Class 387

[Minstral25]

The seats are fine for me too, and I have regular back problems. Had 40 minutes on a brand new 387/2 tonight and an hour on a 387/1 this morning, no issues at all.

Comparing the 387/2 with the 387/1, I would say the newer train had harder seats, so suspect that the seats 'give' a little bit with age. Pretty much like every padded seat I've ever used anywhere.

I agree entirely - travelled yesterday with a bad back had a 387/1 out from Redhill to St Pancras and a 377/6 back from Victoria to Redhill. Total of 1 hour 40 in the seats and perfectly fine. I like the space and armrests to.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And for the record I will be using the 700s for around 90% of my rail trips, the rest should be the 387/2 with the rare 377 after coming back from a gig (going is normally on a GatEx service).

Have to say as someone who travels daily into London I'd be very happy on 377/6 and 387's but I am not happy about the 700's. The amount of room around the seat (I am 54cm wide and I believe the seats are 43cm wide - someone might know better on that last stat) so I am going to be encroaching on the person next to me, the reduction of leg room with my long legs as well. It's not the seats themselves but how they are arranged. Still look forward to actually testing them rather than the mock up.

 

[Class377/5]

I don't think I'd disagree wildly with anything you say here. I take your point that I'm also paying some of the season ticket to TfL.

I'll leave the topic of seats alone until I can sample them over a longer period and in the proximity of other patrons.

Not the answer I was expecting. I look forward to your views in a few months then.

Yeh I'm don't think the performance of the fleet is of biggest concern,the performance of network rail and it's infrastructure would worry me more. Just cannot see 24 tph working.

The problem of a lack of alternative routes and limited capacity that sees problems ripple across the network. Once London Bridge is done and allowed to flow then pressure will be off all the routes and I honently think things will be better. Resources can then be aimed at other areas that are failing far more frequently than should be the case.

Have to say as someone who travels daily into London I'd be very happy on 377/6 and 387's but I am not happy about the 700's. The amount of room around the seat (I am 54cm wide and I believe the seats are 43cm wide - someone might know better on that last stat) so I am going to be encroaching on the person next to me, the reduction of leg room with my long legs as well. It's not the seats themselves but how they are arranged. Still look forward to actually testing them rather than the mock up.

The leg room on production models does vary. I think there will be a period of finding the best seats for all of us.

Seat wise, I find people encroaching any with arm rest. Prehaps the lack of them on the 700s will make people think twice?

However isnt this the 387 thread?

 

[AM9]

I agree entirely - travelled yesterday with a bad back had a 387/1 out from Redhill to St Pancras and a 377/6 back from Victoria to Redhill. Total of 1 hour 40 in the seats and perfectly fine. I like the space and armrests to.

If the 700 seats are as bad as many here are claiming, then many of the passengers will stand rather than sit. That will leave more chances of vacant seats for me getting on at St Albans. Then I can enjoy 20 minutes in a seat designed for good posture. There will still be plenty of room for those wanting to stand though.
I haven't noticed hoardes of passengers leaving the 'rock hard' 387 seats empty though.

 

[Bald Rick]

If the 700 seats are as bad as many here are claiming, then many of the passengers will stand rather than sit. That will leave more chances of vacant seats for me getting on at St Albans.

Good luck with that

 

[AM9]

Good luck with that

I thought that it didn't need a smiley as we all know that most people don't/won't have that much of a problem with seats.

Still, here it is

 

[The Box Photter]

Watch out for all those passengers just waiting to give up their seats for AM9 at St Albans.

Good luck mate

 

[AM9]

Watch out for all those passengers just waiting to give up their seats for AM9 at St Albans.

Good luck mate

I think that you missed the point. Most passengers don't have a problem with the seats even if they have travelled from Bedford, so they will sit contentedly as they do now on the firm 387 seats.
I don't usually worry that much about a seat when the train already has standees on arriving at St Albans. If I was that desperate, I'd get an empty St Albans starter slow train. If I'm going south of the river, there's always a wide choice of seats after St Pancras.

 

[Minstral25]

The leg room on production models does vary. I think there will be a period of finding the best seats for all of us.

Seat wise, I find people encroaching any with arm rest. Prehaps the lack of them on the 700s will make people think twice?

However isnt this the 387 thread?

As others have said I await the opportunity to ride one in practice.

However back to topic are any 387/2's out today in service?

 

[urpert]

There will be a pair on the 1030 Sevenoaks - Bedford.

 

[bb21]

387202 is also out today (or rather, has been). Finishing on arrival at Brighton at 1209.

 

[JonathanH]

387202 is also out today (or rather, has been). Finishing on arrival at Brighton at 1209.

From realtimetrains, it looks like there are three workings into Brighton Down Sidings and three out during the day. Given it isn't on the diagram 387203 worked on Thursday which comes out on the front of 1W94 1602 Brighton to Bedford, is it likely to come back out as the leading unit on 1W96 1635 Brighton to Bedford then 5Y96 1902 Bedford to Bedford Jowett Sidings to berth at Bedford overnight?

 

[bb21]

It has been allocated to 1W94 on a red triple, leading unit if I guess correctly.

After that it does 1W57 Bedford 1840 - Brighton 2111, then 1W68 Brighton 2133 - Bedford 0008, then to the depot.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Now being delayed en route due to a train fault.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Actually it was the trailing unit on 1W94.

 

[Class377/5]

387205/210 delivered in to Stewarts Lane as 5O90 08+35 Bletchley TMD to Stewarts Lane.

387208/209 worked 5Z37 09+38 Tilgate Sidings to Littlehampton and 5Z38 14+05 Littlehampton to Tilgate Sidings on driver training run.

387206 at Streatham Hill.

387204/207/211/212 at Bletchley TMD.

387201/202/203 in service on Thameslink.

 

[IrishDave]

387204 and 387212 were on a test run from Bletchley to Brighton and back today (this one), and I happened to catch them when they were sat in platform 7 at Brighton. They were both carrying a new Gatwick Express livery (or at least one I haven't seen before) - see attached photos. Apologies for the reflections, it was quite bright and difficult to find a good angle.

The first and third carriages (421xxx and 423xxx) carried the large "GX" livery, while the second and fourth carriages (422xxx and 424xxx) carried the smaller "GX" livery. (421xxx is the first class coach, even though it was on the buffer stops at Brighton - I presume it would normally be at the London end.) I quite like the smaller logo look. The larger one is a bit odd up close, though from a distance it looks quite good.

 

[JaJaWa]

At least these 387s have a much improved seat back table design that hopefully won't squeak

As silent as the seat back tables on the 700s?

 

[absolutelymilk]

Does anyone know what the power output of the 387s is?

 

[Nym]

In terms of?

 

[AM9]

Does anyone know what the power output of the 387s is?

Aren't they about the same as the 377s, i.e. 1.2MW? The difference would be the mechanical ability of the traction motors to spin at slighjtly higher speeds as required for 110mph running.
Of course when on 3rd rail DC, they would be crippled by software to somewhere near 0.8MW!

 

[Class377/5]

Aren't they about the same as the 377s, i.e. 1.2MW? The difference would be the mechanical ability of the traction motors to spin at slighjtly higher speeds as required for 110mph running.
Of course when on 3rd rail DC, they would be crippled by software to somewhere near 0.8MW!

Believe so as the 379 that did the 110mph testing just had a software mod. Although you can't go over 100mph on DC anyway as its the max limit of the technology used.

 

[trainmania100]

Hi does anyone know of they are out to play with Thameslink today?
Thanks

 

[causton]

Hi does anyone know of they are out to play with Thameslink today?
Thanks

387201 and 387203 are showing on the following so far:

1W12 Brghtn 07:48 BedfdM 10:20
1W25 BedfdM 10:40 Brghtn 13:09

387202 is showing on:

1W11 BedfdM 06:58 ThBdgs 08:58
2W22 ThBdgs 09:11 BedfdM 11:19
1W29 BedfdM 11:40 Brghtn 14:09

 

[absolutelymilk]

In terms of?

Either horsepower or MW.

 

[urpert]

Anything on Sevenoaks services today?

 

[AM9]

Either horsepower or MW.

1 MW = 1341.02 hp (approximately).
Therefore 1.2MW ~ 1.2 x 1341.02 = 1609.224 hp

Bear in mind that the 1.2MW figure is the peak traction motors output per 4-car set, - the units's hotel and auxiliary demands all come from the same ac or DC prime supply. The software limits the traction demand when on DC. Not sure by how much for Electrostars but the class 450 desiros are limited on DC to 50% of their designed maximum.

 

[LBSCR Times]

Anything on Sevenoaks services today?

Only the booked ones, one return trip a day.
But this is every day anyway.
(08.20 ex Luton and 10.30 ex Sevenoaks)

 

[Deepgreen]

I noticed a pair of class 387/2s at Purley yesterday afternoon, and I'm 99% sure the rear unit has its rear driving car (south end) in the small GX logo livery, rather than the large logo version. I had thought that the small logo version was applied to the intermediate two cars only, with driving cars having the large variety. Is this the first livery abberation on these units, or was my 1% room for doubt too low?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Does anyone know what the power output of the 387s is?

The technical specifications state that for DC operation the output is roundly 1.12mW (1500hp) and for AC it is 1.68mW (2250 hp).

 

[swt_passenger]

I noticed a pair of class 387/2s at Purley yesterday afternoon, and I'm 99% sure the rear unit has its rear driving car (south end) in the small GX logo livery, rather than the large logo version. I had thought that the small logo version was applied to the intermediate two cars only, with driving cars having the large variety.

Yesterday's info by IrishDave (at #2594) suggests they alternate down the side large/small/large/small.

Done that way they'll alternate properly whether running as 4,8 or 12 car and the end car will have either version, dependent on which side you are looking at.

Exactly as seen in this video, which has both the right and left sides of the train passing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWCfAvCsGec

 

[Deepgreen]

Yesterday's info by IrishDave (at #2594) suggests they alternate down the side large/small/large/small.

Done that way they'll alternate properly whether running as 4,8 or 12 car and the end car will have either version, dependent on which side you are looking at.

Exactly as seen in this video, which has both the right and left sides of the train passing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWCfAvCsGec

That would make sense and also reassure me about my sight/memory!

 

[Harbon 1]

Just to add fire to the seat discussion...

I sat on a few on, at a guess, 387 213 or somewhere around that region, and they are pretty dire really as seats go IMO (obviously I was working so didn't get to sit for long ).

The term 'Ironing Board' sprung to mind immediately.

 

[MCR247]

I must be the only person in the UK that actually loves these 'ironing boards'