whats important to you

[whole diary]

[shaun healey]

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^▸ (First Great Western), 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^▸ (High Speed Train) 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^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)), 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.

[JayMac]

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

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

ok order for me most important first:

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

[Mookiemoo]

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^▸ (First Great Western), 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^▸ (High Speed Train) 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^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)), 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.

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!

[Chris from Nailsea]

Welcome to the Coffee Shop forum, shaun healey - and sorry to learn that you've not managed to benefit from a FGW^▸ (First Great Western) '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! 

[grahame]

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

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.

[Tim]

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

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

[Mookiemoo]

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.

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!

[grahame]

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  ?

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!

[Tim]

There's a perception that disability doesn't come through life style choice, whereas haveing a cycle with you does

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"

[shaun healey]

I do remember the old ads on the TV for the HST^▸ (High Speed Train), remember jimmy savel and 'the age of the train', back in them days, BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) 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^▸ (First Great Western) would argue otherwise, people want some space when travelling, of note here, i was sitting on a XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) 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.

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

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

[grahame]

Buses, air planes, and cars don't have tables. They all seem to manage OK without them.

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^▸ (in my humble opinion) - 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'll now retire to my bunker and wait for the usual enraged indignant posts to rattle off the thread 

I've probably helped stoke the fire 

[Btline]

I can see the huge problems FGW^▸ (First Great Western) (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^▸ (High Speed Train) with the unnecessarily high seats)

...get a coffee, sit back, and enjoy the view...

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 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]

[Mookiemoo]

I can see the huge problems FGW^▸ (First Great Western) (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^▸ (High Speed Train) with the unnecessarily high seats)

...get a coffee, sit back, and enjoy the view...

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 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!