Class 390 or 397

[Scotrail314209]

8 seats for staff? Just wow. Four max, I would suggest - how are there even eight catering staff on the train? Buffet/shop/whatever (but that should be staffed at all time), chef or two; does it really need 5 or 6 others. I'd also suggest that breaks should be staggered, like they do in shops and other workplaces, so that there is a customer facing presence at all times.

The Shop staff member always uses the single seats in Coach C, which I believe are used by passengers in exceptional circumstances. E.G. the train being packed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Shop staff member always uses the single seats in Coach C, which I believe are used by passengers in exceptional circumstances. E.G. the train being packed.

Those seats are kept free for non-wheelchair user passengers needing assistance (whether booked or not), I believe, being directly opposite the guard's cubicle. Because of that the buffet steward can use them when not needed for that purpose.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

The Shop staff member always uses the single seats in Coach C, which I believe are used by passengers in exceptional circumstances. E.G. the train being packed.

The only Standard class seats with armrests by the window and they don’t let anyone sit there; it irritates me

 

[HSP 2]

The only Standard class seats with armrests by the window and they don’t let anyone sit there; it irritates me

It irritates me that I can't sit in the back cab and look out of the window. But that's not going to happen.
So are you saying that a person who can be doing a 4h 50 min. run should not be able to have a sit down near to there point of work, IIRC if your working a shift that is over 4hr you are allowed an off the job brake of 10 mins. and then a 40 min. brake before recommencing your duties.
If things have changed please update me on this.

By the way I thought that all standard class seats had armrests (but maybe not a window).

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

It irritates me that I can't sit in the back cab and look out of the window. But that's not going to happen.
So are you saying that a person who can be doing a 4h 50 min. run should not be able to have a sit down near to there point of work, IIRC if your working a shift that is over 4hr you are allowed an off the job brake of 10 mins. and then a 40 min. brake before recommencing your duties.
If things have changed please update me on this.

By the way I thought that all standard class seats had armrests (but maybe not a window).

No. I was saying they should fit other seats with armrests... Wow.

 

[py_megapixel]

No. I was saying they should fit other seats with armrests... Wow.

At all seats, there is a little plastic thing which folds down as an armrest, is there not? (I'm not sure how to describe it better than that, but in the spoiler is a public domain photo I found where I've circled what I mean):

Spoiler

By Alex Liivet from Chester, United Kingdom - Train Interior, CC0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=63981256

Or do you mean there should be an armrest on specifically the window side? If so, that might be a deliberate decision to make the window seat feel less cramped or something like that.

 

[Mogz]

I imagine a 390 with the leg room and seating layout of a 397 could make for a very pleasant travelling environment.

Or, alternatively, a 397 with the seats of a 390!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

At all seats, there is a little plastic thing which folds down as an armrest, is there not? (I'm not sure how to describe it better than that, but in the spoiler is a public domain photo I found where I've circled what I mean):

Spoiler

View attachment 87452

By Alex Liivet from Chester, United Kingdom - Train Interior, CC0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=63981256

Or do you mean there should be an armrest on specifically the window side? If so, that might be a deliberate decision to make the window seat feel less cramped or something like that.

On the window side. There is a huge bulge thing under the windows where armrests should be... I don’t know whether there’s any technical equipment in there that supplies the plug sockets with power or something but it really ought to be moved. It’s the only downside to the train’s interior IMO

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or do you mean there should be an armrest on specifically the window side? If so, that might be a deliberate decision to make the window seat feel less cramped or something like that.

It's like it is because they needed to put something in a conduit (I forget what) so they put it there as a fake armrest, but it doesn't really work, and whatever-it-is should have gone somewhere else. The aisle is too narrow to move the seats in by an armrest-width.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Dec 2020 ==

I imagine a 390 with the leg room and seating layout of a 397 could make for a very pleasant travelling environment.

Or, alternatively, a 397 with the seats of a 390!

Close to perfect would be a 397 with Grammer IC3000s in a roughly half and half airline/bay layout, all window-aligned, and the higher quality Mk5a interior panelling. I can dream

 

[py_megapixel]

It's like it is because they needed to put something in a conduit (I forget what) so they put it there as a fake armrest, but it doesn't really work, and whatever-it-is should have gone somewhere else. The aisle is too narrow to move the seats in by an armrest-width.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Dec 2020 ==



Close to perfect would be a 397 with Grammer IC3000s in a roughly half and half airline/bay layout, all window-aligned, and the higher quality Mk5a interior panelling.

maybe we could have Siemens build quality and bogie design rather than CAF, too
But then, as you've said before, it's just a "344"...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Dec 2020 ==

It's like it is because they needed to put something in a conduit (I forget what) so they put it there as a fake armrest, but it doesn't really work, and whatever-it-is should have gone somewhere else. The aisle is too narrow to move the seats in by an armrest-width.

At the very least they could have moved the conduit down a couple of inches and put something which actually looks like the top of an armrest there

 

[Mogz]

Might be getting OT but I think my perfect EMU or hauled coach would have been:

- A Siemens 444 derivative (including the seats);

- 50-50 mix of table and airline seats;

- a decent luggage/cycle area

- a small element of pre-bookable compartment seating for first class (eg for business meetings) and standard class (for families)- the idea being you pay per compartment for a group rather than per seat to avoid the squabbles caused when people get territorial like on heritage lines or on the continent).

You could even have a staff compartment to use as a mess room. Problem solves!

 

[Jamesrob637]

A UK-spec version of Railjet would've been great!

 

[Bletchleyite]

A UK-spec version of Railjet would've been great!

I don't think they're that great, in particular the pneumatic recliners on the 1st seats are a flawed design which don't hold the seat upright properly. (It's not one broken one, either, I tried several), and the shape of the panelling around the windows block looking out along the vehicle so give a slightly claustrophobic feel.

 

[Jamesrob637]

I don't think they're that great, in particular the pneumatic recliners on the 1st seats are a flawed design which don't hold the seat upright properly. (It's not one broken one, either, I tried several), and the shape of the panelling around the windows block looking out along the vehicle so give a slightly claustrophobic feel.

Ok so put 390 or 444 seats in then! But the design is solid - weighs a fair bit indeed but lightweight just rattles around on a train.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ok so put 390 or 444 seats in then! But the design is solid - weighs a fair bit indeed but lightweight just rattles around on a train.

I didn't of course mention that in Standard the seat is the venerable Grammer IC3000. Maybe the designers of Classes 350/1 and /3 should go and have a word - clearly they influenced the fact that First is inferior to Standard there too!

 

[Railperf]

No contest. Having travelled on both, the 390 is the overall winner in terms of quietness, comfort and ride quality and tilt allows them to run faster. 397 interiors are brighter and more modern - highlighting a need for the 390's to undergo a serious interior refurbishment. But the 397 ride is awful and not enjoyable - even if the views are better due to the larger windows.

 

[Jamesrob637]

I didn't of course mention that in Standard the seat is the venerable Grammer IC3000. Maybe the designers of Classes 350/1 and /3 should go and have a word - clearly they influenced the fact that First is inferior to Standard there too!

60000 posts (ish) and I'm prepared to bet at least half contain the words "seat", "Grammer" or "Fainsa"

The 390 in First is excellent.- done it countless times as I'm sure have you. You praise the TPE First Class but the last time I was in First on TPE I was a bit intoxicated. The last time I did TPE First remotely sober was in 2015 and my ex was nagging me the whole way

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Dec 2020 ==

No contest. Having travelled on both, the 390 is the overall winner in terms of quietness, comfort and ride quality and tilt allows them to run faster. 397 interiors are brighter and more modern - highlighting a need for the 390's to undergo a serious interior refurbishment. But the 397 ride is awful and not enjoyable - even if the views are better due to the larger windows.

Which 397 was yours?! I thought we were at 160kmh and I put on my GPS - we were closer to 200. That's how good they ride. The 390 is so good for a near-20 year old product though.

 

[Railperf]

Which 397 was yours?! I thought we were at 160kmh and I put on my GPS - we were closer to 200. That's how good they ride. The 390 is so good for a near-20 year old product though.

well 110mph maximum (177km/h) for the 397's for the time being. The 390s's are designed for 140mph (225km/h) and based on the Italian Pendolino platform which is designed for 155mph (250km/h). The Pendolino ride has to be one of smoothest and quietest of any train in the UK right now.

 

[43096]

I don't think they're that great, in particular the pneumatic recliners on the 1st seats are a flawed design which don't hold the seat upright properly. (It's not one broken one, either, I tried several), and the shape of the panelling around the windows block looking out along the vehicle so give a slightly claustrophobic feel.

Claustrophobic? Not even slightly. If you want claustrophobic and poor views out, try a 390. It’s not even a contest.

And I’ve never had a problem with RailJet first class seats.

 

[DB]

One window bay, fitted with 8 Standard seats with tables and sockets, would be fine. It'd be relatively cheap to move the partition in coach K one bay along. (You'd not have to actually move it, just add another one).

Given that they will soon be doing a full interior refurbishment, it could easily be done then.

The mk4s have a pair of dedicated standard style seats for staff at the end of the first class coach next to the buffet.

 

[tetudo boy]

I haven't gone on a 397 yet, but based on some reviews, the Pendolino is an obvious choice.

 

[Bletchleyite]

well 110mph maximum (177km/h) for the 397's for the time being. The 390s's are designed for 140mph (225km/h) and based on the Italian Pendolino platform which is designed for 155mph (250km/h). The Pendolino ride has to be one of smoothest and quietest of any train in the UK right now.

Of course being designed for 140mph doesn't mean a good ride - the Mk4 coach's ride is utterly, utterly dire. Pacers aside, Mk4s are the only UK rail vehicle where the ride has been so bad I at one point thought we were partially off the road and considered going and pulling the handle, though before I had chance to get up it stabilised.

 

[Railperf]

I never found the Mk 4's ride bad at all.,

 

[Bletchleyite]

I never found the Mk 4's ride bad at all.,

Try north of Newcastle, some bits are really rough if running at speed.

 

[DB]

I never found the Mk 4's ride bad at all.,

Indeed. Not as good as a mk3, but perfectly acceptable and better than mk5a

 

[Railperf]

Indeed. Not as good as a mk3, but perfectly acceptable and better than mk5a

No trains ride well on bad track.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No trains ride well on bad track.

Actually some do - the Class 158 for instance, or the heavier Class 221 Super Voyager.

 

[Kite159]

Easily a Pendo.

The seats on a 397 are completely rubbish in my eyes (would rather sit on a 700) and they are far too short.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The seats on a 397 are completely rubbish in my eyes (would rather sit on a 700) and they are far too short.

Are they too short? Is there genuinely demand for a 260m train hourly from Manchester to Scotland?

They would be too short to operate from Euston unless doubled up, but they don't operate from Euston.

 

[Kite159]

Are they too short? Is there genuinely demand for a 260m train hourly from Manchester to Scotland?

They would be too short to operate from Euston unless doubled up, but they don't operate from Euston.

Considering some services on the Manchester - Scotland route used to be run with doubled up 350s. And due to the length a pair of units can't go to the airport as they will be too long for the platforms & trackwork (other than maybe platform 4)