|
shadow
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: January 16, 2008, 08:26:06 pm » |
|
Interestingly, XC▸ have made the 8:03 train (from Newton Abbot) to Manchester a carriage shorter (4 instead of 5) - I asked why and apparantely Virgin took many of the 5 carriage ones with them.
According to wikipedia, so I'm not 100% how accurate this is, there are officially 44 sets of super voyagers. Currently XC have 23 Class 221 (the super voyagers) and Virgin West Coast have 21. They also have all 34 Class 220's (Normal Voyagers). Virgin's west coast fleet is made up mainly of the pendlinos and the other 21 Super Voyagers usully the penzance/plymouth to scotland services have the 5 carriage super voyagers, whilst newcastle gets a normal voyager. I'm not sure about the other services though, i can only talk about ones i see at Bristol. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Conner
|
|
« Reply #16 on: January 16, 2008, 10:10:27 pm » |
|
Interestingly, XC▸ have made the 8:03 train (from Newton Abbot) to Manchester a carriage shorter (4 instead of 5) - I asked why and apparantely Virgin took many of the 5 carriage ones with them.
According to wikipedia, so I'm not 100% how accurate this is, there are officially 44 sets of super voyagers. Currently XC have 23 Class 221 (the super voyagers) and Virgin West Coast have 21. They also have all 34 Class 220's (Normal Voyagers). Virgin's west coast fleet is made up mainly of the pendlinos and the other 21 Super Voyagers usully the penzance/plymouth to scotland services have the 5 carriage super voyagers, whilst newcastle gets a normal voyager. I'm not sure about the other services though, i can only talk about ones i see at Bristol. Penzance-Manchester is Super Voyager. But I think Plymouth-Manchester is Voyager apart from the two Penzance diagramms. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
shadow
|
|
« Reply #17 on: January 16, 2008, 11:55:45 pm » |
|
I guess it can also depends on what train sets are at what depot?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
devon_metro
|
|
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2008, 04:37:46 pm » |
|
Silly thing is, Birmingham - Manchester is tilt (5 car)
And yet the ECML▸ route via Sheffield is busier and not tilt, so 220s are more prefered.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
swlines
|
|
« Reply #19 on: January 17, 2008, 06:52:42 pm » |
|
Noticed a few comments about making the Voyagers longer... While that may be the best thing to do (with common sense and what not) in many cases it is no longer practical. Birmingham New Street where many trains now reverse gets busy very easily and as Voyagers can take half a platform it is much easier to get paths there. In addition, the Voyagers cover the entire network. Reversing at Reading would be problematic for the Bournemouth route as they mainly use the bay platforms opposite the Southern side in the mornings, which can't take any longer than a 5 coach!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
shadow
|
|
« Reply #20 on: January 18, 2008, 06:57:00 pm » |
|
I suppose when they bring the 5 HST▸ 's into play, things might chance.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
swlines
|
|
« Reply #21 on: January 20, 2008, 09:39:52 am » |
|
The CrossCountry HSTs▸ will displace several units and will be doubling up busy trains on the Bournemouth route initially I'm told.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
devon_metro
|
|
« Reply #22 on: January 20, 2008, 10:34:38 am » |
|
I was on a Voyager yesterday.
Stank of the toilel in the vesutiable and the window alignment is simply shocking!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dog box
|
|
« Reply #23 on: January 20, 2008, 10:08:09 pm » |
|
Bloody horrible vomit comets
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 23, 2008, 04:38:31 pm by dog box »
|
Logged
|
All postings reflect my own personal views and opinions and are not intended to be, nor should be taken as official statements of first great western or first group policy
|
|
|
|
swlines
|
|
« Reply #24 on: January 21, 2008, 06:10:02 am » |
|
I was on a Voyager yesterday.
Stank of the toilel in the vesutiable and the window alignment is simply shocking!
That's because the retention tank was designed as if the train wouldn't be moving... hence why the aircon inlet is right next to it...  Well, it doesn't move on paper. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Timmer
|
|
« Reply #25 on: January 21, 2008, 07:15:18 am » |
|
That's because the retention tank was designed as if the train wouldn't be moving... hence why the aircon inlet is right next to it... Well, it doesn't move on paper. I'm surprised thats not a Health and Safety issue. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Doctor Gideon Ceefax
|
|
« Reply #26 on: January 22, 2008, 08:48:18 pm » |
|
Voyagers are without a doubt the worst long distance stock I have ever travelled on. Overcrowding is often horrendous, it's not too infrequent that passengers are turned away from travelling on them, and the seating is far too upright and uncomfortable. Two four car voyagers actually have less seats than one 2+7 HST▸ .
They don't appear to be overly popular with the staff either, the guard rather than having a guards van or a back cab appears to share a tip up seat in a fairly public area with the stewards, and doesn't actually even have a window to look out of. Indeed I've seen their own staff rammed in vestibules with the punters on a regular basis, as they don't appear to have any proper accomodation for themselves to sit in!
Because of the tapered bodysides, the standing room in vestibles is also far more uncomfortable than other trains. The fixtures and fittings rattle away, which I believe is due to poor design rather than underfloor engines, the 170's, 180's and 158's certainly don't seem anywhere near as bad.
However the increase in frequency was definitely welcome, timekeeping isn't generally that bad, and the onboard staff are superb.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Timmer
|
|
« Reply #27 on: January 22, 2008, 09:22:41 pm » |
|
Welcome to the forum Doctor Gideon Ceefax.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #28 on: January 22, 2008, 09:37:53 pm » |
|
Voyagers are without a doubt the worst long distance stock I have ever travelled on. Overcrowding is often horrendous, it's not too infrequent that passengers are turned away from travelling on them, and the seating is far too upright and uncomfortable. Two four car voyagers actually have less seats than one 2+7 HST▸ .
They don't appear to be overly popular with the staff either, the guard rather than having a guards van or a back cab appears to share a tip up seat in a fairly public area with the stewards, and doesn't actually even have a window to look out of. Indeed I've seen their own staff rammed in vestibules with the punters on a regular basis, as they don't appear to have any proper accomodation for themselves to sit in!
Because of the tapered bodysides, the standing room in vestibles is also far more uncomfortable than other trains. The fixtures and fittings rattle away, which I believe is due to poor design rather than underfloor engines, the 170's, 180's and 158's certainly don't seem anywhere near as bad.
However the increase in frequency was definitely welcome, timekeeping isn't generally that bad, and the onboard staff are superb.
You are right- they are dreadful! But- why aren't the Mk2▸ carriages that the new Virgin Trains replaced being put in for FGW▸ . Andrew Haines said: "we are scouring the land for more rolling stock- it is curently not available." Yes it is - liar!!!! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
swlines
|
|
« Reply #29 on: January 23, 2008, 04:36:01 am » |
|
He's not lying, he's actually correct but just isn't saying the full answer.
Mk2▸ rolling stock is not 125mph rolling stock and currently the only paths on the fast lines other than the few for Turbos are 125mph. As such, 125mph rolling stock is needed...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
