transport for wales new seats

[stephen owen]

Travelling from Chester on a refurbished 175 to Llandudno i noted the new seats as being hard, i dont think this will be popular, especially on long journeys.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Nope, but it's the way of the world unfortunately. The subject of new and refurbished trains having much harder seats has been widely debated (actually - not much to debate, just about everyone agrees), but we are told it is all to do with reduced padding to be fireproof and thinner seats to maximise legroom.

The fireproof one appears to be a classic example of safety being taken to extreme measures (usually cost, but in this case comfort). The last train fire was 20 years ago next week, and was the result of a fuel tank rupturing following a direct impact, with a rapid inferno resulting. I'm not sure fireproof seats would have made much of a difference in that case. Before then, can anyone think of the previous fire in a train which entered the passenger area (excluding the Taunton sleeper train, where I agree standards need to be different)?

Just another example of where the railway gold-plates safety in a way that would not be tolerated in any other walk of life. As a great counter example in transport, look at the disquiet from the police and motoring organisations at the widespread creation of all lane running and removing hard shoulders from motorways. Sorry, slight digression!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Travelling from Chester on a refurbished 175 to Llandudno i noted the new seats as being hard, i dont think this will be popular, especially on long journeys.

They're the same seats, they just haven't collapsed over 10+ years. I expect they will soften over time.

 

[tomwills98]

They're the same seats, they just haven't collapsed over 10+ years. I expect they will soften over time.

I didn't think we changed the seat profile, just changed the foam and the seat cover. Welsh bums have got too used to seats that haven't seen any love for about fifteen years, they'll soften over time

 

[class26]

Nope, but it's the way of the world unfortunately. The subject of new and refurbished trains having much harder seats has been widely debated (actually - not much to debate, just about everyone agrees), but we are told it is all to do with reduced padding to be fireproof and thinner seats to maximise legroom.

The fireproof one appears to be a classic example of safety being taken to extreme measures (usually cost, but in this case comfort). The last train fire was 20 years ago next week, and was the result of a fuel tank rupturing following a direct impact, with a rapid inferno resulting. I'm not sure fireproof seats would have made much of a difference in that case. Before then, can anyone think of the previous fire in a train which entered the passenger area (excluding the Taunton sleeper train, where I agree standards need to be different)?

Just another example of where the railway gold-plates safety in a way that would not be tolerated in any other walk of life. As a great counter example in transport, look at the disquiet from the police and motoring organisations at the widespread creation of all lane running and removing hard shoulders from motorways. Sorry, slight digression!

But what no one asks is why do car seats get more and more comfortable but presumably still stay within fire regs ? (or are the seats in my Jag not compliant ?

The answer i suspect is that these are the seats you have to put up with as we (Dft or Train co`s) are not prepared to pay any more for better, more comfortable seats

 

[Mikey C]

I didn't think we changed the seat profile, just changed the foam and the seat cover. Welsh bums have got too used to seats that haven't seen any love for about fifteen years, they'll soften over time

People nowadays are soft. In the old days everyone in Wales would sit on sacks of coal or slate and not complain

 

[mpthomson]

But what no one asks is why do car seats get more and more comfortable but presumably still stay within fire regs ? (or are the seats in my Jag not compliant ?

The answer i suspect is that these are the seats you have to put up with as we (Dft or Train co`s) are not prepared to pay any more for better, more comfortable seats

Because your car seats aren’t in a mass transit vehicle and are therefore subject to completely different regulations.

Your second paragraph is nonsense.

 

[mpthomson]

Nope, but it's the way of the world unfortunately. The subject of new and refurbished trains having much harder seats has been widely debated (actually - not much to debate, just about everyone agrees), but we are told it is all to do with reduced padding to be fireproof and thinner seats to maximise legroom.

The fireproof one appears to be a classic example of safety being taken to extreme measures (usually cost, but in this case comfort). The last train fire was 20 years ago next week, and was the result of a fuel tank rupturing following a direct impact, with a rapid inferno resulting. I'm not sure fireproof seats would have made much of a difference in that case. Before then, can anyone think of the previous fire in a train which entered the passenger area (excluding the Taunton sleeper train, where I agree standards need to be different)?

Just another example of where the railway gold-plates safety in a way that would not be tolerated in any other walk of life. As a great counter example in transport, look at the disquiet from the police and motoring organisations at the widespread creation of all lane running and removing hard shoulders from motorways. Sorry, slight digression!

Except they’re the same seats with new foam that will soften over time.

 

[BucksBones]

But what no one asks is why do car seats get more and more comfortable but presumably still stay within fire regs ? (or are the seats in my Jag not compliant ?

The seats in modern cars tend, in my experience, to be firm but (and this is particularly the case in posh cars like yours ) adjust in about 35 different ways so they support in all the right places. You certainly don’t find the squishy armchairs you used to get in big French cars these days.

Saying that, I agree that more effort needs to move made with train seats; only yesterday I was talking to a North-Eastern colleague who said that after a recent Azuma-induced lumbago incident he’s decided to drive to London whenever he comes down. I bet loads of people feel like that.*

*(I wouldn’t include class 175 seats in that though; they’re fine IMO)

 

[Bletchleyite]

I genuinely don't mind hard seats, as I've said before - I quite like ironing boards, even the original flat type on which I've done almost the whole run between East Croydon and MKC on a number of occasions, and that's nearly 2 hours. The specific problem with the offending "Azuma seat" (Fainsa Sophia) is that the base isn't thick enough and so you feel a supporting bar through it. The moquette cover is better than the flat cloth one at masking it but after about an hour you still feel it.

Back on topic, the seat used on 175/180 is quite reasonable and I don't think I'd be bothered about it being quite hard. Indeed it's quite a cleverly designed seat as it has the supporting structure in the middle (where your knees don't go) rather than at the sides (where your knees do go). Much better than that aspect of say the FISA LEAN which doesn't work for those of us who are both tall and have rugby player sized legs who physically can't get their knees fully together because there are big chunks of muscle in the way of doing so.

 

[BucksBones]

I genuinely don't mind hard seats, as I've said before - I quite like ironing boards, even the original flat type on which I've done almost the whole run between East Croydon and MKC on a number of occasions, and that's nearly 2 hours. The specific problem with the offending "Azuma seat" (Fainsa Sophia) is that the base isn't thick enough and so you feel a supporting bar through it. The moquette cover is better than the flat cloth one at masking it but after about an hour you still feel it.

Back on topic, the seat used on 175/180 is quite reasonable and I don't think I'd be bothered about it being quite hard. Indeed it's quite a cleverly designed seat as it has the supporting structure in the middle (where your knees don't go) rather than at the sides (where your knees do go).

Quite - it’s more down to shape than squishiness, as it were... Those bouncy mk1 seats, whilst redolent of a golden era (or something) weren’t actually all that comfortable if we’re honest! (And the Citroen seats to which I referred were comfortable for about an hour until the lack of support began to make itself apparent!!!)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quite - it’s more down to shape than squishiness, as it were... Those bouncy mk1 seats, whilst redolent of a golden era (or something) weren’t actually all that comfortable if we’re honest! (And the Citroen seats to which I referred were comfortable for about an hour until the lack of support began to make itself apparent!!!)

I think the overall issue (and this is where the ironing board and the Grammer E3000 "Desiro seat" win out) is that if you shape a seat, it's only going to fit the person you shape it for, whereas if it's pretty much flat it will suit most people. Even with a relatively flat seat you can still provide lumbar support and underthigh support. Where it falls down is things like contoured headrests (only any use if they're not supporting the back of your shoulders instead), fixed armrests and a seat base that is shaped for a particular weight, size of backside and upper thigh (which is where the Fainsa Sophia really falls down).

I suspect if I was 11 stone rather than 19 stone but otherwise built about the same (which I think as far as a seat goes would involve lopping off most of my upper body and becoming a dismembered backside and legs ) I might well not push down far enough to feel the supporting bar. Or if I had a longer lower leg it might lift my thighs up enough that I similarly wouldn't feel it.

 

[BucksBones]

Where it falls down is things like contoured headrests (only any use if they're not supporting the back of your shoulders instead),

Ugh, you’ve just reminded me of a journey on a refurbished Grand Central 180. I’ll put up with most things but I won’t be doing that again.

 

[43096]

Because your car seats aren’t in a mass transit vehicle and are therefore subject to completely different regulations.

Your second paragraph is nonsense.

If you think his second paragraph isn’t the root of it, then you are hopelessly naïve.

 

[Cardiff123]

I recently made a long trip on a class 800. Changing at Cardiff for the refurbished class 150 for the final leg of my journey, I felt like I was sinking into the 150's decently padded Chapman seats, after 2 hours on the ironing boards of the 800.
With TfW's focus on the passenger, you'll hope that they listen and don't put ironing boards on their new trains.

 

[swt_passenger]

When I saw the thread title I thought it might be about the entire Welsh train fleet...

 

[Colin1501]

I'm not convinced the explanation around fire regulations stacks up. I've sat in seats in road coaches and aircraft that have considerably more padding than those in a lot of modern rolling stock, and they must be subject to fire regulations every bit as stringent.

 

[JetStream]

Personally, they're very comfortable, and it's long overdue!

 

[416GSi]

I was on a refurbished 175 yesterday and also noticed that the seats were harder than the non-refurbished ones. I don't have an issue with that, but I didn't like the fact that they have removed the coat hooks!

 

[class26]

Because your car seats aren’t in a mass transit vehicle and are therefore subject to completely different regulations.

Your second paragraph is nonsense.

I would have thought the second para was spot on. They are not prepared to pay more and know full well that we do not really have a choice except sit for hours on end in traffic jams . Go the Germany and sit in an ICE train and feel the comfort of those seats which are still subject to EU fire regs.

 

[class26]

I'm not convinced the explanation around fire regulations stacks up. I've sat in seats in road coaches and aircraft that have considerably more padding than those in a lot of modern rolling stock, and they must be subject to fire regulations every bit as stringent.

It doesn`t stack up. We, the public are being taken for fools. Simple.

Also ask this question. Why did the Dft insist that GWR in their 802`s ( not specified by the Dft) have to keep the same seats as the Dft specified 800`s . Answer - the y were terrified that GW would buy more comfortable seats which would reflect badly on Dft.

 

[class26]

Because your car seats aren’t in a mass transit vehicle and are therefore subject to completely different regulations.

Your second paragraph is nonsense.

So are you really saying that the seats in the 800`s are the best that can be bought for those trains and keep to fire regs ?
They cannot be so therefore they are what the dft is prepared to pay as I said above.

And the point you miss is I have a choice, Go in my car in relative comfort or get excruciating back and bum pain on an 800. Car seats get better, train seats get worse. Regulations is a cope out.

 

[James James]

I would have thought the second para was spot on. They are not prepared to pay more and know full well that we do not really have a choice except sit for hours on end in traffic jams . Go the Germany and sit in an ICE train and feel the comfort of those seats which are still subject to EU fire regs.

I personally found first class on the ICE to be rather uncomfortable (1x on ICE-T, 1x on ICE-1). But then again I rarely travel in the UK so I wouldn't know if that's much worse.

 

[Ethano92]

So are you really saying that the seats in the 800`s are the best that can be bought for those trains and keep to fire regs ?
They cannot be so therefore they are what the dft is prepared to pay as I said above.

This exactly. The DfT are cheap, there's no shock. Same reason they find it alright for people to commute from East Grinstead, Brighton, Bedford etc without a seat back table or WiFi.

It wouldn't surprise me if the DfT have made the regulations so restrictive that more comfortable (more expensive) seats can't be found but it's for that exactly, nothing to do with fire safety. I personally really don't mind hard seats, I find them fine but the part that does annoy me is knowing the DfT is making rail transport unattractive for so many, it simply isn't the way forward.

 

[Brissle Girl]

So are you really saying that the seats in the 800`s are the best that can be bought for those trains and keep to fire regs ?
They cannot be so therefore they are what the dft is prepared to pay as I said above.

And the point you miss is I have a choice, Go in my car in relative comfort or get excruciating back and bum pain on an 800. Car seats get better, train seats get worse. Regulations is a cope out.

Ian Walmsley (who knows a bit or two about train procurement) is on record as saying it’s all down to cost. So I’m inclined to agree that the second paragraph is spot on, and definitely not nonsense.

 

[Cheshire Rover]

Some of t

People nowadays are soft. In the old days everyone in Wales would sit on sacks of coal or slate and not complain

Some of the Northern trains I have recently travelled on seem to have been filled which such media

 

[PeterC]

I'm not convinced the explanation around fire regulations stacks up. I've sat in seats in road coaches and aircraft that have considerably more padding than those in a lot of modern rolling stock, and they must be subject to fire regulations every bit as stringent.

I don't normally travel by coach but I find seats on GoAhead and Arriva buses more comfortable than most train seats. With the so called "ironing board" seats it isn't so much the lack of padding but that they feel very narrow.

(Before somebody starts quoting measurements I said FEEL, I am talking about customer peception)

 

[Tetchytyke]

I don't think it is cost, at least not directly. It's just a lack of attention to detail, something which the whole IET project has suffered from. Fainsa do a seat, the IET needs a seat, job done, let's move on to something a bit more exciting.

Where cost comes in is in changing the seats; at this stage, that will cost a LOT of money, as Hitachi will charge for any changes to the spec at a very high price.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I find seats on GoAhead and Arriva buses more comfortable than most train seats

You've clearly never sat on an Urban 90 then!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I personally really don't mind hard seats, I find them fine

I do too, and I also like thin backs because it means more legroom, and flat backs (or inset at the sides) because again more space for knees with nothing to clout them on. To me the contoured-based ironing board used by Northern on 19x and ScotRail on 385s are good seats and regular ones are perfectly acceptable. The problem with the 80x seat is not that it's hard but that the base isn't hard enough so you feel the support structure through it. It's a design flaw of that particular seat (which otherwise would be OK), not an issue with hard seats, at least to me.