How would you refurbish a Pendolino?

[387star]

hey are already being refurbished not ssure if new units will be retrofitted
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
http://www.alstom.com/press-centre/2013/10/alstom-to-modernize-virgins-pendolino-in-the-uk/

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Reconfiguring the seats - even in 1st - would help , so suitcases do not get a view and the removal of the unused "service points" would give some more seating.

Top on the list would be removal of the appalling "chime" for PA announcements (guaranteed to wake you up in a bad mood - along with replacing the "smug sounding" security announcement - or varying it a bit)

 

[zn1]

will everyone stop harking on about the great old days of BR.How often did APT-P, actually complete a weeks service..The APT-P werea pre-production fleet, built to iron all the faults so a squadron could enter service, which one didm with all the high failing bits removed and rebadged as IC225..the 225 fleet is a service design formation of APT.

The reason Chiltern use the MK3 is because they are an available asset, easily tweaked to what they want out the vehicles, chiltern have contributed to the refurbishment i suspect, but the majority of the money spent is by the rosco, who are getting the money back via hiring costs

refurbishment is also down to the ROSCO's,they want to get maximum return for the vehicles after overhaul, a TOC such as Virgin who wanst XYZ from the vehicle, for the costs required to refurbish and then rehire the vehicles and locos it appears obvious to me that it was cheaper long term to go for the new vehicle option. The cost of rebuild and rehire didnt fit the toc hence...new fleet etc etc..and vehicles placed in to storage to await hire by another company...those vehicles that were to far gone and beyond economic rebuild price cut up....that included what was thought to be some decent Mk3 DVT's, the majority have work with anglian jobs, the others have been slowly moulding until chiltern took up a hire in, Network rail saw a use with their fleet...

BR's maintenance regime was fairly strict, there were only a few cases where what were technical write off's were rebuilt..off top of my head - the 310/1 DMBT damaged at stafford was technically a new coach, and given a new design code, there was a CIG DT that was smashed at streatham hill head shunt that got rebuilt, only because at the time they were of premium use, and it was cheaper to repair for the time they had left..BR Made some unpopular decisions, the shutting down of the class 50's, but there were a fleet 47/7 going spare, larger fleet, better spares, class 55 deltic because it was cheaper to run a HST than one deltic hauled set....It was cheaper to run a HST from London to holyhead than to use the hauled set with loco change - if memory serves, it was cheaper to run a HST than use one class 47 to holyhead and back from crewe...

 

[Bevan Price]

Well, obviously any refurbishment will depend on what the accountants allow, and passengers opinions will come last. If I was in charge (and I never will be), I would:
Extend them all to 11 cars.
Reduce the amount of first class to 2 coaches.
Replace most of the airline type seating by 4-seat bays, with space for luggage behind the seat backs. That was one great positive feature of all "open" coach designs until the late 1970s - plenty of space for large items of luggage.
The management types who like to "squash people into rows of airline type
seating " forget (or don't care) that:-
(i). Passengers have luggage in assorted shapes & sizes, many items not fitting into overhead luggage racks.
(ii) Passengers prefer to be close to their luggage, to lessen the risk of it being stolen by some low-life thief, so they do not want luggage racks that they cannot easily see.
Also, as far as possible, seats would be aligned adjacent to windows.

Finally, I would put photos & drawings of the existing 390 interior into a train design manual, titled "how not to design train interiors".

 

[cjmillsnun]

will everyone stop harking on about the great old days of BR.How often did APT-P, actually complete a weeks service..The APT-P werea pre-production fleet, built to iron all the faults so a squadron could enter service, which one didm with all the high failing bits removed and rebadged as IC225..the 225 fleet is a service design formation of APT.

The reason Chiltern use the MK3 is because they are an available asset, easily tweaked to what they want out the vehicles, chiltern have contributed to the refurbishment i suspect, but the majority of the money spent is by the rosco, who are getting the money back via hiring costs

refurbishment is also down to the ROSCO's,they want to get maximum return for the vehicles after overhaul, a TOC such as Virgin who wanst XYZ from the vehicle, for the costs required to refurbish and then rehire the vehicles and locos it appears obvious to me that it was cheaper long term to go for the new vehicle option. The cost of rebuild and rehire didnt fit the toc hence...new fleet etc etc..and vehicles placed in to storage to await hire by another company...those vehicles that were to far gone and beyond economic rebuild price cut up....that included what was thought to be some decent Mk3 DVT's, the majority have work with anglian jobs, the others have been slowly moulding until chiltern took up a hire in, Network rail saw a use with their fleet...

BR's maintenance regime was fairly strict, there were only a few cases where what were technical write off's were rebuilt..off top of my head - the 310/1 DMBT damaged at stafford was technically a new coach, and given a new design code, there was a CIG DT that was smashed at streatham hill head shunt that got rebuilt, only because at the time they were of premium use, and it was cheaper to repair for the time they had left..BR Made some unpopular decisions, the shutting down of the class 50's, but there were a fleet 47/7 going spare, larger fleet, better spares, class 55 deltic because it was cheaper to run a HST than one deltic hauled set....It was cheaper to run a HST from London to holyhead than to use the hauled set with loco change - if memory serves, it was cheaper to run a HST than use one class 47 to holyhead and back from crewe...

You missed my point. My point is that the 390s were not the great leap forward you make them out to be. They just aren't. 15MPH could've certainly been achieved under BR had they not bottled it.

I didn't say they were all great days. APT actually was got working properly by the end. But it was already canned. As I said, BR bottled it (I guess you didn't read that part)

The 225 pretty much only shares the body profile with the APT-P. It is not a squadron service APT by any stretch of the imagination. Certainly lessons learned from BR's in house APT project were taken on board by the private companies (GEC and Metro Cammell) responsible for the 225s.

BR did sweat their assets, yes their maintenance regime was strict, so are the TOCs (perhaps more so as they're more likely to get sued over dangerous defects!). Perhaps there is parity in this.

The 390s had the potential to be a very nice train, but they got some minor details wrong. Larger windows would've remained within the safety regs of the time, and would've brightened up the interior.

Luggage racks are too small, however it's a tilting train.

The seats though. Ugh.

We're stuck with the 390s now. Lets just hope the refurb brings some much needed improvements. At least they aren't as bad as Voyagers. 222s showed how the Voyagers should've been done.

 

[Wolfie]

You missed my point. My point is that the 390s were not the great leap forward you make them out to be. They just aren't. 15MPH could've certainly been achieved under BR had they not bottled it.

I didn't say they were all great days. APT actually was got working properly by the end. But it was already canned. As I said, BR bottled it (I guess you didn't read that part)The 225 pretty much only shares the body profile with the APT-P. It is not a squadron service APT by any stretch of the imagination. Certainly lessons learned from BR's in house APT project were taken on board by the private companies (GEC and Metro Cammell) responsible for the 225s.

BR did sweat their assets, yes their maintenance regime was strict, so are the TOCs (perhaps more so as they're more likely to get sued over dangerous defects!). Perhaps there is parity in this.

The 390s had the potential to be a very nice train, but they got some minor details wrong. Larger windows would've remained within the safety regs of the time, and would've brightened up the interior.

Luggage racks are too small, however it's a tilting train.

The seats though. Ugh.

We're stuck with the 390s now. Lets just hope the refurb brings some much needed improvements. At least they aren't as bad as Voyagers. 222s showed how the Voyagers should've been done.

my bold

Your statement showsa a complete ignorance of how BR worked as a nationalised industry. BR did NOT bottle it, BR's paymasters the DOT did that.....

 

[HSTEd]

How exactly do you propose for BR to procure a fleet of trains when they had been instructed not to by the Treasury?

 

[gordonthemoron]

just think how more claustrophobic a 390 would be with Mallard seating

 

[bramling]

Fair dos to anyone who actually likes travelling in a Pendolino. Tastes do differ. If anyone doesn't particularly care about windows etc, fine.

What I can't believe is this "well you don't need windows anyway" tripe. What kind of Stockholm Syndrome is this? It's like an extended version of the Edinburgh cliche "You'll have had your tea...":

You won't be wanting a window then
You won't be needing legroom or decent pitch
You won't be needing somewhere to put your luggage now
You won't be wanting a pleasant interior

This is exactly the mentality Tyler is on about in the report mentioned over on another thread; the railways are captured like a hostage in a state of denial, where things that are commonplace everywhere else in the world (and used to be in Britain) are treated as insane demands, as if we're demanding at-seat silver service dining and massages delivered by unicorns.

And no, this isn't a misty-eyed BR nostalgia-trip. Scotrail's Desiros show that a modern train can be designed with respect paid to passenger comfort.

Pendos are technically impressive - but best appreciated zipping past at 90mph as I stand on Motherwell station waiting from my train. I don't want to step inside one (and I have spent hours travelling in them).

Would I prefer a Pendo to a rake of Mk1 carriages? Of course. Or to something that broke down all the time? Of course. Or to something that crawled from Glasgow to London at 80mph? Of course. But what I'd really prefer is something far better, which is easily possible given a tiny bit of imagination. And that isn't demanding unicorns.

What's shocking is the enormous sunk cost involved. Like them or loathe them, we're going to be stuck with them until they fall apart. That doesn't mean we have to like them - someone should have thought things through more thoroughly before sinking all that money into them.

To be fair, I don't mind travelling on 390s, but it does depend on where you sit. If you are lucky enough to secure one of the seats which have a full window view, it's quite a pleasant journey. I've had some pleasant trips doing the full run from London to Glasgow in 1st class, and come away feeling fresh and relaxed, likewise if you get the right seat in Standard class it can be a very pleasant experience, especially at night with the comparatively dim lighting. The trains also have the advantage of being long, especially the 11-car sets, so by national standards you're less likely to get an overcrowded train if you pick the right time to travel.

The flip side of the coin is that if you get a busy train, the journey can be literally torture.

By contast, get on a 91+Mk4 set, or even something like a humble class 365, and almost any seat gives you a comfortable journey, which is what the designers should have achieved with the 390.

 

[starrymarkb]

By contast, get on a 91+Mk4 set, or even something like a humble class 365, and almost any seat gives you a comfortable journey, which is what the designers should have achieved with the 390.

My experince of the Mk4 seats was far from comfortable, oh and only about a 3cm wide sliver of Window. I've not sampled a UK Pendolino but I find Voyager seats pretty comfortable.

 

[A0wen]

You missed my point. My point is that the 390s were not the great leap forward you make them out to be. They just aren't. 15MPH could've certainly been achieved under BR had they not bottled it.

The max speed of a Pendolino isn't 125 -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_390

"The new trains were intended to run at 140 mph (225 km/h), but the West Coast Main Line modernisation programme, which was an upgrade to the infrastructure to allow faster line speeds, ran over budget. Consequently plans were scaled back, and in a manner reminiscent of the introduction of the Intercity 225, the lack of signalling upgrades resulted in the maximum line speed being restricted to 125 mph (200 km/h). "

You can't blame the train for not going fast enough or Virgin for only achieving a 15mph speed improvement - the root cause is Railtrack / NRs responsibility.

The 390s had the potential to be a very nice train, but they got some minor details wrong. Larger windows would've remained within the safety regs of the time, and would've brightened up the interior.

Luggage racks are too small, however it's a tilting train.

The seats though. Ugh.

We're stuck with the 390s now. Lets just hope the refurb brings some much needed improvements. At least they aren't as bad as Voyagers. 222s showed how the Voyagers should've been done.

I've used the Pendos a few times and they're absolutely fine.

Priority should be given to seating over luggage - sorry the train is there to transport the person as the first priority. It's why FGW are right to have configured some of their HSTs with the airline style seats - to minimise the number of people who end up standing.

I've never had an issue with the view out of a Pendo. If I get a seat without a window view, then I sit and read, it's not a problem.

The seats on Pendos, Voyagers, Meridians and Desiros are, for me, much much better than what preceded them - as I was reminded when I got an HST on the MML the other day rather than a Meridian.

 

[cambsy]

Reason the Super Voyager have larger windows is purely down to the tilt profile for going round curves faster, the 221 has 6 degrees of tilt where as the 390 has 9 degrees of tilt, which means the 390 can go round Weedon at 120mph and the 221 110mph, so the 390 has the slightly quicker journey times. in terms of 390 refurbishment, I think give interior a spruce up, looking bit tired now, re paint body shell, new seats though not sure what design, i wouldn't think they need anything major done.

 

[Thunderer]

A nice class 87 and a rake of MKIIIa coaches - now that was true WCML travelling. Pendolino? Nothing more than a glorified silver smarties tube - no character or proper space inside....funny how "progress" has actually taken rail travel backwards isn't it?!

 

[jon91]

A nice class 87 and a rake of MKIIIa coaches - now that was true WCML travelling. Pendolino? Nothing more than a glorified silver smarties tube - no character or proper space inside....funny how "progress" has actually taken rail travel backwards isn't it?!

Once again in this thread personal opinion is mistaken for fact...

Isn't Virgin's reliability bad enough without having to keep Modernisation-era locomotives running?

 

[transmanche]

A nice class 87 and a rake of MKIIIa coaches - now that was true WCML travelling.

Yet far more people are travelling on Pendolinos up and down the WCML than ever travelled during the 87+mkIII days...

 

[Yew]

Priority should be given to seating over luggage - sorry the train is there to transport the person as the first priority. It's why FGW are right to have configured some of their HSTs with the airline style seats - to minimise the number of people who end up standing. .

FGW have only done that to some sets, as a lot of their HST's are used for reading commuters. These sets are usually diagrammed to keep off the longer distance services, as they arent suitable for them. Its also worthwile remembering that HST's also have a decent luggage rack, unlike pendolinos. The trains dont just cover london, in the peaks. They cover a much wider area, which a high density seating layout is less than ideal.

I do wonder if having High Density sets for London to Birmingham runs, and Lower density sets for longer distance routes could be a good idea however..

 

[TEW]

There is very little difference between the two types of HST set FGW have. Low Density sets have 2 extra table per carriage. It's not just into London in the peaks that the high seating capacity is useful, there's plenty of long distance FGW services that get very busy and all the seats are much appreciated.

 

[Thunderer]

Yet far more people are travelling on Pendolinos up and down the WCML than ever travelled during the 87+mkIII days...

Yes indeed... that's because we have a bigger UK population now (especially over the last 15 years) and more and more people are turning to the railways to travel around the country as the motorways and roads are near to full capacity - especially around our big cities like Manchester, Birmingham and London British Rail was starved of any government funding all through the 1970's, 80's and 90's in favour of road building and the people who ran BR battled hard to keep services going. Travelling by train was a much more pleasant experence then than it is now - being squashed into a 4 coach XC Voyager that stinks of sewage....Pendolino the same smell and squashed in - A good ole 87 or 86 with some MK2 or MK3 stock was a far better experience... and cheaper as well

 

[bramling]

The max speed of a Pendolino isn't 125 -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_390

"The new trains were intended to run at 140 mph (225 km/h), but the West Coast Main Line modernisation programme, which was an upgrade to the infrastructure to allow faster line speeds, ran over budget. Consequently plans were scaled back, and in a manner reminiscent of the introduction of the Intercity 225, the lack of signalling upgrades resulted in the maximum line speed being restricted to 125 mph (200 km/h). "

You can't blame the train for not going fast enough or Virgin for only achieving a 15mph speed improvement - the root cause is Railtrack / NRs responsibility.



I've used the Pendos a few times and they're absolutely fine.

Priority should be given to seating over luggage - sorry the train is there to transport the person as the first priority. It's why FGW are right to have configured some of their HSTs with the airline style seats - to minimise the number of people who end up standing.

I've never had an issue with the view out of a Pendo. If I get a seat without a window view, then I sit and read, it's not a problem.

The seats on Pendos, Voyagers, Meridians and Desiros are, for me, much much better than what preceded them - as I was reminded when I got an HST on the MML the other day rather than a Meridian.

I can see the point about luggage space, but the reality is that people *do* bring luggage with them, and it can cause total chaos when luggage starts to overflow into aisles and door areas if there are no designated spaces available, or worse if people start being forced to place luggage on seats if there is literally nowhere else for items to go.

In this way the 1/3 2/3 door setup is better as luggage can go in the vestibles, and people are happy with this as they can still see their luggage - unlike on, say, a 158.

 

[plastictaffy]

Sell 'em all to a European operator, and use all the AC electrics that are rotting in various locations, and run a proper train.

 

[transmanche]

Yes indeed... that's because we have a bigger UK population now (especially over the last 15 years) and more and more people are turning to the railways to travel around the country as the motorways and roads are near to full capacity - especially around our big cities like Manchester, Birmingham and London British Rail was starved of any government funding all through the 1970's, 80's and 90's in favour of road building and the people who ran BR battled hard to keep services going. Travelling by train was a much more pleasant experence then than it is now - being squashed into a 4 coach XC Voyager that stinks of sewage....Pendolino the same smell and squashed in - A good ole 87 or 86 with some MK2 or MK3 stock was a far better experience... and cheaper as well

By what percentage do you think the UK population has grown in the past 15 years? (That's in reality, not what the Daily Mail and UKIP imagine.) And by what percentage do you think WCML passenger numbers have grown over the same period?

Yet if trains were as bad today as you make out, surely everyone would be travelling on NatEx/Megabus/etc coaches and not on trains...

 

[fowler9]

By what percentage do you think the UK population has grown in the past 15 years? (That's in reality, not what the Daily Mail and UKIP imagine.) And by what percentage do you think WCML passenger numbers have grown over the same period?

Yet if trains were as bad today as you make out, surely everyone would be travelling on NatEx/Megabus/etc coaches and not on trains...

Give me an hour and the tiniest bit of motivation and I will prove you wrong. You don't even need the population to grow for passenger numbers to increase. You just need where and when they work to change. About 2 years ago my train use skyrocketed, and it wasn't because I liked the trains or the job.

 

[Harpers Tate]

Priority should be given to seating over luggage - sorry the train is there to transport the person as the first priority..

So, let me just check. If (as IS UNDOUBTEDLY the case) those persons happen to bring luggage with them - what do you suggest is done with it? In fact what happens is that the luggage ends up either congesting other parts of the train (gangways, doorways) or occupying the very seats you have supposedly provided for passengers. Are you suggesting that luggage should be "Ryanaired" - limited in size and/or checked and charged for? And if it's checked - then where are you proposing it will go? Or shall we simply require those with luggage to go by car or bus? It seems to me that anything done to hugely limit peoples' baggage will very likely result in a reversal of.......

Yet far more people are travelling on Pendolinos up and down the WCML than ever travelled during the 87+mkIII days...

And as for that - well far more people are also travelling on Northern's 2-car 14x fleet as well. Which tells us what, exactly?

 

[Geezertronic]

And as for that - well far more people are also travelling on Northern's 2-car 14x fleet as well. Which tells us what, exactly?

That people don't care what the stock is as long as they get to their destination?

 

[fowler9]

That people don't care what the stock is as long as they get to their destination?

Kind of says that people aren't using the trains because they think they are good but because they have to.

 

[starrymarkb]

Sell 'em all to a European operator, and use all the AC electrics that are rotting in various locations, and run a proper train.

I can't see that going down well with the traveling public or being politically acceptable.

I can see the headlines in the press now. "Modern Trains replaced by Old Wrecks" - Look at past press coverage of SWT replacing 170s with older 158s (which was handled well by the quality of the refurb plus the age difference wasn't to big.) or Southern replacing 377s with 30 year old 313s.

 

[fowler9]

I can't see that going down well with the traveling public or being politically acceptable.

I can see the headlines in the press now. "Modern Trains replaced by Old Wrecks" - Look at past press coverage of SWT replacing 170s with older 158s (which was handled well by the quality of the refurb plus the age difference wasn't to big.) or Southern replacing 377s with 30 year old 313s.

At the end of the day if you refurbish them people won't know the difference. Most people use them because they have to based on price. Anecdotal but most of the people I work with who get the train do so because they can't afford to drive, not because they love the ambiance of the Northern Line or the 86 bus.

Train use is going up because people are forced to live further away from where they work and to an extent population increase. Not because people In Manchester think "I'll get a job in London because the Pendolinos are much nicer than the old stock".

I'm lucky, I got a permanent job 30 minutes walk away from where I live. I like public transport but it is nice not to have to rely on it.

 

[starrymarkb]

That may be true of some stocks, but something as striking as a UK Pendolino being replaced by an 87 and Mk3s would be noticed. Especially given how much they are used in Virgin's marketing. Then there is the speed difference and again the increase in Journey time won't go down well. I know Plymouth's politicians kick at any increase in journey time (they want more 3hr services to London)

 

[HSTEd]

I would be interested to see what the actual time advantage of a Pendolino over something like a Cl350 actually is.

Loco hauled sets seemed to manage 2hr30 as it is, so I can't imagine the tilt actually gains very much.

 

[transmanche]

Give me an hour and the tiniest bit of motivation and I will prove you wrong.

Oh you won't be proving me wrong, you'll be proving Thunderer wrong - he 's the one who made the claims...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Kind of says that people aren't using the trains because they think they are good but because they have to.

So why aren't they all using NatEx/Megabus then?