Thoughts on Compartments

[Mogz]

Perhaps something like these TGV compartments (albeit with a door) would be acceptable?

Without a door, one almost thinks "whats the point"?

 

[Mogz]

I think 4-a-side per these SNCF trains could be grim when full though...

 

[hwl]

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/367122/response/913588/attach/7/Design Triangle HS2 HS2 OP REP 000 000002 P03 Report Part 1.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

p.38 and 39 show how you could achieve sound-proofed compartments that would keep the noisy kids from annoying other passengers within a hybrid saloon/compartment style layout, but that are easy to see into from all angles, alleviating safety concerns.

Most of the stuff in that though experiment document were placed in the recycling receptacle after much analysis especially for classic compatibles. e.g the whole zone concept (Italian HS thinking).

Most HS2 journey will sub 80minutes, much shorter than on the continent and loadings much higher hence optimised for UK.

 

[hwl]

I think 4-a-side per these SNCF trains could be grim when full though...

And they are a foot wider than UK stock - that makes space optimisation a different game over there.

 

[yorkie]

Ugh, I can't be bothered with this any more. There's plenty of good reasons stated here as to why they're unsuitable for the modern railway. I'm outta here.

I would describe the railway systems in continental Europe as more modern (or certainly better) than the UK in most respects, and yet they do have compartments. The suggestion that a UK train is more modern than an ICE is incorrect in my opinion. If you wish to disagree, you are entitled to that opinion. I do not think people on either side are going to change their minds.

 

[delt1c]

I would describe the railway systems in continental Europe as more modern (or certainly better) than the UK in most respects, and yet they do have compartments. The suggestion that a UK train is more modern than an ICE is incorrect in my opinion. If you wish to disagree, you are entitled to that opinion. I do not think people on either side are going to change their minds.

Fully agree with you, I have travelled in the 4 aside compartments in France and even when train is full they are not cramped.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fully agree with you, I have travelled in the 4 aside compartments in France and even when train is full they are not cramped.

I can't see how they wouldn't be. Middle seats are rubbish. If you're going to have 4 across I'd definitely rather it was 2+2, though 3+1 might have something going for it as you can occupy it to 3 across rather than 2 across before it feels cramped.

 

[yorksrob]

I can't see how they wouldn't be. Middle seats are rubbish. If you're going to have 4 across I'd definitely rather it was 2+2, though 3+1 might have something going for it as you can occupy it to 3 across rather than 2 across before it feels cramped.

I think that there's a lot to be said for 3+1 generally. I'm surprised that more train companies haven't experimented with it.

 

[delt1c]

I can't see how they wouldn't be. Middle seats are rubbish. If you're going to have 4 across I'd definitely rather it was 2+2, though 3+1 might have something going for it as you can occupy it to 3 across rather than 2 across before it feels cramped.

Have you travelled in these compartments in France?

 

[RLBH]

I can't see how they wouldn't be. Middle seats are rubbish.

Even if there's plenty of room - if you've got seats four deep before getting to an aisle, the person in the 'window' seat is potentially going to need three people (maybe even six, depending on legroom!) to move if they want to use facilities on the train or get off at an intermediate station. I say 'get off', because most people will probably stand if the alternative is getting three people to move. A lot of people will stand if the alternative is asking one person to move.

The number of people you have to ask to move is probably a better metric of how crowded a train will feel than the number of millimetres of space each person has. On that metric, compartments four abreast is three times worse than 2+2 seating.

 

[delt1c]

Even if there's plenty of room - if you've got seats four deep before getting to an aisle, the person in the 'window' seat is potentially going to need three people (maybe even six, depending on legroom!) to move if they want to use facilities on the train or get off at an intermediate station. I say 'get off', because most people will probably stand if the alternative is getting three people to move. A lot of people will stand if the alternative is asking one person to move.

The number of people you have to ask to move is probably a better metric of how crowded a train will feel than the number of millimetres of space each person has. On that metric, compartments four abreast is three times worse than 2+2 seating.

Having used them I disagree, never had a problem. Is your reply based on actual usage or opinion?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Having used them I disagree, never had a problem. Is your reply based on actual usage or opinion?

I agree with him and I've used them lots. I only really like a compartment when it's to myself/my travelling group. Same with a table, really - the preference is a unit of seating to myself, so my favourite type of seating is First Class single seats where I can have a window, not be pushed against someone and not have to ask to get up.

Similarly on flights it's window for short haul (where I won't have to get up) and aisle for long haul (where I will).

 

[delt1c]

I agree with him and I've used them lots. I only really like a compartment when it's to myself/my travelling group. Same with a table, really - the preference is a unit of seating to myself, so my favourite type of seating is First Class single seats where I can have a window, not be pushed against someone and not have to ask to get up.
Similarly on flights it's window for short haul (where I won't have to get up) and aisle for long haul (where I will).

So it is personal preference? Have you used the French 4 aside compartments ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

So it is personal preference? Have you used the French 4 aside compartments ?

No, but as I don't like the middle seat in German 3-a-side ones I can't imagine them finding favour with me.

 

[RLBH]

Having used them I disagree, never had a problem. Is your reply based on actual usage or opinion?

You must be a saint amongst men, then, as the issues with the third seat in a bank of three are well known, and banks of four can only be worse. Good interior design and/or additional space may well ease these issues, but applying the same measures to 2+2 seating would achieve the same benefits in a superior seating arrangement.

There's nothing to say you couldn't enclose some compartments in 2+2 seating. There might even be an argument for it. But that's a different matter altogether from reintroducing a seating layout which hearkens back to lashing stagecoach bodies onto a flat wagon.

The one time I've used compartment stock in service was an overnight train from Hamburg to Copenhagen. With eight of us in a compartment, it was decidedly unpleasant, and for the remainder of my InterRail travels I stuck to sleeping car berths when travelling overnight.

 

[mpthomson]

Of course it’s not a civil liberties issue.

A perceived reduction in seating capacity is not an issue in first class (6 seats per pair of windows in a compartment is the same as 2+1 in an open coach).

In standard, the couple of family compartments that you would add per train would be an increased amenity that would benefit the non-compartment travellers by keeping the screaming kids out of the saloon. It would be easy to enforce via such rules as:

- Pre-booked travellers only.
- Adults only permitted when accompanied by a child under 7 (off peak)
Or
- Priority to adults with children under 7 (peak time).

If you take the perceived reduction in capacity to its logical conclusion, you should just take out as many seats as possible to create more standing room.

To those who scream that compartments are not wanted- has a survey ever been carried out as to the type of passenger accommodation that people would prefer on long distance trains?

So let's make booking and seating far more complicated in order to facilitate something that no one other than a vanishingly small group of rail enthuisiasts, in terms of regular rail users, actually wants or is shouting for? Ok then, that makes sense....

 

[nlogax]

The answer is pretty obvious here; if you want a return to compartments on UK stock, go visit a heritage railway. Compartments are obviously not coming back.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The answer is pretty obvious here; if you want a return to compartments on UK stock, go visit a heritage railway. Compartments are obviously not coming back.

Not even many of those have them - Mk1 TSOs are the staple of the preserved railway.

 

[bastien]

So let's make booking and seating far more complicated in order to facilitate something that no one other than a vanishingly small group of rail enthuisiasts, in terms of regular rail users, actually wants or is shouting for? Ok then, that makes sense....

Another one who knows what people who *don't* use the railway want.

 

[Journeyman]

Another one who knows what people who *don't* use the railway want.

So...where's your evidence that there are potentially millions of people out there ready to abandon their cars the moment we bring back compartments?

 

[Mogz]

So let's make booking and seating far more complicated

No more complicated than the current arrangement of expressing a preference for a table or airline seat, surely?

The Germans (and indeed other continental European countries) seem to manage somehow. Are we British uniquely thick, or something?

to facilitate something that no one other than a vanishingly small group of rail enthuisiasts, in terms of regular rail users, actually wants or is shouting for?

When was the last passenger research carried out on the subject? The results may surprise you.

Having fitted out the HSTs in a high-density layout as FGW, GWR later made much of the fact that they were responding to customer demand by ensuring that their new trains, both IET and Electrostars, had more tables.

British Airways were the first to market 'your own private cabin area' in First Class, now most airlines offer this level of privacy.

I'm sure many businesspeople and families would very much appreciate the privacy of a compartment.

As a parent to small children who has used them on the continent I can tell you it stops them from escaping, gives them more room to play and stops the noise bothering other passengers. Practical benefit, not nostalgia.

I wouldn't mind if it was simply pie-in-the-sky proposals that were being dismissed here, but the fact is they exist on the continent. They used to exist here. They are very useful. There needn't be many of them.

 

[bastien]

So...where's your evidence that there are potentially millions of people out there ready to abandon their cars the moment we bring back compartments?

In my head, just like yours.

 

[Journeyman]

In my head, just like yours.

Right - so why do your amazing ideas have any more validity than mine?

 

[Mogz]

The answer is pretty obvious here; if you want a return to compartments on UK stock, go visit a heritage railway. Compartments are obviously not coming back.

A heritage railway is not going to get me and my family to where I want to go. I don't want them back for the fun or nostaligia of it. I want an enclosed environment in which my children are not bothering other passengers, aren't going to escape, and is an environmentally friendly alternative to driving (which, frankly, is often more attractive than the prospect of us all cramming into XC 2+2 airline seats).

If your answer is that I should drive instead, how on earth is this for the best? Successive governments have been trying to encourage people on to public transport. Is this not still the case? Are they a victim of their own success?

Should we have a new campaign for the travelling public to keep overcrowding off the trains by going by road instead?

Answers on a postcard, please!

 

[Journeyman]

A heritage railway is not going to get me and my family to where I want to go. I don't want them back for the fun or nostaligia of it. I want an enclosed environment in which my children are not bothering other passengers, aren't going to escape, and is an environmentally friendly alternative to driving (which, frankly, is often more attractive than the prospect of us all cramming into XC 2+2 airline seats).

If your answer is that I should drive instead, how on earth is this for the best? Successive governments have been trying to encourage people on to public transport. Is this not still the case? Are they a victim of their own success?

Should we have a new campaign for the travelling public to keep overcrowding off the trains by going by road instead?

Answers on a postcard, please!

You're being unrealistic here. Honestly, I don't see any mass clamouring for the return of compartments for the sake of travelling with kids. I did it entirely in open saloons when my three kids were growing up, and it was never once a problem. My answer isn't that you should drive instead, it's more that you're creating a problem where one doesn't exist, and proposing a solution that 99.9% of people pretty much don't care about.

We all have our own preferences - I'm extremely fussy about where I sit on trains - but I appreciate my views aren't shared by others, and in this case, you and one or two others on a very specialist forum are going against the views of a LOT of people.

 

[bastien]

Right - so why do your amazing ideas have any more validity than mine?

Because I'm not (wilfully?) ignoring the fact that these things ACTUALLY EXIST on brand new stock in Germany.

 

[Journeyman]

Because I'm not (wilfully?) ignoring the fact that these things ACTUALLY EXIST on brand new stock in Germany.

I'm not ignoring that at all, but frankly I don't see what it has to do with anything here. In the UK, there appears to be next-to-zero demand for compartments, and a number of very serious practical reasons why they're no longer provided. If you were to ask British non-rail users why they don't use trains, without prompting them, I guarantee you not one of them will mention them.

Try it.

 

[Mogz]

If you were to ask British non-rail users why they don't use trains, without prompting them, I guarantee you not one of them will mention them.

Try it.

Why not ask rail users what sort of passenger accommodation they would prefer?

I would be interested to see whether tables/ airline seats/ compartments featured in many of the answers pertaining to passenger comfort in the abandoned XC consultation a few years back.

I must say, whilst I accept that the trend in the UK is very much against compartments being reintroduced, and I respect the reasoned views of those who don't like/want to travel in them, from the tone of the debate one would think that the pro-compartment posters were proposing making UK trains like the Berlin-Warsaw express (almost exclusively compartments in Second Class) or proposing the return of non-corridor stock. We aren't. It's a DB ICE style proposal that we would favour.

 

[Journeyman]

Why not ask rail users what sort of passenger accommodation they would prefer?

I would be interested to see whether tables/ airline seats/ compartments featured in many of the answers pertaining to passenger comfort.

There's actually been a lot of market research into the layouts passengers prefer, and the answer is almost universally "a decent mix of airline seats and tables". Compartments never get mentioned.

 

[Mogz]

There's actually been a lot of market research into the layouts passengers prefer, and the answer is almost universally "a decent mix of airline seats and tables". Compartments never get mentioned.

That would depend on the terms of reference.

If the question is a closed one, such as 'do you prefer airline or table seating' then of course compartments will not be mentioned.

If the question is open, such as 'what sort of seating layout do you prefer on a train'? or provides the full range of options (airline, facing with table, facing without table transverse or compartment) then the responses may be different.

Can anyone point to any research that supports one side or the other in this debate? So far we have all (me included) had to rely on subjective arguments, personal preferences and bare assertions as to what we THINK the travelling public might want.