Pendolino seating vs LNER stock

[jc71]

I was on the Severn Valley Railway today and was seated in a 60 feet long Gresley coach. 64 seats, all with tables, windows perfectly matched up with the seating. Luggage space beneath every seat and luggage racks above.

A Pendolino has a maximum coach capacity of 76 (E or F), in a coach 78 feet 5 inches long. If we examine the usable space of a coach, the Pendolino is maybe 25% longer so the LNER coach, if made to the same length as the Pendolino coach, and including suitably wider doors and a toilet, would be able to accommodate about 80 passengers.

I know that there are obviously massive structural differences and have read that the Pendolino wondows are smaller for greater structural rigity, but the LNER coach could still have smaller windows but still have them lined up with the seats. Why can't the Pendolino have the same interior layout and dimension as the LNER coach, and accommodate all of its passengers without obscured (or non-existent), views? Even substituting massive luggage racks at each end for a cluster of four seats, or removing a table area for disabled seating, the revised layout would still match the capacity of the current Pendolino.

Feel free to blaze away at me with structural protocols etc, but think first about just lining seats up with windows. On Pendolinos they have luggage racks across windows and seats against solid walls! How does that work?

 

[NotATrainspott]

I was on the Severn Valley Railway today and was seated in a 60 feet long Gresley coach. 64 seats, all with tables, windows perfectly matched up with the seating. Luggage space beneath every seat and luggage racks above.

A Pendolino has a maximum coach capacity of 76 (E or F), in a coach 78 feet 5 inches long. If we examine the usable space of a coach, the Pendolino is maybe 25% longer so the LNER coach, if made to the same length as the Pendolino coach, and including suitably wider doors and a toilet, would be able to accommodate about 80 passengers.

I know that there are obviously massive structural differences and have read that the Pendolino wondows are smaller for greater structural rigity, but the LNER coach could still have smaller windows but still have them lined up with the seats. Why can't the Pendolino have the same interior layout and dimension as the LNER coach, and accommodate all of its passengers without obscured (or non-existent), views? Even substituting massive luggage racks at each end for a cluster of four seats, or removing a table area for disabled seating, the revised layout would still match the capacity of the current Pendolino.

Feel free to blaze away at me with structural protocols etc, but think first about just lining seats up with windows. On Pendolinos they have luggage racks across windows and seats against solid walls! How does that work?

One of the reasons is that back then, LNER or whoever could have whatever window arrangement it desired on each coach so it made it easy to align windows with seats. Any carriages with a different internal layout could have different window arrangements to match, and since the body was non-structural (that being the job of the chassis frame) and there were no crash regulations it meant that it was trivial to design those other arrangements. The move to monocoque body shells and the need to standardise carriage designs for a production line means it's more difficult to have different carriages have a different window arrangement. If you need to use the same bodyshell for first and standard class, unless you have the same seating bay pitch in both you'll have one or the other becoming unaligned. The new Class 80x IEP trains are no different, as they have a completely standard arrangement for the structure of the carriage but their interiors are entirely non-structural, so it's easy to reconfigure it to have more or less seating if required.

 

[jopsuk]

British Rail Mark 3 carriages had standardised window spacing- I'm not sure if the Mark 2s did? Perhaps the later, air con, versions?

 

[ryan125hst]

You wonder why they don't just have two carriage designs: one for first class and one for standard class. Each one should be looked at individually for seat pitch, window spacing, luggage rack provision, toilet locations etc. Then buffet cars and first class carriage containing the kitchen could simply have these added with the windows effectively covered over, either partially or fully as required.

I'm guessing this optioned would cost a lot more, but it would provide a far better passenger environment.

 

[jopsuk]

It would cost a lot more. The Mark 3s have shown the benefit of the standardised shell, flexible interior- once more, there's a number of FGW 1st class HST carriages are becoming Standard Class.

The idea of having different window layouts did, indeed, used to be how it was one, as already explained in this thread. But that concept was dead by the 70s.

 

[bronzeonion]

The original MK2s... Loads of different window layouts for different purposes and still monocoque construction, infact a pioneer for BR! That rules that argument out.

 

[Taunton]

On Pendolinos they have luggage racks across windows and seats against solid walls! How does that work?

Designer incompetence. There's no other words for it.

It would cost a lot more. The Mark 3s have shown the benefit of the standardised shell

Not so. It would NOT cost a lot more (do we really think the Mk 1/2 would have cost a lot less with a standard shell). I have challenged designers in the past on this point. One stated that compared to the Mk 2 it would avoid having two sizes of window glass - completely unaware that they use the same window glass, just the spacing is different.

On the more general point, it would be instructive to current rolling stock designers to be made to go to preserved railways and see how a number of aspects were done far better in past generations. Seat comfort with the same number across in the same width is just one of them. On trivia, toilets continue to be produced in 2014 where the seat falls down with vibration during "men's operations". Attention, the GWR had this sorted a century ago, just by placing it sufficiently far out that the seat goes way beyond the near-vertical when raised. You lot at Bombardier and Siemens apparently need to go to Didcot museum to see how to do this.

 

[table38]

The 185s show how it can be done (with three different sizes of window!)

 

[asylumxl]

I do love how so many people on RUK feel they are better informed on industrial design than the professionals.

Typical that people over simplify things. There's many more factors than windows and seat pitch at play in the design of the carriage.

But by all means, if you think you can do better then please put your money where your mouth is and prove it. I look forward to seeing you tender for rolling stock orders...

 

[physics34]

MkI, IIs and IIIs, all more comfortable than a pendo

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

MkI, IIs and IIIs, all more comfortable than a pendo

Yes I agree with that. and you normally get proper window seats and tables. The Chiltern silver trains are good.

 

[DarloRich]

You wonder why they don't just have two carriage designs: one for first class and one for standard class. Each one should be looked at individually for seat pitch, window spacing, luggage rack provision, toilet locations etc. Then buffet cars and first class carriage containing the kitchen could simply have these added with the windows effectively covered over, either partially or fully as required.

I'm guessing this optioned would cost a lot more, but it would provide a far better passenger environment.

That coasts more though doesn’t it, therefore it wont happen as passenger comfort comes a long way down the list of required design outcomes.

I do love how so many people on RUK feel they are better informed on industrial design than the professionals.

Typical that people over simplify things. There's many more factors than windows and seat pitch at play in the design of the carriage.

But by all means, if you think you can do better then please put your money where your mouth is and prove it. I look forward to seeing you tender for rolling stock orders...

I don’t think I am an expert at design. I am, however, an expert at having to travel in the products of the sainted industrial design professionals. So, why does passenger comfort come so far down the list of design requirements? Perhaps you could enlighten us.


Whilst it is specious to compare a modern train with a 70 year old design there are ideas that can be borrowed or improved upon. Also one does wonder why we haven’t yet managed to improve on the British Rail designed intercity trains despite all of our wonderful modern technology.

 

[jopsuk]

I'm wondering if I have to use bigger type to make the point that the trend, in Britain, started with the Mark 3s/HST that you all so love.

 

[DarloRich]

I'm wondering if I have to use bigger type to make the point that the trend, in Britain, started with the Mark 3s/HST that you all so love.

With comfortable seats, windows you can see out of and light airy carriages? I will have more of that trend please.

 

[jopsuk]

Even in the original British Rail configurations Mark 3 Standard class at least had seats next window pillars.

 

[tom1649]

At least on a Mark 3 (with original IC70 seats) I don't feel hemmed in by a ridiculously high seat back, so even if I don't have a window seat I can see over the seat in front to the next window. Not usually the case on certain new/refurbished stock, where all you can see is the pillar!

 

[asylumxl]

Perhaps you could enlighten us.

Well the structural qualities of the carriage will be the main factors that dictate the design of the carriage. The carriage will be primarily designed for safety and to have good crash worthiness. The carriage will also need to have a resonant frequency that falls within a certain range, otherwise it will not be approved for running. While I'm sure most people in the industry would like something unusual with real wow factor, like anything involving engineering, it requires a careful compromise between form and function.

Then there's various other factors, such as the placement of equipment, meeting noise requirements, meeting accessibility requirements (accomodating a wheelchair turning circle etc.), meeting interior specification requirements. And that's just to name a few things.

Even in the original British Rail configurations Mark 3 Standard class at least had seats next window pillars.

Here here!

 

[GatwickDepress]

I've always found the APT interior as compared to a Pendolino's quite interesting.

 

[jopsuk]

... though the windows are bigger, yes, that clearly shows seats next to pillars!

 

[phil beard]

Well the structural qualities of the carriage will be the main factors that dictate the design of the carriage. The carriage will be primarily designed for safety and to have good crash worthiness. The carriage will also need to have a resonant frequency that falls within a certain range, otherwise it will not be approved for running. While I'm sure most people in the industry would like something unusual with real wow factor, like anything involving engineering, it requires a careful compromise between form and function.

Then there's various other factors, such as the placement of equipment, meeting noise requirements, meeting accessibility requirements (accomodating a wheelchair turning circle etc.), meeting interior specification requirements. And that's just to name a few things.

Here here!

Sadly, the next requirement will be the TOC trying to cram in as many seats as possible without worrying about passengers' needs, especially seat pitch. Modern seats are bolt upright without backrest tilt and as for those FGW high backrest seats...

 

[Wyvern]

Didnt the safety people ask for the high backed seats? I'm sure I read something somewhere.

 

[HSTEd]

High backrest seats are, I believe, required by crashworthiness standards.

 

[tom1649]

High backrest seats are, I believe, required by crashworthiness standards.

I take it this doesn't apply to metro stock, otherwise we'd have LUL S8s and Class 378s with high backed seats.

 

[starrymarkb]

I like the high backed seats. Means I can rest my head properly

 

[MCR247]

Same here! I can manage to get some sleep on hgih backed Grammer (FGW HST etc) seating, but I've got no chance if I'm sat in an IC70

 

[tom1649]

No one else finds them claustrophobic then? I like to be able to see my surroundings.

 

[jopsuk]

Seat comfort can be a highly personal thing- there's no one seat that will suit everyone. Some on this forum would do well to remember this when ranting about comfort.

 

[ainsworth74]

Didnt the safety people ask for the high backed seats? I'm sure I read something somewhere.

They did but not as high as is seen on some stock (FGW HST standard class seats for example). I believe the seats on 185s, in terms of seat back height, remain compliant and I feel offer a good compromise between offering proper support for the head and not making someone feel 'entombed' (it also helps that 185s have only a couple of seats with no window view).

 

[DarloRich]

Well the structural qualities of the carriage will be the main factors that dictate the design of the carriage. The carriage will be primarily designed for safety and to have good crash worthiness. The carriage will also need to have a resonant frequency that falls within a certain range, otherwise it will not be approved for running. While I'm sure most people in the industry would like something unusual with real wow factor, like anything involving engineering, it requires a careful compromise between form and function.

Then there's various other factors, such as the placement of equipment, meeting noise requirements, meeting accessibility requirements (accomodating a wheelchair turning circle etc.), meeting interior specification requirements. And that's just to name a few things.

Whilst all correct none of that, really, impacts on what seats you add to the train or the comfort of those seats.

 

[Mikey C]

I like a high back seat, being fairly tall, but surely they won't need to design seat heights around Basketball Players and Peter Crouch!