Well, a most pleasant trip to Edinburgh and back, care of First
Scotrail's nice little offer, rather enhanced by the Edinburgh Fringe
being in full swing (I hadn't realised).  Most of it on time, as well,
give or take 10 minutes lost at Winsford on the return due to
signalling problems.

Just a quicky, then, on the subject of the GNER Mallard, which I was
able to sample in some length this morning...

First impressions: very nice.  Tasteful, toned-down colours, but also
making use of the same idea VT do in having some seats coloured
differently from others to break the monotony.  All seemed fairly well
screwed together, and the wood panelling on the coach ends plus
spotlights down the middle of the ceiling added to a feeling of
quality.

Impressions after about half an hour: bloody awful.  Why?  Quite
simply, the seats are the worst I have ever had the misfortune to sit
on in any InterCity passenger vehicle, and that includes the famed
InterCity 70.

The problem?  Not the legroom (I had a priority seat, and later a
table).  Not the "wings", as they were soft.  Not even the layout.
The problem was that the seat base, except for the middle 8in or so
(and my backside is rather wider than that), tilts slightly
*forwards*, the backrest bends my back in a very unnatural fashion
(because there was no "inset" bit at the bottom) and there was no
thigh support whatsoever.  By the end of the trip, I was having to sit
sideways as it was the only way to get comfortable.  I'd have swapped
for a Voyager at York if my schedule hadn't been as tight.

Other minor points: buffet area too small, and queues back into the
Standard coach instead of the vestibule end, and a lot of wasted space
that could be converted into a nice Stehcafe, German-style.   Bog in
the coach I was in wouldn't flush.  The Mk4s are still riding like
carts, with bangs and rattles coming from the bogies (not just one bad
coach, I swapped between two to get a table later on and both were as
bad).

Oh well, GNER, back on the avoid list, and I hope you sack your
ergonomics people, as they really haven't done their job.  I was
hoping the Mallard would be worth waiting for, but it really wasn't.

On a side note - I've realised why the Pendolino's aircon seems to me
to be so much better than anything else - moving air.  Because the
ducting and outlet is in the luggage rack not far above the seating,
the air doesn't stagnate like in other trains, so even if it isn't
blowing colder as such it feels much more pleasant.  Only one way to
improve on that - road-coach style adjustable vents would be lovely.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

> On a side note - I've realised why the Pendolino's aircon seems to me
> to be so much better than anything else - moving air.  Because the
> ducting and outlet is in the luggage rack not far above the seating,
> the air doesn't stagnate like in other trains, so even if it isn't
> blowing colder as such it feels much more pleasant.  Only one way to
> improve on that - road-coach style adjustable vents would be lovely.
> 
> Neil


I think you must be a strange shape! The mallards are the best trains 
I've ever travelled in, IMHO! They have a few minor problems, but I've 
never noticed a problem with the seats, they are certainly a million 
times better than the hard seats they replaced.

And much better than the 125mph tube trains that Virgin West Coast seem 
to be running now - those tiny windows are a joke!

In message , at 22:34:12 on Sat, 27 Aug 
2005, Neil Williams  remarked:

>I swapped between two to get a table later on and both were as bad


What did you think of the table? The Mallard set I travelled on had 
"short" [1] tables, so if you were in an aisle seat the table only got 
halfway across my lap. This made it very awkward for using a computer.

[1] In terms of the distance from the side of the coach to where they 
stopped, which was a noticeable distance from the aisle.
-- 
Roland Perry

"Neil Williams"  wrote in message 
news:4310e4e7.512396@news.tesco.net...

> Well, a most pleasant trip to Edinburgh and back, care of First
> Scotrail's nice little offer, rather enhanced by the Edinburgh Fringe
> being in full swing (I hadn't realised).  Most of it on time, as well,
> give or take 10 minutes lost at Winsford on the return due to
> signalling problems.
>
> Just a quicky, then, on the subject of the GNER Mallard, which I was
> able to sample in some length this morning...
>
> First impressions: very nice.  Tasteful, toned-down colours, but also
> making use of the same idea VT do in having some seats coloured
> differently from others to break the monotony.  All seemed fairly well
> screwed together, and the wood panelling on the coach ends plus
> spotlights down the middle of the ceiling added to a feeling of
> quality.
>
> Impressions after about half an hour: bloody awful.  Why?  Quite
> simply, the seats are the worst I have ever had the misfortune to sit
> on in any InterCity passenger vehicle, and that includes the famed
> InterCity 70.
>
> The problem?  Not the legroom (I had a priority seat, and later a
> table).  Not the "wings", as they were soft.  Not even the layout.
> The problem was that the seat base, except for the middle 8in or so
> (and my backside is rather wider than that), tilts slightly
> *forwards*, the backrest bends my back in a very unnatural fashion
> (because there was no "inset" bit at the bottom) and there was no
> thigh support whatsoever.  By the end of the trip, I was having to sit
> sideways as it was the only way to get comfortable.  I'd have swapped
> for a Voyager at York if my schedule hadn't been as tight.
>
> Other minor points: buffet area too small, and queues back into the
> Standard coach instead of the vestibule end, and a lot of wasted space
> that could be converted into a nice Stehcafe, German-style.   Bog in
> the coach I was in wouldn't flush.  The Mk4s are still riding like
> carts, with bangs and rattles coming from the bogies (not just one bad
> coach, I swapped between two to get a table later on and both were as
> bad).
>
> Oh well, GNER, back on the avoid list, and I hope you sack your
> ergonomics people, as they really haven't done their job.  I was
> hoping the Mallard would be worth waiting for, but it really wasn't.
>
> On a side note - I've realised why the Pendolino's aircon seems to me
> to be so much better than anything else - moving air.  Because the
> ducting and outlet is in the luggage rack not far above the seating,
> the air doesn't stagnate like in other trains, so even if it isn't
> blowing colder as such it feels much more pleasant.  Only one way to
> improve on that - road-coach style adjustable vents would be lovely.
>
> Neil
>
> -- 
> Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
> When replying please use neil at the above domain
> 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.


When you've lost a lot of weight you self-confessed fat-arsed *******, then 
try again.


Until then, please keep away from the rest of us, thereby leaving more room 
!

Yours aye

Rab

"Neil Williams"  wrote in message 
news:4310e4e7.512396@news.tesco.net...

> Impressions after about half an hour: bloody awful.  Why?  Quite
> simply, the seats are the worst I have ever had the misfortune to sit
> on in any InterCity passenger vehicle, and that includes the famed
> InterCity 70.
>
> The problem?  Not the legroom (I had a priority seat, and later a
> table).  Not the "wings", as they were soft.  Not even the layout.
> The problem was that the seat base, except for the middle 8in or so
> (and my backside is rather wider than that), tilts slightly
> *forwards*, the backrest bends my back in a very unnatural fashion
> (because there was no "inset" bit at the bottom) and there was no
> thigh support whatsoever.


I totally agree about the 'unatural' backrest. This is a major problem with 
the seat. it is not anatomically correct.

..  The Mk4s are still riding like

> carts, with bangs and rattles coming from the bogies (not just one bad
> coach, I swapped between two to get a table later on and both were as
> bad).


I understood this was addressed as part of the upgrade but I can feel no 
difference. The track quality particularly between Leeds and Doncaster makes 
for a very lively cup of coffee.

Aside from these problems I like the new Mallards but the class 373 is in a 
different league. GNER will not impress many by replacing these with HST's 
on electrified lines. New stock and electric locomotives required.

David

>
> First impressions: very nice.  Tasteful, toned-down colours, but also
> making use of the same idea VT do in having some seats coloured
> differently from others to break the monotony.


Or even the same idea Intercity had in the Mk4s in having some seats
coloured diffrently from others to break the monotony.

All seemed fairly well

> screwed together, and the wood panelling on the coach ends plus
> spotlights down the middle of the ceiling added to a feeling of
> quality.
>
> Impressions after about half an hour: bloody awful.  Why?  Quite
> simply, the seats are the worst I have ever had the misfortune to sit
> on in any InterCity passenger vehicle, and that includes the famed
> InterCity 70.
>
> The problem?  Not the legroom (I had a priority seat, and later a
> table).  Not the "wings", as they were soft.  Not even the layout.
> The problem was that the seat base, except for the middle 8in or so
> (and my backside is rather wider than that), tilts slightly
> *forwards*,


Ive noticed this on a few of the Mallards, it can feel like the whole seat
is leaning forwards. But this doesn't happen on them all, or even the
majority of them, so I think its something to do who's fitted the seat
rather than the seat its self.

 > the backrest bends my back in a very unnatural fashion

> (because there was no "inset" bit at the bottom) and there was no
> thigh support whatsoever.  By the end of the trip, I was having to sit
> sideways as it was the only way to get comfortable.  I'd have swapped
> for a Voyager at York if my schedule hadn't been as tight.
>
> Other minor points: buffet area too small, and queues back into the
> Standard coach instead of the vestibule end, and a lot of wasted space
> that could be converted into a nice Stehcafe, German-style.


The big problem is the lack of space in the buffet area for pax and staff,
the only area there is for storage of moduels and trollies is the bit
between the counter and the seats.


-- 
http://europeanrailways.fotopic.net/
Any views or opinions expressed and presented are not those of the author
and do not represent those of his employers, they belong to the voices in
his head.

David Haggas wrote:


> Aside from these problems I like the new Mallards but the class 373 is in a
> different league. GNER will not impress many by replacing these with HST's
> on electrified lines. New stock and electric locomotives required.
>
> David


Fot what it's worth here's my 2 cents...

I have never had a problem with the ride on a Mk4, and I regularly use
them from KX to Glasgow. The seats on the Mallard were OK I thought.
Maybe harder than the originals, but that could be just that the
originals had all those years of wear to soften them. The ride quality
is very subjective. Just as ride quality in cars is. Some like the firm
ride and quick bump response of a sports car or hot hatch (which can
give some people joint and head aches) and some like the softer, more
wallowing feel of a luxury saloon (which can give some motion
sickness). I don't dispute that some don't like the feel of a Mk4, but
to say it rides like a cart, is a little harsh and unwarranted as many
I know like it. The bogies don't make any more rattles than any Mk3
I've ever been in. Oh and why does EVERY GNER HST I've been on had one
or more horrendous wheel-flats somewhere in the set?!

Regarding David's point above about the 373's - I agree. I understand
why GNER want to commonize their fleet and keep it to 91's and HST's.
Then there's the speed restrictions that are imposed on the 373's on
part of their journey to Leeds. The restrictions are imposed (as usual)
because the infrastructure is not up to the job. Surely then, it would
make more sense to upgrade the infrastructure. Yes this will cost, but
it will have a longer term benefit for ALL GNER's services on this
route, and the HST's (good though they are) have a limited life left.
The 373's have much more potential use. It's also sad that the fastest
trains to grace UK railways have a speed restriction imposed on them
because of past underinvestment. Ironic isn't it?

The benefits in using the 373/2's are obvious - 578 seated passenger
capacity (something no HST formation can do), the comfort - easily the
quitest and most comfortable carriages I have ever been in. There is
more leg room than in anything else (or any airliner I've been in), and
the 2 bar cars, which mean less queuing in my experience than in a Mk3
or Mk4 set. They've already proven popular, I know of some people who
will let a Mk4 set go and wait the extra 10 to 15 minutes to get the
"White Rose" set. That says something surely.

Then there's the possibility of them being stabled because of no use?
Scandalous. Just as EWS' storage of 60's and all those 92's with
nowhere to go. I hate to see good machinery just going to waste, unles
there is some use for them when CTRL section 2 opens.

Anyway, as I said, just my 2 cents worth.

"Roland Perry"  wrote in message
news:gSGDasPGeWEDFADC@donald.internetpolicynews.co.uk...

> In message , at 22:34:12 on Sat, 27 Aug
> 2005, Neil Williams  remarked:
> >I swapped between two to get a table later on and both were as bad
>
> What did you think of the table? The Mallard set I travelled on had
> "short" [1] tables, so if you were in an aisle seat the table only got
> halfway across my lap. This made it very awkward for using a computer.


The idea behind the short tables was to stop the damaged caused by the
trolleys hitting the ends of the tables.

However this has just lead to the trolleys hitting the seats or your knee. A
better idea would have been a full length table with metal edging.


-- 
http://europeanrailways.fotopic.net/
Any views or opinions expressed and presented are not those of the author
and do not represent those of his employers, they belong to the voices in
his head.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 08:28:06 +0100, Roland Perry 
wrote:


>What did you think of the table? The Mallard set I travelled on had 
>"short" [1] tables, so if you were in an aisle seat the table only got 
>halfway across my lap. This made it very awkward for using a computer.


The table *appeared* to be full size, but I only sat in window seats
so didn't notice if it was too rounded etc for practical use of a
laptop.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 10:04:14 +0000 (UTC), "Boogaloo"
<morebeer@anytime.please> wrote:


>Or even the same idea Intercity had in the Mk4s in having some seats
>coloured diffrently from others to break the monotony.


Credit to BR, then.  I thought I remembered the Mk4 standard having
them all in red and white?  Obviously not...


>Ive noticed this on a few of the Mallards, it can feel like the whole seat
>is leaning forwards. But this doesn't happen on them all, or even the
>majority of them, so I think its something to do who's fitted the seat
>rather than the seat its self.


The seats may have been better if they had been tilted about 5 degrees
further backwards.  The backrest was still a very odd shape, though,
and I think it was that that was causing a sore back.  I may have been
unlucky - but if this only applies to some sets there is a serious
lack of quality control going on, which given the solid and quality
feel of the rest of the job is quite surprising.

The odd thing about these ones was that it was not possible for me to
find any comfortable position at all, other than sideways.  It's not
that I always sit in one position - I slouch in 158 seats as that
feels right, and sit bolt upright in Pendolino seats, as they feel
designed for that.


>The big problem is the lack of space in the buffet area for pax and staff,
>the only area there is for storage of moduels and trollies is the bit
>between the counter and the seats.


Ah, I was wondering what that space was for.  Just looked wasted to
me.

Give the queue it may almost have been worth having seats all the way
up to the counter on one side, and a space twice as long but half as
wide with no seats on the other side.  The queue wasn't that long, but
it was causing disruption because the new seats (and maybe the old
ones as well) are so close together across the coach that it can be
difficult for two people to pass if they are all occupied.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 09:08:03 +0100, "Rab C Nesbitt"
 wrote:


>When you've lost a lot of weight you self-confessed fat-arsed *******, then 
>try again.


You appear to be trolling, but I will bite nonetheless.

You will notice that I quoted 8" as what I thought might be the
maximum comfortable backside width.  That's quite narrow, and even if
I didn't eat for 6 months and therefore lost any weight I do have, I
wouldn't end up that thin.

Thin or otherwise, the backrest was also poorly-designed for someone
of any width.  Completely the wrong shape, and that was the major
problem.

I would suggest for the future less attempts at ergonomically
designing seats, as there's not been one yet that everyone likes (I
really like Pendolino/Voyager seats, but see how many don't).  Much as
I criticise it (mainly for the armrests), a version of the InterCity
70 with liftable armrests and a higher back would be a decent
compromise.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"50bmg"  wrote in message
news:1125223989.070801.267590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

>
> The benefits in using the 373/2's are obvious - 578 seated passenger


373/3s. The 373/2s are the French sets.


> capacity (something no HST formation can do), the comfort - easily the
> quitest and most comfortable carriages I have ever been in. There is
> more leg room than in anything else (or any airliner I've been in), and
> the 2 bar cars, which mean less queuing in my experience than in a Mk3
> or Mk4 set. They've already proven popular, I know of some people who
> will let a Mk4 set go and wait the extra 10 to 15 minutes to get the
> "White Rose" set. That says something surely.


Exactly what I do. Plan my journey around a GNER*.


> Then there's the possibility of them being stabled because of no use?
> Scandalous. Just as EWS' storage of 60's and all those 92's with
> nowhere to go. I hate to see good machinery just going to waste, unles
> there is some use for them when CTRL section 2 opens.


IIRC, Eurostar UK had already indicated to GNER that they would require them
back, in any case. GNER are pre-empting the situation by replacing them with
available HSTs. AFAIK E* have not yet gone public on their plans but there
are strong rumours that the current Brussels services may be extended
through to Amsterdam, using the new Belgian/Dutch high-speed lines. Perhaps
a recast of the entire E* network may be envisaged. Certainly, in my
experience, the 14-vehicle 373/3s would be adequate on the Brussels run,
rather than the 18-vehicle 373/0, 373/1 or 373/2.

Jack Taylor wrote:

> "50bmg"  wrote in message
> news:1125223989.070801.267590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > The benefits in using the 373/2's are obvious - 578 seated passenger
>
> 373/3s. The 373/2s are the French sets.


Actually all 18 car sets are classified 373/1 even if their numbers are
in the 3730XX, 3731XX or 3732XX range. All the 3733XX (North of London
regional sets) are known (confusingly) as 373/2.... not to be confused
with an SNCF owned 3732XX numbered set... clear as mud huh?

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 10:29:29 GMT, Jack Taylor wrote:

>IIRC, Eurostar UK had already indicated to GNER that they would require them
>back, in any case. GNER are pre-empting the situation by replacing them with
>available HSTs. AFAIK E* have not yet gone public on their plans but there
>are strong rumours that the current Brussels services may be extended
>through to Amsterdam, using the new Belgian/Dutch high-speed lines.


This was a plan, but Eurostar abandoned it.

Regards,

          Rian

-- 
Rian van der Borgt, Leuven, Belgium.
e-mail: rvdborgt+@evonet.be  www: http://www.evonet.be/~rvdborgt/
Attention: new e-mail and web address because my provider found it
necessary to change its name.

In message , at 10:13:43 on Sun, 28 Aug
2005, Neil Williams  remarked:

>>What did you think of the table? The Mallard set I travelled on had
>>"short" [1] tables, so if you were in an aisle seat the table only got
>>halfway across my lap. This made it very awkward for using a computer.
>
>The table *appeared* to be full size, but I only sat in window seats
>so didn't notice if it was too rounded etc for practical use of a
>laptop.


Here's an "official" picture.

You only notice how short the table is when you come to use it with
something like a laptop, which has to dangle off by a couple of inches,
and is in danger of falling into the aisle!

<http://www.gner.co.uk/GNER/PressCentre/ImageLibrary/GNER+Mallard+train+
Standard+Class+coach+interior.htm>

-- 
Roland Perry

Neil Williams wrote:
   :


> for practical use of a laptop.


Where I work, we're not allowed to call them laptops any more as they 
get too hot !  "Mobile PC" is the - er - "PC" name now.

"Rian van der Borgt" <rvdborgt+@evonet.be> wrote in message
news:slrndh35sp.2st.rvdborgt+@xs1.xs4all.be...

>
> This was a plan, but Eurostar abandoned it.


A shame. If E* went somewhere useful, beyond Brussels, it might be more
heavily used.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 07:28:06 UTC, Roland Perry  
wrote:

: In message , at 22:34:12 on Sat, 27 Aug 
: 2005, Neil Williams  remarked:
: >I swapped between two to get a table later on and both were as bad
: 
: What did you think of the table? The Mallard set I travelled on had 
: "short" [1] tables, so if you were in an aisle seat the table only got 
: halfway across my lap. This made it very awkward for using a computer.

It's crazy. I can't see why they couldn't make them full size.

I particularly like the priority tables in Pendolinos, where you can 
fold up the aisle bits to get in and out (if no one's using them). 
Very practical, and full width too.

Ian

"50bmg"  wrote in message 
news:1125223989.070801.267590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

>
> David Haggas wrote:
>
>> Aside from these problems I like the new Mallards but the class 373 is in 
>> a
>> different league. GNER will not impress many by replacing these with 
>> HST's
>> on electrified lines. New stock and electric locomotives required.
>>
>> David
>
> Fot what it's worth here's my 2 cents...
>
> I have never had a problem with the ride on a Mk4, and I regularly use
> them from KX to Glasgow. The seats on the Mallard were OK I thought.
> Maybe harder than the originals, but that could be just that the
> originals had all those years of wear to soften them. The ride quality
> is very subjective. Just as ride quality in cars is. Some like the firm
> ride and quick bump response of a sports car or hot hatch (which can
> give some people joint and head aches) and some like the softer, more
> wallowing feel of a luxury saloon (which can give some motion
> sickness). I don't dispute that some don't like the feel of a Mk4, but
> to say it rides like a cart, is a little harsh and unwarranted as many
> I know like it. The bogies don't make any more rattles than any Mk3
> I've ever been in. Oh and why does EVERY GNER HST I've been on had one
> or more horrendous wheel-flats somewhere in the set?!


Because GNER haven't spent any money on replacing the 1976-vintage WSP 
system on its HST sets, unlike FGW and MML who have changed most (but by no 
means all) of theirs. The new WSP equipment makes a *big* difference to the 
number of wheelflats.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 10:27:19 UTC, wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk (Neil
Williams) wrote:

: Thin or otherwise, the backrest was also poorly-designed for someone
: of any width.  Completely the wrong shape, and that was the major
: problem.

I agree with you. I prefer the look of Mallard seats (and interiors) -
nicer colours - but the ergonomics of Voyager and Pendolino ones are 
far better.

Ian

"David Haggas"  wrote in message 
news:des0pk$4i2$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...

> .  The Mk4s are still riding like
>> carts, with bangs and rattles coming from the bogies (not just one bad
>> coach, I swapped between two to get a table later on and both were as
>> bad).
>
> I understood this was addressed as part of the upgrade but I can feel no 
> difference. The track quality particularly between Leeds and Doncaster 
> makes for a very lively cup of coffee.


IMX the ride quality is fine - provided the coach has been refurbished 
recently! After just a few months it gets back to it's bad old self, 
especially in First Class I find.

-- 
*** http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/ ***
Rich Mackin (rich-at-richmackin-co-uk)
MSN: richmackin-at-hotmail-dot-com

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 23:45:44 +0100, Steve Jonson  wrote:


>And much better than the 125mph tube trains that Virgin West Coast seem 
>to be running now - those tiny windows are a joke!


I don't find them a problem, though one reason I prefer Voyagers is
because of the large (top-to-bottom) ones provided there.  There are
seats against a pillar in the Mk4s as well, anyway.

Besides which, the body profile of the Mk4 and Voyager/Pendolino is
not all that much different, all three being designed for tilt.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Living in Texas means I only sampled Mallard for the first time last 
weekend.  Yes the interiors look nicer, but I put a lot of this down to 
them being refurbished. The old Intercity Mk4s looked nice when new - 
and only turned shabby with age. You see the same run-down effect with 
airplanes as well.

I do agree with the seats although I didn't find they leaned forward. Or 
didn't notice it if they did. The backs were very uncomfortable for both 
my wife and I.  btw I'm in my BMI as weight goes...
A sort of funny flat hard shape.

Didn't try the buffet.




-- 
Richard Marsden
LNER Encyclopedia
Imminent new home: http://www.lner.info

John Tattersall wrote:

> "50bmg"  wrote in message
> news:1125223989.070801.267590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > David Haggas wrote:
> >
> >> Aside from these problems I like the new Mallards but the class 373 is in
> >> a
> >> different league. GNER will not impress many by replacing these with
> >> HST's
> >> on electrified lines. New stock and electric locomotives required.
> >>
> >> David
> >
> > Fot what it's worth here's my 2 cents...
> >
> > I have never had a problem with the ride on a Mk4, and I regularly use
> > them from KX to Glasgow. The seats on the Mallard were OK I thought.
> > Maybe harder than the originals, but that could be just that the
> > originals had all those years of wear to soften them. The ride quality
> > is very subjective. Just as ride quality in cars is. Some like the firm
> > ride and quick bump response of a sports car or hot hatch (which can
> > give some people joint and head aches) and some like the softer, more
> > wallowing feel of a luxury saloon (which can give some motion
> > sickness). I don't dispute that some don't like the feel of a Mk4, but
> > to say it rides like a cart, is a little harsh and unwarranted as many
> > I know like it. The bogies don't make any more rattles than any Mk3
> > I've ever been in. Oh and why does EVERY GNER HST I've been on had one
> > or more horrendous wheel-flats somewhere in the set?!
>
> Because GNER haven't spent any money on replacing the 1976-vintage WSP
> system on its HST sets, unlike FGW and MML who have changed most (but by no
> means all) of theirs. The new WSP equipment makes a *big* difference to the
> number of wheelflats.


Beat me to it! The new WSP systems react to wheelslip up to 50 times
faster than the old system. Faively/FGW still working on making it even
better.

"Jack Taylor"  wrote:


>
>"Rian van der Borgt" <rvdborgt+@evonet.be> wrote in message
>news:slrndh35sp.2st.rvdborgt+@xs1.xs4all.be...
>>
>> This was a plan, but Eurostar abandoned it.
>
>A shame. If E* went somewhere useful, beyond Brussels, it might be more
>heavily used.



Eurostar are only interested in keeping down their costs and making
the most of the subsidies from the English and French Governments.

"Neil Williams"  wrote in message
news:4311d693.722498@news.tesco.net...

> On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 23:45:44 +0100, Steve Jonson  wrote:
>
> >And much better than the 125mph tube trains that Virgin West Coast seem
> >to be running now - those tiny windows are a joke!
>
> I don't find them a problem, though one reason I prefer Voyagers is
> because of the large (top-to-bottom) ones provided there.  There are
> seats against a pillar in the Mk4s as well, anyway.


True, but at least on a Mk4 you always get some window, there is at least a
couple rows of seats on a Pendolino that have no window at all, and I dont
mean the seat is against a pillar, its next to a wall, the closest window is
on the other side of the train.


>
> Besides which, the body profile of the Mk4 and Voyager/Pendolino is
> not all that much different, all three being designed for tilt.
>


But on the inside there is allot of difference, the floor height inside a
Voyager is far higher than that of a Mk4, and almost anything else on the
railways, which means you are sitting higher up in the vehicle, and the
higher up you go on a vehicle designed for tilt, the narrower it gets. This
is one of the endless things I dislike about the Voyagers, they are the only
train in the UK that, for me, there is no shoulder room.


-- 
http://europeanrailways.fotopic.net/
Any views or opinions expressed and presented are not those of the author
and do not represent those of his employers, they belong to the voices in
his head.

Tony Polson wrote:

> "Jack Taylor"  wrote:
>
> >
> >"Rian van der Borgt" <rvdborgt+@evonet.be> wrote in message
> >news:slrndh35sp.2st.rvdborgt+@xs1.xs4all.be...
> >>
> >> This was a plan, but Eurostar abandoned it.
> >
> >A shame. If E* went somewhere useful, beyond Brussels, it might be more
> >heavily used.
>
>
> Eurostar are only interested in keeping down their costs and making
> the most of the subsidies from the English and French Governments.


Much like every other transport provider then. Difference is in some
cases they call them subsidies, in others tax breaks. The market at the
moment is dominated above a certain travel time by cheap air fares
making the rail alternative poor value beyond Brussels for most
travellers. This makes the idea of the through Eurostar service a
riskier proposition commercially. If the idea of making the polluter
pay ever comes into effect that may change. The faster timings from
2007 for Paris and Brussels are likely to grow the market and together
with sets out for refurbishment means the GNER *s have to go back.
HST's may be a poor alternative but they will prove cheaper in some
respects, not least the wheel wear which on GNER services proved to be
far more dramatic than on 373's elsewhere.

jon.porter1@lycosmax.co.uk wrote:

> John Tattersall wrote:
>
> Beat me to it! The new WSP systems react to wheelslip up to 50 times
> faster than the old system. Faively/FGW still working on making it even
> better.


What have they done to improve it? Is it just in the processors and
software, or have they upgraded the wheelspeed sensors as well -
basically, have Faiveley installed a whole new system? I guessed it was
something like that - or that GNER had issues with their wheel lathe...
or both. I know Bounds Green hasn't got such a facility which would
mean sending sets up north for wheel work. I'm sure I heard somewhere
that their EMU neighbors at Hornsey had a wheel lathe that they let
GNER use occasionally, but I've not ever seen a blue and red set in
there.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:54:10 +0100,  wrote:


>
> Tony Polson wrote:
>> "Jack Taylor"  wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Rian van der Borgt" <rvdborgt+@evonet.be> wrote in message
>> >news:slrndh35sp.2st.rvdborgt+@xs1.xs4all.be...
>> >>
>> >> This was a plan, but Eurostar abandoned it.
>> >
>> >A shame. If E* went somewhere useful, beyond Brussels, it might be more
>> >heavily used.
>>
>>
>> Eurostar are only interested in keeping down their costs and making
>> the most of the subsidies from the English and French Governments.
>
> Much like every other transport provider then. Difference is in some
> cases they call them subsidies, in others tax breaks. The market at the
> moment is dominated above a certain travel time by cheap air fares
> making the rail alternative poor value beyond Brussels for most
> travellers. This makes the idea of the through Eurostar service a
> riskier proposition commercially. If the idea of making the polluter
> pay ever comes into effect that may change. The faster timings from
> 2007 for Paris and Brussels are likely to grow the market and together
> with sets out for refurbishment means the GNER *s have to go back.
> HST's may be a poor alternative but they will prove cheaper in some
> respects, not least the wheel wear which on GNER services proved to be
> far more dramatic than on 373's elsewhere.


I think that the proposed pollution tax on internal flights will amount to  
8 on an internal eu flight. Thats not really going to make much  
difference to my travelling habits.

I cant really see that the reduced journey times to Paris and Brussels are  
going to grow the market that much, Eurostar may win market share at the  
expense of the airlines especially at the business end of the market but  
the fact remains that the London to Brussels market isnt exactly huge.  
Some of the Eurostars Ive been on to Brussels I have had a coach to myself!

Dreams of Eurostars leaving St Pancras every few minutes for the continent  
are just that even if Eurostar have 100% of the market, the market just  
isnt that big.

Paul

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 20:05:19 +0000 (UTC), "Boogaloo"
<morebeer@anytime.please> wrote:


>True, but at least on a Mk4 you always get some window, there is at least a
>couple rows of seats on a Pendolino that have no window at all, and I dont
>mean the seat is against a pillar, its next to a wall, the closest window is
>on the other side of the train.


One row at one very outer end, as I recall.  Oddly, it is rarely the
last seat to be taken.  I have never had to sit there personally, and
I've used both Voyagers and Pendolinos extensively and at most times
of day.

There are also some with very little in the way of window.  I avoid
these as well - but again it's rare to have to sit there as they're
rarely the last seat spare - so someone obviously likes them.  I
imagine it's a good place to sit if you just want a kip, as the
lighting is subdued at that point.


>But on the inside there is allot of difference, the floor height inside a
>Voyager is far higher than that of a Mk4, and almost anything else on the
>railways, which means you are sitting higher up in the vehicle, and the
>higher up you go on a vehicle designed for tilt, the narrower it gets. This
>is one of the endless things I dislike about the Voyagers, they are the only
>train in the UK that, for me, there is no shoulder room.


So long as I get a window I'm OK on a Voyager or Pendo, but if I don't
I admit it's a bit cramped.  Then again, I don't have very wide
shoulders - so again it's a case that these things should be designed
for most common shapes and they've missed you, just like GNER have
completely missed the shape of my back.

As for the floor height, it's good and bad.  A raised floor means you
miss the constraining bit at platform height, though as you correctly
state it means it's narrower higher up.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

> One row at one very outer end, as I recall.  Oddly, it is rarely the
> last seat to be taken.  I have never had to sit there personally, and
> I've used both Voyagers and Pendolinos extensively and at most times
> of day.


The thing that gets me is theres a luggage rack about three rows away with a
nice view out part of a window!

-- 
http://europeanrailways.fotopic.net/
Any views or opinions expressed and presented are not those of the author
and do not represent those of his employers, they belong to the voices in
his head.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:56:11 UTC, "paul Hutchinson" 
 wrote:

: Dreams of Eurostars leaving St Pancras every few minutes for the continent  
: are just that even if Eurostar have 100% of the market, the market just  
: isnt that big.

A quick web search suggests that there are around forty flights from 
London to Paris each day. That's a reasonable market, isn't it?

Ian

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 00:18:53 +0100, Ian Johnston  
 wrote:


> On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:56:11 UTC, "paul Hutchinson"
>  wrote:
>
> : Dreams of Eurostars leaving St Pancras every few minutes for the  
> continent
> : are just that even if Eurostar have 100% of the market, the market just
> : isnt that big.
>
> A quick web search suggests that there are around forty flights from
> London to Paris each day. That's a reasonable market, isn't it?
>

  One of Easyjet's 737 carries 149 passengers , a Eurostar 794. Based on  
your figure of 40 flights per day if the entire air market closed down it  
could be accomodated on 8 trains. Eurostar currently runs around 12 trains  
a day and boasts it has 60 odd per cent of the market.
Paris is undoubtedly the prime market.

If the Brussels service operated under any commercial criterior it would  
have closed by now.

Paul






-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

"paul Hutchinson"  wrote:


>On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 00:18:53 +0100, Ian Johnston  
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:56:11 UTC, "paul Hutchinson"
>>  wrote:
>>
>> : Dreams of Eurostars leaving St Pancras every few minutes for the  
>> continent
>> : are just that even if Eurostar have 100% of the market, the market just
>> : isnt that big.
>>
>> A quick web search suggests that there are around forty flights from
>> London to Paris each day. That's a reasonable market, isn't it?
>>
>  One of Easyjet's 737 carries 149 passengers , a Eurostar 794. Based on  
>your figure of 40 flights per day if the entire air market closed down it  
>could be accomodated on 8 trains. Eurostar currently runs around 12 trains  
>a day and boasts it has 60 odd per cent of the market.
>Paris is undoubtedly the prime market.
>
>If the Brussels service operated under any commercial criterior it would  
>have closed by now.



Absolutely.  Even the extensive use of Eurostar by civil servants
shuffling paper between Whitehall and Bruxelles has significantly
failed to impact the bottom line.

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 00:58:44 +0100, "paul Hutchinson"
 wrote:


>  One of Easyjet's 737 carries 149 passengers , a Eurostar 794. Based on  
>your figure of 40 flights per day if the entire air market closed down it  
>could be accomodated on 8 trains. Eurostar currently runs around 12 trains  
>a day and boasts it has 60 odd per cent of the market.
>Paris is undoubtedly the prime market.


One of the things that says is that the E* sets are too long, and so
is their associated infrastructure.  A 5-car EMU, perhaps doubled to
10 cars on busy services, would have sufficed, certainly for
Bruxelles.


>If the Brussels service operated under any commercial criterior it would  
>have closed by now.


It is interesting that most cross-border services, give or take the
Euregiobahn and its ilk, have to operate on a commercial basis in much
of the rest of Europe.

Then again, the trouble with the Tunnel is that it was a nonsensical
commercial project; it was never going to make money.  If politically
desirable (which it probably was), it would only make sense as a
nationalised, Government-funded piece of infrastructure.  This might
have led to more sensible charges to E* and the likes, and so more
chance of it "breaking even" on its own.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"paul Hutchinson"  wrote

> >
>   One of Easyjet's 737 carries 149 passengers , a Eurostar 794. Based on
> your figure of 40 flights per day if the entire air market closed down it
> could be accomodated on 8 trains. Eurostar currently runs around 12 trains
> a day and boasts it has 60 odd per cent of the market.
> Paris is undoubtedly the prime market.
>

September MR quotes Eurostar as having (May 2005) 69% of the (E* + air)
London - Paris market, and 62% of the London - Brussels. It doesn't seem
likely that the 20 minute time saving with CTRL2 will grow the market much,
but could accelerate the shift from air to rail which has already occurred
with CTRL1. But it doesn't seem realistic to expect that E* will need to run
more than around 20 trains each way per day to/from Paris (currently around
15), and may not need extra trains to Brussels, in view of the current low
loadings.

Peter

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 09:45:43 +0100, Peter Masson  
 wrote:


>
> "paul Hutchinson"  wrote
>> >
>>   One of Easyjet's 737 carries 149 passengers , a Eurostar 794. Based on
>> your figure of 40 flights per day if the entire air market closed down  
>> it
>> could be accomodated on 8 trains. Eurostar currently runs around 12  
>> trains
>> a day and boasts it has 60 odd per cent of the market.
>> Paris is undoubtedly the prime market.
>>
> September MR quotes Eurostar as having (May 2005) 69% of the (E* + air)
> London - Paris market, and 62% of the London - Brussels. It doesn't seem
> likely that the 20 minute time saving with CTRL2 will grow the market  
> much,
> but could accelerate the shift from air to rail which has already  
> occurred
> with CTRL1. But it doesn't seem realistic to expect that E* will need to  
> run
> more than around 20 trains each way per day to/from Paris (currently  
> around
> 15), and may not need extra trains to Brussels, in view of the current  
> low
> loadings.


Whilst the use of St Pancras as the terminal will cut 20 mins off the  
journey time and open up new markets it means an extended journeytime for  
much of Eurostars established passengers. Anyone arriving at Waterloo or  
Victoria will have to allow at least 30 mins extra to cross London.  
Unfortunately these are the same passengers who have easy access to  
Gatwick, Heathrow and Southampton Airports. It is also the reason why  
Southern are introducing an "express" service from Brighton to Ashford in  
December (see other thread).

It will be interesting to see what happens but I can see the move being  
more market neutral than positive.

Paul



-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On 28 Aug 2005 23:18:53 GMT, "Ian Johnston"
 wrote:


>On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:56:11 UTC, "paul Hutchinson" 
> wrote:
>
>: Dreams of Eurostars leaving St Pancras every few minutes for the continent  
>: are just that even if Eurostar have 100% of the market, the market just  
>: isnt that big.
>
>A quick web search suggests that there are around forty flights from 
>London to Paris each day. That's a reasonable market, isn't it?


Eurostar claim to have about 60% or so of the London-Paris market.
That suggests that even if they had 100% they would not make a profit.
Eurotunnel have absolutely no chance.
-- 
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 22:10:44 UTC, Terry Harper 
 wrote:

: Eurostar claim to have about 60% or so of the London-Paris market.
: That suggests that even if they had 100% they would not make a profit.
: Eurotunnel have absolutely no chance.

I agree completely. It's one of the Great Business Truisms of our 
time. If a tunnel can sink, it's sunk.

Ian

Roland Perry wrote:


> 
> Here's an "official" picture.
> 
> You only notice how short the table is when you come to use it with
> something like a laptop, which has to dangle off by a couple of inches,
> and is in danger of falling into the aisle!
> 
> <http://www.gner.co.uk/GNER/PressCentre/ImageLibrary/GNER+Mallard+train+
> Standard+Class+coach+interior.htm>
> 


Well I have no problems using my laptop in the aisle seats. But, then it 
is a 12" job so is small enough to fit on a seat back flip down table too.

Philip.

Neil Williams wrote:


> The seats may have been better if they had been tilted about 5 degrees
> further backwards.  The backrest was still a very odd shape, though,
> and I think it was that that was causing a sore back.  I may have been
> unlucky - but if this only applies to some sets there is a serious
> lack of quality control going on, which given the solid and quality
> feel of the rest of the job is quite surprising.


There are QC issues and GNER will be sending some sets back to 
Bombardier for modification when the whole fleet's finished (a couple of 
weeks time). Problems include split stitching on the seat covers, frayed 
carpets, toilet door locks and flushes.



> 
> The odd thing about these ones was that it was not possible for me to
> find any comfortable position at all, other than sideways.  It's not
> that I always sit in one position - I slouch in 158 seats as that
> feels right, and sit bolt upright in Pendolino seats, as they feel
> designed for that.
> 


I find slouching most comfortable in Mallards. I'll grant you that 
Voyager/Pendolino seats are more comfortable but Mallard seats are way 
better than previous Mk 4 seating and IC70s.

Philip.

On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 07:47:24 +0100, Philip Hardy
 wrote:


>I find slouching most comfortable in Mallards.


I would if the seat base was longer and not arranged such that it felt
like I'd slip straight off it... I couldn't sit upright because of the
back rest.  Sideways seemed the best compromise...


> I'll grant you that 
>Voyager/Pendolino seats are more comfortable but Mallard seats are way 
>better than previous Mk 4 seating and IC70s.


The previous Mk4 standard seating was utterly inappropriate for IC
use, so I'll give you that - no better than the 323 seating.  The
First Class was also pretty dire.

As to IC70s, the main objection to those is the armrests - if some
enterprising TOC would cut them off and fit liftable versions I'd
probably like them better than the Mallards.  There were a number of
XC Mk2s running around with the old "bucket" seat bases with no centre
armrest but IC70-type seat cushions, and those were fine so long as
the person next to you didn't expand into your space.

That said, the Mallard seats *look* good.  There are just a few minor
things about the design that makes them hellishly uncomfortable for
me.  I don't think you'd have to change a lot to make them work.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.