Internal locked door - Class 700 First Class

[Jan Mayen]

Perhaps have First Class at the back of all Thameslink trains, including those which have all First declassified? Then the driver can lock out (including platform doors) the section behind them?

 

[Horizon22]

To be honest the bashing of Medway on here is quite ridiculous. I have lived in Medway from 2022 after living in Plumstead so have been a user of the Thameslink service for commuting since it began when I worked in Slade Green. There were more issues on the trains with drugs and antisocial behaviour between Deptford and Charlton than I see in the Medway towns.

When I said the North Kent line, this was the section I was referring to. Would extend the issues down to Slade Green though or at least Plumstead, although Abbey Wood has got better since the Elizabeth line started up.

I would say the Medway towns do have general other issues though with anti-social behaviour but that’s more generally in and around the station and immediate surroundings.

 

[MotCO]

So, effectively legitimise the behaviour?

But they would do their anti-socialising elsewhere on the train.

 

[londonteacher]

When I said the North Kent line, this was the section I was referring to. Would extend the issues down to Slade Green though or at least Plumstead, although Abbey Wood has got better since the Elizabeth line started up.

I would say the Medway towns do have general other issues though with anti-social behaviour but that’s more generally in and around the station and immediate surroundings.

I would agree about definitely around the stations. In the stations would be difficult as they are staffed and barrier for most of the day.

 

[Hadders]

Perhaps have First Class at the back of all Thameslink trains, including those which have all First declassified? Then the driver can lock out (including platform doors) the section behind them?

There is a first class compartment at either end of all Thameslink trains (the compartment at the rear of the train is always declassified).

Of course if there was only once compartment at the back, it would be at the front on the return journey.

 

[Rail101]

A few months ago I experienced the situation described by the OP. The external doors were available to board but the internal door separating the (rear) first class compartment with standard class was locked shut. This was a Beford service heading northbound where some of the stations have short platforms so there was a risk of not being able to exit the train at the required station as well as of course the potential safety issues mentioned. I did send Thameslink a message on social media but not sure whether it was sorted out. It definitely didn't occur to me to pull any kind of alarm but I can see why someone might do so. I didn't think too much of it at the time.

 

[abn444]

There is a first class compartment at either end of all Thameslink trains (the compartment at the rear of the train is always declassified).

Of course if there was only once compartment at the back, it would be at the front on the return journey.

I think what they're saying is that the front section should be declassified with the rear being the "actual" first class on services which have first, rather than the other way round which it is at the moment

 

[bramling]

Perhaps have First Class at the back of all Thameslink trains, including those which have all First declassified? Then the driver can lock out (including platform doors) the section behind them?

It isn’t really an issue as the routes which are booked to convey first generally don’t have as many issues, for the majority of the time anyway.

Cambridge is very tame, Bedford and the Brighton line tend to be fairly busy which acts as a natural deterrent, the only bit which is slightly “chavvy” is Hitchin to Peterborough, and that’s fairly low-level.

Locking sections out on Rainham on quieter services isn’t really a problem. It isn’t ideal, and I daresay it probably isn’t explicitly GTR policy, just something that’s done locally as a way of trying to reduce problems.

I can’t see first lasting forever on Thameslink anyway. Though if it was ditched altogether on the 700s it would mean it probably would have to be on all GN services because of the way 700s interwork. I guess you could keep first on Fen Line services if desired and just declassify the 387/379s when working Cambridge stopping services. I suspect real first is a bit of a free-for-all on those services anyway nowadays.

 

[Russel]

Maybe a better solution would be upgrading the wall between the cab and the coach from thin plywood to something actually soundproof and weed smoke proof. Or having a space or non public section of the train or something. Drivers need peace and quiet to drive without distractions.

Are you sure the wall between the saloon and cab is thin plywood?

So, effectively legitimise the behaviour?

Exactly, properly funding the BTP and increasing the size of the Thameslink revenue protection team would be a much better option that just sweeping the issue under the carpet.

 

[RiverDon]

Are you sure the wall between the saloon and cab is thin plywood?

I can only talk for the trains I drive (class 158 and 170) but you can hear passengers talking at normal conversation level on the other side up to about 50mph and the whole wall wobbles when you shut the door. In the class 158 where the drivers seat is attached the the wall, you can feel it move if someone leans or bumps against it on the other side. The 158 cab doors often open themselves on the move too. Trust me they're thin.

 

[Russel]

I can only talk for the trains I drive (class 158 and 170) but you can hear passengers talking at normal conversation level on the other side up to about 50mph and the whole wall wobbles when you shut the door. In the class 158 where the drivers seat is attached the the wall, you can feel it move if someone leans or bumps against it on the other side. The 158 cab doors often open themselves on the move too. Trust me they're thin.

Fair enough but these are 20 and 30 year old units, not modern class 700s.

 

[sleepinghobby]

The external doors should of course be locked out in addition to the internal door. If processes are followed correctly, the platform PIS will state that the first coach is locked out (possibly limited to front of train only).

Fully support drivers locking off the coach behind them. On overnight services, as well as ASB, odourous drug usage, and loud noises, I have seen 'passengers' bang on the cab door relentlessly, scream at the driver through the cab door, scratch at the cab door and batter it with a fire extinguisher. I have also twice seen a driver hold a train at the platform to air out their cab and the coach behind.

Many here would consider it trivial but I have also seen the drivers cab door obstructed by 'luggage' - whilst personally on the train maybe in the low 4 figures and certainly in the 5 figures from outside the train.

 

[bramling]

Fair enough but these are 20 and 30 year old units, not modern class 700s.

I seem to recall it was said that some level of focus was given with the 700s to sound-deadening the cabs.

If it was, it doesn’t seem to have been very effective, as sitting in the seats adjacent to the bulkhead you can clearly hear when staff are in the rear cab talking on their phones or whatever.

 

[Recessio]

I seem to recall it was said that some level of focus was given with the 700s to sound-deadening the cabs.

If it was, it doesn’t seem to have been very effective, as sitting in the seats adjacent to the bulkhead you can clearly hear when staff are in the rear cab talking on their phones or whatever.

I often sit in the front First class and I can clearly hear AWS chimes and occasionally drivers talking, there can't be very much sound proofing

 

[WeGoAgain]

I came across an unusual situation this evening. The interior door that seperates (declassified) first class and standard class was locked on a Class 700.

As @sleepinghobby said (post number 42), this was not procedural. I believe it would have been prudent to try and let the Driver know, failing that, letting Platform Staff know at St. Pancras and/or if you had/have access to X (formerly Twitter), you could have informed them too.

Though catastrophe's on Trains appear quite rare, they can still happen. And something which seems to happen relatively frequently are passengers being taken ill on a Train. A situation could have arisen whereby someone had a medical emergency in that part of the coach and an off duty medical person being unable to get to attend to them which could potentially have devastating consequences.

Ignoring the situation (as suggested above) is all well and good... until something happens.

 

[fandroid]

The thing about safety rules is that they're designed to keep people safe without requiring staff to constantly weigh up those risks locally.
The locking of the connecting doors to that compartment while a side door remains unlocked increases the risk for anyone who does entering. It shouldn't just be shrugged off. Reporting it would be the right thing to do. Probably not while the train is still on its journey though.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

I used to be a TL driver. I always used to lock out the front first class (behind me) after about 9pm. It was always full of people who didn't have first class tickets, being irritating and causing a distraction with loud rowdiness or playing audio from devices out loud.

I was on a TL service where rowdiness was occurring in the front 1st Class section on a southbound Brighton service. Driver announced at Gatwick that if the loud music did not cease, the train would be held indefinitely. Had the desired effect, but once we got up to line speed, it re-started. Driver must have anticipated this because some BTP and TravelSafe staff were waiting at Three Bridges and it was good to see some youths being handed MG11 notices as the rear section I was in picked up speed after a short delay.

 

[Peter0124]

Just wondering how thin the TPE 397 cab walls are given the bike area is behind it, popular for prams?

 

[ChilliSauce]

I suspect real first is a bit of a free-for-all on those services anyway nowadays.

It would work if GTR were to fully revenue protect it by checking tickets on every train and then dishing out the Penalty Fares for those without the correct ticket ..

But then that can be said for the class 700 service as a whole .. all services need to have revenue protection in place for at least some of their journey .

And the Farringdon "loop hole" closed ...

 

[kacper]

And the Farringdon "loop hole" closed ...

What is the Farringdon loop hole please

 

[Mattplans]

And the Farringdon "loop hole" closed ...

And how do you suggest they do this?


The Farringdon loophole is here to stay unless GTR wants to add additional gatelines. Keep in mind London Underground already have an exit/entrance they close outside of certain hours, and more often than not this secondary entrance is left unstaffed with the gates open. Surely any new gateline will have to be staffed by GTR themselves? GTR used to have a staff member by the main exit during peak hours, but even they are nowhere to be seen nowadays.


I think it's strange that some suggest first class needs more enforcement. The things that pass for first class on British Railways is unbelievable.

What is the Farringdon loop hole please

Farringdon is a station managed by London Underground where Thameslink call. The 'loop hole' is that you can travel in without (or by doughnutting) on your GTR ticket and join London Underground by using the validators placed around the station. These validators are intended for people travelling outside of the London travelcard area (like Brighton or Bedford) and want to continue their journey on the Elizabeth or Met lines. Otherwise, these passengers would have to leave Farringdon on their paper ticket and re-enter using an Oyster card. Some people misuse the validators that are placed in the station (so you don't have to do all that) and don't pay for their inbound journey to Farringson on Thameslink, only for their LU journey. That's the general gist.

 

[Kite159]

And how do you suggest they do this?

The simplest way is to remove the platform side validators, at the cost of any genuine passengers changing from using oyster/Contactless to another ticket having to exit and re-enter the station. All those who think payment is optional will suddenly find themselves stuck or paying for a ticket from City Thameslink/St Pancras to Farringdon if they want to doughnut or short fare (especially if they are coming from a station which lacks barriers)

 

[Horizon22]

I often sit in the front First class and I can clearly hear AWS chimes and occasionally drivers talking, there can't be very much sound proofing

Can sound-proofing be “uni directional” though? I’m no expert but if this is the case just because you can hear noises from a 700 cab doesn’t mean staff can hear from a 700 saloon.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2026 ==

It would work if GTR were to fully revenue protect it by checking tickets on every train

Simply unworkable I’m afraid there would never be the resources to do so.

And the Farringdon "loop hole" closed ...

I presume you mean the validator connecting Elizabeth line and the Northbound?

 

[Kite159]

Can sound-proofing be “uni directional” though? I’m no expert but if this is the case just because you can hear noises from a 700 cab doesn’t mean staff can hear from a 700 saloon.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2026 ==



Simply unworkable I’m afraid there would never be the resources to do so.



I presume you mean the validator connecting Elizabeth line and the Northbound?

And the ones between LU & the southbound platform.

 

[Horizon22]

The simplest way is to remove the platform side validators, at the cost of any genuine passengers changing from using oyster/Contactless to another ticket having to exit and re-enter the station. All those who think payment is optional will suddenly find themselves stuck or paying for a ticket from City Thameslink/St Pancras to Farringdon if they want to doughnut or short fare (especially if they are coming from a station which lacks barriers)

A massive passenger inconvenience for the majority of people who are doing the right thing. There are mid-platform validators in a whole host of places (Stratford comes to mind), which are theoretically subject to the same risks. Presumably it is within a threshold GTR will accept.

 

[Russel]

It would work if GTR were to fully revenue protect it by checking tickets on every train and then dishing out the Penalty Fares for those without the correct ticket ..

Wouldn't even need to be every service, just enough to make people realize they are actually serious about revenue protection.

 

[renegademaster]

Are you sure the wall between the saloon and cab is thin plywood?



Exactly, properly funding the BTP and increasing the size of the Thameslink revenue protection team would be a much better option that just sweeping the issue under the carpet.

Revenue protection only works if the people you are prosecuting actually have any money to extract

 

[Krokodil]

it was good to see some youths being handed MG11 notices

Do you reckon that they were done under byelaw 7?

Revenue protection only works if the people you are prosecuting actually have any money to extract

I disagree. There's also the option to turf someone off.

 

[bramling]

I disagree. There's also the option to turf someone off.

So someone boards at Stevenage, revenue approach them for their ticket, the response is “I go London”, which gets repeated multiple times in response to every question asked, you tell them they’re going to get turfed off at Finsbury Park, which is the next station. Upon arrival there they walk away with a smirk on their face, straight down the (ungated) spiral staircase down to LU for the next stage of their free journey. It wouldn’t make any difference if there was a gateline as they’d just push through, in the same way they probably had at Stevenage.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2026 ==

The thing about safety rules is that they're designed to keep people safe without requiring staff to constantly weigh up those risks locally.
The locking of the connecting doors to that compartment while a side door remains unlocked increases the risk for anyone who does entering. It shouldn't just be shrugged off. Reporting it would be the right thing to do. Probably not while the train is still on its journey though.

Yeah it should be resolved, but to be honest if it was benefiting me personally, or at least not adversely affecting me, I wouldn’t bother. The minuscule safety risk would be outweighed by the delay.

 

[Horizon22]

So someone boards at Stevenage, revenue approach them for their ticket, the response is “I go London”, which gets repeated multiple times in response to every question asked, you tell them they’re going to get turfed off at Finsbury Park, which is the next station. Upon arrival there they walk away with a smirk on their face, straight down the (ungated) spiral staircase down to LU for the next stage of their free journey. It wouldn’t make any difference if there was a gateline as they’d just push through, in the same way they probably had at Stevenage.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2026 ==

There's only so much you can do. The railways cannot resolve all of society's ills.