Great Western Coffee Shop

i never go near the Cotswold Line but this seems to be a flash point between users and think it would be interesting to see main issue

faster service

please vote above  ;D

note: the fares are very reasonable especially the season tickets.  THere is sufficient FC seating in the peaks.  And you know something, even in the morning peak there is often seating available even after reading in SC - I often look as I walk to the elevators to move over to plat 10.  

I remember a few years ago, even after oxford there were people sitting in the vesdtibules of FC because everyhere else was rammed.

I think almost everyone would agree turbos are just not designed to be sat in for 2.5 hours!

I DID!

as soon as i wrote that it popped up must be a delay on votes, only 2 people have voted so far

Difficult choice, but faster service will always win.

At the end of the day, it is the only one to get people out of their cars. If Worcester people knew they could get to London in 2 hours, the passenger numbers would boom.

It's interesting that you've posted your poll in 'across the west', relex109, yet you seem to have made it specific to the Cotswold line. That may be why you've received so few responses?

No problem: I'll reply on the basis of my own perception of what I generally look for on journeys 'across the west' - in which case, I'd tend to agree with previous posters, and voted for 'faster service'.  ;)

I'm glad you noticed as I wasn't sure where to put this please could you move it for me :-) btw in okehampton today if you can make it

Topic duely moved ... and I have posted a "please go and vote" advertorial where it was ...

What i would want, as would most people, if asked - is an utterly reliable, punctual service - which is not an option here. Note that the number of posts to the Charlbury commuter blog has fallen off a cliff in recent times, because FGW are doing a good job of delivering on that front - whether or not some people want to acknowledge it. I wonder what West Coast customers would say they want - a Virgin flier once a day each way, or a service that does a bit better than 21% on time, which is how bad it has got some days recently due to infrastructure failures.

Allied to that would be plugging the holes in the current timetable - sort of addressed here - better provision for commuting in the Vale of Evesham to Worcester and some sort of shuttle at the southern end of the line to produce a 30-minute frequency for much of the day.


So why are Virgin running trains every 20 minutes on the Birmingham and Manchester routes? Following your logic, one train an hour running at Virgin's headline timings should suffice. With slower FGW journey times on most routes, in recent years, traffic should have been falling if you are right - it hasn't, until recently perhaps, and that's nothing to do with the speed the trains are running at.

And some people go on and on about "park-and-ride" passengers from Charlbury and Hanborough. If you put on more frequent trains, then you would get plenty of cars off the roads between those places and Oxford - a reliable service with a turn-up-and-go frequency is a far better traffic builder than a headline timing achieved by one train a day.

As for "lower fairs" - is this some kind of attack on the Cotswolds' penchant for village fetes?

Unfair comparison for 2 reasons:

1. All of the VT services are fast.

2. Apart from plugging the gaps, there is no scope for frequency improvements for Worcester - London trains. Even I am prepared to admit that 30 minute frequencies Worcester to London would be excessive! ;) Some extra commuter trains from Evesham to Worcester would be good, but the majority of Worcester people will want journey time and reliability improvements first.

:P

Let me remind you of your own words:


Faster is not the only way to get people out of their cars - that's why Virgin run high-frequency, it gets people out of cars and also gets them off planes - the number of Manchester-London flights is in rapid decline, in part because the trains are faster, but also because - so long as NR's rubber bands stay on for the day - after years and years of disruption for engineering work on the WCML, it offers a reliable service, and you don't need to look at a timetable, just turn up at the station. Therefore, speed is not the only factor at work.

Virgin's trains are 'faster' because the few places they stop at are a whole lot bigger than Hereford or Worcester (eg Coventry is twice the size of the two combined, MK is fast heading that way), so they don't need to make so many stops to pay their way. That simply doesn't apply on the Cotswold Line, never has and never will. Even one super-fast HST a day, with 472 people from Hereford and Worcester filling every single seat before it leaves Shrub Hill, will not alter the economics of the route, which are reliant on money from the intermediate stations.

And here you are saying there is no scope for frequency improvements on the Cotswold Line, yet you have on many occasions in the past advocated either booting intermediate passengers off Worcester trains at Oxford or splitting trains at Oxford, with the following stopper, or the rear portion of the train, then making the full journey through to Worcester - and the whole process being repeated in the other direction - which looks to me rather like a doubling of the frequency - and a doubling of fuel bills, train crew costs and wear and tear on the track - but then of course, so much new money will flow from Worcester that it will all pay for itself - silly me for forgetting that.

How much more reliable than 94.5 per cent do you want FGW to be? Even Chiltern, Merseyrail and c2c are now stuck at 96-97 percent, with far less complicated networks than FGW runs

Is it too much to ask........

One service in each direction be an express

I suggest the 0630ish in the morning and the 1830ish in the evening - (yes its selfish! but I would adapt if other services were more appropriate)

Just give worcester area passengers the chance to get to london in two hours - we know its possible - it used to happen

I was asked how many people even contemplate what I do - that is only because of distance.  How many people in the SE commute nearly two hours each way - large number I suspect.  Give us a fast service - more maybe would.

And as Industry Insider has already demonstrated, you are highly likely to get something nearer to 2hrs post-redoubling, with the trains making stops much as they do now - I don't believe five or 10 minutes past that mark really is the end of the world and I don't think most people in Worcester would be that bothered either, if they knew the train was going to get them there on the dot of the published time - though I agree a London arrival time about 8.35-8.40 for the first Hereford is needed.

How many people with a two-hour commute actually want to do it? And unless you work around Paddington, you need to add cross-London time in too, along with travel to and from the station at the other end. You are a pretty rare case and I really don't think that's going to change - even when it was 1hr 20mins for the fastest train between Moreton and London, regular commuters were rare birds and no more common than they are now - and they usually catch the first two trains of the day, which have never been the quickest, not the Herefords.

Sorry, buy your arguments are getting worse and more desperate - why try and twist an old post?

When I suggested splitting trains at Oxford, I was talking about getting a fast portion to Worcester. The section behind would continue to Worcester to cater for the Worcester market. Of course that would mean, on paper, a service doubling to Worcester - but in reality not.

As for VHF - if you want to travel at an affordable prices, you still need a timetable. And people are attracted by the journey time FAR MORE than the fact that it is 3 tph. In reality, for a 2 hour journey, 2tph/3tph is little difference. It does provide more capacity, and allows each train to miss a stop without reducing other stations' service levels.

Punctuality, fair enough - but it will take a good stint of punctuality in the 90s% before people are convinced to return to the Cotswold Line.

My arguments are getting worse and more desperate?

I quote: ", I was talking about getting a fast portion to Worcester. The section behind would continue to Worcester to cater for the Worcester market."

Eh?

You claim I am twisting things. What I would call twisted is saying that running two trains instead of one is not a doubling of the frequency - because that is the reality, on paper and everywhere else. Unless of course, one portion went non-stop to Worcester and all the rest of us for intermediate stops were crammed into the other bit  then yes, it would only be a one train an hour frequency (except at the crock of gold and traffic magnet known as Worcester).

If speed is the only thing that matters, then given that on every major intercity route except the WCML (when it is working) and bits of XC, trains are now slower than they were under BR, following your logic people will have turned away from the railways, which is not the case. Flights from Manchester to London would be in rude health, not being taken off - and Concorde would have wiped the floor with jumbo jets.

And your beloved Chiltern should clearly give up on Birmingham now - because their service offer is based on nothing more than punctuality, reliability and value for money - and the nearer you get to London, ever greater frequency. On the odd occasions I use Chiltern from Bicester, I never worry about aiming for a specific train, because I know there will be another one along in a maximum of 20 minutes.

If you want to spend endless hours playing the options on journey planners to find the cheapest fare, that's up to you. Your average passenger doesn't - they just want to know that there are trains at the times they want to travel that will get them where they want to go in a reasonable time, and at the time stated, and the more options they have, the better.

And you simply won't give FGW any credit for improving punctuality, will you? Overall, for the past 12 months, the High Speed Services punctuality figure is 89.8 per cent, while the figure for May was 94.3 per cent. In the Thames Valley, those figures are 90.6 and 95.4. They reflect my experience - yes, on the Cotswold Line - and, from what has been posted elsewhere, other people's FGW journeys too. How often do you actually set foot on the Cotswold Line or any other FGW trains?

ok the reason i set up this poll wasnt for another place to argue about this, it was to see what each individual thought without one person shouting and screaming that they are correct and everyone else is wrong, from what i can see from the poll results so far is that there doesnt seem to be a problem with getting a seat, of that that isnt a priority aslong as your on the train? there is also a mix of more frequest and faster services, unfortunatly the result of this would be in order for some of the bigger stations to get faster services the smaller stations would lose regularity, cant help but wonder what the people who belive the smaller stops should be cut out if they lived there, i think someone brought up a good point that most people dont mind if the train takes abit longer aslong as it runs to time do people agree with this?

i'll take the middle ground here

I PERSONALLY have not seen greater punctuality - but I admit I am cursed

i am going to start a blog and try to get a personal bad luck discount

however on a more serious note............ I am between the two stances

I do think there is a case for a 2 hour or close to sub two hour service from worcester to london - what gets missed out is up to the planners

If speed is not an issue why to virgin run the one only stop euston train to give a headline figure from brum

two hours versus 2 hors 15 can make a BIG difference - esecially when for those who work IN LONDON rather than the thames valley going to brum and then virgin to euston is cheaper (on a monthly season ticket FC) - well it was about six week ago when I checked it out

But then you get to the 15 minutes only affects regular commuters

you may not et many idiots like me but you WILL get more people commuting 2-3 times a week

No!

You have a market at worcester and malvern which could well travel more frequently - I know of two people who live in worcester who travel to Reading 3 times a week who drive to cheltenham because its easier than the cotswolds chugging. that just personal acquaintance.

I dont think anyone is saying have a WCML frequency express service but yes, as I've said before - if you live in a small town you cant expect every train to stop there

If there was one quick and reliable express from the north cotwolds - north of evesham to malvern  - which only stopped at evesham, morton, one of kingham or charlbury, oxford,  reading and pad - yes I do think it would pay its way - and one in reutrn

so are you telling me that you would sacrifice the entitlement of a regular service to smaller stations in order to save 15 mins on your journey? how much quicker would the penzance to london be if it only stopped at plymouth exeter taunton and reading make the other people get a local to a bigger station so that i can get there 20 mins faster

yes I would

if I could have a service that allowed me to leave worcester at 630 , get me to london at 830 and the same in reverse - hell yes - I did it in 2004 and early 2005

the thread was - what is important to you

The probem is since may 2005 its gotten beyond a joke how much padding is there

personally id lose the padding - but then 2/5 times the train will be late so we know that is not going to happen (thats from previous experience)

fact is - if you live in morton/kingham/charlbury - you may have to change but you have more choice of trains anyway! as far as I can tell

relex, that has always been the position of those posting here who travel from worcester, no matter that it is one of the smallest cities in England and simply cannot support the type of limited-stop services they dream about - and the service Worcester does have depends on money earned from the stations along the route, whether they like it or not.

Apart from one train a day that turns back at Moreton in mid-afternoon, everything else that stops here and places further south is through to or from Worcester, so no, we don't have more choice - we have just the same frequency as Worcester, so that's why we don't like people advocating dropping our stops to save themselves five minutes on their journeys.

None of those advocating this one super-train have ever explained what its value would be if it runs at a time that is no use whatever to them. You aren't going to use it if it gets there an hour too early or too late for you, are you?

Some of you want it to be the first from Hereford, others the next. What on earth is wrong with everything running to the same overall timing? Something that will be easier to organise in future with more double track.

And coming home, you're just going to get on the first thing going your way, not wait for a later train that is quicker but still gets you home later than the first train - saving yourself a lot more than 15 minutes.

Let the redoubling happen and see what they can manage after that, but please forget notions of dropping stops at the likes of Moreton, Charlbury and Kingham - they are far too lucrative to miss, so it will never happen. All the small stations along the way that you hate so much generate almost half as many rail journeys a year combined as Worcester.

Virgin run one quicker train a day each way so they can use that time in their adverts - just as BR used to do between London and Birmingham way back in the 1980s.

i must be wierd then as i would happily endure 10 mins extra to ensure some poor sod who has the misfortune to live at a smaller station gets a regular service

Firstly, I do appreciate the improvements in reliability. I regret I have not stated this before. :-X

Recent Cotswold journeys have run to time (despite the odd hold up here and there) except the first off peak Turbo service, which obviously can't keep to 125 mph timings south of Didcot.

It also seems like SDO is getting more efficient, with reduced dwells. Although ticket checking is still abysmal - not blaming the guards, it just seems like there is too much for them to be doing. It must only be the ticket barriers preventing a lot of fare dodging!

However, this thread is about importance. For Worcester people, speed of service is most important too. A service missing Pershore, Honeybourne and Hanborough on a service that arrives in London by 0830 would be used by MORE long distance business travellers - most people need to be at work by 9. If this can be achieved by a <2 hour schedule, so much for the better.

And when it comes to missing out stops - the stations have a decent service for the size of station. With any shuttle service, this will get even better. Therefore, I don't see the problem with a train missing a few stops now and then! At the moment FGW can't as they can't fit in such trains with all the padding.

And wouldn't an advert from FGW highlighting 2 hour schedules to London from Worcester be a great thing for pulling passengers onto the railway. Just have some lower off peak fares as far as Oxford to get bums on (the many empty) seats!

Size of station (do you mean size of community served? Foregate Street is hardly 'big' as city centre stations go) Charlbury is a very small town - population about 3,000 - yet the number of train journeys it generates is massive - because rail is by far the quickest and most convenient way to and from Oxford and London. You can say the same about Moreton and Kingham (and the other places Kingham serves). The trains stop where there is money to be made - including Hanborough.

Industry Insider has ably demonstrated the difficulty of doing anything much to amend the current level of peak services, due to the tidal flows in morning and evening, so slotting in more trains at these times is hard.

As for needing to be at work by 9am - very few of the Worcester business passengers are day in, day out commuters - so I doubt they all need to be in London offices by then, witness the numbers who use the Cathedrals Express - very heavily loaded arriving at Moreton today, with barely a seat left past Kingham and full and lots standing from Charlbury into Oxford. First class was somewhere between half and two-thirds full leaving Oxford.

This is a case where maybe moving this train forward 15 minutes or so could create a slot for an extra service, reaching Oxford at 8.50, to ease the pressure on the Cathedrals Express on that section of the journey and give Hanborough another useful train into Oxford - but not be a substitute, as many people from Moreton and the West Oxfordshire stops are going all the way into London. The trick would be getting a train out to Moreton. Perhaps it could hitch a ride on the back of a slightly earlier 6.48 London-Malvern?

And moving the 8.58 from Malvern back to its old time of 8.30-8.35 and putting an HST back on it would also help, as the yawning gap in London arrivals off the Cotswold Line in the mornings (nothing from 9.47 until 11.30) is probably the worst aspect of the current timetable - many people feel they have no choice but to use the Cathedrals Express to get a decent day out in London.

And wouldn't an advert from FGW highlighting a 2hr schedule bring FGW into disrepute when people look at the timetable and realise that every other train takes five, 10 or 15 minutes longer?

No-one in Birmingham ever took that BR sign bragging about 'London Euston in 91 minutes' or whatever it was seriously in the 1980s, because they knew that every other train took 101. The railways cannot get away with doing a Ryanair in their advertising - nor should they try it.

Far be it from me to intervene in a debate between experts, as a new contributor, but it does seem to me that the journey that I now make between Hereford and Paddington via Evesham on Sundays, that used to take 3:00 hours, and now takes 3:30 or more, according to engineering works, and stops at 17 stations (if a direct train), is beyond the bounds of what might be considered to be reasonable, particularly if the length of the journey at each end is taken into account. I cannot speak for all weekend commuters, but can only say that many people that I know locally have either given up coming back to Herefordshire at the weekends or have chosen to drive. I can only conclude that those responsible for drawing up time-tables have no idea what it is like to work in London from first thing Monday morning until last thing Friday evening and then take 10 hours out of the weekend to travel.  The days when I used to catch a train at Kingham 7:30am each morning and be in work in Victoria seem to be a distant memory.  But then, that was before the awful people moved in to the Cotswolds.     

Welcome to the Coffee Shop forum, Nostalgic - and thanks for your rather thought-provoking post!

I think you have made what is called a lifestyle choice - and if FGW was required to provide specially-tailored services to fit in with everyone's lifestyle choices, then they would be struggling to actually operate a coherent timetable. Now that they run the entire Cotswold and Oxford service, rather than a couple of trains each way, each day, FGW have made choices about service and stopping patterns that may have extended your journey which benefit them financially by increasing the frequency and attractiveness of the service at places that generate more money than Hereford.

As with the weekday timetable, there is a chunk of padding added in recent times for reliability reasons - notably five-minute stops by virtually everything at Evesham at weekends - and quite a bit is likely to be cut post-redoubling.

There are still some nice people in the Cotswolds - though whether I count as one, I have no idea...

Good question, re, whats important to me !..
I live in Honeybourne and as so, have a pretty good service, im not a regular traveller on FGW, but do use them for leisure use whenever i can, and i have an interest in railways.

Now, i have a small child of 4, plus wife, if we wish to go out for the day using a FGW service, chances are that if we do find some seats we will not be able to sit as a family group, due to the design of the revampt Mk 3's and the total lack of seats with a proper table arrangement.  FGW advertise a thing called a FAMILY CARRIAGE, on certain trains, well for the life of me ive never seen one, i would expect the 'family carriage' so be so designed for family groups, ie so that a family can sit together, correct me if im wrong, but the HST just isnt a leisure travellers train, its now a glorified commuter train, just not practical for family travel. Families do use trains and its a great shame the designers of the HST didnt take this into account,or those at FGW who ok'ed the design, but we all know why that was..something to do with more seats in the franchise agreement.  I suppose if there ever was a proper carriage with tables intoduced it would be quickly taken by the office boys and girls with thier mobile offices, and wouldnt they like that!!.

As for trying to reserve a table seat, well, you should try it, ive never yet suceeded.... As for a recent trip to devon, i could have used FGW, but opted for XC, i got a table seat in both directions, it was on time, comfortable and the tea man was very regular., so as for importance, that pretty much sums it up.

I'm one for 'lower fairs'. All the tall rides give me vertigo. ;D ;D

ok order for me most important first:

better frequency
more standard seats
lower fairs
rolling stock
faster journey
more first class seats

Why do people have so m uch of a problem with people who work on the train.......there seems to be resentment on all fronts about this

Is it the mobile phone issue?  I work, I need a table, cant say ive ever used my mobile phone for work!

Welcome to the Coffee Shop forum, shaun healey - and sorry to learn that you've not managed to benefit from a FGW 'family carriage' yet.

They certainly do exist: I've tended to avoid them - not because they're full of people using laptops, but because they are actually used by families, and thus are often rather lively!  ;)

For so many people the seats with tables in standard class are so much better - be it a decent place to work (far better a proper table than a shelf that the person in front shakes about, and is too small to get a decent screen angle), a place to meet with colleagues on your way to / from a meeting (far better that talking to the back of heads or across and aisle), or a place to have the whole familiy.  So there will be natural competiton for the limited resource with everyone thinking that his / her profile of traveller has the best moral claim on those seats.

People who work say "I am a regular traveller - I bring good income to the railways and so I deserve the better seats"

Groups travelling to meetings will say "we need those seats ... other such as people who want to use the train as an office can do almost as well in other seats"

And people with kids will say "come on - we can't possibly cope, the four of us, in the racks".

I suspect you were asking a rhetorcial question!

I suppose the better / official answer is to say "if you really need the extra space / facilities / table offered, you should travel first class.  You're expecting too much by feeling you have a right to a table in standard class; you get what you pay for!"

While you have two products (rack and table) where the demand is our of proportion to the supply to the extend that there's a supply shortage of one, you're always going to get the resentment, I fear.

I also suspect that some non-workers rightly or wrongly view workers as people who have only got the laptop out to fuel their self importance. 

Speaking as someone who has travelled with a laptop, large bags, pushchairs and a bike on occasion, I think that we all just need to be a bit more tolerant of each other. 

Why are we mostly all tolerant of disabled passengers who need extra assistance or facilities (wheelchair space etc), but intolerant of folk who need  space for a laptop, bike or pushchair?

We are social mammals - putting up with other people is part of life

Agreed totally if, like me you do it all the time!

However if you were a one off business traveller, say going for an interview, or a meeting, and you were lucky enough to get a standard seat with a table.......................I suspect that there are still those that would relegate you to the racks.  I always here people supporting groups and families but I have yet to hear anyone suggest that maybe someone who will use a table rather than use it to perch a cup of coffee on with a magazine is better off with it!

The case for the occasional business traveller being 'allowed' a seat at the table is that he has probably paid far more (in pence per mile) than the season ticket holder, or the family who will be partly/probably travelling on child tickets, advanced purchases, and railcards.  Why should the people who pay less get the best facilities  ;D ??? :P ?

There's a perception that disability doesn't come through life style choice, whereas haveing a cycle with you does ... and there is a sufficient minority of wheelchairs on trains for the more fortunate ones of us to feel really good about giving up more than aveage space to them. One wonders if things would get more tense if wheelchair users became the majority of rail passengers ...

I'm sure this is one we won't resolve here.  In Utopia, fares and incomes are such that anyone who needs the extra space and / or a table has sufficient resources to be able to pay for those First Class facilities ... probably funded by (?) the state / system ensuring they get the money they need for such things, rather than the state / system feeling that people aren't actually bright enough to make their own spending decisions, but rather spending for them and distorting supply and demand.  Oops - I could get very political!

Absolutely agree that using a wheelchair is not a lifestyle choice.  However deciding to travel is always a choice whoever the passenger is.  We all agree that it is wrong to think "why doesn't that person in the wheelchair stay at home rather than take up valuable space on our train", but plenty of people will think that about the mother with 3 children or the cyclist who takes his bike with him because he needs it as part of his journey or the student with 3 huge bags. 

Everyone has a right to travel.  If you are a supporter of public transport then you have to accept that transport is avilable to any member of the public.

I really dislike these argument along the lines of "I am more entitled to a seat than you because I am a regular customer/paid more for my ticket/have important work to do."  they are subjective, downright antisocial and mean spirited.   they also apply false categories to people.  I have personally been both the annoying parent with a pushchair (on a cheap AP fare) and the smartly dressed business man with no luggage (on a ^140 walk-on fare) who has given up his flip-down seat for someone else's buggy.  Which version of me was more entitled to a seat?

There  has to be an element of give and take and "to each according to his needs"

I do remember the old ads on the TV for the HST, remember jimmy savel and 'the age of the train', back in them days, BR did cater for the family, nice wide seats, all with tables etc, I just think that now the leisure traveller has been forgotten, we are in the minority, but its the way of life now with commutors, why cant they start work when they get to work (toungue in cheek comment)!!.

Ok we have a carriage on some services that are designated a FAMILY CARRAIGE, so if I join that train with my family and head for the carriage, and then see loads of office types with laptops hogging the table seats, i would be a tad dissapointed, especially if there were other seats in the other carriages available, it clearly shows that the designers got it wrong, but they or FGW would argue otherwise, people want some space when travelling, of note here, i was sitting on a XC voyager at Paignton a short while ago, we as a family were the first to board it and therefore got a table seat, as others boarded, they went straight for the tables seats, as we had a bit of time to kill before departure, i had a quick stroll though the train, and all the table seats were taken, even by lone travellers. XC has more table seats per train than does FGW, and also the seat back hieghts are much less enclosing on the passenger, probably due to the curved design to them, rather than the tall angular HST seat.

I know nothings going to change on the FGW HST, but as the question was asked about whats important to me, well thats it, I use the train when i can, my little one loves travelling on trains, its just a pity that FGW put little thought into the general user of trains and made them into commuter trains.

long distance train travel in the uk seems to be pack em in get em there fast now.... something has been lost!

Indeed, but is dumbing down train travel so that it's no better than a bus really the way to go? 

The direct coach takes about 4 hours for London to Worcester ... and that gets customers. Following your argument, if 4 hours is OK for the coach, then it's OK for the train. So that would allow the London to Oxford stoppers to carry on through to Worcester ... 16:27 from Paddington to Oxford, arrives Oxford 18:11, leaves 18:16, into Foregate Street at 20:08 (20 mins slower than current train as it calls everywhere including the halts).  Still better that the 16:30 coach which arrives in Worcester at 20:35, but I'll bet there would be more than one or two indignant people here if I put if forward as a serious proposal.

Much better - IMHO - to take advantage of the strengths of rail. The ability to move around on the journey and provide some extra space (especially in First). Smoother ride. Faster journey times. Ability to take cycles. More comfortable. More ecofriendly. Safer. If you're going to say it's sufficient for rail only to match other means, then what's the point of offering rail?


I've probably helped stoke the fire  ;)

I can see the huge problems FGW (and other operators) have faced with tables.

Personally, I prefer tables. Not because I can do work - but because the view is better! (esp on FGW's HSTs with the unnecessarily high seats)


I agree. Whilst I appreciate that some have to work on the train; or other can save time at home/work by working, I do feel that people can't switch off anymore. I saw somebody on the train with three Blackberrys :o the other day and just wondered what effects being on call all the time were having on the person...

The main reason I like rail travel is because I can relax and enjoy the view. When driving, I hate the fact that I can't look around.

Perhaps we would be a healthier society if we used our train travel to escape from the busy world, and enjoy the countryside.

[waits for the backlash]

i have been known to have two laptops on the go as well as a phone!

My defence?  I was doing my OU work on mine but had to wait for an IM to come in from somebody at work to give the green light to someone else to start their piece of the exercise!  Cant connect to the IM system at client from my own machine! Had to have a papertrail for compliance so calling me was not an option!

I personally find coach travel claustrophobic, slow and uncomfortable. At least with the train I can get up and walk around!

I know that you are an exception. Your commutes are so long you NEED to work on the train (esp. with the OU stuff as well). I just hope you switch off once you're off the train!

But when people are on a 40, 60 or 90 minute commute, perhaps they should relax...

But once you get your Blackberry you are "empowered" - just imagine the power that man must wield (or thought he did) with three of them !

It was a woman.

Some seem to be missing my point, which is family travel. and the abilty for a family to sit together as a group, which as the HST has a almost total lack of tables (even in the so called family carriage) is an impossibility, if there were, i would travel more often on FGW, its what is important to me.

I seem to remember back when my (now grown-up) kids were young and we travelled everywhere by train as a family, I used to welcome any chance at all to sit well away from them so I could get on with reading my paper and gazing out of the window! "That's alright dear, you sit there with our little darlings and I'll find myself somewhere up the other end of the carriage..."  ;D  :D

Have to agree completely with that - the majority of travellers (especially the ones paying the higher fares) are travelling individually or in pairs. At risk of sounding like a stuck record, I really like what FGW has done to the HSTs because it has produced lots of very nigh quality airline seating, vastly superior to the airline seats in the HSTs pre-refurb which were pretty dreadful, especially in terms of legroom. That is why I always sought out a table pre-refurb and just put up with the occasional specimen of swamp life sitting opposite me exploring the deepest recesses of his/her nasal cavity.

The argument that "it's impossible for families to travel without a table" is, I'm afraid, fatuous. I've never heard families travelling by air or bus (or car, far that matter...) complain that it's impossible without fixed tables. I've travelled with groups of friends on the new HSTs many times and it's just not an issue. It can sometimes be tricky finding a suitable number of seats together (which you can't always solve by reserving - XC seem to produce some bizarrely random seat reservations for groups) but that was always the case anyway; people would invariably spread out 1 or 2 to a table until all the tables were gone.

As an aside, Amtrak's Amfleet vehicles (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amfleet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amfleet) if you're interested) which operate most of the long-distance services here in the North East US (unless you want to pay through the nose to travel on a marginally faster Acela service) are fitted entirely with airline-style seating except for the cafe cars and I heard no complaints from the large number of family groups using the trains over the Independence Day holiday last weekend. These seats always face forwards; Amtrak somehow manages to physically turn whole trains at the end of each journey. Considering their age they are remarkably presentable and comfortable, my main gripe is that they have slitty little windows with big gaps between them so there are lots of seats with no view... It's almost like being back at home on a Voyager except it has legroom and enough toilets (sorry, restrooms!).

One of the things that annoy me about table usage are those that sit at one but don't need one!  And I dont mean families.  I see it more often on arrive wales services.

You get on, a good 90 minutes to do some work, you look up and down the car and every table has at least two people at it, which is fine.

EXCEPT all they are using it for it to put a cup of coffee on!  Invariably they are reading a novel or a news paper.  These same people  then get shirty when you sit down and dare to encroach over a perfectly measured 1/4 of the table (which wit a 17 inch laptop on a 158 I do just by getting the laptop out).  YOU DONT NEEED A TABLE FOR A CUP OF COFFEE!

I once had a woman on a 175 down to Newport.  She was sitting at the table that only has two seats - i think the wheel chair space is in front of it - and had her luggage piled on the table.  It was the only table not occupied as above.  When I asked her could I have some space she directed me to the airline seats. Pointed out that my laptop wouldnt fit so (un)graciously move her suitcases etc and then flounced off making a big point of being the one to move.  And proceeded to go back to sleep.

I did however get the table to myself for the duration - by the time we got to HEreford if was full of course books and laptop - but at least it was being used as more than a luggage rack!

After considerable travel first and second on the continent, there is nothing worse than returning to Britain's overcrowded and jam packed full trains. Everyone should have access to a table and enable a group of four to sit together 2+2. This issue is of course nothing to do with the TOCs but the way investment has been starved both financially AND it's methodology. To ask any TOC to 'tool up' to meet demand with such contrived franchises is nothing short of unforgivable. Jamming people into the 'Airline' seating for anything more than an hour is very poor and for anyone over 5' 10'' cruel there simply isn't the needed room in them.

Doubling the amount of rolling stock in use would help on services that currently have less than three coaches, and more services for all others would assist, but it might help to note that a train in Switzerland is declared officially by SBB as Full when over 80% of the Second or 70% of the First accomodation is occupied. They recognise the need for space and treat passengers with the respect they deserve, hence the seven minute dual pathing of relief services in busy periods.

The UK needs to think strongly about signalling in the future to enable more services to run on existing tracks, in addition to the obvious bottlenecks requiring work, and the HS series of developments.

It's shameful that twenty years after I visited France and did a day trip from Paris to Nantes, in comfort and at 150mph plus, with just over 4 hours travel, that the same distance from the British Capital to St Austell, makes a day trip by train to the Eden project from London an impossible dream.

Britain needs to rethink, and rethink quickly many aspects of the Rail System.

My laptop was perfectly suited to the small table on a number of journeys I took yesterday (One being an empty HST up the cotswolds. Funny that ;))

I think the comparison is probably wrong in most cases!

When you fly it is - for most people - a one off return trip to somewhere they want to go to. Several hours in economy is bearable.

Train travel in the UK is more mundane for most people - and you spend a lot longer in total there than you probably do in a plane (business people and jet setters excepted)

If I cant fly Virgin and use my airmiles or premium/upper then I will go cattle because I cant afford the several K plus to go better - because it is a one off! 

Note - most first/business seats are not occupied by people paying the full fare - they are occupied by frequent fliers/mileage club holders having upgraded.

The comparison is only valid I think for people using the train to go on vacation - and how many of them are there?

How can this be done realistically. The trains would have to be hugely long to seat an off peak load at tables. As for rush hour. Scale this up to "everybody" - how many new depots, stations, platforms would have to be rebuilt. The cost? And that's before you add on the price of the extra carriages!


The fact of the matter is that people would rather sit down than stand. At peak times, this is impossible, but the HSTs have been made airline only to maximise seated passengers. I don't particularly like it. But instead of ranting without thinking about practicalities, I realise why FGW have done what they have done.


Very nice for the Swiss. But what a waste of rolling stock during the off peaks. And a busy country like Britain is never going to achieve such statistics!


We have. But ramming more trains onto the same tracks affects reliability and punctuality. Look at the WCML with VHF. The cramming of more trains is also why many FGW trains take longer now, as they get held up more by other trains.


But France is different to the UK. Paris is more central than London, so it can have lots of LGVs in all axises from the capital. Cities in France are better spaced so it makes sense for a high Speed line.

Nantes is France's 6th-ish city (aka, say, Liverpool - who's hourly clockface service is probably as good as or better than Nantes') so it deserves good rail links. St Austall is nowhere near that. If, by some dream, a HSL reaches Cornwall, it probably wouldn't stop here - it would speed onto Truro! More likely, an HSL will only reach Exeter or Bristol (more likely) and the journey time will still prohibit a day trip.

My advice, book a travelodge... ;)