|
Title: Remove First Class? Post by: Ollie on September 23, 2009, 13:18:13 http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2057632_help_me_ban_first_class_rail
I don't really have an opinion on this, it's just a stupid idea. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: devon_metro on September 23, 2009, 13:34:59 Communists... :D
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Super Guard on September 23, 2009, 13:57:19 Perhaps we should send the 142s to run Reading-London with 100% standard and we'll have some HSTs going Exmouth instead... St James's Park might get interesting though ;D
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Chris2 on September 23, 2009, 14:15:20 Perhaps we should send the 142s to run Reading-London with 100% standard and we'll have some HSTs going Exmouth instead... St James's Park might get interesting though ;D Maybe the odd 153 as well.Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: moonrakerz on September 23, 2009, 16:03:39 They've ruined our education system by using this logic:- if you can't improve the worst, then destroy the best !!!!!!
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Tim on September 23, 2009, 17:44:16 Ollie's post got me thinking again about first class although I started thinking about it when people were posting about the possibility of using trains in reverse formation at Paddington. before I start I should declare that I am usually a Standard class passenger but that I occassionally go FC when a good AP ticket comes up and / or I woudl like the extra space.
There does seem to be an assumption that "first class passengers are the railway's best customers" and that FGW would be stupid to do anything (such as make them walk further at Paddington) to annoy them. On purely economic grounds I am not sure that that arguement stacks up. A standard class coach carries about 82 passengers and a FC coach about 42 (very roughly). FC is more expensive to run for other reasons from leather seats, to free drinks and snacks and the provsion of an extra staff member to serve them. I suspect that utilisation of the FC seats (even in peak time) is also lower. Very roughly a FC fare is twice a SC, and the costs of carrying a FC are also about twice. So I don't think FC passengers are very much more or less valuable to FGW than standard class passengers. Contrast this with airlines where the business fares are often many manytimes more extensive than economy and are therefore much more valuable to the airline. You can make other valid arguements for the provsion of FC (including, that it enables pasengers to work and thereby increases business effciency, that it attracts a group of passngers that might not otherwise travel standard class), but when capacity is constrained the argument for abolishing FC and carrying an extra 100 passengers per train (assuming that the demand to travel is there) is also powerfull (in terms of congestion, environmental impact etc). How you balance the arguemnts does seem to depend on availability of capacity. If you have spare capacity (in terms of platform length etc) then having some FC coaches (and other things like bike space and buffets) makes sense as it may attract new users, increase the farebox and at least pays for itself. However, if and when we reach the point when all trains on a route are say 10 26m coaches and it is prohibitively expensive to lengthen them any more (because of short platforms) and there is still a huge demand to travel (and congestion on the roads, CO2 targets to be met etc) then squeezing more people in by moving to all SC starts to make sense. I don't think we are quite at the point yet, and personally I think that Mr Renshaws egalitarian motives are wrong (as devon-metro says "communist"), but it would also be wrong if FGW were forced to raise the standard fares in order to price a large number of SC passengers off trains so as to free up space for a small number of FC passenegrs would it not? I hope FC survives, but if the main attarction of FC is that it is half empty when SC is more than full then the balance between the classes in terms of fares and number of seats in each class is wrong. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: bemmy on September 23, 2009, 18:14:30 Surely the communist thing to do would be for First and Standard Class to become Soft and Hard Class. ;D
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Andy on September 23, 2009, 18:42:34 Might there be benefits in reducing the number of first class coaches in some sets to run services for which the take-up of FC seats is consistently low?
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: devon_metro on September 23, 2009, 18:49:39 What about 3 classes of accommodation?
Second Class could be First Class seating without any at seat service or complimentary snacks etc. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Brusselier on September 23, 2009, 18:58:23 Surely the communist thing to do would be for First and Standard Class to become Soft and Hard Class. ;D Or even "party member" or "non-party member" ;) Quote from: devon_metro What about 3 classes of accommodation? Leisure Select anybody? Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Mookiemoo on September 23, 2009, 19:14:19 If they removed first class - I for one would no longer contribute my annual sum to FGW
Now, I dont necessarily want the current level of provision - if they reduce the cost of the ticket! I could live with no at seat service etc - for a cheaper fare (I moan normally because they keep reducing the provision AND increasing the fare). However - I need to be able to (1) guarantee a seat and (2) guarantee a table with a power socket. If I cant get (1) or (2) I'll become one of the B&B commuters and find a B&B to stay in during the week as commuting becomes non feasible. I know, as has been said, mine is an extreme case but I wonder how many more business people would change model .... As for the over crowding reading to paddington - I have noticed over the last months a strange sheep like behaviour. You have a train coming into Reading - next stop paddington - which is heaving in standard. There is one about 5-10 minutes later (at most) - which is *usually* emptier - yet the sheeple all try to crowd into the overcrowded one without the application of common sense and waiting for the emptier one. This cycle tends to repeat every other train from what I have unscientifically observed. I suspect, although I may be wrong, on the RDG-PAD service there are probably only 3-4 trains per day in each direction which leave after each other and which are all rammed. Hardly a reason to remove first class from most of the sets - which is the only way to guarantee you wont get a first class set on one of these trains. If commuters engaged brain (yes I know its early in the morning and they probably havent had their coffee fix) there may be less of an issue. I bet half of the sheeple could alter their working day by fifteen minutes to half an hour one way or the other to avoid the worst of the overcrowding and smooth the flow. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: moonrakerz on September 23, 2009, 20:07:09 I have noticed over the last months a strange sheep like behaviour. You have a train coming into Reading - next stop paddington - which is heaving in standard. There is one about 5-10 minutes later (at most) - which is *usually* emptier - yet the sheeple all try to crowd into the overcrowded one without the application of common sense and waiting for the emptier one. This cycle tends to repeat every other train from what I have unscientifically observed. My tactics on the tube exactly - if the first one is packed, let it go and observe front/rear coaches - usually one or both is fairly empty, even at the height of the rush hour. Wait for next train at appropriate place on platform - easy ! Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: old original on September 23, 2009, 20:31:52 No first class???
where would the of duty staff sit??? ;D ;D ;D Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: caliwag on September 23, 2009, 21:47:02 ...and the retired servants of course...mind, not a lot different to the company car brigade who clutter our roads...please do yer selling on the internet. >:(
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Trowres on September 23, 2009, 23:38:07 Congratulations, Tim, for a balanced and well-considered reply. If there is an economist lurking here they may be able to confirm the theory that the market segmentation offered by first class increases revenue and (indirectly) benefits passengers travelling standard class.
On the other hand, there are also reasons to suspect that the existence of first class is detrimental to the lot of the majority of passengers:- 1. Deliberate nobbling of the lower-cost option to preserve the difference of the premium product. It has certainly happened with computer printers, but has it happened with rail? One example might be the exclusion of passengers on standard tickets from dining. I'm sure someone can think of better examples. 2. Compromises in rolling stock design. Ever since the Mk3 coach was designed, pax in standard have had to put up with obstructed views as the bodyshell was designed for proper seat/window alignment in first. 3. As already stated, first has the potential to be detrimental to overall capacity. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Tim on September 24, 2009, 08:51:50 On the market segmentation point, you can (and do) of course have this even without the class split (AP vs Open return, season tickets, cheaper fares for the young and old and groups) and I am sure that when used properly it dpes lead to greater passenger numbers and overall revenue increases.
1. Deliberate nobbling of the lower-cost option to preserve the difference of the premium product. It has certainly happened with computer printers, but has it happened with rail? One example might be the exclusion of passengers on standard tickets from dining. I'm sure someone can think of better examples. Has this happened? SC has improved in some ways (at seat sockets for example). The only major worsening of SC accomodation has been less room per seat - perhaps the existance of FC has something to do with this. 2. Compromises in rolling stock design. Ever since the Mk3 coach was designed, pax in standard have had to put up with obstructed views as the bodyshell was designed for proper seat/window alignment in first. I've never realised this before! Of course the orginal Mk3 was far better for SC window alignment than almost anything since. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: eightf48544 on September 24, 2009, 11:24:27 On the question of seat alingment Ian Walmsley came up with a novel solution in one of his recent Modern Railways articles.
As a great advocate of loco hauled trains rather than glorified multiple units (IEP), he came up with a coach designed based on seating modules with a window. Thus First was wider than standard each coach then had so many modules to make it around 23 mtrs (not 26 as IEP). But the first and standard coaches would be slightly different lengths. His argument is that with modern contruction techniques and the number of each required (+ 1000 first) the cost of construction would be very similar. You then stick a 4MW plus electric on the front until the wires run out and 2MW diesel comes on for the rest of the journey maybe leaving some coaches behind. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: broadgage on September 24, 2009, 12:16:09 I doubt that I would use the train if first class was abolished.
Reading passengers who dont approve of first class should use the local services that have no first class. Some trains are very overcrowded in both first and standard, but in many cases standard seats are available, however the "Reading sheep" prefer to travell towards the London end of the train, and in many cases seats are available towards the country end. What we really need are longer trains, not the costly, complicated, route restricted, IEP, but proper full length locomotive hauled trains, with diesel or electric locos being used as required. As few as 6 full length loco hauled sets (plus a maintenance spare) would greatly improve matters and could be introduced quickly. Use of a 12 car loco hauled set on the busiest six HST diagrams would very substantialy increase seating capacity. The gain would not be restricted to the trips served by the locohauled sets, since 6 HSTs would be freed for use in place of the 6 most crowded DMU diagrams. This in turn would free 6 or more DMUs, for lengthening the worst crowded DMU diagrams. Therefore the relatively modest cost of obtaining 7 locohauled sets would benifit a large number of customers. This will not require years of research and development, hauled coaches, diesel locos and electric locos are matures technologies, available from various supplies. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: JayMac on September 24, 2009, 12:43:49 Quote Reading passengers who dont approve of first class should use the local services that have no first class. I think you'll find that even the local services, operated using class 165/166, have a first class section. No leather seats, power points or at-seat service though. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: IndustryInsider on September 24, 2009, 12:56:16 Use of a 12 car loco hauled set on the busiest six HST diagrams would very substantialy increase seating capacity. And it would very substantially increase journey times. Lower top speed and poor acceleration. I remember the days when the Wessex Scot used to struggle out of Oxford with it's 11 or 12 coaches in the days when it used to split at Carstairs. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: jane s on September 24, 2009, 15:43:28 Personally I am in favour of reducing the number of first-class carriages/seats to the level where supply equals average demand for the route & time of day (meaning that in the very few cases where it is full, they will have to wait a few minutes for the next train - in which the carriage will be empty!)
On the turbos, I have noticed that some sets have first-class at both ends, and others at only one - why? Also, on 6-car trains, this also means that they may, or may not, have first class at both ends AND in the middle - some of which are almost completely empty (until you get to Hayes/Southall where they fill up with standard-class passengers who couldn't care less if they are disturbing genuine first-class people who have paid for their tickets.) Also there is no consistency whatsoever about the formation - in no circumstances should the first-class ever be at the end pointing away from London, because this is the end that is generally standing room only in Standard, causing the over-spill. So - make sure there is only ever ONE first-class section in a 3-car unit, please! As for the inter-city trains, I don't use them very often, but again there generally seem to be too many first-class carriages at the expense of standard. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Mookiemoo on September 24, 2009, 16:14:59 Personally I am in favour of reducing the number of first-class carriages/seats to the level where supply equals average demand for the route & time of day (meaning that in the very few cases where it is full, they will have to wait a few minutes for the next train - in which the carriage will be empty!) On the turbos, I have noticed that some sets have first-class at both ends, and others at only one - why? Also, on 6-car trains, this also means that they may, or may not, have first class at both ends AND in the middle - some of which are almost completely empty (until you get to Hayes/Southall where they fill up with standard-class passengers who couldn't care less if they are disturbing genuine first-class people who have paid for their tickets.) Also there is no consistency whatsoever about the formation - in no circumstances should the first-class ever be at the end pointing away from London, because this is the end that is generally standing room only in Standard, causing the over-spill. So - make sure there is only ever ONE first-class section in a 3-car unit, please! As for the inter-city trains, I don't use them very often, but again there generally seem to be too many first-class carriages at the expense of standard. I'm not an expert but since they dont split HST sets during the day - its almost impossible I believe to fiddle with the first class carriages in that way The difference is a 165/166 on the local services - please dont insist they are all 165 units for the love of all that is holy. To be honest, unless a ticket examiner gets on a local service, you may as well say they are all standard class ..... Also - Why SHOULD first class have to wait for the next train so standard can get on the current one? Kind of brings into question the idea of first class. Of course the griping is usually from people who cant afford first class............... no surprise there then Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Andy on September 24, 2009, 16:40:36 Of course the griping is usually from people who cant afford first class............... no surprise there then ::) Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: broadgage on September 24, 2009, 17:25:24 Use of a 12 car loco hauled set on the busiest six HST diagrams would very substantialy increase seating capacity. And it would very substantially increase journey times. Lower top speed and poor acceleration. I remember the days when the Wessex Scot used to struggle out of Oxford with it's 11 or 12 coaches in the days when it used to split at Carstairs. Would the performance be much reduced ? I was thinking of class 67s or something based on that design, top speed of 125. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: inspector_blakey on September 24, 2009, 17:31:42 Top speed isn't the issue, it's acceleration/deceleration that take up the time. An HST on one power car can still, I believe, make it up to 125 mph eventually but because it only has half the horsepower it would normally the acceleration is much reduced, and consequently journey time increased.
A 67 has 3200 hp, but an HST on both power cars has about 4500 hp under the bonnet (correct me if I'm wrong, somebody!). So if you put a 67 on a heavier load than an HST (12 vs 8 ) you're definitely going to slow things down considerably. Having the power concentrated in just one place also increases the risk of problems with traction/wheelslip. Indeed, HSTs themselves have problems with adhesion sometimes, take a look at this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3CJPgn7moo&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3CJPgn7moo&feature=player_embedded) Differently formed HST sets to respond to first class demand during the day are a non-starter. Firstly, it's not a straightforward business to split and re-marshal an HST (take a look at all the air connections and electrical jumpers between the vehicles next time you see one). And, as we saw with 2+7 buffet-less sets travelling PAD-PNZ, sooner or later something will go wrong with the service and you'll end up with set allocation completely screwed up! Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on September 24, 2009, 19:12:28 They've ruined our education system by using this logic:- if you can't improve the worst, then destroy the best !!!!!! Hear hear. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: devon_metro on September 24, 2009, 19:22:22 Must agree. Grammar schools ought to stay :D
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on September 24, 2009, 19:35:16 Lucky, they all went in Worcestershire in the 80s. >:( Plenty cling on in Birmingham though, but they are HEAVILY subscribed to from most of the surrounding counties who lost out.
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: paul7575 on September 24, 2009, 20:05:36 Would the performance be much reduced ? I was thinking of class 67s or something based on that design, top speed of 125. Wouldn't they be limited to 110 mph max anyway with ordinary Mk3 rolling stock? Also, where are all these coaches going to come from? You want 84 (for 7 + 1 spare sets), and IIRC from that competion commission report a while back, there is nothing like that number available. WSMR and GC before them were scraping the bottom of the barrel, I thought? Paul Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: IndustryInsider on September 25, 2009, 02:20:22 A class 67 + 12 carriages would not stand a chance of getting to 125mph. It would struggle to get to 110mph and that would be with very poor acceleration.
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: jane s on September 28, 2009, 17:00:58 Of course the griping is usually from people who cant afford first class............... no surprise there then ::) Why would I want to pay a fortune for a carriage that ends up being full of "standing room onlies" just like all the others because there is (usually) no-one to stop them???? Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: matt473 on September 28, 2009, 17:09:13 I am all for first class even though I am highly unlikely to afford it unless I can get ridiculously low advance fares. Some first class fares are extremely high but since people claim this back usually it is not too muchof a burden on the individual.This can be beneficial to tocs as first class can (but not always) be a real money spinner. This means that those travelling standard can get lower prices as these are cross subsidised from the higher priced tickets for first class. The only time first classis useless is on local journeys where it is an uneccessary waste of capcity such as the Thames Valley and XC turbostars. First class should remain though on all intercity services, after all the airlines offer comfort to business passengers so why can't rail against to help it compete with air?
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: willc on September 28, 2009, 20:59:59 Use of a 12 car loco hauled set on the busiest six HST diagrams would very substantialy increase seating capacity. And it would very substantially increase journey times. Lower top speed and poor acceleration. I remember the days when the Wessex Scot used to struggle out of Oxford with it's 11 or 12 coaches in the days when it used to split at Carstairs. Would the performance be much reduced ? I was thinking of class 67s or something based on that design, top speed of 125. The class 67s may have a design top speed of 125mph, but have never achieved it, except in testing. For everyday purposes they are limited to 110mph and since the end of the express parcels runs between the West Midlands and Scotland I doubt any even threatens that speed, given their main regular jobs are for Wrexham & Shropshire, the FGW loco-hauled set, plus similar jobs in Scotland and the Scotrail sleepers north of Edinburgh. Indeed the five locos on sleeper duties have cast iron brake blocks due to problems on the West Highland Line's hills and are limited to 80mph as a result. As for first class on Turbos, while the 166s' two first class compartments may be an unneeded luxury on most Thames Valley services, for Oxford and Cotswold Line services - which these sets were built for - those extra seats are still needed. If a 165 turns up on the 8.58 from Malvern, it's almost guaranteed that some first class passengers from Charlbury will have to sit in standard at least as far as Oxford. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: DevonTrains2008 on September 28, 2009, 21:24:50 My opinion is to reduce the amount of 1st class coaches, and increase the number of standard ones. Prehaps on some workings where less business passengers are found scrapping 1st class and replacing it with standard may not be a bad idea?
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Mookiemoo on September 28, 2009, 21:43:08 My opinion is to reduce the amount of 1st class coaches, and increase the number of standard ones. Prehaps on some workings where less business passengers are found scrapping 1st class and replacing it with standard may not be a bad idea? And can you isolate those sets? Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on September 28, 2009, 23:43:11 My opinion is to reduce the amount of 1st class coaches, and increase the number of standard ones. Prehaps on some workings where less business passengers are found scrapping 1st class and replacing it with standard may not be a bad idea? But what do you do WHEN (not if) the sets get mixed up (due to one of a myriad of possible reasons) and a peak time London service, full of businessmen who have First Class season tickets/expensive First Anytime Returns, is operated by a Standard only train? Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: JayMac on September 29, 2009, 00:06:47 My opinion is to reduce the amount of 1st class coaches, and increase the number of standard ones. Prehaps on some workings where less business passengers are found scrapping 1st class and replacing it with standard may not be a bad idea? HST sets (indeed all trains) have to be in revenue earning service for as long as possible during the day. You cannot adjust the ratio of coaches at different times of the day to perfectly suit the loadings. Oh, and in this day and age it is not just business types travelling in 1st class, even a prole like me can be found in there occasionally. I once returned from a camping trip on Dartmoor looking decidedly tramp-like with my dog on a piece of string (I'd lost his lead) and I overheard a 'suit' asking the Customer Host to have the 'homeless guy' removed. I got up and showed Mr Nosy my ticket and my house keys, which shut him up! CH apologised but not Mr Nosy. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Tim on September 29, 2009, 14:04:01 A class 67 + 12 carriages would not stand a chance of getting to 125mph. It would struggle to get to 110mph and that would be with very poor acceleration. why not put a 67 at each end? Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Tim on September 29, 2009, 14:05:37 This can be beneficial to tocs as first class can (but not always) be a real money spinner. This means that those travelling standard can get lower prices as these are cross subsidised from the higher priced tickets for first class. See my post above. I'm not convinced it is the money spinner it is made out to be. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: RailCornwall on September 29, 2009, 14:17:35 Ludicrous suggestion, if you want to draw business people off planes and onto the train, comfort and some degree of civility should be provided for them. Any reduction would be self defeating.
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: broadgage on September 29, 2009, 20:22:36 A class 67 + 12 carriages would not stand a chance of getting to 125mph. It would struggle to get to 110mph and that would be with very poor acceleration. why not put a 67 at each end? That is what I was presuming, for a trial one could have a driver in each locomotive, though for regular use of course through control would be required. Since my first post on this subject however, others have cast doubts as to the suitability of 67s for 125 MPH operation, though that is what they were designed for. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Trowres on September 29, 2009, 22:04:51 Ludicrous suggestion, if you want to draw business people off planes and onto the train, comfort and some degree of civility should be provided for them. Any reduction would be self defeating. Ludicrous, perhaps, until you do the sums? Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: willc on September 30, 2009, 01:29:35 The sums have done many times by the rail industry - hence the disappearance of first class on many routes all over the country since the early 1980s - but as well as InterCity lines, there are places, especially on London outer-suburban services, where in the Monday to Friday peaks the amount of money coming in more than justifies allocating space for first class seats. BR made a deliberate decision to keep first class on Thames Valley commuter trains when it ordered the Turbos in the early 90s for that very reason.
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Tim on September 30, 2009, 09:05:27 The sums have done many times by the rail industry - hence the disappearance of first class on many routes all over the country since the early 1980s - but as well as InterCity lines, there are places, especially on London outer-suburban services, where in the Monday to Friday peaks the amount of money coming in more than justifies allocating space for first class seats. BR made a deliberate decision to keep first class on Thames Valley commuter trains when it ordered the Turbos in the early 90s for that very reason. My original post is that doing the sums may produce a different answer depending on how close you are to maximum capacity on a route. If there is plenty of capacity it makes sense to have both SC and FC to draw as many people as possible onto the train. RailCornwall is perfectly correct that you need FC to draw business people off the planes and onto the trains. BUT if capacity is limited you may be faced with deciding - "do I make this coach FC and draw 40 business people off a plane, or make it SC and draw 80+ shop-workers out of their cars?" It would be mice to be able to add an extra coach of each class, but lack of stock, platform length and or motive power may stop you doing this. As a FC costs at least twice as much to convey as a SC passenger a purly ecomonic analysis would suggest that FC only makes more money for TOCs if FC fares are at least twice that of SC. If you start to price "externalities" (CO2 saved by getting business people off the road, increased productivity if those people can work on their journey, congestion and lives saved by getting people off the road) if gets much more complicated and your answer may well depend on how you price the externalities. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Henry on September 30, 2009, 09:14:24 Valid points have been made in the article, if people bother to read it. Standing on any form of Transport should be addressed, something which some TOC's have failed to do. Seem to remember SWT taking seats out of their suburban stock to allow more standing passengers. God forbid we have another incident like 10 years ago, with a full and standing train. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: paul7575 on September 30, 2009, 16:39:41 Valid points have been made in the article, if people bother to read it. Standing on any form of Transport should be addressed, something which some TOC's have failed to do. Seem to remember SWT taking seats out of their suburban stock to allow more standing passengers. God forbid we have another incident like 10 years ago, with a full and standing train. Are you seriously suggesting there should be no standing on any public transport? How are you going to enforce that on local buses, trams, tube etc? So why not have standing on suburban trains? If you wanted no one standing on longer distance intercity trains, you'd have to make them 100% reserved, which would be fairly impractical for all those commuters using intercity services over part of their routes... Paul Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on September 30, 2009, 16:49:58 It is unrealistic for there to be no standing. Otherwise we'd have to have mega long and frequent trains in the peaks, which would then just sit in sidings for the rest of the day. Not cost effective.
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: inspector_blakey on September 30, 2009, 16:55:31 Quite right.
Virtually all of Amtrak's trains are fully reserved which, combined with the extortionate fares they charge unless you book in advance (e.g. Trenton NJ to Philadelphia PA, $50 for a 30-minute journey) makes walk-up travel a near impossibility. The flexibility that many rail fares will give you in the UK simply doesn't exist here. I'd far rather have that flexibility and have to stand occasionally. And the issue of standing on a train being less safe than sitting is a complete red herring. It's been studied extensively in the past (can't remember off the top of my head if it was the RSSB or the HSE); the conclusion drawn was that standing is an issue of comfort, not safety, and I tend to agree. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: JayMac on September 30, 2009, 17:46:52 Valid points have been made in the article, if people bother to read it. Standing on any form of Transport should be addressed, something which some TOC's have failed to do. Seem to remember SWT taking seats out of their suburban stock to allow more standing passengers. God forbid we have another incident like 10 years ago, with a full and standing train. What happened in 1999 with a full and standing train? Can you jog my memory? If it's a reference to Ladbroke Grove then the nature of that accident with its fire and a high closing speed had little bearing on the injuries suffered by passengers, whether seated or not. modified to add apostrophe to the first 'its'. I know from experience on this forum that this kind of thing is important! Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on September 30, 2009, 19:19:53 And you could argue that a full and standing train is safer for passengers in the event of a collision!
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: super tm on September 30, 2009, 19:55:10 If standing was a safety issue then all passengers would be made to stay in their seats for the whole journey, there would be no trolley service or buffet service and no guard could walk up and down the train checking tickets etc.
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Phil on September 30, 2009, 20:24:04 If standing was a safety issue then all passengers would be made to stay in their seats for the whole journey, there would be no trolley service or buffet service and no guard could walk up and down the train checking tickets etc. Except during take off and on the approach to a station, obviously. ;D (though sometimes, TOCs seem so utterly in thrall of the airline industry that I fully expect "customer hosts" to stand at the front of the carriage and demonstrate emergency procedures at any moment. Next thing we know they'll be charging for baggage...) Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on September 30, 2009, 23:18:29 Yes, we'll need seat belts and oxygen supplies at each seat. ::)
God, I hope no EU Health and Safety bureaucrats are reading this - I wouldn't put it past Brussels! Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: JayMac on September 30, 2009, 23:24:48 (....... Next thing we know they'll be charging for baggage...) Sshhh.... don't go giving TOCs ideas! Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: caliwag on October 01, 2009, 21:28:24 I seem to recall a shopper being charged for extra bags a few year ago...in the days of Regional railways (bloody BR) I'm sure it was somewhere near Stamford... incredible. Once the press got hold of it, it was quietly dropped. Anybody shed any light on it...absolute shame!! >:(
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: inspector_blakey on October 01, 2009, 21:32:52 There are actually limits to what you can take on board with you (and always have been, it's not something recent). The Accompanied Animals and Articles (AAA) conditions are, I think, an additional document to the conditions of carriage that can be inspected at stations. Tickets can (or used to be) issued for luggage in excess of the allowance, with status AAA printed on them.
There have to be rules of some sort covering luggage, otherwise people will just try taking the p*ss... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/6588209.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/6588209.stm) Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Mookiemoo on October 01, 2009, 21:35:42 There are actually limits to what you can take on board with you (and always have been, it's not something recent). The Accompanied Animals and Articles (AAA) conditions are, I think, an additional document to the conditions of carriage that can be inspected at stations. Tickets can (or used to be) issued for luggage in excess of the allowance, with status AAA printed on them. There have to be rules of some sort covering luggage, otherwise people will just try taking the p*ss... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/6588209.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/6588209.stm) So was I taking the piss with one carry on bag and two suitcases - one which weighed 56lbs and one which weighed 69lbs? Had to have help hauling them on the train.......and off again. When I departed these shores they were empty - combined weight 30lbs! I damn sure would not have been happy having to buy separate tickets for them! Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: JayMac on October 01, 2009, 21:43:02 There are actually limits to what you can take on board with you (and always have been, it's not something recent). The Accompanied Animals and Articles (AAA) conditions are, I think, an additional document to the conditions of carriage that can be inspected at stations. Tickets can (or used to be) issued for luggage in excess of the allowance, with status AAA printed on them. There have to be rules of some sort covering luggage, otherwise people will just try taking the p*ss... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/6588209.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/6588209.stm) So was I taking the piss with one carry on bag and two suitcases - one which weighed 56lbs and one which weighed 69lbs? Had to have help hauling them on the train.......and off again. When I departed these shores they were empty - combined weight 30lbs! I damn sure would not have been happy having to buy separate tickets for them! One wonders what the 95lbs additional weight on your return to these shores was. Do we need to inform HM Revenue and Customs? ;D Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on October 01, 2009, 21:48:03 They do say that you should be able to carry them yourself.
I don't know how many lbs you're allowed to bring on. I take it on a Pacer it is less lest the engine breaks down. Is their a weight restriction (e.g. most airlines are about 50 lbs) Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: inspector_blakey on October 01, 2009, 21:57:25 Ah, but appendix B, covering AAA, goes into excruciating details about whats allowed...
Quote APPENDIX B ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS FOR LUGGAGE, ARTICLES, ANIMALS AND CYCLES Conveyance of Luggage and Articles in Passenger Accommodation 1. Passenger accommodation in these Conditions means the parts of trains with seats or sleeper berths including luggage stowage areas above, beneath and behind seats and adjacent to doorways. 2. Condition 46 allows you to take small items of Luggage and Articles into the passenger accommodation of a train. Small items are considered to be those with dimensions not exceeding 90 x 70 x 30 cm with a weight not exceeding 50kg. Each passenger (aged 5 years or more) may take three small items into a train free of charge, however, the dimensions of only two of these items may exceed 55 x 40 x 20 cm. 21 3. A fee not exceeding half the adult fare for your journey is charged for: ● each additional item in excess of a passenger^s free allowance; and ● any item with dimensions exceeding 90 x 70 x 30 cm. 4. A Train Company may refuse to accept Luggage or Articles in passenger accommodation if any of the following apply: ● the restrictions listed in Condition 49 apply; ● the item would obstruct doorways, gangways or corridors; ● the dimensions of the item exceed 100 x 100 x 100 cm; or ● in the opinion of the Train Company^s staff, the item is only suitable to be conveyed in a luggage van. 5. For wheelchairs please refer to the table ^Luggage and Miscellaneous Articles^ Conveyance of Luggage and Articles in Luggage Vans 6. A luggage van, in these Conditions, means the part of some trains provided specially to convey parcels, packages, cycles and larger items of Luggage. 7. Under Condition 47 the Train Companies may convey larger items of Luggage and Articles in a luggage van, if one is available. Items with dimensions exceeding 150 x 150 x 100 cm, or with a weight exceeding 75kg, will not be accepted. A fee not exceeding half the adult fare for your journey is charged for each item. 22 Your Maximum Free Luggage / Articles Allowance 90 x 70 x 30 cm maximum dimensions and 50kg maximum weight 90 x 70 x 30 cm maximum dimensions and 50kg maximum weight 55 x 40 x 20 cm maximum dimensions and 50kg maximum weight + + 8. Luggage and Articles conveyed in a luggage van must be clearly labelled with your name, address and destination station. Staff will not release the items to you until you have proved ownership. 9. A Train Company may refuse to accept Luggage or Articles in a luggage van if any of the restrictions listed in Condition 49 apply. 10. For wheelchairs please refer to the table ^Luggage and Miscellaneous Articles^. Animals 11. You may take dogs and small animals with you into the passenger accommodation of trains. Animals, with the exception of blind or deaf persons^ assistance dogs at the discretion of the steward, may not be taken into buffet or restaurant cars. Animals are not generally allowed in sleeper compartments, however dogs may be conveyed in sleeper cabins with the permission of the Train Company. You should apply for such permission at least 48 hours before you travel. 12. Except for dogs, animals must be conveyed in a fully enclosed basket or pet carrier designed for this purpose with dimensions not exceeding 85 x 60 x 60 cm. Baskets and pet carriers must be large enough to allow the animal to stand and lie down in comfort. Animals which are too large for a basket or pet carrier with dimensions 85 x 60 x 60 cm may not be conveyed by train. 13. Two animals may accompany you on trains free of charge. 14. A fee not exceeding half the adult fare for your journey is charged for each additional animal in excess of a passenger^s free allowance. 15. An animal may be conveyed in a train^s luggage van, if one is available. A dog should be muzzled and its lead securely fastened as directed by Train Company staff. Baskets and pet carriers must be secure. Dogs and any baskets or pet 23 Your Maximum Free Animal Allowance 85 x 60 x 60cm maximum dimensions 85 x 60 x 60cm maximum dimensions + carriers must be clearly labelled with your name, address and destination station. Staff will not hand over animals until you have proved ownership. 16. Dogs must be kept on a lead throughout your journey; other animals must not be taken out of their baskets or pet carriers. If your dog or other animal causes a nuisance or inconvenience to other passengers you may be asked to remove it from a train or railway premises by the Train Company or Rail Service Company staff. The tables below are a guide to the conveyance of luggage, articles and animals by train. I've just done a quick "cut and paste" so not all the tables are in this, the ones that are are mangled and the diagrams are missing. If you really care then check out the NRCoC online pdf, pp. 21-26, http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/nrcc/index_custom.html (http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/nrcc/index_custom.html). I was amused to note that the carriage of livestock is specifically prohibited. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Mookiemoo on October 01, 2009, 22:03:10 There are actually limits to what you can take on board with you (and always have been, it's not something recent). The Accompanied Animals and Articles (AAA) conditions are, I think, an additional document to the conditions of carriage that can be inspected at stations. Tickets can (or used to be) issued for luggage in excess of the allowance, with status AAA printed on them. There have to be rules of some sort covering luggage, otherwise people will just try taking the p*ss... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/6588209.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/6588209.stm) So was I taking the piss with one carry on bag and two suitcases - one which weighed 56lbs and one which weighed 69lbs? Had to have help hauling them on the train.......and off again. When I departed these shores they were empty - combined weight 30lbs! I damn sure would not have been happy having to buy separate tickets for them! One wonders what the 95lbs additional weight on your return to these shores was. Do we need to iform HM Revenue and Customs? ;D 20 packs pounce cat treats 8 pairs levis 40 (ahem) womens undergarments 40 (ahem) mens undergarments 10 womens undergarments for which there is no male equivalent 2 Ralph Lauren toweling bathrobes (try getting a terry towel robe in the UK - John Lewis/M&S either want a small fortune or only sell fluffies) 60 pairs of socks (the cashier in Walmart thought I was but but where in the UK can you get 6 fruit of the loom or haynes undergarments for $2.99) 6 pairs of jammies 20 t-shirts with *humourous phrases* that my small mind finds amusing which you dont seem to get in the UK - the two best of which were "Sorry - mind closed until further notice" and " Sarcasm is only one of my many talents" 1 Kansas university fluffy hoody in crimson and blue - my winter outergarment since I dont do coats 1 pot watcher 2 full set of clinique facial care - cleanser, soap, toner, light moisturiser, factor 15 day cream, night cream - that will last a year and saved me close to ^50 alone! And - which is where most of the weight was - 1 ream of US letter printer paper and 6 packs of college ruled letter paper - te airline lost my file I'd taken over to work on my course whch started that week - I am OCD in that each course has to be all on the same type of paper/size etc etc and it was start o US paper pr fall behind - of course once I stsarted - the whole course had to be on the same paper so I had to bring back enough three hole punch US paper to cover a 60 credit OU course! I HAD THE LUGGAGE ALLOWANCE SO WHY NOT! Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Mookiemoo on October 01, 2009, 22:04:42 They do say that you should be able to carry them yourself. I don't know how many lbs you're allowed to bring on. I take it on a Pacer it is less lest the engine breaks down. Is their a weight restriction (e.g. most airlines are about 50 lbs) 70lbs in FC! At least with north west (although now they are delta I see that being reduced) and since they did the baggae check at MCI ot was their rules that applied! Even virgin upper class only allowed 50lbs Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on October 01, 2009, 22:07:42 So it looks like 110 lbs is the baggage weight limit for taking onboard the train.
If there's a guard's van, each item can be up to 165 lbs. But you won't be accepted on a train if you have >165 lbs. After all, that is 11 stone! And Fallen Angel certainly has been using a credit card on her travels! ;D :P Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Mookiemoo on October 01, 2009, 22:11:33 So it looks like 110 lbs is the baggage weight limit for taking onboard the train. If there's a guard's van, each item can be up to 165 lbs. But you won't be accepted on a train if you have >165 lbs. After all, that is 11 stone! And Fallen Angel certainly has been using a credit card on her travels! ;D :P *smug mode* Debit card I was down to 20 odd socks (my cat likes to take them from the laundry and bury them) and we wont tal about the under garmetns - needless to say I was anticipating such a trip and refused to pay rip off UK prices. The jeans had been waiting over a year since my december trip last year failed to acquire jeans as 34-32 mens and 25 inch leg womens were off the shelves as being minority sizing in lieu of the crimbo decorations. We had holes in our jeans! Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Mookiemoo on October 01, 2009, 22:13:50 I can't believe you went to all the trouble of converting the kg weights to lbs. Actually, no, hang on, I can, metric is an evil EU conspiracy to subdue the British into using simple logical units of measurement whilst progressively eroding our national identity ;) Wasnt me but..... I'm 33, I was taught metric but my mother was imperial only (my dad could handle both but preferred imperial) I spent my childhood converting between the two. As an adult - I work in imperial (maybe cos I spent too much time in the states at college and working) - except in academic work when I automatically go SI units Beware blakely - you WILL succumb to the dark side! Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: inspector_blakey on October 01, 2009, 22:16:20 20 packs pounce cat treats 8 pairs levis 40 (ahem) womens undergarments 40 (ahem) mens undergarments 10 womens undergarments for which there is no male equivalent 2 Ralph Lauren toweling bathrobes (try getting a terry towel robe in the UK - John Lewis/M&S either want a small fortune or only sell fluffies) 60 pairs of socks (the cashier in Walmart thought I was but but where in the UK can you get 6 fruit of the loom or haynes undergarments for $2.99) 6 pairs of jammies 20 t-shirts with *humourous phrases* that my small mind finds amusing which you dont seem to get in the UK - the two best of which were "Sorry - mind closed until further notice" and " Sarcasm is only one of my many talents" 1 Kansas university fluffy hoody in crimson and blue - my winter outergarment since I dont do coats 1 pot watcher 2 full set of clinique facial care - cleanser, soap, toner, light moisturiser, factor 15 day cream, night cream - that will last a year and saved me close to ^50 alone! And - which is where most of the weight was - 1 ream of US letter printer paper and 6 packs of college ruled letter paper - te airline lost my file I'd taken over to work on my course whch started that week - I am OCD in that each course has to be all on the same type of paper/size etc etc and it was start o US paper pr fall behind - of course once I stsarted - the whole course had to be on the same paper so I had to bring back enough three hole punch US paper to cover a 60 credit OU course! I HAD THE LUGGAGE ALLOWANCE SO WHY NOT! I just hope no-one from HMRC is reading this... Quote From 1 December 2008, when travelling from a non-EU country (including the Canary Islands, the Channel Islands and Gibraltar) you can bring the following into the UK for your own use without paying UK tax or duty: * 200 cigarettes; or 100 cigarillos; or 50 cigars; or 250g of tobacco * 4 litres of still table wine * 16 litres of beer * 1 litre of spirits or strong liqueurs over 22 per cent volume; or 2 litres of fortified wine (such as port or sherry), sparkling wine or other alcoholic beverages of less than 22 per cent volume and * ^300 worth of all other goods including perfume and souvenirs. If you have any more than these allowances you must declare the goods in the red channel or use the red point phone. If you do not, you are breaking the law and we may prosecute you. SI units are a bit too thoroughly ingrained in me, I think - everything in labs is still metric here. I can't get used to temperatures in fahrenheit, that's the main thing... Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on October 01, 2009, 22:25:04 Umm, because despite being educated with kg, they mean nothing to me.
I have always weighed myself in Feet and Stone, always cooked in Ounces as that's what my parents use. And when I last looked, road signs and limits were in miles. Whenever I do anything academic (and academic calculations) I use metric. But in the "real world" I've quickly learned that Imperial is far easier and known by everyone. And it is an EU conspiracy that has FAILED, many markets have gone back to using lbs because people EVERYONE can use them. PS: try and use metric in English language: *But London's kilometres away... *Anyone with a kilogram of common sense... *They're trying to fit a litre into a millilitre pot.... *The kilometre-ige of the race... Don't quite work, do they? PS: I've never used Fahrenheit. I use Celsius, although we should technically use Kelvin... Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Mookiemoo on October 01, 2009, 22:25:55 20 packs pounce cat treats 8 pairs levis 40 (ahem) womens undergarments 40 (ahem) mens undergarments 10 womens undergarments for which there is no male equivalent 2 Ralph Lauren toweling bathrobes (try getting a terry towel robe in the UK - John Lewis/M&S either want a small fortune or only sell fluffies) 60 pairs of socks (the cashier in Walmart thought I was but but where in the UK can you get 6 fruit of the loom or haynes undergarments for $2.99) 6 pairs of jammies 20 t-shirts with *humourous phrases* that my small mind finds amusing which you dont seem to get in the UK - the two best of which were "Sorry - mind closed until further notice" and " Sarcasm is only one of my many talents" 1 Kansas university fluffy hoody in crimson and blue - my winter outergarment since I dont do coats 1 pot watcher 2 full set of clinique facial care - cleanser, soap, toner, light moisturiser, factor 15 day cream, night cream - that will last a year and saved me close to ^50 alone! And - which is where most of the weight was - 1 ream of US letter printer paper and 6 packs of college ruled letter paper - te airline lost my file I'd taken over to work on my course whch started that week - I am OCD in that each course has to be all on the same type of paper/size etc etc and it was start o US paper pr fall behind - of course once I stsarted - the whole course had to be on the same paper so I had to bring back enough three hole punch US paper to cover a 60 credit OU course! I HAD THE LUGGAGE ALLOWANCE SO WHY NOT! I just hope no-one from HMRC is reading this... Quote From 1 December 2008, when travelling from a non-EU country (including the Canary Islands, the Channel Islands and Gibraltar) you can bring the following into the UK for your own use without paying UK tax or duty: * 200 cigarettes; or 100 cigarillos; or 50 cigars; or 250g of tobacco * 4 litres of still table wine * 16 litres of beer * 1 litre of spirits or strong liqueurs over 22 per cent volume; or 2 litres of fortified wine (such as port or sherry), sparkling wine or other alcoholic beverages of less than 22 per cent volume and * ^300 worth of all other goods including perfume and souvenirs. If you have any more than these allowances you must declare the goods in the red channel or use the red point phone. If you do not, you are breaking the law and we may prosecute you. SI units are a bit too thoroughly ingrained in me, I think - everything in labs is still metric here. I can't get used to temperatures in fahrenheit, that's the main thing... If you exclude the clinique I did not spend over ^300 in total! Kansas is CHEAP Unless you want produce when they make waitrose and M&S look cheap. A small piece of non plastic cheese is like ^5 - a non plastic loaf is about ^3 and dont even look at fresh vegetables - corn and soya is however cheap Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: JayMac on October 01, 2009, 22:30:37 So it looks like 110 lbs is the baggage weight limit for taking onboard the train. If there's a guard's van, each item can be up to 165 lbs. But you won't be accepted on a train if you have >165 lbs. After all, that is 11 stone! I make it 150Kg (330lb), split between three items, allowable in passenger accomodation from the information supplied in the NRCoC. Quite how one person can cart about 150Kg of luggage without causing delays to trains (or injury to themselves!) is beyond me. Take note of the '+' signs in the illustration: (http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt68/bignosemac/cats-crop.jpg) Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Mookiemoo on October 01, 2009, 22:37:03 Also - I challenge HMRC to value pounce treats not available in the UK or t shirts which the UK don't have the silly idiocy for!
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on October 01, 2009, 23:49:44 Re baggage allowance: I was referring to a limit on each item, although I didn't make this clear.
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: DevonTrains2008 on November 02, 2009, 20:18:20 Do any HST 125s go to 125 mph anywhere on the FGW network anymore - if yes, where?
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on November 02, 2009, 20:33:47 In theory, from London Paddington to Wotton Bassett. (whatever the spelling is)
Although there has been debate on these forums whether FGW tell drivers to do 110 in normal running to save fuel and allow make up time. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: DevonTrains2008 on November 02, 2009, 20:36:23 Is Wotton Basset near Swindon?
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 02, 2009, 20:38:05 Wootton Bassett is, yes. ;D
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: inspector_blakey on November 02, 2009, 20:43:53 I thought there were additional 125 stretches between Wooton Bassett and Bristol TM but am open to correction.
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 02, 2009, 20:45:32 ... but am open to correction. It's Wootton Bassett! ;D Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: inspector_blakey on November 02, 2009, 20:47:17 Long-lost cousin of Bertie Bassett, presumably. Although how we got to this in a thread that's titled "Remove First Class?" is beyond me...
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: DevonTrains2008 on November 02, 2009, 20:52:58 I don't know how it's realated to first class but i'm suprised there are no 125 sections at all Reading > Newbury > Westbury > Exeter!
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 02, 2009, 20:54:45 To be fair, in view of the degree of levity that has been creeping in, all the way through this topic: perhaps we should move some of the posts here to 'the lighter side'? ::)
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: John R on November 02, 2009, 21:18:58 I thought there were additional 125 stretches between Wooton Bassett and Bristol TM but am open to correction. The first bit from WB towards Chippenham is, and the Hullavington route to Parkway is 125mph most of the way. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: inspector_blakey on November 02, 2009, 21:30:40 I don't know how it's realated to first class but i'm suprised there are no 125 sections at all Reading > Newbury > Westbury > Exeter! Look at it on a map - it curves around all over the place. This was one of Gerry Fiennes' laments in the 1960s when he was general manager at Paddington, because it was a barrier to increasing the pretty pedestrian speed of express trains to the west via the Berks and Hants. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on November 02, 2009, 23:04:17 2 hours to Exeter is pretty impressive IMO. How long would that take in a car?
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 03, 2009, 22:30:04 Further to my previous post,
Quote To be fair, in view of the degree of levity that has been creeping in, all the way through this topic: perhaps we should move some of the posts here to 'the lighter side'? ::) I have now moved a few earlier posts, from here, to a new topic at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=5602 C. ;) Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: DevonTrains2008 on November 04, 2009, 16:58:05 2 hours to Exeter is pretty impressive IMO. How long would that take in a car? 3, so I guess that is pretty impressive! Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: devon_metro on November 04, 2009, 16:59:16 If going via Bristol on the m4 add on a bit of time to take into account the 50mph sections and Avonmouth roadworks.
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: inspector_blakey on November 04, 2009, 17:14:53 Funny how the road system parallels the rail network, and there's a Great Way Round to the south-west via Bristol which is longer in distance but generally higher speed in both cases.
Just a thought. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on November 04, 2009, 17:36:50 So the B&H can't be that slow, if it's an hour quicker by rail. It would be even better if tilt enabled 125 line speeds!
Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: IndustryInsider on November 04, 2009, 17:48:58 It would be even better if tilt enabled 125 line speeds! Well, in an ideal world I suppose it would be. Sadly it's not just a question of building a tilting train for the route. Lots of infrastructure work would be required and practically the whole route resignalled so that there was adequate braking distances. There's no way that sort of money would be found for a route with an average of one high speed train per hour. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: DevonTrains2008 on November 05, 2009, 08:37:49 M4/M5 is the fastest road route between the London area and The West isn't it?
I'd rather go by train though, anyday. Title: Re: Remove First Class? Post by: Btline on November 05, 2009, 19:54:16 According to Google, going M4, M5 saves 1 minute over the A303.
Journey time 3 hours 22 minutes. So the train would be well beyond Plymouth by then! This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. Views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net |