Recently saw this article: (Sorry, I do not know the source.) Following is copied except I have added conversion from the quoted NTD amounts to US$:

KTX May Succumb to Reverse Direction Seat Complaint

KTX seat occupation rate of May was disappointing 64%, just 4% increase from opening month of April. KR, Korea Railway came to believe that reverse-direction-seat is the major reason. KR at last admitted their mistake to put in 20% more seats (by having those fixed) but ended up losing much more passengers. KR is looking into a plan to replace the seats with huge budget of 3.6 billion NTD equivalent. (US$3,200,000) Furthermore, because of unique structure of KTX train, not allowing detachment of individual cars, they can work on only one train set per month. This means it will take 4 years to complete the job. At present, 404 seats per train (43% of 935 seats) are in reverse direction. One young lady sent her embarrassing trip experience to KR internet bulletin board. She was seated opposite to a young man, a stranger. After two hours of leg crouching (to avoid accidental knee-touch) and looking away, both of them had stiff neck and cramp legs upon arrival. This concern had been raised during the train order stage. Looks like several KR people, who had underestimated the concern at the time, have to worry about their rice bowl. (3-June-2004)
*************
This appears to have occurred because of the lack of understanding of one simple difference: In South Korea (and Japan, Taiwan, the USA, and quite a few other places) it is expected that you will be in a seat that is facing in the direction of travel. In France, England, and I understand most of the rest of Europe; train seats are fixed so that about half will be facing backwards on any given trip.

It appears that it never occurred to the French, who basically sent the Koreans standard TGV train sets that Korean passengers expected to be facing the direction of travel. It appears that it equally never occurred to the Koreans that anyone would consider it reasonable for long distance train passengers to be expected to ride facing backwards. Even with this, the reaction appears to be a little extreme.

Maybe Mr. Lee, Wonyoung could explain a little why this is so. Maybe Mr. Goeff M. could add a few words as to why riding backwards is so acceptable in Europe.

Actually, this item is one of many little and not so little surprises that occur when moving between cultures. Each has their own set of unwritten norms that are so basic that they can lead to sometimes hilarious and sometimes highly embarrassing mis-communications.

These sort of things even go into basic engineering standards. I for one find the European obsession with having the rail joints in track precisely opposite each other completely incomprehensible, while it is difficult for the European to understand why anyone could possibly consider it a bad idea.
 

As for why it's acceptable for some seats to face backwards, I think everybody now has grown up with it, and thus expects and accepts it as a fact of life. I, for one, don't actually mind going backwards as you can see what's gone past. If on the inside side of the train, you can see the signals for trains going the other way. Old trains in the UK were frequently in small compartments with rows of seats (or benches) facing each other. Leaving just a few facing seats and having mostly airline style seats means, of course, more seats.

With regards to track joints, I prefer the parallel way. Especially after getting quite queasy with the American alternate joints, where the train sways from side to side every 30ft. I think most of our stuff is welded rail now anyway. Are there engineering reasons why one is better over the other? If there are, I assume there are pros and cons for both, else the UK and the USA would have had similar standards.

Geoff M.
 

I think you are quite right. It is mostly what is customary so that you consider it normal. In fact, even in the broader sense, I have concluded that generally your life experience between birth and age 15 fairly well sets your definition of normal for life. Personality determines how rigid you will be about that "normal" Actually, after 15 years in Asia, I find my normal has adjusted considerably.

I have tried to wrap my brain around the logic behind squaring rail joints, and I cannot. It makes construction easier as track and turnouts can be installed in panels. Most European texts have lengthy discussions on how to provide extra support in joint areas while my mind is saying unsquare them so you don't hit them with both wheels at the same time. Think about the difference when driving a car between hitting a pot hole with one wheel and hitting a ditch of the same size that runs across the road. I have seen specifications where it was required that the WELDS be squared across the track.

The decision to not square joint was made before 1900 in the US, and remember since at that time each of the many railroad companies did their own thing, this was actually independent conclusions by many different railroad company engineering departments.

Particularly for steam engines, there was a very complex system of springs on American engines that did not exist on European engines, so that to try to run a European designed multi-axle steamre on American track could literally tear the engine up. By the time the Flying Scotsman came to the US, most of the Southern RR track was welded. Things must be developed and operated as a system!!
 

The most common (and sensible to my mind) are those where something like each half of the car has seats facing the center (or the door, whatever).

The other is where alternate rows of seats are reversed, forming a "club" type of seating. Sometimes there is a table between two rows (like on some British trains) but other times the knees do knock. Which is ok if one is traveling with family. This sounds like the situation the "young lady" was in, above, and I can see why people would avoid those seats.

Recently I was on an airplane for a 2 hour flight and the row forward of me was facing backwards. No table. Traveling alone and the plane was full... No, not fun.
 

As to forward vs. backward, I don't care, myself, which way I face. However, I wouldn't be comfortable sitting in that "club" arrangement with strangers (especially rubbing knees with a young woman). For three or four friends, or a family group, however, that could be an ideal arrangement.

Acela Express has a mix of forward- and backward-facing seats, some in groups of four but most not. That seems to give most everyone what they want. The Bombardier commuter cars have a similar mix.

Actually, I really think the best arrangement is to have all seats reversible so passengers can configure them as they like -- just as it was on the lightweight equipment ordered by most railroads after WW II. In fact, I'll engage in a bit of typical American arrogance and assert that, from a passenger comfort point of view, the postwar North American passenger equipment was the best designed and most comfortable that has ever run on any railroad, period. When I first rode European trains extensively in the 1970s, most of their equipment looked to me about like the commuter cars my father rode to work on the New York Central. That's even more true today.
 

I've been told both yes and no when I've asked this question on board.

Just an observation, but the forward facing seats always fill up first!
 

The Human Animal is physically and mentally wired to walk and run forward, not in reverse. When the body is in motion, the brain expects the physical world (buildings, landscapes, other human beings) to appear to move "toward" you.

However, when those physical features (as viewed from a train window) appear to move away, rather than toward, the brain processes that visual information as abnormal and therefore "wrong." We're accustomed to seeing where we're going, not where we've just been. That's why many train passengers, forced to ride backward for hours at a time, find it unnatural, disorienting, and even physically sickening.

In countries that use seats which face both ways, most passengers will ride in reverse only when there's no forward-facing seat available. Very few will plop down in a backward-facing seat by choice. And that goes even for the French.

[This message has been edited by dilly (edited 06-24-2004).]
 

[This message has been edited by Lee, Wonyoung (edited 06-26-2004).]

[This message has been edited by Lee, Wonyoung (edited 06-26-2004).]

[This message has been edited by Lee, Wonyoung (edited 06-26-2004).]