365517,New Livery.

[southern442]

Not strictly true actually.

But you do have to pay Loads more for things that essentially come for free on Southern trains (namely 377/6's). In my opinion I think that GTR should at least try to add some form of tables as the 700's are totally inadequate for longer distance travel.

 

[physics34]

Have GTR actually critised the Class 700 as I've seen nothing other than a single comment in a magazine that wasn't even link to a person just 'GTR'.

well, true, iam only going by what i saw in that article... but however much you defend the 700s, they are inadequate for the people who will travel from Littlehampton and stations around there to and from London Bridge everyday.

 

[Goldfish62]

Have GTR actually critised the Class 700 as I've seen nothing other than a single comment in a magazine that wasn't even link to a person just 'GTR'.

Err, yes. Govia' s bid director was less than complimentary about the interiors. There was a whole article in Passenger Transport.

 

[Class377/5]

The general point Id like yo make is the comments are directed at the spec laid out by DfT rather than the 700s themselves.

Err, yes. Govia' s bid director was less than complimentary about the interiors. There was a whole article in Passenger Transport.

I'd not seen that actual article. First time anyone actually put a name to the quote as pervious comments I've made didn't give any info.

well, true, iam only going by what i saw in that article... but however much you defend the 700s, they are inadequate for the people who will travel from Littlehampton and stations around there to and from London Bridge everyday.

Interesting that th we same people criticizing the Class 700s are the people who choose to run the 700s to Littlehampton.

But you do have to pay Loads more for things that essentially come for free on Southern trains (namely 377/6's). In my opinion I think that GTR should at least try to add some form of tables as the 700's are totally inadequate for longer distance travel.

To be fair the 377/6 are a newer design with specs choose by Southern (and not well liked by passengers).

Standard class

That's not what was said. It was the whole units so my correct comment stands.

 

[samuelmorris]

Realistically, what needs changing on the 700s that they don't like? Just the tables?

 

[southern442]

Realistically, what needs changing on the 700s that they don't like? Just the tables?

Operators set standards for the network. Passengers expect those standards to be maintained. The Standard class seats for the 700s are hard, and do not have armrests or tables, yet they are in a 2+2 layout. By getting rid of seats less people can sit (obviously) and the people that do get to sit will have to sit in a lot less comfort as currently all BML stock have armrests and/or tables bar the 319/4s, and at least the seats on those trains were comfy.

The First Class is also appalling. I know that the Brighton Mainline isn't the best for First Class so we could let this one slide, but the 319's had an excellent 2+1 intercity style FC with large tables and fairly comfortable seats. The 442's also have a very good FC section, and the 377/4s and /5s have FC in compartments with slightly bigger seats, more legroom and power points. I'm not sure if the 700s have plug sockets, but what I can say is that FC passengers will be greeted with ironing boards for seats and a layout that should be used in standard, a far cry from the previous 319's.

In other words, most of the interior needs upgrading

 

[bramling]

Operators set standards for the network. Passengers expect those standards to be maintained. The Standard class seats for the 700s are hard, and do not have armrests or tables, yet they are in a 2+2 layout. By getting rid of seats less people can sit (obviously) and the people that do get to sit will have to sit in a lot less comfort as currently all BML stock have armrests and/or tables bar the 319/4s, and at least the seats on those trains were comfy.

The First Class is also appalling. I know that the Brighton Mainline isn't the best for First Class so we could let this one slide, but the 319's had an excellent 2+1 intercity style FC with large tables and fairly comfortable seats. The 442's also have a very good FC section, and the 377/4s and /5s have FC in compartments with slightly bigger seats, more legroom and power points. I'm not sure if the 700s have plug sockets, but what I can say is that FC passengers will be greeted with ironing boards for seats and a layout that should be used in standard, a far cry from the previous 319's.

In other words, most of the interior needs upgrading

The minimum benchmark standard of comfort should have been the earlier 377s. We have already gone slightly backwards in comfort standards with the refreshed class 365s. Standards of comfort should be moving forwards instead of backwards. Sadly once the Great Northern side joins Thameslink it's inevitable reliability will slip backwards as well.

 

[southern442]

The minimum benchmark standard of comfort should have been the earlier 377s. We have already gone slightly backwards in comfort standards with the refreshed class 365s. Standards of comfort should be moving forwards instead of backwards. Sadly once the Great Northern side joins Thameslink it's inevitable reliability will slip backwards as well.

Sometimes it makes me wonder if they do it deliberately to make customer experience less enjoyable :roll:

 

[samuelmorris]

Unfortunately I didn't get the opportunity to try out the 700 on demonstration, how do the seats realistically compare to the 377/6 (so presumably also 387) and, say, 360s/450s?

Could the tables issue not just be solved by fitting seatback tables to the 700s before they start building them en mass? Or has someone explicitly said no to that idea?

 

[southern442]

Unfortunately I didn't get the opportunity to try out the 700 on demonstration, how do the seats realistically compare to the 377/6 (so presumably also 387) and, say, 360s/450s?

Could the tables issue not just be solved by fitting seatback tables to the 700s before they start building them en mass? Or has someone explicitly said no to that idea?

I'm not sure but I think someone has said that it wouldn't be feasible.
Either way we will be ignored.

 

[jon0844]

We were told it would slow boarding and alighting, which maybe true during the peaks when every millisecond counts.

But fitting seat back tables wouldn't exactly be difficult or that expensive. The 365s still have them, thankfully.

 

[southern442]

We were told it would slow boarding and alighting, which maybe true during the peaks when every millisecond counts.

But fitting seat back tables wouldn't exactly be difficult or that expensive. The 365s still have them, thankfully.

I'm pretty sure that most people would rather have slow boarding and alighting than no sort of comfort whatsoever. If it was just half tables and fold down seat back ones most people would be happier.

 

[jon0844]

Passengers might, but given the huge demands of the core when everything joins up, I can see how the DfT and others might be rather concerned about people faffing around trying to pack away their stuff to let the person in the window seat out and so on.

Of course you could ask why anyone thought such an idea was going to work, as I have a real fear that the service is going to go tits up rather too regularly. Even if the rolling stock is nice and reliable, ATO works perfectly, the signalling doesn't mess up at any point on the route(s), I think the mixed service patterns will cause all sorts of problems given everyone shares the same two platforms.

But, hey, I'm happy to be proved wrong.

 

[southern442]

Passengers might, but given the huge demands of the core when everything joins up, I can see how the DfT and others might be rather concerned about people faffing around trying to pack away their stuff to let the person in the window seat out and so on.

Of course you could ask why anyone thought such an idea was going to work, as I have a real fear that the service is going to go tits up rather too regularly. Even if the rolling stock is nice and reliable, ATO works perfectly, the signalling doesn't mess up at any point on the route(s), I think the mixed service patterns will cause all sorts of problems given everyone shares the same two platforms.

But, hey, I'm happy to be proved wrong.

Well I'm not trying to prove you wrong, but in this day and age the DfT come up with a lot of stuff that can easily be criticised, stuff which they claim to be benefits to service when in fact the general public would rather it not happen, yet they press ahead anyway which annoys people.

 

[jon0844]

We're both pretty much saying the same thing.

 

[southern442]

We're both pretty much saying the same thing.

I guess so
The problem is that the DfT want to do something to improve it but when people don't want it they will do it anyway as they still see it as an improvement :roll:

 

[jon0844]

More that the DfT thinks it is necessary to do something to speed up the services, and a price worth paying. But the only benefit, if any, is at the busiest times of the day and only for a few stations on the route.

Sure, you can't ask passengers to lock away the seatback tables in the core, but I am not sure it will be such a big disaster and the lack of any tables will be a far bigger problem in the long run, and will most likely result in them being added at some point in the future when they get a refresh.

Of course that could be many years from their initial introduction date.

 

[Goldfish62]

The general point Id like yo make is the comments are directed at the spec laid out by DfT rather than the 700s themselves.



I'd not seen that actual article. First time anyone actually put a name to the quote as pervious comments I've made didn't give any info.



Interesting that th we same people criticizing the Class 700s are the people who choose to run the 700s to Littlehampton.



To be fair the 377/6 are a newer design with specs choose by Southern (and not well liked by passengers).



That's not what was said. It was the whole units so my correct comment stands.

I'm afraid you've lost me now.

 

[Class377/5]

I'm afraid you've lost me now.

Pointing out your comments over the class 700 was wrong.

 

[Goldfish62]

Pointing out your comments over the class 700 was wrong.

I realise that, but what did I get wrong?

 

[tsr]

To be fair the 377/6 are a newer design with specs choose by Southern (and not well liked by passengers).

I'm afraid that's not really the case. The trains are not especially enjoyed for longer-distance express services such as those to Brighton, principally because First Class is obscurely-marked and it's often better to have 12 coaches of 377 rather than 10, 8 vs 5, etc. However, Metro-area passengers have really liked them and I have been on the receiving end of a lot of praise concerning them. People generally only have a couple of niggles - about the toilet bowls and PA feedback, mainly - which aren't really too major.

However, these are outweighed by the seating layout, extra coach compared to a 455 unit, luggage/bike/wheelchair spaces, and power sockets, all of which are massive positives for the passenger. Even the seats aren't bad for longer runs, though the new ones on the Class 700s seem to be a considerable step down on comfort, and so, whilst they are roughly the same shape and size, the similarities really end there.

 

[bramling]

I'm afraid that's not really the case. The trains are not especially enjoyed for longer-distance express services such as those to Brighton, principally because First Class is obscurely-marked and it's often better to have 12 coaches of 377 rather than 10, 8 vs 5, etc. However, Metro-area passengers have really liked them and I have been on the receiving end of a lot of praise concerning them. People generally only have a couple of niggles - about the toilet bowls and PA feedback, mainly - which aren't really too major.

However, these are outweighed by the seating layout, extra coach compared to a 455 unit, luggage/bike/wheelchair spaces, and power sockets, all of which are massive positives for the passenger. Even the seats aren't bad for longer runs, though the new ones on the Class 700s seem to be a considerable step down on comfort, and so, whilst they are roughly the same shape and size, the similarities really end there.

I did Victoria to Warnham on 2x377/6 and I wasn't impressed with the seating comfort. As you say, OK for short distances, but not good for longer journeys. The only benefit was the train was 10 cars.

I dread to think what the class 700 may be like if these are less comfortable than the 377/6. The class 700 is certainly not a metro train when used for journeys like Royston to London or Cambridge to Gatwick.

 

[physics34]

I did Victoria to Warnham on 2x377/6 and I wasn't impressed with the seating comfort. As you say, OK for short distances, but not good for longer journeys. The only benefit was the train was 10 cars.

I dread to think what the class 700 may be like if these are less comfortable than the 377/6. The class 700 is certainly not a metro train when used for journeys like Royston to London or Cambridge to Gatwick.

its basics like, passengers who will get on at, say, Arundel going to St Pancras every morning will find them a step down on a 377........for a start there will be nowhere to put their cup of coffee, let alone nowhere to put their laptops and hard seats compared to the 2x2 seating on 377s.

Still wondering if GTR will have any scope in altering the layout even though the first 12 cars are already being built and i presume all the seating and spec has already been ordered.

The layout is very adequate for Caterham/Tattenham/Epsom/Sutton to Bedford/Peterborough/Cambridge (stopping) services and will be an improvement on 319s but not so on the longer distance Brighton/East Grinstead/Littlehampton services.

 

[southern442]

It's as if the DfT are trying to make it a misery for people!

 

[bramling]

its basics like, passengers who will get on at, say, Arundel going to St Pancras every morning will find them a step down on a 377........for a start there will be nowhere to put their cup of coffee, let alone nowhere to put their laptops and hard seats compared to the 2x2 seating on 377s.

Still wondering if GTR will have any scope in altering the layout even though the first 12 cars are already being built and i presume all the seating and spec has already been ordered.

The layout is very adequate for Caterham/Tattenham/Epsom/Sutton to Bedford/Peterborough/Cambridge (stopping) services and will be an improvement on 319s but not so on the longer distance Brighton/East Grinstead/Littlehampton services.

I guarantee there will be a backlash from places like Royston, Hitchin, Huntingdon (etc). And rightly so, as a new train should deliver improved comfort over what came before, not represent a downgrade. Huntingdon to St Pancras and return will mean roughly 2 hours a day sitting on a hard seat, people will be less than impressed especially when they remember the cost of their season ticket. As a minimum the new trains should be no less comfortable than a class 365 or 377/5.

It's all very well saying the new trains will increase the chances of getting a seat due to the 12-car formations, but in reality most or even all people on these journeys will already be getting a seat on the current trains, even during the high peak. From Hitchin and Stevenage there are very few AM peak trains where it's impossible to get a seat now.

 

[Class377/5]

I'm afraid that's not really the case. The trains are not especially enjoyed for longer-distance express services such as those to Brighton, principally because First Class is obscurely-marked and it's often better to have 12 coaches of 377 rather than 10, 8 vs 5, etc. However, Metro-area passengers have really liked them and I have been on the receiving end of a lot of praise concerning them. People generally only have a couple of niggles - about the toilet bowls and PA feedback, mainly - which aren't really too major.

However, these are outweighed by the seating layout, extra coach compared to a 455 unit, luggage/bike/wheelchair spaces, and power sockets, all of which are massive positives for the passenger. Even the seats aren't bad for longer runs, though the new ones on the Class 700s seem to be a considerable step down on comfort, and so, whilst they are roughly the same shape and size, the similarities really end there.

No the 377/6 are a newer design. The 700s were spec was give in 2008, the 377/6 in 2012 hence my stating the five car 377 are a newer design. That is simply a fact.

And again the layout for the 700s was driven by the DfT specs where as Southern choose the new Electrostar spec.

I love the fact people are stating the 700s aren'the suitable after spending minimal time on the mock up when most haven'the spent any real time on them. Seem most people are rather satisfied with the 387 outside the rail forums (ie commuters) too.

I guarantee there will be a backlash from places like Royston, Hitchin, Huntingdon (etc). And rightly so, as a new train should deliver improved comfort over what came before, not represent a downgrade. Huntingdon to St Pancras and return will mean roughly 2 hours a day sitting on a hard seat, people will be less than impressed especially when they remember the cost of their season ticket. As a minimum the new trains should be no less comfortable than a class 365 or 377/5.

It's all very well saying the new trains will increase the chances of getting a seat due to the 12-car formations, but in reality most or even all people on these journeys will already be getting a seat on the current trains, even during the high peak. From Hitchin and Stevenage there are very few AM peak trains where it's impossible to get a seat now.

After spending many hours on 377, 387 and 700 seats, the 700 win hands down with 387s second place.

 

[jon0844]

I think the 700s will be just fine. My only complaint is the lack of seat back tables, which is a pretty minor issue (and one that can be rectified either before introduction or during their life).