Swt 444/450

[Eagle]

If all else fails you could add a 6th coach to every other 444...

Those coaches are going to be a) very expensive, because it'd be a small and bespoke order using a design that Siemens doesn't make any more and b) very timeconsuming to add. Look how long the 458 conversion is taking.

 

[RobShipway]

It would be easier to add the new coaches to the class 450's and that design is still in production at the moment in the shape of the class 350's for TPE/LM.

 

[AndyLandy]

Repeating myself again (and still not answered by anyone)-

All the 12 coach 450s that run in the peaks are full so if these are replaced by 10 coach 444s were are all the passengers going to go that cannot get a seat (or even get on the train). The 12 coach 450s are a franchise commitment (number of seats etc) so instead of just moaning about the 450s on the route come up with a viable solution!

I wont hold my breath.

Hehe. If there was a viable solution, we'd probably already be doing it.

The sad fact of the matter is that London-Portsmouth, at about 1h30-ish on a fast train, isn't really long enough to mandate express-layout trains. The 450s are pretty adequate for this service. For sure, 444s would be nicer, and it's great that Portsmouth gets some at all, but we have to be realistic.

 

[RobShipway]

Hehe. If there was a viable solution, we'd probably already be doing it.

The sad fact of the matter is that London-Portsmouth, at about 1h30-ish on a fast train, isn't really long enough to mandate express-layout trains. The 450s are pretty adequate for this service. For sure, 444s would be nicer, and it's great that Portsmouth gets some at all, but we have to be realistic.

Surely, you could change some of the class 450 sets into a sub set say 450/9, that had 2+2 seating with tables within them, rather than the 2+3 seating they have now. Then those are use on the Waterloo - Portsmouth route?

At the end of the day are the people complaining about not having the 444's on the Waterloo - Portsmouth route, sad on the fact that they now have 2+3 seating without tables and would prefer 2+2 seating with tables or is the problem the location of the doors that they are not at the ends of the carriages in the 450's as they are in the 444's?

 

[Rhydgaled]

are the people complaining about not having the 444's on the Waterloo - Portsmouth route, sad on the fact that they now have 2+3 seating without tables and would prefer 2+2 seating with tables or is the problem the location of the doors that they are not at the ends of the carriages in the 450's as they are in the 444's?

As I said above, the door layout and lack of tables/legroom are linked. Wider doors = reduced furnishable area = something has to give. Plus not having internal doors to seperate passengers from the outside of the train while the external doors are open, but that's only an issue in certain weather conditions, the standing room around the doors robs space from the seating area all the time.

 

[MCR247]

Repeating myself again

You have a lot more patience than I have

Surely, you could change some of the class 450 sets into a sub set say 450/9, that had 2+2 seating with tables within them, rather than the 2+3 seating they have now. Then those are use on the Waterloo - Portsmouth route?

At the end of the day are the people complaining about not having the 444's on the Waterloo - Portsmouth route, sad on the fact that they now have 2+3 seating without tables and would prefer 2+2 seating with tables or is the problem the location of the doors that they are not at the ends of the carriages in the 450's as they are in the 444's?

So what about the people that now won't fit on to the train because of the reduction in seating?

 

[swt_passenger]

Repeating myself again (and still not answered by anyone)-

All the 12 coach 450s that run in the peaks are full so if these are replaced by 10 coach 444s were are all the passengers going to go that cannot get a seat (or even get on the train). The 12 coach 450s are a franchise commitment (number of seats etc) so instead of just moaning about the 450s on the route come up with a viable solution!

I wont hold my breath.

You're preaching to the converted from my point of view. I've read all the franchise stuff, and don't understand why the 'No 450' mob, and a few posters on here, don't understand the overall capacity arguments.

AFAICT this decision was made in about 2006 to meet DfT's requirements for capacity in the 2007 franchise onwards. Here we are in 2013 and the same old debate happens about once every 6 weeks. SWT aren't going to change anything, the DfT aren't going to agree to removing 20% of the seats from a subclass, and IMHO no other incoming franchisee is going to suggest it either...

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It would be easier to add the new coaches to the class 450's and that design is still in production at the moment in the shape of the class 350's for TPE/LM.

They don't need additional odd coaches here and there. They already have a plan to increase most of the few remaining mainline 8 car services to 12 car - as a result of the internal cascade following the 458/460 and the 456 arrival.

Unless you are proposing another round of platform lengthening to run 3 x 5 car 450s in multiple or something...

 

[southern442]

I have a solution...

put full length tables on the 450's so that'll stop half the complaining...

 

[MCR247]

I have a solution...

put full length tables on the 450's so that'll stop half the complaining...

*bangs head against desk*

 

[455driver]

but we have to be realistic.

Good luck with that on her!

 

[Eagle]

put full length tables on the 450's so that'll stop half the complaining...

The seats would need to be further apart to do that. Which obviously would reduce the number of seats.

 

[455driver]

Surely, you could change some of the class 450 sets into a sub set say 450/9, that had 2+2 seating with tables within them, rather than the 2+3 seating they have now. Then those are use on the Waterloo - Portsmouth route?

At the end of the day are the people complaining about not having the 444's on the Waterloo - Portsmouth route, sad on the fact that they now have 2+3 seating without tables and would prefer 2+2 seating with tables or is the problem the location of the doors that they are not at the ends of the carriages in the 450's as they are in the 444's?

Right do you actually have a clue how the service provision bumph as stated by the DaFT(or whoever) works?
SWT have to provide X number of seats from A to B per hour, the only way they can do that is to use the 450s in 12 coach formations on every train, so a few figures for you (using a 350/1 as the best solution possible with 2+2 seating and tables)-

....................................1st/standard(tip up)
4 coach 450/0 (2+3) seats- 0/70, 24/32, 0/61(9), 0/70 so 24/233(9)
5 coach 444/0 (2+2) seats- 35/24, 0/47, 0/76, 0/76, 0/76 so 35/299(0)
4 coach 350/1 (2+2) seats 0/60, 24/32, 0/50(9), 0/60 so 24/202(9)

So a-
12 coach 450/0 gives you 72/699(27)
12 coach 350/1 gives you 72/606(27)
10 coach 444/0 gives you 70/598(0)

If you are serious about using 450s with 2+2 seating you will lose 93 seats per train, what are you going to do with them, the trains are already full and standing up from Haslemere (never mind Guildford) so those 93 passengers have got to go somewhere, suggestions?


Note-
The line is already run at maximum capacity during the peaks (hence some trains being routed via the new line as there is not the capacity to cross at Woking jn) so you cannot run any more trains even if there were any available.

 

[southern442]

The seats would need to be further apart to do that. Which obviously would reduce the number of seats.

Well maybe not full length tables. Maybe smaller tables that still extend across the seating bays would be good enough.
But let's be honest, if people are complaining this much then they might as well pay extra for a first class upgrade!

 

[Eagle]

That would still need the seats to be further apart (by the same amount).

It's the width of a table that's the problem, not how far across it extends.

 

[southern442]

That would still need the seats to be further apart (by the same amount).

It's the width of a table that's the problem, not how far across it extends.

Maybe I should have made my previous post clearer, but I meant narrower tables, not shorter ones.

 

[RobShipway]

Right do you actually have a clue how the service provision bumph as stated by the DaFT(or whoever) works?
SWT have to provide X number of seats from A to B per hour, the only way they can do that is to use the 450s in 12 coach formations on every train, so a few figures for you (using a 350/1 as the best solution possible with 2+2 seating and tables)-

....................................1st/standard(tip up)
4 coach 450/0 (2+3) seats- 0/70, 24/32, 0/61(9), 0/70 so 24/233(9)
5 coach 444/0 (2+2) seats- 35/24, 0/47, 0/76, 0/76, 0/76 so 35/299(0)
4 coach 350/1 (2+2) seats 0/60, 24/32, 0/50(9), 0/60 so 24/202(9)

So a-
12 coach 450/0 gives you 72/699(27)
12 coach 350/1 gives you 72/606(27)
10 coach 444/0 gives you 70/598(0)

If you are serious about using 450s with 2+2 seating you will lose 93 seats per train, what are you going to do with them, the trains are already full and standing up from Haslemere (never mind Guildford) so those 93 passengers have got to go somewhere, suggestions?


Note-
The line is already run at maximum capacity during the peaks (hence some trains being routed via the new line as there is not the capacity to cross at Woking jn) so you cannot run any more trains even if there were any available.

I was not serious about changing the seats from 2+3 to 2+2, but wanted someone to show how pathetic those wanting the class 444's permanently back on the Waterloo - Portsmouth route are being, when they would have a severe reduction in the number of seats as the 444's would have to run 5car x 3 I.e. 15 coaches to have the same amount of seats as the 3x4 car 450's have within them.

With regards to extending the platforms as someone mentioned, extend them to where please as most of the platforms are extended to the full length that they can possibly be extended too on the route.

The only solution, if more trains cannot be run in my mind is to run 1x444, plus 2x450 which would make a 13 carriage train and on most stations there would have to have SDO in operation so the doors of the carriages that are within the platform boundaries can be opened.

I would also suggest that the Train Managers on the trains make announcements as to where on the train passengers are likely to get seats as times when I have been on any train from Portsmouth to Waterloo, the majority of standing people are at the back of the train, when you have the odd spare seat within the front 4 carriages. Admittedly, not enough for the 93 people standing but if people filled the odd empty seat here or there you would find that 93, is down to about 63 in my opinion. Passengers must also note that a) they are not paying to sit down in a seat, fares are paid to get you from a to b and b) any bags etc passengers have should be either in the overhead baggage area or between their legs or within a specified baggage area on the train. Passengers following the last step I have found frees up many seats on trains.

 

[Eagle]

The only solution, if more trains cannot be run in my mind is to run 1x444, plus 2x450 which would make a 13 carriage train and on most stations there would have to have DDO in operation so the doors of the carriages that are within the platform boundaries can be opened.

I think you'd still need to extend a few platforms if you did that, because as far as I'm aware (happy to be corrected if anyone knows any examples) you can't use SDO at a terminating station.

 

[southern442]

A fresh question, where do the majority of passengers travelling on the direct line go to?

 

[455driver]

I think you'd still need to extend a few platforms if you did that, because as far as I'm aware (happy to be corrected if anyone knows any examples) you can't use SDO at a terminating station.

You can (10/12 coach trains at Alton do it) but at most large terminii the back end of the train will be out over the points which will lock up a lot of points (and platforms) so its not a good idea.

 

[Rhydgaled]

12 coach 450/0 gives you 72/699(27)
12 coach 350/1 gives you 72/606(27)
10 coach 444/0 gives you 70/598(0)

Purely hypothectical, not going to happen, but what if not all 444s were 5-car sets and you could make an 11-car set out of them? And would they fit the platforms, or is 12x20m (240m) the limit?

Looks like it is the 2+3 seating that does it capacity wise, going by seats per metre I think the 10-car 444 would have quite a few more seats than a 12-car 350/1 if the 444 was somehow 10metres longer to match the length of the 350 (assuming 444 vehicles are exactly 23m and 350 vehicles are exactly 20m)

 

[Eagle]

240 m will be the length a lot of platforms will be built to. (For reference, an 11-car 444 rake would be 253 m.)

 

[455driver]

Purely hypothectical, not going to happen, but what if not all 444s were 5-car sets and you could make an 11-car set out of them? And would they fit the platforms, or is 12x20m (240m) the limit?

Not at Waterloo they wouldnt which would be a bit of a problem.

 

[cjmillsnun]

So what about the people that now won't fit on to the train because of the reduction in seating?

As a regular passenger on that route, I can say that passengers tend prefer to stand than use the middle seat. It's a non ideal franchise commitment for both the passengers and SWT, but that's DaFT for you.

Also as stated the line is operated to capacity, meaning the only way to provide enough seats is with 3x450.

As much as I'd like to see more 444s it won't happen because it can't.

 

[AndyLandy]

The other dead giveaway on platform lengths is that SWT could easily form 11-car Express Sprinter sets on WEML services (3x 159 and a 158). The fact that they're never more than 10-car sets suggests that 230-240m is about the limit.

Oh, and if you've ever been to Waterloo, it's pretty easy to tell if you stand on the end of a platform with a 10-car 444 in.

 

[Matt Taylor]

I think you'd still need to extend a few platforms if you did that, because as far as I'm aware (happy to be corrected if anyone knows any examples) you can't use SDO at a terminating station.

SDO is used for 12 car services that terminate at Alton.

 

[Class377/5]

SDO is used for 12 car services that terminate at Alton.

Like so


Alton Station by Sparkyscrum, on Flickr

 

[Eagle]

Ah okay, I wasn't aware there were such services.

 

[455driver]

A fresh question, where do the majority of passengers travelling on the direct line go to?

Some to Woking but the vast majority are going to Waterloo, there are a lot of 'City' types live down there (hence the house prices in the area).

 

[southern442]

Some to Woking but the vast majority are going to Waterloo, there are a lot of 'City' types live down there (hence the house prices in the area).

So southbound the majority of passengers travel the full length of the line?

 

[cjmillsnun]

So southbound the majority of passengers travel the full length of the line?

Most of it. It's normally full by Petersfield.