Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

[physics34]

But then you get less standing capacity.

If you want InterCity quality on a Bedford-Brighton journey you've always got the option of travelling via London on EMT and Southern.

Thameslink is really a metro-type service like Crossrail that happens to be extended out a bit further for added convenience.

i dont know how long they expect people to be standing for though? As all the seats on the Littlehampton ones will all be taken up by Worthing.. and the East Grinstead ones will be taken up by Hurst Green!

When you pay £5k or more i wouldnt like to be told... "tough *****, you are lucky to have this service... if you dont like it then go somewhere else or another way".

The units will be doing mid-range routes so should be designed appropriately.

 

[southern442]

i dont know how long they expect people to be standing for though? As all the seats on the Littlehampton ones will all be taken up by Worthing.. and the East Grinstead ones will be taken up by Hurst Green!

When you pay £5k or more i wouldnt like to be told... "tough *****, you are lucky to have this service... if you dont like it then go somewhere else or another way".

The units will be doing mid-range routes so should be designed appropriately.

That is the main problem here. Yes they can cram in more "customers" but at a station such as where I live, where I am currently able to get a seat, I probably won't be able to get one when these trains come into service.

 

[A-driver]

But then you get less standing capacity.

If you want InterCity quality on a Bedford-Brighton journey you've always got the option of travelling via London on EMT and Southern.

Thameslink is really a metro-type service like Crossrail that happens to be extended out a bit further for added convenience.

No ones talking about a Bedford to Brighton length journey. The issue is these units will be used twice daily by commuters from Huntingdon to Farringdon (over 1 hour) and similar lengthy trips. Yes there will still be 365s and 377s running Huntingdon to kings X but it defeats the object of new trains if they are going to be avoided by those travelling longer distances instead cramming onto other trains and changing at kings X for the tube or Thameslink.

 

[D365]

In this instance, I'd imagine the GN Peterborough [non-stop south of Biggleswade] services will remain to be more popular in the peak...

 

[Hadders]

Remember that one of the design principles of these trains was to have fewer seats so more people can stand so we can't really complain about that.

However the contrast to the original interiors of the class 365s is vast and a huge step backwards.

 

[Stats]

i dont know how long they expect people to be standing for though? As all the seats on the Littlehampton ones will all be taken up by Worthing.. and the East Grinstead ones will be taken up by Hurst Green!

You should have a reasonable expectation of a seat 20 minutes after boarding on a peak service.... at least that's what the franchise agreement requires GTR to design their train plan around.... Good luck with that.

 

[richa2002]

Remember that one of the design principles of these trains was to have fewer seats so more people can stand so we can't really complain about that.

Why can we not complain about that? I disagree with the principle and once again shows how population growth is having a detrimental effect on quality of life. A similar density of stock should have been ordered and if people found it too overcrowded, they should just move elsewhere and perhaps the massive bias towards London would wain. Keep accommodating the growth and it'll only get worse.

 

[Haydn1971]

Remember that one of the design principles of these trains was to have fewer seats so more people can stand so we can't really complain about that

Wasn't it more along the lines of ensuring all off peak passengers get a seat, which allowed more standing squash space at peak ?

 

[southern442]

Remember that one of the design principles of these trains was to have fewer seats so more people can stand so we can't really complain about that.

If it was a public survey, and they found that, for example, 70% of the public wanted fewer seats so more people can stand, then we couldn't complain. But we can't be expected to all agree with something that the designers decided was right. And anyway, despite the overcrowding, everyone usually gets on the train anyway so space is not an issue.

 

[LBSCR Times]

Unfortunately there is only a finite amount of pathways on the Brighton mainline, and if every peak service were still to be formed of CigBigCig's (comfy 2+2 seating!), then there would no end of complaints from peak hour passengers joining anywhere north of Preston Park.
The 700's are probably the modern equivalent of 4Vep's, a jack of all unit, rather than aimed at a certain sector, and designed for crush loading in Central London.
My main gripe with the 700's is the lack of power points and fold-down tables.....

 

[RichardN]

If it was a public survey, and they found that, for example, 70% of the public wanted fewer seats so more people can stand, then we couldn't complain. But we can't be expected to all agree with something that the designers decided was right. And anyway, despite the overcrowding, everyone usually gets on the train anyway so space is not an issue.

You obviously don't try and board at East Croydon trying to get to London Bridge in the morning peak. The first Thameslink train in the Evening peak via London Bridge always left passengers behind there as well...

 

[Hophead]

We also have to hope the inter-unit connections throughout the train will not be noisy at speed; a 377 with an inoperative gangway door (every unit has at least one!) does let in a fair amount of noise, although it's obviously intended that the door should generally be closed.

 

[asylumxl]

We also have to hope the inter-unit connections throughout the train will not be noisy at speed; a 377 with an inoperative gangway door (every unit has at least one!) does let in a fair amount of noise, although it's obviously intended that the door should generally be closed.

A maximum noise level is given as part of the specification and as such if it doesn't meet the requirements the trains will have to be modified in some way to meet them.

 

[Hadders]

I fear the 700s will be a big step backwards in quality for outer suburban passengers.

I know it's a difficult call but I fail to see why we couldn't have had a 365 style interior. It seems as though we've gone for bottom of the range - not even a table back seat in sight. God help a passenger with a coffee travelling between London and Cambridge/Peterborough/Brighton etc.

Cars seem to get more comfortable with each new model. Why is the opposite true for trains?

 

[physics34]

We also have to hope the inter-unit connections throughout the train will not be noisy at speed; a 377 with an inoperative gangway door (every unit has at least one!) does let in a fair amount of noise, although it's obviously intended that the door should generally be closed.

378s are fine, so i'll assume the 700s will be too.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I fear the 700s will be a big step backwards in quality for outer suburban passengers.

I know it's a difficult call but I fail to see why we couldn't have had a 365 style interior. It seems as though we've gone for bottom of the range - not even a table back seat in sight. God help a passenger with a coffee travelling between London and Cambridge/Peterborough/Brighton etc.

Cars seem to get more comfortable with each new model. Why is the opposite true for trains?

i expect complaints when the units enter service..... maybe tables will be added later but i doubt it as TOCs and the DfT tend not to listen to passengers needs!

 

[387star]

Fold down tables are better left out if anything like those in 377s to avoid intense ear ache

Be interesting to see how the 387/2s are perceived as well and if passengers prefer the 442s

 

[southern442]

The 700's are probably the modern equivalent of 4Vep's, a jack of all unit, rather than aimed at a certain sector, and designed for crush loading in Central London.

The 4Vep's were much more comfortable and 2+3 though.

 

[tsr]

Fold down tables are better left out if anything like those in 377s to avoid intense ear ache

The seat back tables on the 377/6, /7 and 387/1 appear to be absolutely OK from a noise perspective. I've also mentioned before that cupholders could be fitted. There will almost certainly be a design that can be used as Chiltern must get through some spares with the 165s. These would solve problems with hot drink injuries or spills. Sadly I have been mentioning this since I visited the mockup at ExCEL but (unsurprisingly, I suppose, as the trains had/have already been specified) it has fallen on deaf ears. Ah well.

 

[AlexNL]

maybe tables will be added later but i doubt it as TOCs and the DfT tend not to listen to passengers needs!

Don't count on GTR to give you tables or power points on board the trains, it's up to DfT to work this out with Siemens.

Govia doesn't have much say in this, as the trains have been procured by DfT directly and the franchise specification states that the franchisee has to use them. The TSGN franchise itself is different from many other franchises too, it's a pure management contract where DfT receives the income from ticket sales and pays a sum to GTR for their services.

 

[387star]

The seat back tables on the 377/6, /7 and 387/1 appear to be absolutely OK from a noise perspective. I've also mentioned before that cupholders could be fitted. There will almost certainly be a design that can be used as Chiltern must get through some spares with the 165s. These would solve problems with hot drink injuries or spills. Sadly I have been mentioning this since I visited the mockup at ExCEL but (unsurprisingly, I suppose, as the trains had/have already been specified) it has fallen on deaf ears. Ah well.

Thameslink trains don't have trollies do they?

I remember chiltern 172s have very good cup holders

 

[AM9]

I fear the 700s will be a big step backwards in quality for outer suburban passengers.

I know it's a difficult call but I fail to see why we couldn't have had a 365 style interior. It seems as though we've gone for bottom of the range - not even a table back seat in sight. God help a passenger with a coffee travelling between London and Cambridge/Peterborough/Brighton etc.

Cars seem to get more comfortable with each new model. Why is the opposite true for trains?

The 700s will safely carry over 1700 passengers per 12-car unit. Thameslink services struggle to carry the current load of passengers. The new trains are designed to last for 30+ years when passenger numbers are expected to greatly increase. There aren't any options to increase the number of trains through the core after ATO is operational and there is little that can be done to turn extra trains at either Kings Cross or St Pancras, so £1.6 billion has been spent on a train that is specified to do the job. A 365 style layout just wouldn't be able to cope in a few years and there would be no way of improving the situation.
I imagine that a cup of coffee bought in London would either be drunk well before reaching Cambridge/Peterborough/Brighton, - or it would be stone cold. Hopefully, common sense (so often referred to here) would prevail on a train that doesn't have tables. I've seen passengers carrying coffee onto Overground trains without throwing it over anybody.

 

[bramling]

Don't count on GTR to give you tables or power points on board the trains, it's up to DfT to work this out with Siemens.

Govia doesn't have much say in this, as the trains have been procured by DfT directly and the franchise specification states that the franchisee has to use them. The TSGN franchise itself is different from many other franchises too, it's a pure management contract where DfT receives the income from ticket sales and pays a sum to GTR for their services.

When the timetable on the GN side falls apart, and the complaints come flooding in, perhaps some 700s could be sent to the Great Western, and the GN can have their 365s back.

The class 700 is a massive retrograde step for the GN side. No length increase on the stopping services as 8-car trains will be inevitable due to platform lengths (what are the prospects of the 8-car 700s being lengthened to 12 cars if platform extensions happen in the future?), elsewhere the current GN services to Peterborough Royston Cambridge and beyond generally don't crush load even in the peaks, most peak services in and out of King's Cross today are 8 cars, so there's a lot of scope for lengthening trains yet before the route runs out of paths. For GN, Thameslink delivers little benefit, and a *lot* of disbenefit compared to today.

A lot more benefit could have come from lengthening all GN platforms to 12 cars, including KX platforms 9 to 11. This opportunity was completely missed during the KX rebuilding works.

 

[AlexNL]

I imagine that a cup of coffee bought in London would either be drunk well before reaching Cambridge/Peterborough/Brighton, - or it would be stone cold.

I've taken to Google to get an idea of the Class 700 interior, appearantly this is what it looks like?

In Dutch "Sprinter Light Train" trains (which work on all-station stopper services), there are no folding tables either. They did manage to create some spots to put a cup of coffee onto.

In coach layout, a small recycle bin has been fitted right underneath the window, which has a lid that is big enough to put a cup of coffee onto. In a four seater spot, a small table has been installed:

 

[RobShipway]

Most commuter trains from class 450 and 458/0 onwards do not have tables between seats and if you are lucky have a few seats with tables that flip up which you might find get added to the class 700's before going into service.

That having been said, I have travelled for over an hour on a 458/0 from Reading and sat in a seat that has had no table with a large coffee and not spilt anything, so if I can do it then anyone can.

 

[Class377/5]

We also have to hope the inter-unit connections throughout the train will not be noisy at speed; a 377 with an inoperative gangway door (every unit has at least one!) does let in a fair amount of noise, although it's obviously intended that the door should generally be closed.

Reports from the test tracks was there hardly any noise at 100mph. The testing on BML, I'm told was similar.

The seat back tables on the 377/6, /7 and 387/1 appear to be absolutely OK from a noise perspective. I've also mentioned before that cupholders could be fitted. There will almost certainly be a design that can be used as Chiltern must get through some spares with the 165s. These would solve problems with hot drink injuries or spills. Sadly I have been mentioning this since I visited the mockup at ExCEL but (unsurprisingly, I suppose, as the trains had/have already been specified) it has fallen on deaf ears. Ah well.

The mock up ExCel was never getting feedback but showing the train off. That this point the contract signed sealed by the DfT so no changes were possible.

Don't count on GTR to give you tables or power points on board the trains, it's up to DfT to work this out with Siemens.

Govia doesn't have much say in this, as the trains have been procured by DfT directly and the franchise specification states that the franchisee has to use them. The TSGN franchise itself is different from many other franchises too, it's a pure management contract where DfT receives the income from ticket sales and pays a sum to GTR for their services.

A point forgotten by most. GTR can't do anything without the DfT OKing it.

When the timetable on the GN side falls apart, and the complaints come flooding in, perhaps some 700s could be sent to the Great Western, and the GN can have their 365s back.

The class 700 is a massive retrograde step for the GN side. No length increase on the stopping services as 8-car trains will be inevitable due to platform lengths (what are the prospects of the 8-car 700s being lengthened to 12 cars if platform extensions happen in the future?), elsewhere the current GN services to Peterborough Royston Cambridge and beyond generally don't crush load even in the peaks, most peak services in and out of King's Cross today are 8 cars, so there's a lot of scope for lengthening trains yet before the route runs out of paths. For GN, Thameslink delivers little benefit, and a *lot* of disbenefit compared to today.

A lot more benefit could have come from lengthening all GN platforms to 12 cars, including KX platforms 9 to 11. This opportunity was completely missed during the KX rebuilding works.

You comparing today's railway and wondering Thameslink is providing more capacity. Well it's not about today but tomorrow and with the rising passenger numbers that have out striped all estimates and continue to rise.

Add for train lengthening, the Desiro City is reconfigurable any point in the future. Part off the deal with the DfT allows for changing lengths 12 to 10 or 8 to 10 or even 12.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In Dutch "Sprinter Light Train" trains (which work on all-station stopper services), there are no folding tables either. They did manage to create some spots to put a cup of coffee onto.

In coach layout, a small recycle bin has been fitted right underneath the window, which has a lid that is big enough to put a cup of coffee onto.

Those bins are a significant disadvantage to anyone over around 5' 6" in height, particularly with long lower legs, because they intrude into legroom, and are fairly poor at their job of being a bin because they are too small. I would vastly prefer they were not fitted, though a small coffee shelf with no bin underneath per the 165s or original 321s would be welcome.

 

[D365]

... so if I can do it then anyone can.

Errr, mobility-wise you don't have problems, do you..?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Those bins are a significant disadvantage to anyone over around 5' 6" in height, particularly with long lower legs, because they intrude into legroom, and are fairly poor at their job of being a bin because they are too small. I would vastly prefer they were not fitted, though a small coffee shelf with no bin underneath per the 165s or original 321s would be welcome.

I'm 6'1", similar sorts of bins are fitted on German S-Bahn/regional EMUs, but I haven't found any issues with it.

 

[Goldfish62]

Unfortunately there is only a finite amount of pathways on the Brighton mainline, and if every peak service were still to be formed of CigBigCig's (comfy 2+2 seating!), then there would no end of complaints from peak hour passengers joining anywhere north of Preston Park.
The 700's are probably the modern equivalent of 4Vep's, a jack of all unit, rather than aimed at a certain sector, and designed for crush loading in Central London.
My main gripe with the 700's is the lack of power points and fold-down tables.....

Personally I regard the 450s as modern day VEPs. The 700s are trams with toilets...

 

[Domh245]

I think that a lot of people here are rather exaggerating the difficulty of mundane tasks. It isn't all that hard to hold a coffee in your hand without suddenly throwing it all over the person next to you and the chair in front.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm 6'1", similar sorts of bins are fitted on German S-Bahn/regional EMUs, but I haven't found any issues with it.

Lower leg length and leg size are key - they are fine if your leg doesn't reach them or will go under them, but if not they force your knees to the right, making the window seat very uncomfortable.

On Eurostar the first thing I do is unclip it and place it on the overhead rack, but that is not possible with all designs.