When, and why, did a decent view out of the window lose its importance ?

[Justin Smith]

Many of us think modern rolling stock has a poor view out of the window, something of great importance to me for sure (I prefer Pacers to Class 150s for that very reason ! ), but why is it so low on the list of priorities for the current generation of rolling stock ?

This was bought into sharp relief by the picture below :

Picture on the left is the APT, and on the right a Pendolino.

And, even more incredibly, an article in the Railway Magazine from Feb 1931 (actually quoted in Railway Magazine "50 Years Ago" for Feb 1981 p87) where the LNER actually went to the trouble of turning the train so the corridor was on the other side from the view of the "coast scenery" whilst crossing the border into Scotland !

 

[Baxenden Bank]

It's probably been done to death elsewhere but I find many trains very claustrophobic, specifically where they have high backed seats. No view of the remainder of the carriage never mind of the outside world.

 

[Rail Quest]

Many of us think modern rolling stock has a poor view out of the window, something of great importance to me for sure (I prefer Pacers to Class 150s for that very reason ! ), but why is it so low on the list of priorities for the current generation of rolling stock ?

Anecdotally, everyone seems to just look at their phones, chat to people they're with or read a book more so than look out of the window. I feel like I'm in a minority when spending entire trips starring out the window. I get that the voyagers referenced above were made before this probably changed passenger habits but nowadays, I doubt it'd be seen as a priority because of modern habits.

To be fair, it feels very rolling stock dependent. Whilst window/seat alignment is a problem on pretty much all modern rolling stock these days, some trains are quite good IMO. An example would by the CAF units, a properly aligned seat on a 195/331 gives quite a good view outside.

 

[John Webb]

Many of us think modern rolling stock has a poor view out of the window, something of great importance to me for sure (I prefer Pacers to Class 150s for that very reason ! ), but why is it so low on the list of priorities for the current generation of rolling stock ?.......

I think it is much due to the bad influence of past micro-management by government dictating that coaches should carry as many people as possible. (The same micro-management that gave us the thin hard seats in the class 700 units and others....)

 

[Trackman]

I'm guessing with the photo on the left is an ATP and on the right a Voyager. Worlds apart, with crash worthiness factored in.
As for windows, I was really surprised on how large the windows were on the new Northern units.

I prefer Pacers to Class 150s for that very reason ! )

Indeed, a Pacer for me over a 150 all day long.

 

[507 001]

The PEP derivative units were known for poor seat/window alignment from new, so it’s not exactly a new issue.

 

[43096]

I'm guessing with the photo on the left is an ATP and on the right a Voyager.

No, it's an APT on the left and a Pendolino on the right.

 

[D365]

Many of us think modern rolling stock has a poor view out of the window, something of great importance to me for sure (I prefer Pacers to Class 150s for that very reason ! ), but why is it so low on the list of priorities for the current generation of rolling stock ?

This was bought into sharp relief by the picture below :

Could somebody provide a caption for the picture please.

 

[eastwestdivide]

The rot set in with the original seating arrangement in the Mk3s, where the bodyshells were the same for 1st and 2nd, with windows spaced for 1st, and the bays for 2nd gradually worse from end to centre of the coach, ending with an airline pair in the centre.

Could somebody provide a caption for the picture please.

APT (class 370) versus Pendolino (390) I think

 

[Justin Smith]

Could somebody provide a caption for the picture please.

Picture on the left is the APT, and on the right a Pendolino (now added to original post).

I'm guessing with the photo on the left is an ATP and on the right a Voyager. Worlds apart, with crash worthiness factored in.

I was (and am) perfectly satisfied with the crash worthiness of the APT, and the Mk3s come to that. And certainly if it means sacrificing a decent view out of the window to try and improve it !

Indeed, a Pacer for me over a 150 all day long.

Absolutely.....

 

[Merle Haggard]

I'm sure I'm not the only one to notice this.
Travel on a scenic route, find a seat with a good view and notice that, not only is no-one else looking out of the window but some have pulled the blinds down.
Good example was travelling on a XC H.S.T. diverted via Gloucester - Swindon. I spent the journey looking out of the window, catching sight of large mammals and circling birds of prey, undulating scenery and stone villages.. The young man across the gangway arrived, pulled down the blind and started to look at a film on his tablet. Ironically, the film seemed to be mainly some C.G.I. of invented creatures. Why is that better than reality?
Or, sitting on the sunlit side of the train at a table seat, making the most of the rare winter sun in a lightly loaded (and un-reservable) train. Another passenger arrives and, rather than sit on the darker side opposite, sits opposite to me. Places her tablet/laptop on the table; it's impossible to view because of the sun, so, without any comment, pulls down the blind, shared by both of us.
So, anecdotally, no-one but train enthusiasts wants to look out of the window and regard the source of light they provide as inconvenient.
Bring back the Bullied Tavern Cars

 

[Bigfoot]

It's probably been done to death elsewhere but I find many trains very claustrophobic, specifically where they have high backed seats. No view of the remainder of the carriage never mind of the outside world.

High backed seats are there to increase your chances of surviving a crash, granted they are rare, but I prefer my neck unbroken.

 

[Dr Hoo]

The rot set in with the original seating arrangement in the Mk3s, where the bodyshells were the same for 1st and 2nd, with windows spaced for 1st, and the bays for 2nd gradually worse from end to centre of the coach, ending with an airline pair in the centre.

Same with the APT prototypes. Eight windows per coach. Standard had 72 seats with 2x8 bays and 2x2 airlines in the centre which pushed the bays variously ‘out of synch’ with the windows.

 

[Mikey C]

The PEP derivative units were known for poor seat/window alignment from new, so it’s not exactly a new issue.

And the Mk3 EMUs were just as bad. Both them and the PEPs also have the large blank wall where the sliding doors open.

Train interior - class 313 at Moorgate

These trains built 1976 were the start of the bad design which overtook Britain's railways. A most gloomy interior due to not having enough windows.

www.flickr.com

The Networkers by contrast were designed with slim pillars and had the seats aligned perfectly with the windows.

 

[Ribbleman]

For all their current reliability issues, the 777s have very large windows following the input of the passenger consultations that took place before the design was finalised. That said, many of the passengers spend their journeys staring at their phones.

 

[norbitonflyer]

And the Mk3 EMUs were just as bad. Both them and the PEPs also have the large blank wall where the sliding doors open.

Whereas Underground stock had glazed door pockets from the 1935 tube stock right up until 1983 (the last to have door pockets rather than externally hung doors). Although surface stock had to wait until the A stock

So, anecdotally, no-one but train enthusiasts wants to look out of the window and regard the source of light they provide as inconvenient.

It's not just inconvenient. I get motion sickness if I can't see my surroundings moving past outside the vehicle.

 

[Turtle]

I'm sure I'm not the only one to notice this.
Travel on a scenic route, find a seat with a good view and notice that, not only is no-one else looking out of the window but some have pulled the blinds down.
Good example was travelling on a XC H.S.T. diverted via Gloucester - Swindon. I spent the journey looking out of the window, catching sight of large mammals and circling birds of prey, undulating scenery and stone villages.. The young man across the gangway arrived, pulled down the blind and started to look at a film on his tablet. Ironically, the film seemed to be mainly some C.G.I. of invented creatures. Why is that better than reality?
Or, sitting on the sunlit side of the train at a table seat, making the most of the rare winter sun in a lightly loaded (and un-reservable) train. Another passenger arrives and, rather than sit on the darker side opposite, sits opposite to me. Places her tablet/laptop on the table; it's impossible to view because of the sun, so, without any comment, pulls down the blind, shared by both of us.
So, anecdotally, no-one but train enthusiasts wants to look out of the window and regard the source of light they provide as inconvenient.
Bring back the Bullied Tavern Cars

I hope you pulled it back up.

 

[Justin Smith]

I hope you pulled it back up.

I hope he did as well !

High backed seats are there to increase your chances of surviving a crash, granted they are rare, but I prefer my neck unbroken.

It's a matter of proportion though isn't it ? How far would you go to reduce your chances of being seriously injured from, say, 1 in 100 Million*, to 1 in 110 Million ? If there was no cost to that reduction, either financial or in terms of your enjoyment of the journey, then yes it'd be worthwhile. But if there is any cost whatsoever it would not be worthwhile, not to me anyway.

* I am not sure what the chances of being seriously injured per train journey is but would have thought it would probably be even less than my guesstimate.

 

[Indigo Soup]

I don't think the habit of looking out of the window has much to do with it at all. There weren't a great many tablets or smartphones around when the Mark 3 stock was designed - or even when the Class 390s were designed, perhaps the worst offenders for lack of a view. And those newsagents and booksellers at railway stations weren't always selling Meal Deals.

No, I think it's a combination of cost - cheaper to provide fewer, smaller, windows, and to have a single window configuration for all vehicles - and the drive to put in as many seats as possible.

Does anyone have any recollection of how the window alignment for the 72-seat, 16-bay Mark 3s compared to the later 76-seat, 10-bay configuration of the same stock?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Does anyone have any recollection of how the window alignment for the 72-seat, 16-bay Mark 3s compared to the later 76-seat, 10-bay configuration of the same stock?

Very similar to the Class 195/331, i.e. the end table bay being aligned but then the rest being progressively worse off-alignment. The airline seats facing out from the centre partition would have had a good full-window view.

Or if you prefer the same as the tables side of the 76-seat layout.

 

[Sun Chariot]

When it comes to a lack of clear view from the carriage, wind the clock back to May 1949 - Bulleid's Tavern Cars and their companion Dining Cars.
Attached images (from a general Internet search) show them in their original configuration.

 

[Merle Haggard]

I hope you pulled it back up.

Indeed; there was a polite exchange of opinions before that was done.

Probably a problem that few will sympathise with, but the 1st in both 221s and 800s have single seats facing the same direction, one behind the other but sharing a single window and blind. That's more difficult to resolve, I've found, if unilateral action is taken (by the other, never me).

 

[Bevan Price]

On occasion, I have leaned my head on the window to ensure that blinds cannot be fully lowered. But what we need is the type of blind I encountered in Austria back in the 1970s/80s. This was some kind of fine mesh - enough to reduce the full intensity of hot sunlight, but fine enough that you could still see outside the train.

 

[scotraildriver]

When we first got class 170s way back in 2000 I was always surprised how the inward facing, single seats begins the cab always used to be occupied first. I assumed that having no one next to you was preferable to a view out the window. It's still the same, but the occupant obviously engrossed on a smartphone these days.

 

[duffield]

When we first got class 170s way back in 2000 I was always surprised how the inward facing, single seats begins the cab always used to be occupied first. I assumed that having no one next to you was preferable to a view out the window. It's still the same, but the occupant obviously engrossed on a smartphone these days.

If available, I always grab one of those on a service I expect to be full when travelling from Derby to Nottingham. I've seen the views a thousand times and it guarantees you a little private space.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

High backed seats are there to increase your chances of surviving a crash, granted they are rare, but I prefer my neck unbroken.

Of the tens of thousands of passenger rail vehicles built over my lifetime, how many have suffered an accident of any kind whatsoever and how many went to the scrapyard totally unscathed? Of those which did suffer an incident how many injuries were prevented by the high backed seats and what level of reduction of injury was achieved compared to an original Mark 3 seat?

 

[vuzzeho]

Honestly? The requirement for more seats means window alignment can't be prioritised for every seat. We face chronic overcrowding, so it makes sense that making sure people can sit on trains is more important than making sure less people get a good view out of windows (which many people won't even look at).

 

[AJDesiro]

I think the 196s (despite their flaws) are probably some of the only modern units to have excellent window alignment, where every single seat other than the bay next to the toilet is perfectly aligned with a window; the Avanti 80x also manage it well (especially at the bays), and these are both units with a high seated capacity per carriage.

It just goes to show that it is still possible…

 

[BlueLeanie]

Of the tens of thousands of passenger rail vehicles built over my lifetime, how many have suffered an accident of any kind whatsoever and how many went to the scrapyard totally unscathed? Of those which did suffer an incident how many injuries were prevented by the high backed seats and what level of reduction of injury was achieved compared to an original Mark 3 seat?

Well, if you're going to deny taller people a head rest and back support, why not switch to straight, backless bench seating throughout?

 

[Justin Smith]

Honestly? The requirement for more seats means window alignment can't be prioritised for every seat. We face chronic overcrowding, so it makes sense that making sure people can sit on trains is more important than making sure less people get a good view out of windows (which many people won't even look at).

They are already squeezing more seats into carriages, in fact for me (I am only 6ft, but have relatively long legs for my height ! ), they have gone too far with that already, particularly on stock which may be used for anything other than short journeys. These stats are from 2010 but I cannot imagine it has improved since then. On some rolling stock I literally cannot get my thigh to fit in the available space and have to sit with splayed legs.
But whatever point you are making there is absolutely no excuse for this (left Pendolino, right class 222) :

I can remember travelling all the way from Edinburgh to Doncaster in Aug 2000 on an "IC225" Mk4 coach staring at 12" of grey plastic with slivers of window either side.....