I was sampling the new working time table and after nice comfortable ride on 17:06 which was tabled as loco haul on VN19 I hoped off and met up with the 3 car Velocity.
It was newer model Velocity rail car with those purple seats with table attached to the back and very straight narrow seats. I found it was extremely cramped to move in and out the seats and anyone taller, broader will find this very troublesome on board what is tabled to replace all older train by approx. the end of the year….
Whoever approved this design for a 3-4 hour duration trip has obviously not tested this design for longer duration travel on board!
The riding conditions onboard the train that replaced the aging N set
- It make people’s backs ache and narrower than the older N and Z car series and lack support such a lengthy journey can’t seat comfortably for long period time on board.
- Very cramped areas can’t reach your bag properly to take thing out when required on route
- without buffet service which reduction standard perviously as it now BYO food and drinks from the vending Machines for food and drinks ie:cashless payment only before you travel for some commuters if they aren’t working at the time for those people caught out, they go hungry and no drinks except water from drink areas in the Velocity.
- I noted the people who design the bins on board these newer trains it failed the test of holding a big volume of rubbish on route, of wraps, containers, bottles etc. it was overflowing and I unable to dispose the trash properly like my fellow travellers….
Now the it compared to the older trains N set design:
- The older carriages bins were better design for volume of the trash accumulating on route due passenger consuming food and drinks on board.
- Seat are more spaced apart for people able to reach items in your bag or slide it under the seat out of the way of other passengers and more comfortable with ample cushioning and length on seat to snuggle back in the seat when tired on route
Now the older train progressively replace by these inferior designed trains only good thing which good about them is external cosmetics sleek design and speed and ease of operation….
Comfort is now less and now is very hard on people when noise constant roar of traction engines and vibrations underneath the areas passenger are sitting on board.
Unlike the fluctuating clatter and powering of traction engines in the older loco hauls that passengers are isolated away from of the source of noise and vibration on board.
So many thing to resolve if they need to progress from the older train to newer train technology…..
Does the people overseeing the withdrawals of the older trains really expect people to subjected to reduction of what the benchmark standard for longer distance travel?
Victoria is broke maybe try limiting the Vlocities were designed for mechanically:
short duration between stop and less time doing lengthy of continuous operation and keep the N set until the state is in better position to get more fit for purpose train from Alstom!
N set although old and outdated some over 60 years old were the benchmark standard in Vic Regional Railway Conditions for the newer trains to take it place to meet in the test time for newer trains most now 25+ years old to exceed or match.
Question to be considered:
- Why are they giving away carriages in a rollingstock shortage?
- Should they wait until teething problems are sorted out with the Newer Timetables?
It seem these decisions are made from comfortable office within the Myki tap on areas and from people who don’t realise that all trains are not the same.
As there is pecking order for railway rolling stock
I suspect our current railway designers may not be aware of this pecking order of types of rolling stock in use in old era of rolling stock classification…… excluding type no.2. *”Intercity” Rolling stock*
- Sleeper & Dining : suited for long distance aka Indian Pacific, Great Souther and Ghan overnight/day on route one way
- Intercity *: Almost like a plane aka XPT that QLD tilt train [came in as it seems with this design they confused with airplane travel with rail travel]
As I observed this odd set up onboard the Overland as now currently their train crew trying to serve coffee to seated passenger in premium red whist the train is bouncing along on route via trolley!
Thank goodness they got a buffet car with tables for them to serve you drinks and drinks on too as I think some passengers get nervous particularly those people in aisle of the carriage as it take two crew to move the trolley safely in the train in Premium Red Class between carriages whist serving and pouring hot drinks and food etc. on “The Overland” unlike a plane where I understand the aisle is one continuous walkway with minimal movement excluding stormy conditions where they stop meal service or drinks!
3.Regional : N sets exceeding 3-5 hrs one way buffet on board
4. Interurban: H sets and Sprinter and Velocities short regional route under 2-3 hrs one way toilets on board no buffet
5. Suburban Metro: Siemens , X’trap,Hi Capacity and Comeng bear min. standard
6. Light rail: aka trams
As they are to be designed in accordance to the Vic Railways the travelling boundary conditions and rolling stock outline dimensions
It mean more $$$ is spent on more expensive bogies, couplers, dampers, insulation etc. for each type of rolling stock further up the pecking order….
For example:
you can’t expect a Interurban ex metro H set rollingstock to perform and operate like a Sleeper & Dining Rolling stock of the Southern Aurora……
Or a Velocity DMU interurban rolling stock to operate and perform like Regional rolling stock like S,Z and N set…..
In Conclusion:
All train have issue but with newer Velocities DMUs the issue of 3×2 reduced to 3×1 which was not so obvious in the system before the management forced a “One Size Fit All Concept” on all lines…..
Now the proof in the pudding of forcing not fit purpose trains is problematic longer routes Warrnambool etc more that 3-4 hrs one way for coach transfer after getting on off the train for the frontline who get the blunt of the commuters and traveller displeasure when things goes wrong which seem common occurrence!
As with past article of the management roles written not one has background experience in rail sector ie: operations or rolling stock designs. if so do you think they should listen to customer feedback more often?
As it okay to dismiss feedback with no suggestions how to improve it or resolve it but with those who offer a suggestions to improve or resolve issues maybe should taken it more seriously then ending up in the spam folders at top level!
As for those advising on the design framework of the newer trains imported from overseas is there any local railway professionals who’s familiar of rolling stock design etc. who can speak out without the risk of losing their job out there by unqualified people in Spring St for not being a “yes man” advising Alstom on the design frame work for the train for Vic Railway Conditions?
As for N sets it was good in it’s prime before they cut back on maintenance on the carriages and locomotive pulling them……
Some these older locomotive and carriages will find a new home but for now keep what we have until Vic in better position get a fit for purpose modern train to take it’s place, if it needs several design from the same manufacturer so be it….
