The Sunday Times: 'Ironing board' seats

[Failed Unit]

They're in a similar boat to those who have been travelling from Flitwick and Harlington, the time difference between those two flows will be about 10-15 minutes. Travel patterns will settle down well within a couple of years of any train type's introduction, and the individual's seat preferences are just one of the factors in deciding those patterns.

Kings Lynn has to suffer these dreadful seats and is significantly further north than Flitwick or Harlington. Imagine you travelled first class on the 365s and get downgraded to an ironing board seat but still pay first class fares. It is not just the 700s that have these substandard seats you know.

 

[bramling]

Often see these quotes. What if you live in Huntingdon for example? Or Kings Lynn? How do you avoid this exceptionally uncomfortable seats then apart from use another form of transport. For the poor person from Kings Lynn you want even go first class.

I can see Jon’s point. I can’t see GTR wanting to keep the last remaining 365s. They have had many micro fleets in the past but it must be a pain for the drivers and fitters having small fleets. Not that I want to see the 365s go. My only criticism of both of the new sets of stock is the uncomfortable seating.

Getting rid of the remaining 365s would throw up issues as well as solving them.

First of all, what would they be replaced with? If one is wanting a common fleet, the neatest option is to steal the Gatwick 387s, perhaps replacing them with 379s. The numbers don't quite match up though, although they're not massively far off. Building more 387s isn't an option now as I understand it. There's also the issue that the remaining 365s will be generally be used on commuter services, London to Welwyn North is over 20 minutes, as is London to Biggleswade, so they're well into the territory where getting people seated is the priority. The 387 simply isn't as good for this as a 365, and unless someone goes for a 3+2 layout (i.e. 357s) never will be. I suppose the next franchise could go for something new for London-Kings Lynn, with the current 387s then replacing the 365s.

On the debit side, the issues I can potentially see with 365s are:
1) Crew training - GN is now back to three different types of stock (plus the 717s).
2) 100 mph top speed - although the 387s are currently limited to this, and the 700s are built as 100 mph.
3) Lack of SDO - I can't see SDO being easily fitted to the 365s. This I could see being a long-term issue, but then again we're not talking about that many platforms. Welwyn North, Knebworth, Baldock and Ashwell?
4) The need to maintain mirrors and monitors, along with the current staffing arrangements. This I could see being an issue, although would it be that expensive to fit bodyside cameras to the 365s? They have an advantage over the 387s in not having a gangway connection, which at least means there should be more space in the cab.

I guess time will tell. I wouldn't say performance is an issue with the 365s though - there really isn't enough of a difference in acceleration between the 365 and 387 to make that much difference.

 

[sefton]

unless those commuting from dormitory towns located up the lines to Cambridge and Peterborough are physiologically different from the existing TL passengers, they will just get on with their lives (maybe a few will go elsewhere but it won't be significant in the volume of passengers travelling).

You are right, GN customers will know that the train company doesn't give a damn about the failed design and nothing they say will change things.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Didn't MkIVs originally have ironing board seats?

 

[Failed Unit]

Didn't MkIVs originally have ironing board seats?

I don’t think the original mk4 was a halo of comfort. GNER made a big deal about the refurbishment. I didn’t mind it but I am sure it divided opinions in the 1990s. Many preferred the IC70.

 

[bramling]

You are right, GN customers will know that the train company doesn't give a damn about the failed design and nothing they say will change things.

GN passengers are a slightly different breed from Thameslink. The latter has been used to rubbish for many years - in other words the lifetime of most current commuters. This isn't quite the case on GN - although things have nosedived since GTR took over the basic M-F peak service is still reasonably well regarded. There's also the difference that many travel much further out than on Thameslink -- Peterborough is much further from London than Bedford, and the service is less frequent so there's less scope for disruption being mitigated by a "turn up & go" timetable.

South of the river offers little comparison as many locations have an alternative to Thameslink.

Ten hours a week is enough misery to make it worth complaining, as opposed to three and a bit hours for a St Albans to London commuter - and this is before we add being stuck for over half an hour on a crowded core platform or getting turfed off somewhere as the train is missing stops to make up time.

 

[bramling]

Kings Lynn has to suffer these dreadful seats and is significantly further north than Flitwick or Harlington. Imagine you travelled first class on the 365s and get downgraded to an ironing board seat but still pay first class fares. It is not just the 700s that have these substandard seats you know.

At least on the 387s the legroom is generally good. The 700 is torture even when just 50% loaded. I've never endured one with someone sitting next to me or directly opposite, and the thought of that fills me with dread. Why should someone subject themselves to this rubbish when they have a car?

 

[Bletchleyite]

At least on the 387s the legroom is generally good. The 700 is torture even when just 50% loaded. I've never endured one with someone sitting next to me or directly opposite, and the thought of that fills me with dread. Why should someone subject themselves to this rubbish when they have a car?

Have you ever tried driving into London in the peak?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don’t think the original mk4 was a halo of comfort. GNER made a big deal about the refurbishment. I didn’t mind it but I am sure it divided opinions in the 1990s. Many preferred the IC70.

The Mk4 is cheap and nasty from start to finish, and the original interior was no different in my view.

 

[bramling]

Have you ever tried driving into London in the peak?

Yes - and in my experience it's nowhere near as bad as stereotyped, especially using LU railheads.

 

[Failed Unit]

The Mk4 is cheap and nasty from start to finish, and the original interior was no different in my view.

I remember these came up a while ago, we couldn’t find any pictures of the original myself included.

Opinion was really divided. I know people with back issues that liked them as the found the IC70 too soft. Others hated them as there were not as comfortable as the IC70. I liked the fact you could actually move the armrest. Little things. I am sure if this thread existed in 1990 then it would have similar viewpoints. I don’t think anyone said the missed the original standard seats in the mallard refurbishment. A number preferred the original first class on the mk4.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Being retired (done my time on Thameslink) , I tend now to use off peak services , sometimes in standard. Very notably , on a quiet train , passengers will tend to go first for the 4 bay seats (in the hope of a bit more leg space) , and as the train fills up , aisle seat spread is very common. Back on the 1632 off West Hampstead slow , bit too early for the peak , very common use of the aisle by all manner of people of all ages. It realy is a pathetic design , which ruins an otherwise good train.

However , with the yet unknown effects of Crossrail and a full timetable in the core , no-one (especially the DfT staring at a financil abyss) , is going to do anything until the effects are seen. I suspect Crossrail at Farringdon with great access to "the Wharf" , Heathrow etc etc, will be a loading game changer. Then this "metro" design can be seen to be either worth it , or a disaster.

 

[Nymanic]

At the risk of further entrenching this thread's derailment, you can find a handful of original Mk4 interior shots at Railfaneurope - any resemblance to ironing boards seems rather limited.

 

[jon0844]

At the risk of further entrenching this thread's derailment, you can find a handful of original Mk4 interior shots at Railfaneurope - any resemblance to ironing boards seems rather limited.

They were quite thin though.

 

[johnkingeu]

My trip yesterday on an ironing board really brought home the major problem with these seats. I was in an aisle seat sat next to a fairly large chap - not obese by any means but a chunky rugby player type. I literally couldn’t get on the seat - half my right butt cheek was hanging off the edge of the seat.

An inch wide spacer in between the seats would have helped a lot - I can’t believe losing 2 inches of aisle space would make that much difference to circulation.

 

[Essexman]

I had my first trip on a GWR 800 train today. Only from Didcot to Paddington but I found the seat hard and uncomfortable. I wouldn't fancy it all the way to Cornwall. As I feared, the new trains are inferior to the 1970s HSTs.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

My trip yesterday on an ironing board really brought home the major problem with these seats. I was in an aisle seat sat next to a fairly large chap - not obese by any means but a chunky rugby player type. I literally couldn’t get on the seat - half my right butt cheek was hanging off the edge of the seat.

An inch wide spacer in between the seats would have helped a lot - I can’t believe losing 2 inches of aisle space would make that much difference to circulation.

Agreed - to quote a "non King" (Edward the Eighth .."something must be done")

Coming back on the London Overground on a very busy train , the lateral seating works well on a functionality basis for those who have seats , do not like it really as it destroys the window gazing aspect - but it works for those seated , relatively comfort wise ...armrests etc and not too hard a seat bottom.

Quite appalling really that no one challenged the DfT on this malarkey...before the damage was done.

 

[bramling]

My trip yesterday on an ironing board really brought home the major problem with these seats. I was in an aisle seat sat next to a fairly large chap - not obese by any means but a chunky rugby player type. I literally couldn’t get on the seat - half my right butt cheek was hanging off the edge of the seat.

An inch wide spacer in between the seats would have helped a lot - I can’t believe losing 2 inches of aisle space would make that much difference to circulation.

Course it wouldn’t make that much difference. How do the powers that be think busy trains cope all around the country on a daily basis? Even doing something about the ducting would have helped a lot.

 

[PHILIPE]

Complaint after complaint on GWR Twitter re the hard seats on the Class 800s. GWR say that they have received positive feedback. Haven't seen any myself. The cut and paste is "ergonomically designed" so I asked them why they state this when it isn't true.

 

[bramling]

Agreed - to quote a "non King" (Edward the Eighth .."something must be done")

Coming back on the London Overground on a very busy train , the lateral seating works well on a functionality basis for those who have seats , do not like it really as it destroys the window gazing aspect - but it works for those seated , relatively comfort wise ...armrests etc and not too hard a seat bottom.

Quite appalling really that no one challenged the DfT on this malarkey...before the damage was done.

Well, judging by some of the rubbish on here whilst the trains were being built, no one would see the error of their ways. Instead we read rubbish about how the trains would be comfortable, how tables could never happen because they’re too heavy, and how the ducting is vital for crashworthiness.

Now we have one of the most unpopular and unfit-for-purpose fleets of trains built in recent memory. We wait to see what the DFT will do about it. It’s certainly the first time I remember a train seat type attracting national media attention.

Of course, this is just one part of the Thameslink fiasco. Worse will be when the ECML timetable melts down on a regular basis. We were promised 6 off-peak Thameslink trains per hour from May (4x 12 car and 2x 8 car), now we only get three, which reads to me as an admission things are too fragile. So all the pain and little of the gain. What a fiasco.

I see even the staunch defenders have gone rather quiet recently...

 

[The Box Photter]

Yet many people still want to hand the entire railway management back to these people!

I watched the puff piece BBC London ran allowing GTR to trumpet the inauguration of services through the Canal Tunnels. It was as though they'd reinvented the train (perhaps they have as a cattle truck) and it included shots of Mr Johnson standing in the cab as the train departed St Pancras heading north. He was heard to ask the driver in his best Etonian accent "...Where does the tunnel start?" to which the driver responded, "..Here". It was also noticable that for most of the on board interview with the Minister, he was sitting in one of the 1st class seting bays just behind the front driving cab, but suspiciously, there were no "1st Class" antimacassars on the seats behind him. Just another example of the duplicitous nature of GTR, the government and DfT.

 

[The Box Photter]

The Thameslink core creates a requirement for an innersuburban layout anyway. If you want an InterCity service from Bedford to Brighton, at least for now, change at St P and London and use EMT and Southern. Thameslink is a suburban commuter service that happens to run a long way out.



As those have 3+2 seating it clearly is not. Someone who would overhang 700 seating by ten inches would also overhang regular 2+2, and wouldn't even be able to sit down in an IC70 seat as they would be wedged atop the armrests.



I have no idea about Great Northern but I have made a number of Thameslink journeys and they appear comparable with the Cityflyer Class 319s which they replace.

The fabled Thameslink Core requirement is something that was dreamed up by DfT in cahoots with TfL to reduce pressure on the Northern and Victoria Lines. They've admitted as much that the new higher frequency service through the core will provide an alternative for passengers currently using those lines.

So the long-distance passengers have to suffer arse and back ache for the next 20 years or so just so that some hipsters don't have to squash themselves together on the Northen Line for 15 minutes each morning. Well thanks very much DfT, you'll be receiving my osteopath bill.

 

[route101]

Had my experience of the ironing boards on a Scotrail 156 today . For me a hard seat , not as comfortable as the existing ones ,too upright . Tried a table and the seat was too high or table too low.

 

[Skimble19]

Meanwhile I'm pretty sure that going forward there will be a desire to get rid of the remaining 365s for reasons that may become more apparent in the coming year.

If you’re referring to the impending removal of dispatch then that’s meant to be starting (in stages, as opposed to one swift change like TL) sooner than you may think. First patch on GN is planned to go reasonably soon, and it’s the patch where the 365s will still be used after May. Personally I hope it’s back tracked, but I’ll be very shocked if that happens.

To stay on topic; anyone wanting a comfortable seat after May you’ll need to travel from Peterborough, Huntingdon, St Neots, Biggleswade or Stevenage if you want a 365. Otherwise it’s a 387, 700 or 717 (or a 313 for a little while longer!)

 

[Antman]

At least on the 387s the legroom is generally good. The 700 is torture even when just 50% loaded. I've never endured one with someone sitting next to me or directly opposite, and the thought of that fills me with dread. Why should someone subject themselves to this rubbish when they have a car?

Exactly nobody would design a new car with such awful seating but it's deemed to be good enough for train passengers. I've heard a few comments from passengers about why spend all that money on new trains and fill them with uncomfortable seats. Just about bearable for shortish journeys but I wouldn't fancy Bedford to Brighton on a 700!

 

[Failed Unit]

Exactly nobody would design a new car with such awful seating but it's deemed to be good enough for train passengers. I've heard a few comments from passengers about why spend all that money on new trains and fill them with uncomfortable seats. Just about bearable for shortish journeys but I wouldn't fancy Bedford to Brighton on a 700!

Short answer is price.

But they didn’t really give users a decent chance to feedback viewpoints either. (Not that I expect that would have any impact judging by the fact so little negative feedback about the timetable was investigated?). The could have fitted the new seats in the 319s before they ordered the 700s (along with various other types) asked what passengers thought of them in use. This has happened in the past.

Sit on this at a station isn’t a good way to test something that many will be on for more that 1 hour.

 

[Essexman]

Complaint after complaint on GWR Twitter re the hard seats on the Class 800s. GWR say that they have received positive feedback. Haven't seen any myself. The cut and paste is "ergonomically designed" so I asked them why they state this when it isn't true.

GWR twitter told me that research showed customers like them. 'Research' can be as meaningless as 'statistics'.

 

[Failed Unit]

GWR twitter told me that research showed customers like them. 'Research' can be as meaningless as 'statistics'.

Yes. The research loads the question in a way the company gets the answer they want.

East coast positioned the catering changes with the question. “Do you feel inclusive food will make your first class ticket better value for money”

Stagecoach for their IEP gave options A & B. But no option for niether. When the interior is released they can say passengers overwhelmingly voted for the preferred option. But in reality many didn’t like either but couldn’t tell them so.

Most research by TOCs is would you rather us cut off your left arm or right arm? Then come out with the majority of passengers want their left arm cutting off. Rather than reality that the majority of passengers are happy with having 2 arms.

Never trust anything a TOC says without challenging the source data. It is almost certainly a fact that they asked the question to get the answer they wanted.

 

[al78]

'Research' can be as meaningless as 'statistics'.

Usually said by people that don't want to accept the research or statistics, because it counters their precious world view.

 

[physics34]

At least on the 387s the legroom is generally good. The 700 is torture even when just 50% loaded. I've never endured one with someone sitting next to me or directly opposite, and the thought of that fills me with dread. Why should someone subject themselves to this rubbish when they have a car?

yeh, you find the 387s to be a compromise, because they have armrests, tables and legroom....even though the seats are still damned hard! The 387s biggest issue id say is the first class.