Of course the original ITT did allow for the possibility of two train types, i.e. outer and inner suburban variants, of the 12 car train. (AIUI all 8 cars would have been inner suburban variants.)
But I also wrote about three types of trains, if you hadn't just skimmed it. I did wrongly have two types of 12 car and just one of the 8 car (which I put in brackets). Still three types though.
Ah re-reading your post above I get what you mean. The way it was written was the source of my confusion.
I understand the need to make dwell times minimal in the core. Why didn't someone spot that this means entirely inappropriate trains for 70% of the regular users (my guess but by time spent on train it is probably higher). It's not the Bedford - Brighton passengers who will be rare, but the daily Haywards Heath to City Thameslink, Peterborough to St Pancras or Horsham to London Bridge passengers who will find these trains a total chore to travel on, a total time waster for them.
Thats an opinion which I don't personally share but I suppose the proof will be when the fleets in service. Again seeing one of these flows on a daily basis and using that as part of my reasoning.
If not having tables makes using a train a time wasting experience, I'd have to say your using the train for the wrong reasons.
Worse bit is I suspect that the Government (including the DfT) is full of people doing long distance commuting and they have brought this on themselves, but they all go to Victoria or Waterloo so won't care.
What is without question is that the trains are wrong for most of the thousands of London commuters who will use them with their reduced leg room, lack of arm rests and tables.
But what is the alternative? Less capacity on the trains requiring tends of billions to build new lines to increase capacity?
It would have been much more sensible to use them on a Southern Metro services through the core to St Albans/Welwyn/Hertford routes - they suit these services
Certainly was planned in the early days (when the bids were going in) for a West Hampstead/Brent Cross to West/East Croydon 12 car metro service. The routes choosen however for the 700s are nothing to do with the DfT but Govia's winning bid for TSGN.
I am fed up of hearing that dwell times in the core are deriving the quality of long distance commutes including mine, with the reality that it will be 30 or 40 years before it will actually be a problem. If so why not change the seating in 2040 as part of a complete refresh if it has become a necessity.
You may be fed up but its important factor especially in the ability to cope with disprution by allowing more trains through the core to reduce delays.
Yeah.
This looks like its like this all the way through even on the 2-across seats on the one nearest the window.
Sure the skirt heating ducts (if thats what they are) need to altered somehow to stop this intrusion or the seats position moved across by a few inches..
Siemens told me the reason why the ducts stick out like that is because they reduced the width of the outer skin making the ducts more of an issue.
I and several other unhappy punters made the point at EXCEL but as you said earlier probably nothing will happen. I got a FCC director to sit opposite me on the "family" seats and my knee was about 2" from his groin - he wasn't comfortable but saw I could not move my knee back further. Seat spacing is going to be a big problem and I can assure you it will take me (and many other much larger than myself) more time to get out risking the precious dwell times.
There is a range of seating on the units and the space does vary (more than I was expecting) so I'm sure many will find an more idea seat to grab. I certainly have a few spots I like.
But the % of local passengers is very low outside London so in reality you build for 90% of the passengers
Its not very low on some of the routes. But again you have such a mix of passenger types you can't satify them all.
[quoteI often change onto coast trains at East Croydon having come off trains so rammed from Redhill that people are lining the aisles against each other - there is always plenty of space to stand on the Brighton trains in comparison. On odd occasions I have gone via Gatwick there have always been lots of seats available on the extended trains.
So whilst they are far from empty compared to my local trains they
seem pretty lightly loaded.[/quote]
Lightly loaded? Sorry but having standing passengers for 45-60mins into a jounery is not what I call lightly loaded. Lighter loaded would fit better with your post.
I've accepted that point and in fact think all Thameslink services should be confined to that Metro area instead of the longer distance services. There will still be 10's of thousands coming long distance on them every day
Please don't take offence but you are shorter than average at 5'6" and thus aren't constrained by reduced leg room and assuming you are not overweight probably not constrained by width either.
I don't take offense from a geninue valid point. I'm stocky so tend to have problems with the width of seats myself. On the mock up me and another friend of mine whose bigger than me managed to sit side by side but I will admit I missed the arm rests.
Exactly which is why the main flow will be one way in the peaks - getting off or on. Thus dwells won't be long as everyone gets off or on in a hurry at these times.
The future loadings are going to be interesting to see if it does generate a change in travel patterns long term for many.
