Pin this* The reason why the class 221s with 4 coaches not 5 is because the ex virgin 221144 only had 2 coaches so they taken 1 coach off 221136, 221140-221141 for 221144
Units 221141 - 221144 were built as 4 car units for the North Wales Services. Virgin took the intermediate coaches from 144 and reformed 142 and 143 to 5 car sets to give them a uniform fleet of 5 car 221s, leaving 144 with just being spare driving cars. Some years later XC took on 144 and reformed it back to a 4 car set by taking a coach from 2 of their 221s (136 and 140 I think), which is why there’s a few 4 car 221s still about.
One of the worst things about Cross Country is their use of a decoupled Voyager from Aberdeen to Penzance. Whoever manages the stock rotation needs to use common sense and should have designated coupled trains for bigger routes. Also, at one point, their HST stock used to be 8 cars, and then they got nerfed to 7. Then, fast forward to 2023, all taken out of the equation because of emissions and age 😕
In "The good old days," the Cross-Country trains had usually at least ten coaches, and sometimes as many as twelve. Many also had a Restaurant Car. When the HST came to the main lines out of London, the fixed formation led to serious overcrowding. When they came to Cross-Country, some genius thought that the loco-hauled trains should be of the same length. Seven and eight coach trains are too short. Even if you form a train of two Voyager sets, you create another problem; there is no corridor connection between the two, and the absence of any on-train catering is another fault. I once had the misfortune to travel from Euston to Coventry on a five-car set. It was bound for Scotland, and most of the passengers boarding at Rugby (the only intermediate stop) had to stand, or wait an hour for their next train to Coventry and Birmingham.
@@andrewtaylor5984They may have been long, but also infrequent. The idea with the voyagers back in the days was to massively increase the frequency with shorter flexibility units. By doing so, the franchise became a victim of its own success and has been dealing with crowdedness ever since.
@@91Durktheturk In the days when I lived in Newcastle, the frequency may be less than today, but there was no demand for additional trains, and I never saw any overcrowding. Not only that, but there were several different destinations. When I was travelling regularly, there was one train to Poole, one to Plymouth, in summer preceded by a relief to Paignton, three others to Bristol, and one to Cardiff. Generally speaking, they stopped only at principal stations, so there was very little local traffic. Four or five coach trains will never be adequate, with one coach for first-class ticket holders, one and a half in some. The absence of catering does nothing to promote travel, unless today's passengers do not mind several hours starvation.
@@trump-sludge2000 We have got to get rid of fixed formations. The people who run the railways do not realise that demand varies according to the day of the week, time of day and season.
@@thomasohare8552 In "The Good Old Days," the standard formation of the Newcastle to Liverpool trains was ten coaches, BG, FK, Restaurant or Buffet, and seven second-class coaches giving 448 seats. Until 1972, there was a Restaurant Car on most, if not all of them. The Hull to Liverpool sets were a fixed formation of six coaches, later cut to five, but I think that the initial formation was adequate. I never noticed the Trans-Pennine DMUs of the 1960/61 era overcrowded. The Trans-Pennine services should have been part of the Inter-City network. To BR Management, Inter-City only meant trains to and from London.
For those that "like" these units, I suspect simply "spot" them and don't use them on a regular basis like I do. When you replace 7 abd 8 coach trains with 4 cars, of course they are going to be overcrowded. Remember also that one of the 4 cars is first class so it makes the journeys even more uncomfortable. Standing for hours on a cattle truck is no fun as I have done on so many occasions on Voyagers. A particular journey I make regularly is between Stafford and Southampton where the trains are packed all the way to Winchester. I, like others have played "musical chairs" at every station stop attempting to find a non-existent unreserved seat on these abysmal units. Now that the Performance Teams of the TOCs can deal with capacity issues "in house" rather than directly with the Government has allowed them to get away with allocating any unit to any service. That is why we see 4 and 5 car Voyagers appearing on the same service one day to the next. This has also allowed TOCs to use stock that give less and less seating capacity alongside their penchant for providing 2 vice 4 cars, 3 vice 4, 4 vice 8, 5 vice 8, 6 vice 8 etc. Passengers having to put up with this nonsense regularly should be inundating the TfL with complaints because orders of stock with less carriages and more standing space will continue to blight their travelling lives.
What I don't understand is how the trains get oversold like this. Am sure there is more to the issue, but it seems common sense only so many people can buy tickets on a certain size train. Signed hopeful.
@@linesided A very good point! In my day working as part of a Performance Team, the person responsible for capacities had to supply the Government with expected passengers per service coupled with the number of carriages required to comfortably seat them. Equipment was also available on train to measure "carried weight" and this data was monitored on a daily basis. If the DfL (as it is now) who audited all Performance facts and figures at least 3 times per year noted lack of capacity on any service, the Company was fined heavily. In other words, if a train was running over capacity on a regular basis, they would force the Company to increase it. The same thing applied if we supplied 4 cars vice 8 etc; we would be heavily fined on each occasion. As far as I am aware (and I have heard the same thing from 2 separate TOC Performance Teams) is that capacity is now dealt with "in-house" and that is why shorter trains are being ordered and many services are being operated with less than the expected number of carriages being made available. This is bad for the customer and it will get worse.
The Voyagers were procured for a timetable based on frequent services with Birmingham New Street as a hub. This proved impracticable and was abandoned after a few months. Virgin should just have refurbished their locomotives and carriages and bought a few new ones that were compatible with the BR fleet.
Virgin XC also had class 86s. I remember travelling on them. They operated down the West Coast Mainline between Edinburgh and Glasgow either to Preston or Birmingham.
I can only speak for the Cross Country units. They sre very variable, some feel like they are ready for the scrapyard, others that just show their age. They don't seem to have had the maintenance thay neede and give a very rough ride. They were always an HST on the cheap and, over time, the difference has only got bigger. From the passenger point of view HSTs have always been more comfortable. The 800s suffer with abysmal seats, other than that they are way better than the 221s.
I've always HATED these trains (mainly the Cross Country ones). When I was living in Leeds and travelling down to SwindonI would have to get these to Cheltenham/Bristol and I rarely ever got a seat. Even when I reserved a seat, the seat never had enough leg room so I would then be cramped and uncomfortable for the entirety of the journey anyway!
Any guesses on who will take the class 222s once they’re gone from emr? Maybe grand central would take a hand full alongside the new open access virgin
The overhead luggage racks on these trains are ridiculously narrow. You can't even fit a well filled laptop rucksack up there. No other train I know in the UK has that problem. I remember the Virgin class 47 trains. They were fantastic. Every seat was at a table, and had proper headrests.
Just so your aware, the train in the top right corner of the thumbnail, is a class 222 meridian, they are not part of the voyager family, you might want to swap it out with a 221 from avanti
It’s technically a variant of the voyager and is very, very similar to the voyagers. Yes I know, it’s a Meridian, but for what it is it basically counts as a voyager, for the same reason that the 810 counts as an at300
@willridestrains the class 810 IS an at300, bad example to use, and you are using a technicality, I'd still switch it to a 221 bc there are no technicality with that
The manufacturer does not decide upon the train length or number of seats. That is specified by the party ordering the trains, in this case, Virgin/the ROCSO in consultation with the DfT.
Virgin originally said that on the Exeter-Birmingham route they would run twice as many trains as before, hence the shorter length. Within a year they were back to the old frequency, but shorter trains. They thought it was like running an airline. But if I want a flight from London to New York and Virgin haven't any seats left there are plenty more airlines to try. Doesn't work that way on the rails.
Amazing Video! Great sum up of the merdians and voyagers . Train demand are increasing using 5 car trains on long distance routes is absolutely abysmal. Intercity trains should be atleast 7 cars or more
Once upon a time, long-distance trains usually had at least 11 or 12 coaches, sometimes as many as 15 or even 16. The eight-coach formations on the East Coast Main Line HSTs were too short. (288 second-class seats, when a loco-hauled train had about 450, depending on the formation.) We then said that HST stood for half-size train. During the HST transition on that line, the loco-hauled trains were shortened to eight or nine coaches, very occasionally ten. At the time BR said that the public had to get used to shorter trains, which was a polite way of saying that there will now be overcrowding.
The voyagers were ordered to double the frequency of services. So rather than one severn coach HST an hour you would get two four or five coach voyagers an hour.
@@samuelrblx2605 In about 1984, BR decided to marshal all its passenger coaches into fixed rakes, even loco-hauled stock. This can only be seen as a retrograde step all these years later. For instance, when the Euston electrification was completed, the normal formation was eleven or twelve coaches, thirteen on the Glasgow trains. By 1991, the fixed formation was eight, excluding the DVT. The same had been happening on other main and even secondary routes over the years.
In the olden days peole would either have one small suitcase or a helpful porter would take their luggage to the guards van. Now people have suitcases on wheels the size of a small caravan and on a busy train they inevitably end up blocking the corridor. How long is it since any of the railway bosses traveled ina busy second class compartment? How long since any of them have been on an ordinary schedualed train at all?
Cross country are awful don't even get a voyager on Welsh services to Cardiff a tatty 170 unit often just 2 coaches when it runs usually cancelled yet west country services usually run with no problems
The Meridians Honestly are not that overcrowded the only except on a single Travel into London the rest of the time they also have in times up to Nine Coach sets, also they where Operated by first by National Express Midland Mainline, and how Abellio East Midland Trains still operate some across Five Seven and Nice Coach sets as well as a pair of Five Coach Sets for Ten Coaches for London and Sheffield
I've rode a voyager once, from milton keynes central to euston, they were, fine, i guess. It wasn't crowded so i could get a seat. But i cant imagine riding on a cross countryone
amazing, i really like the voyagers and this video was sent to me! thank you for sharing. btw how do you have less subs than me?? we post the same content
I don't see why two decades later more intermediate carriages have not been bought to extend the 220 and 221 sets or more units to ensure that all services are doubled up (as some of their services do require the use of two split coaches for smaller less in-demand routes, i.e. services to Paignton). Really the voyagers should all be 5-6 coaches long, and for routes where splitting the train is unnecessary, intermediate coaches should be taken from units and put into others to form 8-10 car fixed units (using the spare cab cars either for new sets with new intermediate coaches, or for spare parts to extend their life). Other than capacity, the 220s have a very crippling issue, as (for some bizzare reason) they have a smaller wheel diameter than the 221 and 222 bogies. It makes for awful ride quality over track joints and just along rail in general.
@@physiocrat7143 Except you can, the meridian (of which some sets were 7 coaches long, which is more than 5) has had carriages added and removed, and they're a Voyager. Any multiple unit can have carriages added or removed, anything preventing such is often a self-imposted technical limitation that can likely be fixed easily with minor modifications.
@@BritishTrainspotting The class 220 sets need all 4 cars because essential kit is spread across the set. As far as I know they have only ever been 4 car sets. They have dozens of connectors and then there is the software. It isn't like hooking on a trailer car and connecting the brake hose and ETH cable. Rolling stock designers do not know about the KISS principle.
@@physiocrat7143 While that's completely true, it wouldn't be unreasonable (atleast imo) for a train refurbishment to includes updates to the equipment and software, after all it would make most sense to improve the consists at the same time as the existing vehicles are refurbished. The true obstacle is the groups involved in the decision making for the rolling stock and any upgrades or modifications, who likely won't see any benefit because all they care about is numbers on paper. Well, that and the possibility the original blueprints or knowledge of the Bombardier Voyager family was lost during the buyout of Bombardier by Alstom
@@BritishTrainspotting The Voyer family was junk at the concept stage. The bodyshell structure is inefficient and overweight, the bogies are hard riding, the restricted profile makes poor use of the already restricted loading gauge, the constant speed diesel gives rise to constant vibration. Virgin and its passengers would have been better off if the existing fleet of mark 2 and mark 3 had been given a light refurb and the class 47 locos re-engined. The whole project was driven by the Operation Princess timetable re-vamp which failed after three months, entirely predictably as the capacity at Birmingham New Street was insufficient. The best thing that could be done with them would be to strip out the power units, replace the rotten bogies and use them as loco hauled sets. There must be more than enough BT10 bogies from scrapped mark 3 vehicles which could be recovered for re-use. Trains shouldn't have to depend on on-board software for basic functions.
urghhh spent sooo many hours of my life crammed in a stinking Voyager vestibule during my decade of daily commuting between stafford and bhm new street, i despise these trains.
If this stands; the Overcrowding become no spaces of no safe for any seats than standing, and X Country Trains and others of Voyager was a option on routes. I was plan on VRII (than VRI(1) as Victorian Railway's), why no one bother ever since a UK rolling stocks has (no) UK Double-deck Trains, (likewise UK Double-deck Buses have)?
Like a racehorse to drive, albeit a rather sterile atmosphere in the cab, akin to using a train driving sim. Whereas driving an HST took infinitely more skill.
The trains still used to be longer, before the HST era. There was no need to restrict the loco-hauled trains to seven coaches, unless that was all that those feeble locos could cope with.
In the good old days of a Peak and ten, eleven, even twelve coaches, I never noticed any overcrowding, and it was by no means rare for a relief to be run at peak times, such as Christmas and Easter.
I've heard two explanations. One is that originally the type of toilet fitted was incorrect and there were leaks. The other is that the toilet tank ventilation is into the train and not to the outside. Not sure of the veracity of either, but the first was told to me by a friend who worked at Bombardier in Derby for a while.
They are not greedy companies. Vastly incompetent. If they had just been greedy they would have given the inherited BR fleet a thorough refurbishment, bought a few more similar vehicles and kept them going. A decent refurbishment is better than a new train at 20% of the cost.
@@willridestrains You are 99 percent correct Little is done to accommodate the passengers. You can tell from the crappy new seats, diabolical 'food' and endless cancellations. Shareholder value is king.
