Thameslink to replace cushions on class 700 ironing board seats to improve comfort.. Finally..

[AM9]

They should put a single first section in the centre, or abolish it altogether. The current arrangement is ludicrous.

Nope, first class there would interfere with the more important provisions for accessible travel, and elsewhere, first class is always problematic anyway (e.g. class 350 and 185).
There no need to alter the current arrangement anyway. The declassified first probably results in less than 1% loss of the crush load capacity. How many times have you not been able to board a class 700 through overloading?

 

[Deepgreen]

AIUI the cost was already in the lease deal, but for something else that was to be due now. So the works being done have been changed, but in a way that will benefit passengers more.

I had understood from discussions quite a while back that the 'ironing board' seats' thin-ness was required by fire risk requirements - clearly either that was wrong or standards/requirements have changed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I had understood from discussions quite a while back that the 'ironing board' seats' thin-ness was required by fire risk requirements - clearly either that was wrong or standards/requirements have changed.

It's wrong and it always has been. It's simply the case that meeting fire regulations by using thinner rather than more expensive, more fire resistant foam (or other options like pocket springs) is cheaper. The interior of the 700 is very much built down to a price.

Of course I'd imagine that in the time these have been in service fire resistant foam technology has improved and got cheaper, as such things generally do.

 

[Deepgreen]

The wheelchair spaces and platform "Harrington humps" for level boarding are in the middle.

Yes, obviously avoiding the humps but towards the centre such that only one area exists per unit and there is never any doubt whether it is in use. There is also the point that if the seats are made more comfortable throughout, perhaps first class will be redundant (while also recognising that first's main advantage is less crowding). It may happen, but I have never witnessed anyone being turfed out of first on a 700 because they have a standard ticket, despite very obviously not having first tickets (school kids, tradesmen, etc.).

Even having a prominent illuminated sign saying whether first is in use would help. At the moment, essentially, anyone sits anywhere on 700s with impunity because they either don't understand or don't care about the system. As a matter of interest, is such a system used anywhere else?

 

[AM9]

Yes, obviously avoiding the humps but towards the centre such that only one area exists per unit and there is never any doubt whether it is in use.

There isn't anyway, those who aren't sure don't take the risk which means they travel the same as they would do if the 1st class was removed.

 

[NCT]

Yes, obviously avoiding the humps but towards the centre such that only one area exists per unit and there is never any doubt whether it is in use.

Having First Class in the middle of the train adversely affects distribution of the mass of standard class passengers and walking through the train.

 

[Deepgreen]

Having First Class in the middle of the train adversely affects distribution of the mass of standard class passengers and walking through the train.

That is a good point. However, surely the current system is untenable, or do people actually believe it works OK? BTW, I have never seen any publicity about how first class works on TL - it may have been posted but, if so, it has eluded me. I use the first class, but I would happily see it go to remove what I perceive as a messy and awkward arrangement - others may see it differently.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Wednesday at 11:31 ==

It's wrong and it always has been. It's simply the case that meeting fire regulations by using thinner rather than more expensive, more fire resistant foam (or other options like pocket springs) is cheaper. The interior of the 700 is very much built down to a price.

Of course I'd imagine that in the time these have been in service fire resistant foam technology has improved and got cheaper, as such things generally do.

I look forward to a return to 4COR cushion depth (I only barely remember them, BTW!).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Wednesday at 11:37 ==

Seat back tables is a must and shoul've been installed from new. Rumour at the time was the tables would somehow slow down station dwell times.

The seat trim is starting to look worn and the cushion padding is starting to collapse so I'm not surprised that there are plans for a refresh.

There are two issues, more with the layout rather than the seats themselves:

1. The lack of leg room in all but the prioroty seats
2. The lack of space between the seats - the window seat is right next to the side wall, and there is no gap between the window seat and aisle seat. The seats are actually the same as those fitted to the 387s but the 387s have better spacing due to the armrests, the result being more elbow room. This does impact the aisle width - there is noticable less room for standing on a 387.

Overall it is a compromise - better spacing of the seats will mean less standing space , and fewer seats if the leg room is improved. One redeeming feature of the 700s is they hoover up people at busy times - this is precicely due to the way the seats are spaced.

How can you tell..?

 

[GEC465]

Changing the seats to match the 387s would be what we really want. .

Definitely not. The 387 padding is a lot worse than the 700s

 

[RacsoMoquette]

Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) on X

NEW: Great British Railways will ban the "ironing-board" seats across all Thameslink trains from next year

x.com

Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander says over 60,000 seat cushions will be replaced with more "comfortable alternatives" and improved backrests

First Class will also get improved cushions, while tables will be added to 70 trains. The upgrades will roll out over two years from next year

Alexander said: "This is what public ownership looks like in action. Less than 100 days since GTR transferred into public control, we're delivering on the improvements commuters have been asking for.

"From next year, we’ll start getting rid of the dreaded ‘ironing board seats’ so passengers can enjoy comfier, more pleasant journeys on some of Britain's busiest commuter routes.

"We know fixing Britian’s railway is more than a refurb job and moves like this are just the start of putting our railway back on the right track. We've frozen fares for the first time in 30 years and publicly owned operators have added 76,000 extra seats on to the network. Once established, Great British Railways will focus relentlessly on delivering a reliable, modern service that puts passenger experience at the heart of everything it does"

About Time! After a decade of extreamly uncomfortable journeys on Thameslink. Why has it taken this long to finally implement these much-needed changes?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

My negative comment - there are more important things to fix.

My positive comment - well its a good start - well done. Thanks !

 

[Tobberz]

Do we presume this interior refit will be used to GBR-liveryify the 700s too?

 

[AM9]

About Time! After a decade of extreamly uncomfortable journeys on Thameslink. Why has it taken this long to finally implement these much-needed changes?

Because 10 years is quite a normal time before a refresh on stock that is designed for heavy commuter use. As for comfort, that is an individual matter.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Because 10 years is quite a normal time before a refresh on stock that is designed for heavy commuter use. As for comfort, that is an individual matter.

Indeed it's worth noting that contoured seats will be less comfortable to those who don't fit in the middle of one, as they will end up with the edge contour pushing into their back.

 

[rmHawk765]

Assuming the 717s are excluded from this?

 

[AM9]

Do we presume this interior refit will be used to GBR-liveryify the 700s too?

It would be much better if the refit didn't waste money on changing the colour of the unit.

 

[rmHawk765]

Definitely not. The 387 padding is a lot worse than the 700s

What? The 387s are far superior and us GN users are not happy about how many GN diagrams are now regularly operated by a 700/0.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Wednesday at 12:14 ==

I think the only route that has it now is Cambridge - London which could really be ran by the higher quality 387s.

Which is now impossible because those 387s are now with Southern... so I guess this is better than nothing.

 

[AM9]

What? The 387s are far superior and us GN users are not happy about how many GN diagrams are now regularly operated by a 700/0.

More important that a train is run at all rather than fussing about which class it is. How happy would "GN users" be if a shortage was just accommodated by dropping trains from the timetable.

 

[rmHawk765]

More important that a train is run at all rather than fussing about which class it is. How happy would "GN users" be if a shortage was just accommodated by dropping trains from the timetable.

Well yes, I'm not even going to get started on the current unreliability of GN services to Ely and Kings Lynn...

 

[bramling]

More important that a train is run at all rather than fussing about which class it is. How happy would "GN users" be if a shortage was just accommodated by dropping trains from the timetable.

There hasn’t really been a “shortage” though, has there?

GN had 21x class 365s which they chose to off-lease, with a further 19 potentially available if desired. More recently, 25x 387s have been transferred to Southern, ultimately contributing to some 465s and 466s being disposed of from Southeastern.

There’s also the matter of Southern choosing to off-lease 46x 455s. I’ll ignore the 313s as, unlike everything else mentioned, they were essentially life-expired.

I’m not necessarily advocating that deploying any of these trains for the benefit of GN services was or is the best option, however it’s a real stretch to claim there’s a “shortage”.

 

[NCT]

Why do the 'I want to travel in comfort and sod other people' brigade think they would be the ones travelling in comfort in such scenarios? They'd be equally likely to find themselves standing uncomfortably or unable to board.

 

[RUK]

It would be much better if the refit didn't waste money on changing the colour of the unit.

They’re having to spend money to buff the current livery now at any rate, because the white shows up dirt so much.

 

[yorksrob]

Excellent news that they're getting the seat back tables.

 

[Tetchytyke]

towards the centre such that only one area exists per unit and there is never any doubt whether it is in use.

The announcements couldn't be any clearer. The first class cabin which is active has announcements which state it is only for first class ticket holders. The cabin which is declassified has announcements saying anyone can sit there.

People who get "confused" do so because they think they've found a whizzy hack to travel in first class for free and get it wrong.

The only real confusion is between trains which are standard class only- where both cabins are declassified- and those which have first class. But you'd have the same issue even with one first class cabin in the middle.

My negative comment - there are more important things to fix.

Ten year refresh, it will have been scheduled in, all they've done is post a press release about how amazing GBR is.

 

[physics34]

I had understood from discussions quite a while back that the 'ironing board' seats' thin-ness was required by fire risk requirements - clearly either that was wrong or standards/requirements have changed.

Yes generally a lie and an excuse to use cheap seats

 

[Magdalia]

There has to come a point where providing for demand is outweighed by comfort.

The trade-off is not just between these, resilience matters too, which is why Thameslink needs to have 20tph peak through the core as an upper limit.

That’s all well and good, but how do I go from Sandy to London in relative comfort?

So? Flitwick also has a class 700 only service, and is nearly twice as busy as Sandy.

Worth noting that Cambridge is a similar distance and journey time from London, and has a half-hourly service of Electrostar trains throughout the day. Is that a “commuter journey” as well, and if so why the difference?

The "Cambridge Cruiser" fast services are borderline intercity, not being wildly less far out than Birmingham, but anything with stops between there and London is a commuter service. That some commuters (e.g. MKC and Reading) get incidental use of intercity services is really a bit moot. Indeed, the unsuitability of HSTs for Reading commuter loads has been complained about thoroughly over the years.

Both of these comparisons are absurd. Sandy is much closer to London (44 miles) than Cambridge (58 miles), the relevant comparator with Sandy is Royston (45 miles), which has mostly class 700 trains.

On the other hand Birmingham (113 miles) is almost twice as far from London as Cambridge.

The Kings Cross-Cambridge route is possibly unique in the number of different functions that it performs. The nearest equivalent I can think of is Brighton. It is a commuter route from Cambridge to London, but has an increasing amount of contra-flow commuting from London to Cambridge, and this is likely to increase further now that Cambridge South is open. It is a major route for Cambridge tourism, I have seen estimates that about 90% of Cambridge tourism is day trips, many of them by train. Then it also has a lot of Cambridge-London leisure travel, including lots of people going up to London late afternoon and returning late evening.

All these combined together put Cambridge-Kings Cross in the top 10 of station to station journey flows where one station is outside London. It is good that there are different trains to meet the requirements of different segments of a very big flow.

Electrostars are also commuter trains, and are utterly horrible when they get crowded - no chance of getting past people to get to the loo and difficult to get past to get off. The 700 is superb for this sort of thing. They eat 500 people off a platform in seconds due to the wide doors, standbacks and wide aisles, and you can still move through the train when they're on. A true commuter success story, just with a bit of a bland interior that appears to be being fixed.

I'd take a 700 over an Electrostar on Thameslink any day. Electrostars did briefly operate on it and they were really not very good at taking the crowds. I'd definitely take one over a 720!

For my own journeys I rarely use the "Cambridge Cruisers", most times I use Thameslink. For me a class 700 is preferable to a class 379/387, especially if the train is going to be crowded.

GN had 21x class 365s which they chose to off-lease, with a further 19 potentially available if desired.

Class 365s were redundant on the GN because they didn't have on board cameras for DOO.

 

[vuzzeho]

Glad to see it! That puts to bed a big complaint about the 700s, though I know people have others... I do wonder if the chance is going to be taken to make other internal modifications, like changing the light temperature.

 

[bramling]

Electrostars are also commuter trains, and are utterly horrible when they get crowded - no chance of getting past people to get to the loo and difficult to get past to get off. The 700 is superb for this sort of thing. They eat 500 people off a platform in seconds due to the wide doors, standbacks and wide aisles, and you can still move through the train when they're on. A true commuter success story, just with a bit of a bland interior that appears to be being fixed.

I'd take a 700 over an Electrostar on Thameslink any day. Electrostars did briefly operate on it and they were really not very good at taking the crowds. I'd definitely take one over a 720!

The "Cambridge Cruiser" fast services are borderline intercity, not being wildly less far out than Birmingham, but anything with stops between there and London is a commuter service. That some commuters (e.g. MKC and Reading) get incidental use of intercity services is really a bit moot. Indeed, the unsuitability of HSTs for Reading commuter loads has been complained about thoroughly over the years.

Okay so the Electrostar isn’t ideal when very crowded, I’m not going to dispute that. As it happens, the 365 was better in this respect. But reality is most of the time these services aren’t sufficiently crowded that people have trouble getting to the loo. Those who know they’re likely to need it have the option of positioning themselves nearby. For about 95% of the time an Electrostar is going to be a lot more comfortable, the seating is massively better for starters, not requiring sitting with a foot contorted over ducting like in the window seats in a 700.

For those comparatively few journeys where the train is very crowded, I see absolutely no reason why we can’t just say tough luck. If people choose to travel at a busy time then they have to accept it isn’t going to be pleasant. There’s numerous options available to them, including travelling at a different time, or moving to a different area.

 

[NCT]

We are barely through post-Covid recovery and economic activity is somewhat subdued. It's easy to be complacent about capacity until demand growth continues beyond current capacity.

 

[bramling]

Nope, first class there would interfere with the more important provisions for accessible travel, and elsewhere, first class is always problematic anyway (e.g. class 350 and 185).
There no need to alter the current arrangement anyway. The declassified first probably results in less than 1% loss of the crush load capacity. How many times have you not been able to board a class 700 through overloading?

I wouldn’t change the first arrangements, though I really can’t see it surviving long-term.

What *is* an issue is the overprovision of first on the 700/0 units, which I’m sure is how the declassification arrangement arose, but I’m sure you wouldn’t want to be losing that!

 

[NCT]

Ideally there would be more disciplined deployment of the 8-car and 12-car trains. 8-cars just on the inners with First Class stripped out. Outers exclusively worked by 12-cars with First Class at both ends.

If LU can keep S8s and S7s on their intended routes, there's no inherent reason why TSGN can't do the same.