There have been a number of threads where discussion has concentrated on the capacity of the latest fleets of EMUs and the seating/standing arrangements adopted to achieve them. To get the relative effects of these arrangements I dashed up a spreadsheet to determine the passenger per metre train length and having looked at the figures, thought that it might be worth starting a thread for discussion. Note that some figures are guesses based on similar layouts where full figures are available. These are suffixed by '?'
So here is the table:
For comparison, I have also added some info. about the two classes of NR metro EMUs in service before the latest shopping spree. The figues are under the same headings and some data doesn't seem to be available:
Notes of interest, despite the pure metro stock not having toilets, it doesn't seem to make that much difference to total capacity, the biggest gain being wide standing areas, particularly with longitudinal seating.
So here is the table:
| seated | standing | total | |||||
| class | train length | No. | pax/m | No. | pax/m | No. | pax/m |
| 700/0 | 162.00 | 427 | 2.64 | 719 | 4.44 | 1146 | 7.07 |
| 700/1 | 242.60 | 666 | 2.75 | 1088 | 4.48 | 1754 | 7.23 |
| 345 | 204.73 | 450 | 2.20 | 1050 | 5.13 | 1500 | 7.33 |
| 707 | 101.60 | 275 | 2.71 | 550? | 5.41 | 825 | 8.12 |
| 717 | 121.70 | 362 | 2.97 | 660? | 5.42 | 1022 | 8.40 |
| 710/1&2 | 82.87 | 189 | 2.28 | 489 | 5.90 | 678 | 8.18 |
| 710/3 | 102.86 | 241 | 2.34 | 641 | 6.23 | 882 | 8.57 |
| 720/5&6 | 122.00 | 540 | 4.43 | 145 | 1.19 | 685 | 5.61 |
| 701/0 | 200.00 | 556 | 2.78 | 746 | 3.73 | 1302 | 6.51 |
| 701/5 | 100.00 | 274 | 2.74 | 361 | 3.61 | 635 | 6.35 |
| 376 | 98.97 | 222 | 2.24 | ||||
| 378 | 98.87 | 182? | 1.84 |
Notes of interest, despite the pure metro stock not having toilets, it doesn't seem to make that much difference to total capacity, the biggest gain being wide standing areas, particularly with longitudinal seating.
Last edited: