

[Oswyntail]

.....Does that apply to planes too?

Yes - there are few experiences more unpleasant than travelling by plane

 

[sprinterguy]

Originally Posted by HITMAN
You have to be having a laugh if you think that a non-tilting train would match the timings achieved by the 390's, when the class 90 is used its slower than a pendo because it can't traverse the corners as fast.

The main reason that the Pretendolino loses time on Pendolino timings is because the 90 can only do 110mph, compared to the Pendos 125mph. But I agree that the Pendos speed up journey times through tilting in comparison to a non tilting 125mph schedule.

I would be curious to know though why it was acceptable to have a relatively large expanse of glass in the driving cars of the APT when compared to the Pendolino, I suppose safety specs have been tightened since the late 70s (plus the 390s use the standard Italian Pendolino window pillar dimensions as mentioned above). I really dislike the poor seat to window arrangement on Voyagers and Pendolinos (to the extent where I will travel first class 90% of the time when with Virgin), but the design has proved it's worth with the rigidity of the bodyshell it creates, as seen in the Tebay accident.

 

[Pumbaa]

The main reason that the Pretendolino loses time on Pendolino timings is because the 90 can only do 110mph, compared to the Pendos 125mph. But I agree that the Pendos speed up journey times through tilting in comparison to a non tilting 125mph schedule.

Trains can only do 125mph on the WCML if they tilt. If non-tilting, max speed is 110. So there is no such thing as a "non tilting 125mph schedule".

 

[HITMAN]

The main reason that the Pretendolino loses time on Pendolino timings is because the 90 can only do 110mph, compared to the Pendos 125mph. But I agree that the Pendos speed up journey times through tilting in comparison to a non tilting 125mph schedule.

I would be curious to know though why it was acceptable to have a relatively large expanse of glass in the driving cars of the APT when compared to the Pendolino, I suppose safety specs have been tightened since the late 70s (plus the 390s use the standard Italian Pendolino window pillar dimensions as mentioned above). I really dislike the poor seat to window arrangement on Voyagers and Pendolinos (to the extent where I will travel first class 90% of the time when with Virgin), but the design has proved it's worth with the rigidity of the bodyshell it creates, as seen in the Tebay accident.

I guess the only other option would have been to make the pillars out of something extremely strong like titanium or carbon fibre, but that would enourmously increase the cost of it. The APT was a strong design, the trouble is it had a problem working in practice, like the brakes were supposed to decellarate it from 155mph in existing signal lengths, but in practice they failed to do so.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Originally Posted by Daimler
I genuinely do believe a large glass area is very important in creating a pleasant atmosphere.

Does that apply to planes too?

Yes - ambience and view are the reasons why Boeing are making a major point of their new 787 having much larger windows than on any previous airliner...


On the subject of the 390s; if I can't find a forward facing window seat free, I'll just stand in the vestible even if there are plenty of non-window ( or rear facing ) seats available. And from a personal point of view I'd rather take 6 hours to go from Euston to Glasgow in a Mk3 than do the trip in 4½ hours in a 390.

The tilt - I don't really enjoy that, especially on the reverse curvey sections - I find the strong sideways force you used to get on the Mk3s much more comfortable than the sudden up and down changes.

 

[Geezertronic]

On the subject of the 390s; if I can't find a forward facing window seat free, I'll just stand in the vestible even if there are plenty of non-window ( or rear facing ) seats available.

That's a bit extreme and sounds a bit illogical, what's the reason for that and is it a Pendolino thing or a train thing in general?

And from a personal point of view I'd rather take 6 hours to go from Euston to Glasgow in a Mk3 than do the trip in 4½ hours in a 390.

You want the ECML not the WCML then

The tilt - I don't really enjoy that, especially on the reverse curvey sections - I find the strong sideways force you used to get on the Mk3s much more comfortable than the sudden up and down changes.

I only notice the tilt when in the lead car, when not in the lead car it's quite enjoyable

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Geezer, it's a travel thing in general - I just hate facing the rear when I'm on the move. ( And yes - I do change seats during reversals unless it's only for a few minutes followed by a second reversal! ).

Edited to add: And just to be clear, it just so happens that ( excluding peak hour services in and out of Waterloo and Victoria ) about 95% the times I can't get a decent window seat and resort to the vestible it's on a 390, so I suppose in that sense it really is just a Pendo thing isn't it? And before anyone asks, yes - I'm fully aware that I'm standing in the crumple zone when I do that.


Yes - although I found the Mk4s much better with their original seats; although those were hard at least they were a better shape and matched the windows better!

In fact, I nowadays always use the Sleeper to get to and from Scotland anyway, although in the past I have done a lot of daytime trips on both the ECMl and WCML. I have only once done the full WCML in a 390, and that was only because there was no Sleeper berth available and we absolutely had to travel that day. Still had the sleeper northbound a few days earlier, though.


For feeling the 390 tilt - I notice it quite heavily even from the middle of the train, whether I'm looking out of the window or not.

 

[TomE]

Just to swing back on to topic for a moment, over the last year I've become a frequent EMT user between London and Sheffield. I've travelled on both refurbed HST and Meridan and have to say I now try and make sure I'm always on the later.

Because I can always book well in advance I always travel 1st (at £17 I don't understand why more don't!) and I find the interior fine and the seats much more suited to me than those in the MK.3. Yes there is engine noise but I don’t find it that intrusive and after a while you don't notice it anyway.

As for the service, it has always been nothing short of excellent. Tea is regularly topped up and apart from weekends I’ve always had at seat service which is great.

At the end of the day I guess it all comes down to personal preference, and not everyone will feel the same, but give me a 222 over almost any other stock on the network today!

Tom.

 

[Justin Smith]

See my correction post - no Pendolino tilts at more than 8 degrees now in Italy, previously they could up to 13.5.

And having looked up the Italian pendos, the pillar widths are the same (within 6cm) as the 390s from ETR460 onwards, and the basic bodyshell is the same as is the construction from the ETR480 onwards, bar the 390 being more circular to fit into our loading guage.

Thus any Pendo you travelled on in Italy has the same pillar width (to within 6cm) as the 390, as the only Pendos left in operation today in Italy have the characteristics outlined above.

Unfortunately I am still unable to find details on exact pillar width.

Source - Alstom Paper: Technological Responses to Tilt; Alstoms approach past and present (2006).

"Within 6cm", that's over 2in, a not insignificant figure.
And what about the height of the windows ?
Whatever the answers to these questions how does it explain away the fact that the Pendolinos only have 53% of the window area of the original APT ?
I travelled on an ETR470 in Italy just over 4 years ago, and I had no complaints about it.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

"Diddums" is the first word that springs to mind.

I wish the designs of seat-back tables were better as much as the next person - one only has to look at some continental trains to see the difference between them and the pathetic little flap you get on most UK stock. "Strong complaints", though? I was under the impression that the primary objective of train travel is transport from one place to another place; the provision of space to double as a mobile office surely must come secondary. And if it's that important, these people should pay the extra and travel in first class, where tables are pretty much always provided.

Yes it's nice to have space to put your laptop, papers etc, but you wouldn't expect it on a bus, coach or aeroplane so why should you have a divine right to it on a train?

(Of course, complaining about double-booking of seats and knackered seat reservation systems I completely understand.)

Trains, esp Inter City, are supposed to be more comfortable than cars or coaches, that's part of the reason they charge such extortionate fares.
Generally speaking I could drive to wherever I want to go with only me in the car for what I get charged for a turn up and go rail ticket.....
And when I'm in my car I don't have to listen to other peoples annoying personal stereos, or get a seat on a Northern C158 where I can only just get my knees to fit in, or get a seat on a Pendolino where I can't see out !
I sometimes think if I hadn't become a rail enthusiast as a kid I'd hardly ever travel by train these days.
The ironic thing is that the modern TOCs would never allow the sort of stuff which helped get me interested in railways (explained on the York Depot link below) !

 

[Daimler]

"Diddums" is the first word that springs to mind.

I wish the designs of seat-back tables were better as much as the next person - one only has to look at some continental trains to see the difference between them and the pathetic little flap you get on most UK stock. "Strong complaints", though? I was under the impression that the primary objective of train travel is transport from one place to another place; the provision of space to double as a mobile office surely must come secondary. And if it's that important, these people should pay the extra and travel in first class, where tables are pretty much always provided.

Yes it's nice to have space to put your laptop, papers etc, but you wouldn't expect it on a bus, coach or aeroplane so why should you have a divine right to it on a train?

(Of course, complaining about double-booking of seats and knackered seat reservation systems I completely understand.)

Huh? One of the main reasons business people - who don't by any stretch of the imagination always travel in first - travel by train is precisely because they feel that they can work on the move - it's one of rail's main selling points!

 

[MCR247]

I travelled on an ETR470 in Italy just over 4 years ago, and I had no complaints about it.

These windows look familiar, I wonder where from? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/CIS_VE_SL.jpg

 

[Pumbaa]

"Within 6cm", that's over 2in, a not insignificant figure.
And what about the height of the windows ?
Whatever the answers to these questions how does it explain away the fact that the Pendolinos only have 53% of the window area of the original APT ?
I travelled on an ETR470 in Italy just over 4 years ago, and I had no complaints about it.

Because a 390 is a damn sight safer than a 370! Put the two together in a high-speed crash, and you can guarantee which ones going to come out in one piece. And it isn't the APT.

I don't have the window specs to hand, but they look a little higher than 390. That'll probably be because the continental loading gauge is bigger, as I've said and others have said countless times before on this thread.

If you want bigger windows on the Pendos, kindly fork out the dosh to rebuild the WCML and then order continental gauge Pendolinos to boot.

 

[northwichcat]

I'm not sure where your comming from about HST's, Virgins main stock before 390's was class 86,87 and 90 locomotives.

I meant to say mk3s rather than HSTs.

You also have to consider that a lot of stops were removed upon the introduction of the new stock, with many passengers being moved onto LM services, so that should roughly cancel out the extra passengers around Manchester.

You're referring to LM who didn't exist at the time are you meaning after the VHF introduction or do you mean on to CT and Silverlink services that have been transferred to VT?

Blackpool-London passengers would be joining Glasgow/Lancaster to London services.

I'm not sure if you're looking at stats for all Virgin's services, all their London services or just their 390 services. If it includes Holyhead/Chester to London services (mostly 221 operated) this includes a large number of passengers taken from ATW (around 50% of passengers travelling between Chester and Crewe. The 221s have much larger windows than 390s.

Some of Virgin's removing stops has meant faster services which makes the train a more attractive option.

You have to be having a laugh if you think that a non-tilting train would match the timings achieved by the 390's, when the class 90 is used its slower than a pendo because it can't traverse the corners as fast.

That isn't what I said. The WCML improvements were all done on the basis of running 140mph tilting trains and then because of budget problems they just tried to get tilting trains to do 125mph. Had they just tried to increase the line speed to 125mph for all types of intercity trains they probably could have achieved it on the same budget.

The tilting is only a real advantage on the WCML which has special speed limits for tilting trains. Could a 390 do London-Paris faster than a 373? Only if the 373 broke down.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

These windows look familiar, I wonder where from? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/CIS_VE_SL.jpg

I'll say something - that front end is a vastly better looking design than the one on the 390s.

 

[HITMAN]

I meant to say mk3s rather than HSTs.



You're referring to LM who didn't exist at the time are you meaning after the VHF introduction or do you mean on to CT and Silverlink services that have been transferred to VT?

Blackpool-London passengers would be joining Glasgow/Lancaster to London services.

Well Yes okay, it wasn't always LM, but it is now which was what I was meaning. For example only one peak Hour train doing Euston - MK to discourage usage as a commuter train. Similarly the withdrawring of the Trent Valley VT services.
I assume the Blackpool - London services would have stopped at Preston, meaning that a significant number of people who would use the service to go Blackpool - Preston will no longer do so. This I think therefore will cancel out the extra users in areas such as Manchester to Crewe.

I'm not sure if you're looking at stats for all Virgin's services, all their London services or just their 390 services. If it includes Holyhead/Chester to London services (mostly 221 operated) this includes a large number of passengers taken from ATW (around 50% of passengers travelling between Chester and Crewe. The 221s have much larger windows than 390s.

Some of Virgin's removing stops has meant faster services which makes the train a more attractive option.

I'm looking at figures for the Franchise.
Indeed they did, but in admitting that by removing stops and making the services therefore faster you must also conceed that by increasing significantly the journey times by upgrades and new trains the service becomes more attractive.

That isn't what I said. The WCML improvements were all done on the basis of running 140mph tilting trains and then because of budget problems they just tried to get tilting trains to do 125mph. Had they just tried to increase the line speed to 125mph for all types of intercity trains they probably could have achieved it on the same budget.

The tilting is only a real advantage on the WCML which has special speed limits for tilting trains. Could a 390 do London-Paris faster than a 373? Only if the 373 broke down.

I don't think they could have done at all, they managed it on the ECML because its much straighter for a much greater length, from Stevenage to just south of Darlington is almost all suitable for 125mph running because the track is generally very straight. However on the WCML even though normal IC trains might be able to get 125mph on places like the trent valley for a minute or so without massive expense to reallign curves and essentially rebuild the line normal trains would face significantly lower speed restrictions in many places. The average speed for a class 87 on the WCML was 75mph.

No, of course it couldn't but since we are talking about the WCML I don't see how thats relevant. HS1 doesn't have loads of sharp curves in it, the WCML does.

 

[northwichcat]

I assume the Blackpool - London services would have stopped at Preston, meaning that a significant number of people who would use the service to go Blackpool - Preston will no longer do so.

Blackpool-London was a North Western Trains service that called at Preston to set-down only on southbound journeys and pick-up only on northbound services. So yes it would have carried passengers between Blackpool and Preston. However, as it did not take passengers between Preston and London there must have been enough passengers for London from other stations who would now travel on Virgin instead, otherwise the service would have stopped running well before Virgin wanted the extra paths.

 

[HITMAN]

Blackpool-London was a North Western Trains service that called at Preston to set-down only on southbound journeys and pick-up only on northbound services. So yes it would have carried passengers between Blackpool and Preston. However, as it did not take passengers between Preston and London there must have been enough passengers for London from other stations who would now travel on Virgin instead, otherwise the service would have stopped running well before Virgin wanted the extra paths.

I see, at the end of the day though the VHF timetable gave significantly more capacity on the WCML and yet VT are having to take measures to prevent overcrowding, they aren't facing a problem getting people to use their trains like in other areas

 

[ChrisCooper]

I love how people always use the "Pendolinos are so safe" arguments. They have been in one accident, and in general terms it wasn't that bad. The ATP was never in a single crash, so how can we know how it would perform? Remember, up until very recently the Mk3 was regarded as ultra safe, now all of a sudden it's this awful deathtrap that will disintegrate in even the most minor accidents. Remember that until Clapham nobody had second thoughts about the Mk1's safety, in fact they were a big improvement on what went before. Mk3s have survived high speed derailments like that at Grayrigg. Ever heard of Colwich, two trains colliding with a closing speed of around 100mph and only one person killed (the driver). The trains were formed of Mk1, Mk2 and Mk3 coaches.

To be honest, a bigger factor in the survivability of Greyrigg compared to other similar accidents was probably not the structural strength of the train, but the interior design, reducing injuries from people flying around in the derail carriages. The small windows might have played a roll too, reducing the chance of ejection, but I'd much rarther have big windows and take the risk given the highly unlikely chance of being in an accident where I might get ejected from the train. Trains are very safe. If you commuted to work every day on Mk1 EMUs you were more likely to be killed crossing the road outside the station than on the train. Don't worry about it and just relax and enjoy the ride, whatever type of train it is. The chances are not a single member of this site will ever be involved in any kind of rail accident, let alone a serious one.

 

[Greenback]

On balance, I would rather have bigger windows and a slighlty greater chance of ejection should I be in an accident.

 

[northwichcat]

they aren't facing a problem getting people to use their trains like in other areas

Is it East Coast you're referring to there?

Certainly Northern, Merseyrail, TPE and XC aren't struggling to get passengers with the exception of parliamentary trains in Northern's case.

 

[Pumbaa]

The ATP was never in a single crash, so how can we know how it would perform? Remember, up until very recently the Mk3 was regarded as ultra safe, now all of a sudden it's this awful deathtrap that will disintegrate in even the most minor accidents.

To be honest, a bigger factor in the survivability of Greyrigg compared to other similar accidents was probably not the structural strength of the train, but the interior design, reducing injuries from people flying around in the derail carriages. The small windows might have played a roll too, reducing the chance of ejection, but I'd much rarther have big windows and take the risk given the highly unlikely chance of being in an accident where I might get ejected from the train.

One factor identified by RAIB was window integrity - flying glass was nil in Grayrigg. In Grayrigg, you're correct in saying that the structural strength of the train wasn't tested much, but it has been in other cases. My basis for 390 vs APT argument was that the APT carriages were based on Mk2f coaches, adapted for tilting and share a lot with early Mk3 designs, before the first production Mk3s were altered before construction in 1975.

With modern production and design, the 390 cars are designed from scratch to be as safe as possible, and have the highest possible integrity at impact. There's a film floating around somewhere of a computer simulated 250mph impact between two 390s that Alstom showed off at a press do, an addition to sideways topples; I'll see if a journo or else has access to it. Needless to say, the results looked impressive.

One last point is the recent accidents a) at Wembley and b) Oxley. In both cases, the damage has been cosmetic to 390s and the replacement of underfloor kit and protection, and the biggest factor behind their lengthy re-entry into traffic was time taken to certify structural integrity; the bodies are impressive pieces of kit that take a long time to give the all OK for. As we speak, the remaining coach E is being refitted with new underfloor equipment and tidies.

 

[Failed Unit]

I see, at the end of the day though the VHF timetable gave significantly more capacity on the WCML and yet VT are having to take measures to prevent overcrowding, they aren't facing a problem getting people to use their trains like in other areas

Please enlighten me. I tend to find loadings on east coast higher. In fact I have never seen a pendo half full. Super voyager maybe.