Class 387

[AM9]

What Kings Lynn to Brighton service would that be? No much thing is proposed. Its Cambridge to Brighton.

Ooops, yes of course. I suppose it will be 377s that will go KGX to KLN. That makes the average from Cambridge to BTN a little shorter.

People are too hooked on max length journies on Thameslink when actually most passengers travel half way at most. Is just the trains that do the actually distance not the passengers.

At last, somebody else who sees it as it is, - a provisioning decision. There's always the few who want to go from end to end, possible some are subscribed to this forum, but hardly typical of paying passengers.

 

[Class377/5]

Ooops, yes of course. I suppose it will be 377s that will go KGX to KLN. That makes the average from Cambridge to BTN a little shorter.

Just a little.

At last, somebody else who sees it as it is, - a provisioning decision. There's always the few who want to go from end to end, possible some are subscribed to this forum, but hardly typical of paying passengers.

I've done Bedford to Brighton more than once (mixture of work and personal). I have heard of people doing the whole route in one go, but that's because they've wanted to do the ride to the seaside in one jounery and choice of unit wasn't important. After all Thameslink isn't the quickest way anyway.

 

[The Box Photter]

In response to AM9 - The term "Northerner" was meant to indicate someone who gets onto a Thameslink train further north than St Albans. I have no option of getting on a stopping train, but currently there are usually a choice of seats available for me in the morning as I board the train at Flitwick. I also choose to board my homeward train at Blackfriars, which also pretty much guarantees a seat.

Given the infrequency of your use of the service and the fact that you seem always to get a seat, you clearly aren't travelling at peak times.

The main problem, as I see it is that the DfT's definition of "comfort" means more space to stand up in and this has been taken on by GoVia as representing a significant upgrade in service provision. To take that argument ad absurdia would surely suggest that even more "comfort" could be provided by removing the seating altogether. When the DLR was extended to Bank, the requirement to get more people onto each train was solved by having perimeter seating, which allowed more standing passengers. The problem was that the space allotted to each seated passenger was too narrow and as a seated passenger, your view was normally the crotch or backside of the person standing less than a foot in front of you. Thankfully, the powers that be saw sense and ordered new trains allowing three-car trains to operate and a return to non-perimeter seating.

I accept that for most people, having to stand for the non-stop journey from St Albans to St Pancras isn't that difficult, but lessening the quality of the journey experience for seated passengers in an attempt to squeeze on some more standing passengers seems to me to be a step backwards. I think it would be more appropriate to ensure sufficient procurement of rolling stock to allow 12-car trains as the norm and the replacement of so-called 1st class seating to allow more standard class passengers to get a seat.

Ask any regular commuter what they'd most like to see as an improvement and I'd be willing to bet "I'd like to get a seat" would be very high on their wish list, but that wouldn't stretch to "I'd be happy with the standard of posterior comfort offered by a park bench and I really enjoy rubbing thighs with my fellow commuters".

 

[Class377/5]

In response to AM9 - The term "Northerner" was meant to indicate someone who gets onto a Thameslink train further north than St Albans. I have no option of getting on a stopping train, but currently there are usually a choice of seats available for me in the morning as I board the train at Flitwick. I also choose to board my homeward train at Blackfriars, which also pretty much guarantees a seat.

Given the infrequency of your use of the service and the fact that you seem always to get a seat, you clearly aren't travelling at peak times.

The main problem, as I see it is that the DfT's definition of "comfort" means more space to stand up in and this has been taken on by GoVia as representing a significant upgrade in service provision. To take that argument ad absurdia would surely suggest that even more "comfort" could be provided by removing the seating altogether.

New franchises work on quality where new stock rates higher than old stock. Will be interesting to see how this applies to the new Northern.

When the DLR was extended to Bank, the requirement to get more people onto each train was solved by having perimeter seating, which allowed more standing passengers. The problem was that the space allotted to each seated passenger was too narrow and as a seated passenger, your view was normally the crotch or backside of the person standing less than a foot in front of you. Thankfully, the powers that be saw sense and ordered new trains allowing three-car trains to operate and a return to non-perimeter seating.

Thats not what happened with the DLR. The reason for the removal of seats was due to gross overcrowding due to Canary Wharf commuters and the late opening of the Jubilee line. The 3 car trains came a lot later once the crowing levels started getting very high again.

I accept that for most people, having to stand for the non-stop journey from St Albans to St Pancras isn't that difficult, but lessening the quality of the journey experience for seated passengers in an attempt to squeeze on some more standing passengers seems to me to be a step backwards. I think it would be more appropriate to ensure sufficient procurement of rolling stock to allow 12-car trains as the norm and the replacement of so-called 1st class seating to allow more standard class passengers to get a seat.

Ask any regular commuter what they'd most like to see as an improvement and I'd be willing to bet "I'd like to get a seat" would be very high on their wish list, but that wouldn't stretch to "I'd be happy with the standard of posterior comfort offered by a park bench and I really enjoy rubbing thighs with my fellow commuters".

Let's not forget that St Albans to St Pancras isn't long enough for requirement to try and provide seating on heavily crowded service as trips have to be over 20mins. Fact that large numbers change at West Hampstead also doesn't help.

 

[Minstral25]

It's not about journey length. My journeys are typically 35-45 minutes on 377 or 387 stock (Redhill to London). I like to take a coffee or some work onto the train so that the half hour is suitably used.

The 387 are ideal in this respect, small drop down tables and arm rests to define my space and that of my neighbour. They are also a great compromise as there is a lot of space in aisles for standing on busier trains with good grab handles. In fact IMO a perfect compromise for this type of route (outer suburban).

The 700's score very negatively for me (I tried out the mock at EXCEL).
1) Lack of table to sit coffee or rest laptop/Phone
2) Lack of armrest to define my space against neighbour
3) Seats closer together as arm rest space is lost - so always squashed with neighbour
4) Possibly perception but seats have much less leg room (at 6'3" a big issue)

It would not lose much space to add armrests and drop down table are essential in the modern world. It's not just for long distance services but also for shorter services from Redhill to London that this type of requirement should be provided. Interesting talking to London TravelWatch the other day they agreed and couldn't understand why it wasn't specified. Too late now of course.

The fact they didn't add on extras oft used in a modern world such as WiFi is beyond me, especially as signal along the BML is awful. But they did add plugs for those less able to plan ahead and charge their equipment which to me is far less necessary than all the points above.

 

[21C101]

It's not about journey length. My journeys are typically 35-45 minutes on 377 or 387 stock (Redhill to London). I like to take a coffee or some work onto the train so that the half hour is suitably used.

The 387 are ideal in this respect, small drop down tables and arm rests to define my space and that of my neighbour. They are also a great compromise as there is a lot of space in aisles for standing on busier trains with good grab handles. In fact IMO a perfect compromise for this type of route (outer suburban).

The 700's score very negatively for me (I tried out the mock at EXCEL).
1) Lack of table to sit coffee or rest laptop/Phone
2) Lack of armrest to define my space against neighbour
3) Seats closer together as arm rest space is lost - so always squashed with neighbour
4) Possibly perception but seats have much less leg room (at 6'3" a big issue)

It would not lose much space to add armrests and drop down table are essential in the modern world. It's not just for long distance services but also for shorter services from Redhill to London that this type of requirement should be provided. Interesting talking to London TravelWatch the other day they agreed and couldn't understand why it wasn't specified. Too late now of course.

The fact they didn't add on extras oft used in a modern world such as WiFi is beyond me, especially as signal along the BML is awful. But they did add plugs for those less able to plan ahead and charge their equipment which to me is far less necessary than all the points above.

Looking at the 700 mockups it looks like there is a blanking panel between the seats that would have room for an arm. They do look very closely spaced.

I agree that armrests are an essential to stop agressive and insensitive people invading your bodyspace. In this age of equality it is very strange that this is overlooked as Women in particular (but also men occasionally) suffer from unpleasant characters (perverts) who use them as a cushion if there is no armrest to stop them (the type who insist on sitting right up close to you in the middle seat of a bay of three on a 319 despite the outer seat being unoccupied).

I think the thing that is unspoken here is that nearly all the people who decide what the seats will be are senior managers with a free first class status pass for life or senior highly paid civil servants who can afford a first class seaaon ticket so don't really give a XXXX about the plebs in standard class, whether conciously or unconciously so.

 

[AM9]

In response to AM9 - The term "Northerner" was meant to indicate someone who gets onto a Thameslink train further north than St Albans. I have no option of getting on a stopping train, but currently there are usually a choice of seats available for me in the morning as I board the train at Flitwick. I also choose to board my homeward train at Blackfriars, which also pretty much guarantees a seat.

It wasn't obvious to me that people in Bedfordshire call themselves 'Northerner'. Most of those on this forum who describe themselves by that label are from Northern Rail territory, and accordingly have a different axe to grind. As you board at Flitwick, you get a peak service of fasts, (Luton, Harpenden, St Albans then fast to St Pancras), and 'slow' (all stops to St Albans then fast to London). With the exception of the 07:32, none of them stop at West Hampstead. There is only 8 minutes difference between the fasts and slows. I don't see the relevance of you getting seats travelling in either direction.

Given the infrequency of your use of the service and the fact that you seem always to get a seat, you clearly aren't travelling at peak times.

I said "On the occasions that I travel on a very expensive anytime ticket, I just get on a train of my choice, (I've never failed to get on a peak service train at SAC because of overcrowding)". I didn't say that I necessarily get a seat. The trains that I have been on are the 07:38, 07:44, 07:55 & 08:02. They didn't look like off-peak trains and I did have to pay full price for an Anytime ticket.

The main problem, as I see it is that the DfT's definition of "comfort" means more space to stand up in and this has been taken on by GoVia as representing a significant upgrade in service provision....

I agree that the DfT's rules don't satisfy everybody, and the commercially minded TOCs are eager to construct their offer to maximise their profit. In general terms though, considering the Governments Laissez Faire attitude to the detail of passenger comfort, (they call it 'competition and choice'), they do get the genertal shape of things right.

I accept that for most people, having to stand for the non-stop journey from St Albans to St Pancras isn't that difficult, but lessening the quality of the journey experience for seated passengers in an attempt to squeeze on some more standing passengers seems to me to be a step backwards. I think it would be more appropriate to ensure sufficient procurement of rolling stock to allow 12-car trains as the norm and the replacement of so-called 1st class seating to allow more standard class passengers to get a seat.

Well the 700s will be in quantities to enable almost all non-metro trains to be 12-car, and there will be more seats overall, and more standing space. But that comes at the expense of seats that are designed for the average passenger's journey time, although there will be the inevitable complaints from those who think that they should have something better.

Ask any regular commuter what they'd most like to see as an improvement and I'd be willing to bet "I'd like to get a seat" would be very high on their wish list, but that wouldn't stretch to "I'd be happy with the standard of posterior comfort offered by a park bench and I really enjoy rubbing thighs with my fellow commuters".

If you ask enough commuters to get any meaningful response, what they would like, I imagine it would be a list of things possibly in this order of preference
1) I would like to have enough trains to get me to my destination at about the right time with a reasonable travelling time
2) I would like to be able to get on the trains (i.e. not too crowded to get on)
3) I would like a seat
4) I would like a firm/soft/springy/high back/low back seat with more room/armrests/more legroom/a table/power points/USB charging outlets/windows that align with the seats/etc./etc....

The last one is an insatiable endless list and is just people indulging themselves because they were asked. Mmmm... I've seen some of those 'demands' on this very forum.

 

[Bishopstone]

I think the thing that is unspoken here is that nearly all the people who decide what the seats will be are senior managers with a free first class status pass for life or senior highly paid civil servants who can afford a first class seaaon ticket so don't really give a XXXX about the plebs in standard class, whether conciously or unconciously so.

In which case, they didn't do a very good job for themselves with the class 387.

 

[Techniquest]

The 700's score very negatively for me (I tried out the mock at EXCEL).
1) Lack of table to sit coffee or rest laptop/Phone

Oh that could be great fun then with regard to 1) as I do use the tables for my coffee/other drinks quite a lot on my travels. I also use the tables quite a bit for doing work, even if that work is just updating my notebook.

I'm less concerned about the other points you made, although the lack of space between one seat and another concerns me. Of course, upon actually trying the 700s out it might be that I find there's plenty of room. We'll see when they enter squadron service and I get the opportunity to pop down there.

But they did add plugs for those less able to plan ahead and charge their equipment which to me is far less necessary than all the points above.

Right, so you're suggesting those of us who use laptops or even smartphones quite a bit during the day don't deserve power points? I particularly take issue with the emboldened part of the above quote. We don't all work in an environment where you can soak up the company's power supply as much as you want. Quite the opposite with my lot, even a short burst of charge for your phone when it's died on you would get extreme tutting and moaning, finger-pointing and, of course, the same sort of attitude you've had in the above quote. Power consumption with my phone varies a lot during an average day, and when you leave the house on a certain percentage (let's say 40%) one day, the next day that may well not be enough to get even half way through the day. This is, I should add, with turning off the device for almost the entire 50-60 minute commute, with the screen brightness turned down, connectivity turned off when not in use, turned off when on shift, etc. When you're out of the house for nearly 10 hours a day, and your employer doesn't like you using the electricity supply, and your colleagues moan that your use of it takes money out of the bonuses pot, you've got to take action. Charge it before you leave, you say, not an option!

 

[LBSCR Times]

I think it would be more appropriate to ensure sufficient procurement of rolling stock to allow 12-car trains as the norm and the replacement of so-called 1st class seating to allow more standard class passengers to get a seat.

Therein lies another problem with joining services up from both sides of the Thames. First Class is well used on the Brighton line, it can be difficult to get a first class seat on some northbound peak services from Three Bridges, and similar on southbound peak services from Blackfriars (because they join at City Thameslink).
And yes, RPI do carry out spot checks too!

 

[The Box Photter]

It wasn't obvious to me that people in Bedfordshire call themselves 'Northerner'. Most of those on this forum who describe themselves by that label are from Northern Rail territory, and accordingly have a different axe to grind. As you board at Flitwick, you get a peak service of fasts, (Luton, Harpenden, St Albans then fast to St Pancras), and 'slow' (all stops to St Albans then fast to London). With the exception of the 07:32, none of them stop at West Hampstead. There is only 8 minutes difference between the fasts and slows. I don't see the relevance of you getting seats travelling in either direction.



I said "On the occasions that I travel on a very expensive anytime ticket, I just get on a train of my choice, (I've never failed to get on a peak service train at SAC because of overcrowding)". I didn't say that I necessarily get a seat. The trains that I have been on are the 07:38, 07:44, 07:55 & 08:02. They didn't look like off-peak trains and I did have to pay full price for an Anytime ticket.



I agree that the DfT's rules don't satisfy everybody, and the commercially minded TOCs are eager to construct their offer to maximise their profit. In general terms though, considering the Governments Laissez Faire attitude to the detail of passenger comfort, (they call it 'competition and choice'), they do get the genertal shape of things right.



Well the 700s will be in quantities to enable almost all non-metro trains to be 12-car, and there will be more seats overall, and more standing space. But that comes at the expense of seats that are designed for the average passenger's journey time, although there will be the inevitable complaints from those who think that they should have something better.



If you ask enough commuters to get any meaningful response, what they would like, I imagine it would be a list of things possibly in this order of preference
1) I would like to have enough trains to get me to my destination at about the right time with a reasonable travelling time
2) I would like to be able to get on the trains (i.e. not too crowded to get on)
3) I would like a seat
4) I would like a firm/soft/springy/high back/low back seat with more room/armrests/more legroom/a table/power points/USB charging outlets/windows that align with the seats/etc./etc....

The last one is an insatiable endless list and is just people indulging themselves because they were asked. Mmmm... I've seen some of those 'demands' on this very forum.

You make many reasonable points here. I'm aware that from Flitwick we have a reasonable choice of services. With the exception of the 0712 from Bedford, all the morning peak hours trains into London stop at Flitwick (although their spacing between 0700 and 0800 is a bit random).

I'll keep an eye out for you on the 0802 from St Albans

The big problem is the issue with competition and choice. You suggest that the specification of the trains is dictated by these factors, along with profit for the operator and shareholders. The crux of your argument is the complete fallacy that we have any choice or that competition exists. The specification of the trains (Class 700) wasn't laid down by GoVia (in fact, indications are that they're not too keen) or by any passenger/stakeholder group that would actually have to use the trains.

Essentially, the Class 700s are medium distance commuter trains that need to turn into tube trains between St Pancras and London Bridge. As we can't put the genie back into the bottle regarding the "popularity" of the Core for passengers as an alternative to the Northern Line, there should have been extensive capacity and flow management studies carried out to decide on the most effective train design.

Assuming a 20 or 24 Tph service though the core and allowing for the current expected journey time of around 12 minutes between St Pancras and Blackfriars, it seems to me that the design of the trains has been unreasonably skewed towards providing maximum standing capacity for the benefit of those passengers who will spend the least time on the train.

It doesn't matter how wide you make the gangway, passengers on a crowded tube-style train will always congregate near the doors, for fear of not being able to exit at their chosen stop. If you don't believe me, have a look at passenger behaviour on the Circle Line. The trains are wide, with perimeter seating and no doors at the end of each carriage. People still stand next to the doors, especially if they have bags/cases or are too short to reach the handrails further down.

The intention once the Class 700s enter service and full implementation of 24 Tph though the core is to have station dwell times of 30 seconds. Passengers won't want to take the risk of missing their station and so the middle of the carriages will be empty, whilst the door areas will be packed.

It can't be too late to change the seating specification as only part of one unit has been built. NOW is the time for GoVia and DfT to listen to their (captive) customers and re-think the seating design.

 

[physics34]

Oh that could be great fun then with regard to 1) as I do use the tables for my coffee/other drinks quite a lot on my travels. I also use the tables quite a bit for doing work, even if that work is just updating my notebook.

I'm less concerned about the other points you made, although the lack of space between one seat and another concerns me. Of course, upon actually trying the 700s out it might be that I find there's plenty of room. We'll see when they enter squadron service and I get the opportunity to pop down there.



Right, so you're suggesting those of us who use laptops or even smartphones quite a bit during the day don't deserve power points? I particularly take issue with the emboldened part of the above quote. We don't all work in an environment where you can soak up the company's power supply as much as you want. Quite the opposite with my lot, even a short burst of charge for your phone when it's died on you would get extreme tutting and moaning, finger-pointing and, of course, the same sort of attitude you've had in the above quote. Power consumption with my phone varies a lot during an average day, and when you leave the house on a certain percentage (let's say 40%) one day, the next day that may well not be enough to get even half way through the day. This is, I should add, with turning off the device for almost the entire 50-60 minute commute, with the screen brightness turned down, connectivity turned off when not in use, turned off when on shift, etc. When you're out of the house for nearly 10 hours a day, and your employer doesn't like you using the electricity supply, and your colleagues moan that your use of it takes money out of the bonuses pot, you've got to take action. Charge it before you leave, you say, not an option!

the seats are so tightly spaced you wont have room to look at your laptop anyway!

Not good for people travelling from Littlehampton/Worthing/Brighton/East Grinstead when they want to check on their emails on the way to and from work.... And their coffee will be on the floor too....very easy to knock over.

petition needed to the DfT to change this.

 

[Techniquest]

Fortunately for me I would normally be travelling off-peak, so not quite the same issue for me with the amount of seats etc, it's mostly the lack of table and the attitude I pointed out previously that got to me!

 

[Kite159]

I like the 387s, good legroom in the airline style seats. I just need to try and get on one when it can get up to some speed, rather than going slowly between east Croydon and le elephant.

3 sets seem to be in use today (107/114; 113/112 plus a third unknown.)

 

[21C101]

We don't all work in an environment where you can soak up the company's power supply as much as you want. Quite the opposite with my lot, even a short burst of charge for your phone when it's died on you would get extreme tutting and moaning, finger-pointing and, of course, the same sort of attitude you've had in the above quote. Power consumption with my phone varies a lot during an average day, and when you leave the house on a certain percentage (let's say 40%) one day, the next day that may well not be enough to get even half way through the day. This is, I should add, with turning off the device for almost the entire 50-60 minute commute, with the screen brightness turned down, connectivity turned off when not in use, turned off when on shift, etc. When you're out of the house for nearly 10 hours a day, and your employer doesn't like you using the electricity supply, and your colleagues moan that your use of it takes money out of the bonuses pot, you've got to take action. Charge it before you leave, you say, not an option!

Charging a mobile phone costs about 0.002p - 0.004p per hour. Good to see Victorian Mill Owners are alive and well.

Personally if my colleagues behaved like that I would tell them to go forth and multiply or even contact the union helpline with a view to raising a greviance. Must be a barrel of laughs where you work.

PS - I normally leave it on charge every night overnight so that you have 100% charge in the morning.

 

[cjmillsnun]

The 387's for GatEx will be very similar to the current trains just with more luggage space. The seats will also be no different, which makes me angry (why pay a premium fare to sit on an ironing board for half an hour when you could just pay the normal fare to sit on a very comfortable 377 seat for an extra 5-10 minutes?

What is this very comfortable 377 seat you speak of?

450s have more comfortable seats IMO

 

[southern442]

I don't disagree with what you are saying here about the 2+2 seatsin the 387s. They are loaned stock for Thameslink services and are not representative of the specification for the lines final deployment. I don't accept the statement:
"The 700's don't have these, meaning the standard of seating is not being met on the Brighton line".
Trains on the Brighton line are not running an inter-city service, even the non-stop trains. The Thameslink service is effectively the stopper service once past Gatwick so it qualifies for inter-city even less. The whole line is 'outer suburban' with a heavy commitment to commuter traffic so the TOC(s) providing the services provide stock that they think meets that requirement.
As many here realise, the 'privatised railway' is not really running in a competitive environment, so they don't really need to try that hard. So if passengers have an expectation of Southeren Railway Brighton Line standards of comfort, they will be disappointed. Looking across enviously at SWT's or FGW's or any other TOC's provision is pointless as the lines aren't in competition so why would the stock be comparable. That's just the way the cookie crumbles.

That is and isn't what I was getting at. Yes passengers will be dissappointed that the seating isn't as good as the norm on this line. The point I was trying to make is that the public complains when there is a reduction in comfort and an increase in price, which is the problem here.

And besides, a lot of people use the tables to do laptop work. There are no standard class tables on the 700's, so people can't do that work. You have stated several times this is a commuter service, so why would they not provide for commuters?

I can't get the address given to work. (bad link)

Apologies, here is a link to an article from Railway Gazette which has an image that also shows it clearly.

I and others here have said that the seats are OK and have a good posture, but others may have different comfort requirements. You can't please all the people etc. ... . I do think that the firmer seats will have a longer service life before the padding needs to be replaced which is a benefit to the TOC, however. In my view, there's nothing worse than a softly padded seat that has lost it's cushioning properties and users are left feeling the rigid support frame through the compressed padding.
Just to re-iterate my comments in post #1041, currently, the railways in Great Britain are run as commercial operations to extract the maximum revenue for shareholders. The rules of service provision and costs are determined by Government who currently wants the passenger to pay 75% of total costs. The minimum standards of timetable, capacity and passenger amenity are administered by the DfT and also bounded by health and safety legislation. So in the above situation, bidders will commit to meeting the standards at the lowest price (or maximum return to Government in the case of non-subsidised routes like Thameslink). Providing a commuter dominated service is extremely expensive undertaking anyway, so peak capacity and reliability is King and individual passenger creature comforts are somewhat lower in the pecking order. Anything else in the current system wouldn't please the shareholders anyway.
I'm afraid that just how it is, - not really satisfactory, and I can't see much praise around for the introduction of this 'privatised railway' in the early '90s. So all of these complaints about things that are trivial in the eyes of the TOCs who get regular kickings for delays and cancellations, will fall on deaf ears.

It is the sad truth. The seats may have a longer design life, and aren't incredibly uncomfortable, but they are incredibly cheap and a far cry from the springy seats of the CIGs and VEPs. What happened to travelling in proper comfort, as opposed to adequate (i.e. not amazing but it will do) comfort?

What is this very comfortable 377 seat you speak of?

450s have more comfortable seats IMO

Have you never been on the first or last carriages of a 377/2, /4 or /5? Or any carriage of the early 377/1's or 377/3's? The 450 seats aren't too bad, but they are hard, and the 377 2+2 seats are much softer. I will say that the 2+3 seating on 377's is really rather bad.

 

[westcoaster]

All this talk of seats lol, but the two seats by the disabled toilets have a much thicker base than all the others.

 

[Kite159]

What is this very comfortable 377 seat you speak of?

450s have more comfortable seats IMO

I agree, a shame they are 2+3 for the majority of the unit. The seats on a 444 on the other hand are quite nice (although as the 444s are designed for long-distance routes they should be)

 

[southern442]

All this talk of seats lol, but the two seats by the disabled toilets have a much thicker base than all the others.

This is also true for the 377/6's. The tip up seats are also more padded.

 

[cjmillsnun]

I agree, a shame they are 2+3 for the majority of the unit. The seats on a 444 on the other hand are quite nice (although as the 444s are designed for long-distance routes they should be)

There was only one modern 3rd rail unit that could beat the 444 on comfort, and they got ruined after Gatwick Express (Southern) got their hands on them.

 

[Techniquest]

Must be a barrel of laughs where you work.

PS - I normally leave it on charge every night overnight so that you have 100% charge in the morning.

Oh yes it is! And yes, there was supposed to be an MGR-load of sarcasm to go with that!

It's surprisingly easy to forget to charge it, then get up late the next morning so left with little time to charge up. Then there's other people misplacing your charger so you can't find it! Yes each of those situations has happened to me on numerous occasions!

If the buses I commute on had power sockets, I'd never have these problems (except for the charger one, obviously) and I could actually keep updated with things much more easily!

 

[Adam0984]

Is there any set diagrams for the 387 I'm down in London on Friday and was hoping to get a ride on one down to Brighton or back

 

[jon0844]

With regards to the reduced number of seats with 2+2 as against how comfortable they are, wouldn't it be fair to say that in most cases anyone travelling from, say, St Albans to the south should almost certainly be able to get a seat at St Pancras given how many people will alight, and being able to sit before others board. Thus, even with fewer seats on the 387s and 700s, those travelling a long way should be able to sit for some of it.

Not sure about trains from Brighton. Would a lot of people get off at Gatwick or East Croydon in the peaks?

 

[Bishopstone]

Not sure about trains from Brighton. Would a lot of people get off at Gatwick or East Croydon in the peaks?

Not sufficient to release a substantive number of seats.

Given the various markets served by the 700s, the design was always going to be a compromise, and that has to be accepted. From the pictures released to date, I feel the compromise has favoured the pure Metro market somewhat - ie the ability to squeeze on just a few more bodies at East Croydon/West Hampstead etc - above middle distance traffic.

I also thought the whole Thameslink rationale - the reason we must suffer 'core' disruption - was for the benefit of supposedly large cross-London flows, eg Luton-Gatwick, or Cambridge-Croydon in the future. Yet now we are told, including in this thread, that in fact hardly anyone wants to go anywhere other than zone one.

To be fair, one counter-point to my argument is that the 700s will (probably) have First Class, with fairly generous 2+2 seating and tables, which is undoubtedly a luxury for pure Metro flows where space is at a premium.

 

[Class377/5]

The big problem is the issue with competition and choice. You suggest that the specification of the trains is dictated by these factors, along with profit for the operator and shareholders. The crux of your argument is the complete fallacy that we have any choice or that competition exists. The specification of the trains (Class 700) wasn't laid down by GoVia (in fact, indications are that they're not too keen) or by any passenger/stakeholder group that would actually have to use the trains.

Sorry but your totally wrong. All the commuter groups on the line had a say. In fact Bedford commuter group stated on thier newsletter they had talked to FCC over the train and provided feedback but we're unable to say anything while contacts were yet signed. Is only a completely false suggestion that groups weren't inoloved.

Also point out the suggestion that Govia aren't happy want actually from the management it seems but a simp ked comment by a normal staff member thats been taken as gospel.

Essentially, the Class 700s are medium distance commuter trains that need to turn into tube trains between St Pancras and London Bridge. As we can't put the genie back into the bottle regarding the "popularity" of the Core for passengers as an alternative to the Northern Line, there should have been extensive capacity and flow management studies carried out to decide on the most effective train design.

Again not true. All bidders had to show using a standard flow management system that thier designs achieved the flow requires set down by the DfT. Namely 1,000 boarding or exitjng the train with the design dwell times of 24tph. Any bigger who failed this would have been rejected out right. Suggestion this want do is another false suggestion that seems more based in opinions that reality. [/quote]

Also point out that as a commuter railways, is it surprising the Core is poplar with commuters who work in London?

Assuming a 20 or 24 Tph service though the core and allowing for the current expected journey time of around 12 minutes between St Pancras and Blackfriars, it seems to me that the design of the trains has been unreasonably skewed towards providing maximum standing capacity for the benefit of those passengers who will spend the least time on the train.

Seating capacity is actually increased by having longer trains. Trains are skewed towars increasing seating capacity and standing capacity. Seems most forget that prior to December there were a total of eight 12 car trains, two of which were of peak. In 2018 the main service to Bedford will be something like eight 12 cars per peak hour! Massive difference.

It doesn't matter how wide you make the gangway, passengers on a crowded tube-style train will always congregate near the doors, for fear of not being able to exit at their chosen stop. If you don't believe me, have a look at passenger behaviour on the Circle Line. The trains are wide, with perimeter seating and no doors at the end of each carriage. People still stand next to the doors, especially if they have bags/cases or are too short to reach the handrails further down.[/quore]

People will always be people and not make more rational decisions. However with wider does than the current stock and improved passenger loading info some will change thier habits.

The intention once the Class 700s enter service and full implementation of 24 Tph though the core is to have station dwell times of 30 seconds. Passengers won't want to take the risk of missing their station and so the middle of the carriages will be empty, whilst the door areas will be packed.

Dwell times in peak in 2010 using 319s were around 40-50 seconds depending a few factors. Having wider doors and longer trains will help decrease that figures and new comers will simply adjust better than existing users.

[qiote]It can't be too late to change the seating specification as only part of one unit has been built. NOW is the time for GoVia and DfT to listen to their (captive) customers and re-think the seating design.

If you think there's only part of one built units your very mistaken. There's five whole 12 car units at Wildernrath with a few completed 8 cars around. Siemens built around 60 carriages with a year of contract signing.

Don't make the mistake that because you haven't seen it that there isn't more. Siemens have released press photos of the first three 12 cars any way.

I also thought the whole Thameslink rationale - the reason we must suffer 'core' disruption - was for the benefit of supposedly large cross-London flows, eg Luton-Gatwick, or Cambridge-Croydon in the future. Yet now we are told, including in this thread, that in fact hardly anyone wants to go anywhere other than zone one.

Your confusing current flows with the expected future flows.

To be fair, one counter-point to my argument is that the 700s will (probably) have First Class, with fairly generous 2+2 seating and tables, which is undoubtedly a luxury for pure Metro flows where space is at a premium.

If your unsure of the fact the class 700s have first class or ed ven how it is laid out, it suggests you don't really know the units at all. 2+2 is throughout the train (expect single seats around the disabled loo).

 

[jon0844]

The open walkways and new technology to show emptier parts of the train should all help with the 700s too.

Whether people actually do walk down to an emptier part of a train remains to be seen though.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I think the thing that is unspoken here is that nearly all the people who decide what the seats will be are senior managers with a free first class status pass for life or senior highly paid civil servants who can afford a first class seaaon ticket so don't really give a XXXX about the plebs in standard class, whether conciously or unconciously so.

I tend to agree with that. A fair number of these decision makers probably don't use public transport at all.

Obviously removing seats makes more room but it says something about London that we have to consider never getting a seat for a 35 minute journey. I tried the east London line and stood for almost an hour.

I avoid planning to use the off peak Northbound Thameslink service at East Croydon as it is often impossible to get in the train. But on Thursday 8th Jan I accidentally noticed how very empty one was and got on. I had a whole table to myself and no-one nearby (probably more than 8 seats to one passenger) . I realised that for the three years while the Thameslink service is diverted away from London Bridge I will be able to get on !. I also now understand why friends of mine complain of hopeless conditions at London Bridge in the evening peak since the start of the year. This makes me fear that a simpler solution than the fly-over just to the East on London Bridge would be to simply terminate the Thameslink services at London Bridge and not run through for ever .

 

[AM9]

I tend to agree with that. A fair number of these decision makers probably don't use public transport at all.

Obviously removing seats makes more room but it says something about London that we have to consider never getting a seat for a 35 minute journey. I tried the east London line and stood for almost an hour.

I avoid planning to use the off peak Northbound Thameslink service at East Croydon as it is often impossible to get in the train. But on Thursday 8th Jan I accidentally noticed how very empty one was and got on. I had a whole table to myself and no-one nearby (probably more than 8 seats to one passenger) . I realised that for the three years while the Thameslink service is diverted away from London Bridge I will be able to get on !. I also now understand why friends of mine complain of hopeless conditions at London Bridge in the evening peak since the start of the year. This makes me fear that a simpler solution than the fly-over just to the East on London Bridge would be to simply terminate the Thameslink services at London Bridge and not run through for ever .

That may be fine for journeys south of the river, but where would you terminate all the southbound trains heading down the MML and ECML?

 

[Class377/5]

I tend to agree with that. A fair number of these decision makers probably don't use public transport at all.

Obviously removing seats makes more room but it says something about London that we have to consider never getting a seat for a 35 minute journey. I tried the east London line and stood for almost an hour.

I avoid planning to use the off peak Northbound Thameslink service at East Croydon as it is often impossible to get in the train. But on Thursday 8th Jan I accidentally noticed how very empty one was and got on. I had a whole table to myself and no-one nearby (probably more than 8 seats to one passenger) . I realised that for the three years while the Thameslink service is diverted away from London Bridge I will be able to get on !. I also now understand why friends of mine complain of hopeless conditions at London Bridge in the evening peak since the start of the year. This makes me fear that a simpler solution than the fly-over just to the East on London Bridge would be to simply terminate the Thameslink services at London Bridge and not run through for ever .

Actually Thameslink has increased its services between Three Bridges and East Croydon to 6tph off peak.

There is no risk of terminating trains at London Bridge Low Level, it just can't cope. The current London Bridge terminators are expected to go to Cambridge from May 2018.