Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
It (same one as on the 195/331 and as was going to be on the 197 until TfW paid extra (!) for Sophias) is noticeably better, though seat shape is always a bit subjective.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Thameslink to replace cushions on class 700 ironing board seats to improve comfort.. Finally..
- Thread starter physics34
- Start date
It (same one as on the 195/331 and as was going to be on the 197 until TfW paid extra (!) for Sophias) is noticeably better, though seat shape is always a bit subjective.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
There's never going to be a one size fits all solution to be fair, but you are right that some seat cushions might do a better job of compromising for the majority. I'm quite short, whereas the person currently sat opposite me on the train looks like a prop forward - I imagine if we could design our own perfect seats they would look very different!
Reminds me of the US Air Force designing a seat for planes that was designed for the average height and build of all pilots - but of course no pilot is perfectly average so it didn't fit anybody. They then went for adjustable seats so each pilot could customise, but somehow I don't think that's an option on trains
Transilien
Member
Maybe in first classReminds me of the US Air Force designing a seat for planes that was designed for the average height and build of all pilots - but of course no pilot is perfectly average so it didn't fit anybody. They then went for adjustable seats so each pilot could customise, but somehow I don't think that's an option on trains
Not yet had the pleasure of a 730, but plenty of journeys in 350s & 450s. The Desiros do ride better than the equivalent Derby offerings but their plug doors are painfully slow.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The 730s have harder seats and a higher density layout than the 350s, but that does mean about 20% more seats in a 240m train. However they do still seem to be quite popular despite the theoretically lower comfort, and they do have some upsides such as huge windows.
Here i am to pop up and complain that the lighting is too bright and harsh lol
I'm biased towards the 350s, but I do have to say that other than the ride quality at speed, I think 730s are very very nice trains. I usually take Avanti, but if I'm on LNWR, I know that (provided I get a seat), I'm going to have a comfortable journey.
Mikey C
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 8,232
I'm not sure that's a fair comparison, as at City Thameslink (and London Bridge, Blackfriars, Farrington, STP) people can spread themselves out down the platform BEFORE boarding. And once they board, they'll generally stay close to that door/carriage. People don't get on the 3rd carriage, then walk through to the 9th carriage, when you can do that on the platform. If part of the train looks rammed, you quickly go down the platform to find a quieter part of the train.
GEC465
Member
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2016
- Messages
- 413
730s definitely have better legroom than the 350s. Much rather that than a 350
In regards to Thameslink 700s I imagine the legroom shouldn't be impacted too much
Get tinted lens glasses.
Often, there's not much of an opportunity to:
a) walk down the platform, especially at Farringdon, or London Bridge as the platform is often clogged with those waiting for their train, 2 minutes later.
B) as a consequence of the above situation, and the knowledge that unless a train comes in with standees pressed flat up against the doors, the amount of standing space in every car means that there's room for shuffling about and squeezing up to accommodate quite a few more. That's why the 700s have so much standee space by design, so that only in the most extreme case of overloading will the dwell take longer than the alloted tome (45s ?), as the stream of core trains would be broken.
They really do provide near conveyor belt clearance.
bramling
Veteran Member
I use blue light blocking glasses especially when travelling in the evening. This applies on any train with LED lighting.
But … it irritates me that I should have to do this.
It’s not good for health to be exposed to blue light late in the day.
I never understand why some people seem to want lighting so bright. There was an almighty rift at my work some while ago over lighting levels in a shared office, where one particular person point blank insisted on having it lit to ridiculous levels which was giving everyone else headaches.
The problem, as always is that no one colour temperature or illumination level satisfies everbody. There's also the fact that many have to drive on reaching their train destination, so winding down their alertness has a safety dimension.
bramling
Veteran Member
Much more of a safety dimension if people don’t sleep well. They could be driving, doing safety-critical work, or operating machinery the following day.
That is a risk of travelling so late, including driving, then expecting/trying to get to sleep too quickly. If being alert is a regular critical requirement, then overall lifestyle needs to be compatible. In your case, you have fixed it simply by acquiring corrective spectacles.
bramling
Veteran Member
Not everyone has the immediate choice of being able to travel at a different time, first and foremost shiftworkers returning from some kind of late shift.
I shouldn’t be having to spend money on corrective glasses simply because rail operators fail to provide the right light, but more importantly how many people even know of the existence of such things as blocking glasses? If we’re saying that a substantial proportion of people probably *should* be wearing them to mitigate against blue light late at night, what’s the point of having that lighting on the train in the first place?
It’s interesting that if you take something like a class 387, which has individually controllable reading lamps above each seat, it’s quite rare to see them on. When boarding one at King’s Cross I will always go round a switch any off that have been left on, however it’s actually quite rare to encounter any on. There’s no discernible difference in usage on the 379s, which for the time being retain dimmer main lighting than the 387s (I don’t think the 379s have LED lighting, though am not fully sure). This does seem to indicate that most people don’t seem to want bright lighting.
One nice feature of the class 700 is actually the “standby lighting” mode, which some drivers select. It does make a positive difference to the ambience as the colour tone appears different. In first at least this is the nearest a class 700 comes to being able to be described as pleasant.
Your aversion to blue content in lighting judging by measures you take seems to be on the extreme end of the scale. Equally,there are many who need brighter and whiter illumination owing to eye defects such as cataracts *, so providing UV levels in lighting are low, (led lighting is free from UV).
Optimum lighting levels for the public varies so there is no single universal 'correct' level or colour temperature.
* There are anou 3.5 million sufferers with cataracts in the UK
rmHawk765
Member
It's bizarre why this can't just be an automatic day/night switch...
bramling
Veteran Member
I suspect the reason is that drivers aren’t really supposed to be using it.
The way it seems to work is once selected it remains that way until either someone changes it, though given only a small minority of trains run like this presumably it must revert back of its own accord at some point.
Clearly there’s a subset of drivers who go into the TMS and select it whenever they take over a train. And for that they should get a gold medal.
By the few that might want it.