What if 67 hauled trains had supplemented Voyagers on XC?

[Waldgrun]

I trust that you may recall, that when Virgin proposed getting new rolling stock, one proposal was for a single ended class 67 with hauled stock. Similar to non powered Voyager vehicles, I believe.
In light of what is now known about Voyager stock, would this proposal have worked out better? Something to think about?

 

[sd0733]

Depends on the length, if they were to have been 4/5 car sets then would have been no difference just slower and probaby lost the oportunity to multi set. And if they were to have been longer then the same could have been done to Voyagers which would have got rid of half the complaints about them. Chances are they would have had similar internals anyway as the Pendolinos did.

 

[route:oxford]

I trust that you may recall, that when Virgin proposed getting new rolling stock, one proposal was for a single ended class 67 with hauled stock. Similar to non powered Voyager vehicles, I believe.
In light of what is now known about Voyager stock, would this proposal have worked out better? Something to think about?

It would have been a disaster.

Planned 125mph running cut back to 100mph running due to the 67s lardiness - causing a recast of timetable.

There would no doubt have been issues with weak infrastructure on the network forcing the 67s down to WHL speeds at certain points.

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Voyager that accurate forecasting wouldn't have resolved in the early nougthies.

 

[jayiscupid]

I trust that you may recall, that when Virgin proposed getting new rolling stock, one proposal was for a single ended class 67 with hauled stock. Similar to non powered Voyager vehicles, I believe.
In light of what is now known about Voyager stock, would this proposal have worked out better? Something to think about?

I seem to remember that the proposal for this was 4 car push pull sets instead of the 220s. The five car 221 sets were still planned as they wanted the tilt option.
Other than the few extra seats you'd gain from an unpowered coach vs. a Voyager I don't think there would have been an improvement from what we have today. If anything it would have been less flexible as you'd lose the option of joining 220&221 together (though there isn't enough stock to do this).

This fact may have helped support Virgin's plan for mini Pendolinos so that CrossCountry could have all of the 221s together to allow them to increase capacity. I guess we'll never know.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Really when they were designing and building them, they should have been 11 or 12 car trains, without the tilt equipment, with vertical body sides, then each coach could have had a little more luggage space at each end of each coach

 

[JN114]

Really when they were designing and building them, they should have been 11 or 12 car trains, without the tilt equipment, with vertical body sides, then each coach could have had a little more luggage space at each end of each coach

20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Prior to the introduction of Voyagers XC were struggling to fill 6 coach MkII rakes with far fewer seats, on less than half the number of trains they operate now. Nobody in the industry predicted the level of "build it and they'll come" growth the XC network saw when the frequencies over the core doubled and journey times decreased with the introduction of faster, tilting (more of the XC network was TASS fitted then) trains.

 

[87015]

20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Prior to the introduction of Voyagers XC were struggling to fill 6 coach MkII rakes with far fewer seats, on less than half the number of trains they operate now. Nobody in the industry predicted the level of "build it and they'll come" growth the XC network saw when the frequencies over the core doubled and journey times decreased with the introduction of faster, tilting (more of the XC network was TASS fitted then) trains.

What?

XC was wedged in hauled days once the sets were cut down to standard 7 car lengths*, and the entire business case for Voyagers required massive growth in passenger numbers because of the huge additional expense of operating far more trains.

*when Virgin could be bothered to do enough maintenance to actually manage that

 

[sprinterguy]

Prior to the introduction of Voyagers XC were struggling to fill 6 coach MkII rakes with far fewer seats, on less than half the number of trains they operate now.

Less seats per hour or day on many corridors probably (due to the lower frequencies), but per train even a six carriage mark 2 formation would offer far more seats than a four, or even five, carriage Voyager, and as 87015 says, Crosscountry operated seven carriage mark 2 and HST formations, not six.

 

[coppercapped]

What?

XC was wedged in hauled days once the sets were cut down to standard 7 car lengths*, and the entire business case for Voyagers required massive growth in passenger numbers because of the huge additional expense of operating far more trains.

*when Virgin could be bothered to do enough maintenance to actually manage that

Eh? The XC trains that sat in Reading for 15-20 mins while the Class 47s ran round were anything but wedged. In the early days there was turnover locomotive, then they were topn'tailed and finally the loco ran round.

But, full? Sometimes (Easter, Christmas and the like) but on average they had plenty of seats.

 

[RobShipway]

I did not realise until today, but there is some 9 car XC services that go from Reading to Manchester which is a class 220 coupled to a class 221. I think the service that I saw earlier today left about 4:20pm. I was not able to get any unit numbers though.

Was this a service that came up from Bournemouth or Southampton or a service that starts from Reading?

 

[AnonymousUser1]

Less seats per hour or day on many corridors probably (due to the lower frequencies), but per train even a six carriage mark 2 formation would offer far more seats than a four, or even five, carriage Voyager, and as 87015 says, Crosscountry operated seven carriage mark 2 and HST formations, not six.

and here the gricers and bashers fall fould of reality , the simple fact is that XC are providing far more seats and a near 'turn up and go' service in the core

 

[broadgage]

I suspect that most passengers would prefer loco hauled trains to DMUs, other factors being equal.

However the main problems with voyagers are not the underfloor engines, but are

1)too short
2)cramped
3)toilets stink.
4) generally nasty !

The first problem could been easily solved by building more of them, or keeping some other stock in addition.

The cramped interior is largely due to the tapered body sides, though a better interior fit out might help a bit.

The toilet stinks to me smells to me like incompetent design or manufacture, toilets should be a mature technology that are well understood.

"generally nasty" is rather subjective, some people like them.
But I suspect that the dissatisfied outnumber the satisfied. It seems a very poor design to make the windows so small, and not aligned with most of the seats for example. And still worse to provide windows for luggage racks but not for seats.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I believe the XC loco hauled sets were to have been identical, save for the underfloor engines, to the Voyager bodies and interiors. The only difference would have been slightly more seats in the end coach with that space not being used for a cab.

 

[neilb62]

Really when they were designing and building them, they should have been 11 or 12 car trains, without the tilt equipment, with vertical body sides, then each coach could have had a little more luggage space at each end of each coach

To run on the WCML as part of the franchise agreement they HAD to tilt.

 

[D1009]

I believe the XC loco hauled sets were to have been identical, save for the underfloor engines, to the Voyager bodies and interiors. The only difference would have been slightly more seats in the end coach with that space not being used for a cab.

What? Was this a completely new design of loco hauled coach? I don't remember that proposal.

 

[All Line Rover]

It seems a very poor design to make the windows so small, and not aligned with most of the seats for example. And still worse to provide windows for luggage racks but not for seats.

Voyagers? Small windows!?

 

[Hadders]

Pendolino windows are small but the windows on Voyagers are huge!

 

[Harbornite]

Speaking of Virgin locomotives, does anyone remember the proposals for Virgin East Coast TGV style trains, which would have been hauled by "Super Deltics" on the non-electrified sections?

 

[swt_passenger]

I did not realise until today, but there is some 9 car XC services that go from Reading to Manchester which is a class 220 coupled to a class 221. I think the service that I saw earlier today left about 4:20pm. I was not able to get any unit numbers though.

Was this a service that came up from Bournemouth or Southampton or a service that starts from Reading?

1620 approx (actual 1617) off Reading northbound would normally be a Bournemouth to Man Picc service. 1620 off Reading southbound is a Newcastle to Southampton. Assuming the former I think it would normally be a single unit; but there were a number of odd workings and cancellations this morning according to RTT so who knows what trains may run doubled up.

There is a reliable weekly doubled service, Friday afternoon's 1445 off Bournemouth, (and its incoming train), but I can't think of any others...

 

[RobShipway]

1620 approx (actual 1617) off Reading northbound would normally be a Bournemouth to Man Picc service. 1620 off Reading southbound is a Newcastle to Southampton. Assuming the former I think it would normally be a single unit; but there were a number of odd workings and cancellations this morning according to RTT so who knows what trains may run doubled up.

There is a reliable weekly doubled service, Friday afternoon's 1445 off Bournemouth, (and its incoming train), but I can't think of any others...

Okay, thanks swt_passenger.

 

[dk1]

As said Voyager windows are very large & as long as you don't have a pillar seat they are fantastic for views with underfloor engines that fade to a gentle purr at speed. If it's during darkness or you are like much of the population & have your face constantly on a device then who cares anyway?

 

[43096]

and here the gricers and bashers fall fould of reality , the simple fact is that XC are providing far more seats and a near 'turn up and go' service in the core

Far more seats? Suggest you go and check the facts.

A 220 has 200 seats. The XC HSTs back before the Voyagers came in had 440 seats.

So an hourly HST had more seats than a half-hourly frequency 220 service. Certainly not far more seats with Voyagers, and once again exposing the utter stupidity of Virgin.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Pendolino windows are small but the windows on Voyagers are huge!

Yeah, windows (other than the alignment of seats to them other than in the all-tables coach) is hardly a complaint that can be applied to Voyagers. There are loads of them and they are huge.

 

[route:oxford]

Far more seats? Suggest you go and check the facts.

A 220 has 200 seats. The XC HSTs back before the Voyagers came in had 440 seats.

So an hourly HST had more seats than a half-hourly frequency 220 service. Certainly not far more seats with Voyagers, and once again exposing the utter stupidity of Virgin.

More fantasy

The vast majority of XC services were not delivered using HSTs - they were diagrammed for elderly 95mph max (on a good day) class 47 units hauling equally elderly Mk2s.

You were lucky if they were hauling 6 coaches and there was all the wasted time around the network as locos swapped ends or power units.

XC was a truly awful and unreliable experience.

(In reality, they should all have been swapped en-masse for brand new 5-car 158s in the early 90s)

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There is a reliable weekly doubled service, Friday afternoon's 1445 off Bournemouth, (and its incoming train), but I can't think of any others...

There's at least one mid-day Plymouth-Newcastle which doubles up at Bristol.

All these negative posts on Voyagers forget the Euston-Chester-Holyhead trains.
Pretty much ideal for the route, and there is no faster rolling stock solution without further electrification.
They are fine at speed with limited stops on the WCML.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Disruption on XC between Reading and Blazingsmoke. Failed freight train in the mortimer area. Might explain the double sets as traincrew and trains were out of position. BMH-MAN term BSK started RDG. NCL-SOU start terminate BHM didnt run down thames valley.

 

[The Planner]

Irrespective of the faults of Voyagers etc, we are not going to move away from the higher frequency service to a longer train hourly one, the world has moved on, people don't want to wait.

 

[swt_passenger]

There's at least one mid-day Plymouth-Newcastle which doubles up at Bristol.

That's correct, but it wouldn't normally be relevant to Robbie's query about a doubled up service seen at Reading...

 

[Peter Mugridge]

So an hourly HST had more seats than a half-hourly frequency 220 service. Certainly not far more seats with Voyagers, and once again exposing the utter stupidity of Virgin.

Wasn't it the DfT? I thought Virgin wanted 7 cars for the Voyagers but the DfT refused?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Far more seats? Suggest you go and check the facts.
A 220 has 200 seats. The XC HSTs back before the Voyagers came in had 440 seats.
So an hourly HST had more seats than a half-hourly frequency 220 service. Certainly not far more seats with Voyagers, and once again exposing the utter stupidity of Virgin.

There were never hourly HSTs though.
Just the odd through working instead of the LHCS, and mainly to Scotland.

Journey times have come down a lot too.
The LHCS was clumsy and slow (eg Poole-Glasgow via Birmingham and Manchester, 47-hauled throughout and running round at Reading.