Is passenger comfort on trains getting increasingly worse?

[Confused147]

Toilets on trains make very uncomfortable travelling especially voyagers. Never use them because I hate the electronic door locking, the flushing mechanism & the cheap hard and crispy paper provided. Why cant they be like your home toilet?

 

[gazthomas]

Don't forget that failures are less likely now too, so no matter how uncomfortable you are you have a good chance of getting where you're planning to!

 

[Clansman]

Bad For Comfort

• Trains without openable windows

How is this bad for comfort exactly?

 

[ooo]

Toilets on trains make very uncomfortable travelling especially voyagers. Never use them because I hate the electronic door locking, the flushing mechanism & the cheap hard and crispy paper provided. Why cant they be like your home toilet?

I imagine the flush uses considerably less water meaning that the tanks fill up slower and so the toilets are less likely to be out of use. In terms of toilet paper on voyagers today at least it seemed perfectly normal and not hard or crispy

 

[Failed Unit]

If all those who dont like modern coaches stopped using them, the resultant decline in passenger numbers would mean we could all have a window seat at a table

Some of us don’t have a choice. Resign from our jobs because we don’t like the new trains is a bit excessive.

Going back to the 1980s and early 90s some I remember.

1st gen DMU to class 150/1 sprinter. Bad passengers complained about noise and uncomfortable seats. (The 150/2 was considered better with the Ashbourne’s)
1st gen DMU with 156. Good change.
Loco haul with 158. Mixed viewpoints. People didnt like the seats on the 158.
Mk4 replacement of Mk3. People didn’t like the ride on the mk4. The threw people around more than the mk3s (some even said worse than a pacer) mixed views on seats. (No change)

153 introduction. Disliked. Loss of capacity.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

• 
  How is this bad for comfort exactly?

Inability to control the temperature around your own seat if it feels too hot or too cold for you. Also, a lack of fresh air: Air from air conditioners can sometimes smell quite stale (though not everyone notices this). Some people probably don't care or don't notice, but I know one or two people who do notice and find trains without openable windows quite unpleasant for that reason.

 

[bramling]

But you wouldn't claim either of these trains had decent leg room.
It seems to be either one thing or the other, not both at the same time (in standard anyhow).

I wouldn’t say legroom in the Turbos is bad, certainly for a commuter unit. 158s I agree are very poor, although that is partly because the seats are so bulky.

Can add any Networker to the list of trains with good window alignment- in fact Networkers are pretty much perfect on that regard.

Some builds of Electrostat aren’t bad either.

 

[Malcolmffc]

Inability to control the temperature around your own seat if it feels too hot or too cold for you. Also, a lack of fresh air: Air from air conditioners can sometimes smell quite stale (though not everyone notices this). Some people probably don't care or don't notice, but I know one or two people who do notice and find trains without openable windows quite unpleasant for that reason.

Why should the whole train have to sit on unbearable heat because a few people don’t like the way it smells?

Currently I have to travel on class 455s, from the supposedly “golden age” of BR. They’re unbearable in the summer whenever there’s a hot day and also noisy. Can’t wait for their modern replacements. A harder seat is a price worth paying for not coming home in sweat.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Why should the whole train have to sit on unbearable heat because a few people don’t like the way it smells?

Ummm, I'm not sure you quite understood my posts. I did not, and would not, ask for there to be no air conditioning. I merely expressed the opinion that it's better if windows can be opened (as well) when passengers want, so they can get fresh air.

 

[yorksrob]

Why should the whole train have to sit on unbearable heat because a few people don’t like the way it smells?

Currently I have to travel on class 455s, from the supposedly “golden age” of BR. They’re unbearable in the summer whenever there’s a hot day and also noisy. Can’t wait for their modern replacements. A harder seat is a price worth paying for not coming home in sweat.

The Golden age of BR rolling stock was actually the preceding 35 years to the 455's, when you would have been able to enjoy the far superior 4SUB's.

 

[Malcolmffc]

Ummm, I'm not sure you quite understood my posts. I did not, and would not, ask for there to be no air conditioning. I merely expressed the opinion that it's better if windows can be opened (as well) when passengers want, so they can get fresh air.

But there’s no point having air-con if the windows are open. And we all know that people are not going to put the comfort of the whole train over the desire to open a window just for themself.

 

[Goldfish62]

Air conditioning doesn't work in a non enclosed environment. It never has done and never will.

Having sealed windows allowing a quieter and more temperate interior environment is one of the biggest advances in terms of passenger comfort that the railways have made in recent decades IMO.

 

[Clip]

Ummm, I'm not sure you quite understood my posts. I did not, and would not, ask for there to be no air conditioning. I merely expressed the opinion that it's better if windows can be opened (as well) when passengers want, so they can get fresh air.

as has been pointed out that means air con doesn't work so wouldn't get added to the train when being built and what people don't realise that unless they open the window one seat in front of them then they don't feel the benefit at all as it goes to the seat behind. no thanks.

 

[Clip]

However - passenger comfort is very subjective and as this forum shows time and time again seats are very problematic and as such there is no one size pleases all answer to the question.

 

[fairlie]

I think there's a lot to be said for windows that can be opened by the train staff if the air conditioning has stopped working (like on 158s). I've often thought it would be good to have individual ventilation - like on a plane or coach - on a train. I sometimes find myself feeling a bit unwell on Pendolinos because of the tilt and being able to have some cool air would be nice!

 

[Dougal2345]

Air conditioning doesn't work in a non enclosed environment. It never has done and never will.

Having sealed windows allowing a quieter and more temperate interior environment is one of the biggest advances in terms of passenger comfort that the railways have made in recent decades IMO.

((not wanting to sound like a stuck record, but 'quieter' is open to debate when the air-conditioning roars like an industrial vacuum cleaner for the whole journey - viz. 444, 450...))

 

[broadgage]

I would agree that passenger comfort and facilities have generally worsened with each generation of new trains.
Restaurants have been replaced with buffets, buffets replaced by trolleys and trolleys replaced with nothing.
Full length trains have been replaced with shorter multiple units, thereby giving the flexibility to always run a train that is too short.
Seats at tables have been replaced largely with bus style seating.
Seats that align with windows have been replaced with ones that don't.
Locomotives or power cars have been/are being largely replaced by underfloor engines.

Another trend is the downgrading of old trains so as to manage expectations about new trains. As an example FGW HSTs had most of the tables removed in order to cram in more seats in a high density commuter layout. This allows the railway to state that the new DMUs have "more tables" which is factually correct if compared to a "modernised" HST.I can remember when almost all seats were at tables on intercity trains.

Lack of capacity should be addressed by infrastructure improvements to allow more or longer trains, and not by simply cramming more people into the same space.

 

[stut]

Ryanair's newest and refurbished aircraft have a seat pitch of 31", easyJet and BA's Airbii are moving towards 28"-29". It surprised me too - I was recently on one of Ryanair's newer jets and they are noticeably roomy and have a nicer atmosphere than competitors - beaten only by Norwegian's new 737s (with the same Sky design but a nicer interior), in my opinion.
Here's the best I could find on train seat space.. but the data is not very comparable. With most European short-haul flights at 1-2 hours, do Ryanair beat the TOCs?!

Seat pitch isn't the same as legroom: it's the cadence of the rows of seats, and so legroom is also affected by the depth of the seat itself. The slimline seats that BA and easyJet use do make the use of pitch as a comparison for legroom somewhat misleading.

That said, the 29" pitch on the BA A319s is awful. Worst of all is their 787-800s, though. 31" pitch and a 17.5" width on long-haul!

Agree that the new FR (bright yellow notwithstanding) and DY cabins are rather good.

 

[stut]

Having sealed windows allowing a quieter and more temperate interior environment is one of the biggest advances in terms of passenger comfort that the railways have made in recent decades IMO.

"Quiet" as a good thing is subjective, of course. The white noise from hopper windows can be a wonderful way to drown out unwanted earbud overspill or kids-on-full-volume-iPad-Peppa-Pig annoyances (or indeed to facilitate the projectile ejection of said annoyances).

 

[AlterEgo]

With the class 800s little priority has been put into passenger comfort. These trains are just as bad as the 220/221 Voyagers, that people have complained about for over 15 years.

No way are they that bad. For a start, the seats are better in both classes, and the overhead racks are enormous which will solve some luggage woes.

In standard class few seats line up with windows some seats have no view at all. Seats are hard, there is engine vibration in diesel mode

No, there is barely any vibration at all even in diesel mode.

the interior is very cold and spartan looking.

We can agree on this.

the seats were well padded and deep had decorative patterns and they always were next to a window and had a table.

...and had fewer seats.

There was even the choice of travelling in a compartment.

...which doesn't give nervous or vulnerable passengers the feeling of security or personal safety.

MK2 coaches offered smother ride quality and more comfy seats and later aircon.

The ride quality is definitely not better on a MkII than on a Pendolino or an 800, for example.

MK3 offered excellent smooth ride quality, soundproofing,

So does the 800 though - it is an exceptionally smooth train. As for ride quality, I have put on YouTube, in the last week, a video on the 800's first service run and one on the GWR Pullman ion a HST. Guess which one has more camera shake?

But looking from a train window is sadly something many passengers are now denied

Only a minority, and that's because trains are more popular than ever and we're asking them to carry more and more passengers.

 

[AlterEgo]

Toilets on trains make very uncomfortable travelling especially voyagers. Never use them because I hate the electronic door locking, the flushing mechanism & the cheap hard and crispy paper provided. Why cant they be like your home toilet?

Probably because they get used literally hundreds of times a day by people who aren't responsible for cleaning them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No way are they that bad. For a start, the seats are better in both classes, and the overhead racks are enormous which will solve some luggage woes.

I do love this - another myth busted. In the late 90s/early 2000s we were told two things - no more regular gangways and no more big overhead racks. Yet many of the EMUs and DMUs ordered in the last 5 years have had both gangways and larger racks and continue to do so.

So there's basically no excuse for the useless coat-racks on Turbostars, Electrostars and 175/180, then. Thought not

The ride quality is definitely not better on a MkII than on a Pendolino or an 800, for example.

The real ride quality benchmark for the BR era has to be the Class 158, which still rides better than most other stock on the network (221s and possibly 800s excepted). No BR era LHCS rode particularly well - Mk1s, well, are Mk1s, Mk2s had a characteristic vertical bounce over the bogies, Mk3s a side to side sway due to inadequate damping, and Mk4s, well, the least said about the appalling ride quality of those the better, the last time I had one of those at 125mph one particular bit of the ECML felt like we had come off and were bouncing along the ballast such was the vibration.

 

[Dougal2345]

The real ride quality benchmark for the BR era has to be the Class 158........

Am I unusual in that I rarely notice 'ride quality' when travelling? I remember in younger days how a 4-TC at the front of a train leaving London would bounce around in an exciting way at 90mph, but with modern stock it all seems much of a muchness to me.

Yesterday for example, I travelled by TGV, Eurostar (373) and 444, and whilst I could tell you a lot about the relative comforts of the journey, what kind of view I got through the windows, how stuffy or noisy it was, what the seats were like, I couldn't make any comparisons about ride quality. Maybe I have some kind of inner ear balance deficiency or something...

 

[bramling]

Air conditioning doesn't work in a non enclosed environment. It never has done and never will.

Having sealed windows allowing a quieter and more temperate interior environment is one of the biggest advances in terms of passenger comfort that the railways have made in recent decades IMO.

I’d go for opening windows any day. Too many experiences of air conditioning being either ineffective or non-operational altogether. Being stuck on a sealed train without air conditioning is completely unbearable, and is far far worse than one with no air conditioning but open windows.

 

[Wivenswold]

If the reaction of my arthritis to an hour on the train home is anything to go by....Mark 3s I usually need a minute or two to straighten up, Class 321, about 30 seconds and 360s up and away.

For softness and sinking into a seat (don't we all love that?) then reverse order in terms of comfort.

So there you have it, a scientific studio (well, of sorts). The seats that we find most relaxing are probably the ones that are worst for us.

 

[squizzler]

I do love this - another myth busted. In the late 90s/early 2000s we were told two things - no more regular gangways and no more big overhead racks. Yet many of the EMUs and DMUs ordered in the last 5 years have had both gangways and larger racks and continue to do so.

So there's basically no excuse for the useless coat-racks on Turbostars, Electrostars and 175/180, then. Thought not



The real ride quality benchmark for the BR era has to be the Class 158, which still rides better than most other stock on the network (221s and possibly 800s excepted). No BR era LHCS rode particularly well - Mk1s, well, are Mk1s, Mk2s had a characteristic vertical bounce over the bogies, Mk3s a side to side sway due to inadequate damping, and Mk4s, well, the least said about the appalling ride quality of those the better, the last time I had one of those at 125mph one particular bit of the ECML felt like we had come off and were bouncing along the ballast such was the vibration.

I agree with this, and the implication which is that rolling stock interiors hit a nadir during the noughties / early teen years of this century. I blame the TSI regulations which were wide ranging and demanding for train manufacturers. We seem to have reached a stage where manufacturers have learnt how to design quality interiors that comply with TSI's at long last. Apart from government specified stock (particularly, from what I hear, the 700's) I think we are back on an upwards curve for vehicle interiors.

 

[Wivenswold]

Strange how things get better when the DfT relinquishes a little control. It's like they haven't got a clue. Hmmm.

 

[LLivery]

Wow! If you are only 6 inches then you are travelling in luxury. Even higher seats must be even more difficult than years ago.

Whoops, I missed the 1. Definitely 6'1"

 

[physics34]

Said my piece on this many a time and in many thread.

Im not sure how often and by whom train journeys are 'tested' to be comfortable but they dont do a very good job. Theres needs to be a body to do a study through surveys and testing.

1, is air con NEEDED 365 days a year? The opening of windows actually is adequate for 90 % of the year and provides fresh air and can be satsfying on an average day. Can there be a way of having both?

2, Seating. This has been heavily discussed on this forum

3, announcements, chimes, alarms, train noise. IMO all 4 should be kept to an absolute minimum.... but this isnt the case and i believe these things make passengers 'edgy' just like a hot carriage or crowded carriage would. They are an irritant.

4, Asthetics. Lighting could be lowered at certain times. Are carpets a requirement..not really IMO. Colour schemes...the less garish the better. Abellios Greys and whites are quite mellow.

5, Toliets, there simply arent enough of them on long distance trains. The small toliets on many classes of stock are ridiculous. Toilets should not be right next to seating. I just think its an ettiquette issue.

6. First Class. Luxury within reason. Make people want to travel that way....dont treat it like providing it is a chore..ie " oh i suppose we better put an anticammaster on the seat.... its the least we need to do."
Seats and other fixtures can last decades...why be so tight with the costs...make it a luxury.

7. Ride quality..... this can be particially solved with sprung seats. People wonder why mk4s are less comfortable than mk3s...here lays the answer as well as horizontal 'sway'issues. Electrostars also have this problem.

 

[stut]

1, is air con NEEDED 365 days a year? The opening of windows actually is adequate for 90 % of the year and provides fresh air and can be satsfying on an average day. Can there be a way of having both?

I would imagine the benefits case wouldn't be there. HVAC is very efficient, and (IIRC) more more economical than the drag from open hopper windows. Of course, it can warm as well as cool.

2, Seating. This has been heavily discussed on this forum

Quite. For example, I love the 387 seating, which puts me in a very small minority!

3, announcements, chimes, alarms, train noise. IMO all 4 should be kept to an absolute minimum.... but this isnt the case and i believe these things make passengers 'edgy' just like a hot carriage or crowded carriage would. They are an irritant.

Some of this will be CYA legal stuff, some of this will be genuinely useful to sight impaired and other vulnerable passengers. I always put usability features to the "Mother-in-Law" test. My M-i-L is in her 80s and travels frequently by train. New ticket machines are completely out the question for her, for example. She travelled on 317 a couple of years ago, visiting us (instead of the usual 365) and completely missed the stop, due to the muted announcements, poor visibility, doors being on the opposite side to those expected and, then, buttons that were hard to press. Some of the features may be annoying, but they really help quite a wide range of passengers who otherwise wouldn't be able to travel.

4, Asthetics. Lighting could be lowered at certain times. Are carpets a requirement..not really IMO. Colour schemes...the less garish the better. Abellios Greys and whites are quite mellow.

Oh god, tell me about it. Lighting is a bugbear of mine. I don't know why there is a current trend for lighting everything up with 100000W LEDs like you're being interrogated, but it causes some of us real problems (the flicker/hue/intensity of LEDs are a massive migraine trigger for me, can leave me in intense pain for hours). You can counteract it with special glasses, but only to a certain extent.

5, Toliets, there simply arent enough of them on long distance trains. The small toliets on many classes of stock are ridiculous. Toilets should not be right next to seating. I just think its an ettiquette issue.

I suspect the rise of the hybrid commuter/inter-city service has a lot to do with this. That's partly down to geography, partly to capacity, but when you don't have vestibules, you don't have separation. However, you do need the accessible toilets to be, well, accessible without forcing wheelchair users to sit in a doorway for the entire journey.

6. First Class. Luxury within reason. Make people want to travel that way....dont treat it like providing it is a chore..ie " oh i suppose we better put an anticammaster on the seat.... its the least we need to do."
Seats and other fixtures can last decades...why be so tight with the costs...make it a luxury.

I'm not really fussed about luxury - luxury costs too much. I just want a bit more space to spread out into. Maybe there's room for a 'premium economy' offering for the likes of me?

7. Ride quality..... this can be particially solved with sprung seats. People wonder why mk4s are less comfortable than mk3s...here lays the answer as well as horizontal 'sway'issues. Electrostars also have this problem.

A bit of a cop-out, IMO.