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!
It's not 1932 anymore, when over half the capacity was first class, the 6-CIT units for London-Brighton had 138 first and 124 third class, although after WW2 were reconfigured like 6-PUL with less first class.
But a 12car 700 with 52 first and 614 standard (about seventh), before declassification might not be gaining all the premium revenue that customers are prepared to pay, so you do have a point.
It's not 1932 anymore, when over half the capacity was first class, the 6-CIT units for London-Brighton had 138 first and 124 third class, although after WW2 were reconfigured like 6-PUL with less first class.
But a 12car 700 with 52 first and 614 standard (about seventh), before declassification might not be gaining all the premium revenue that customers are prepared to pay, so you do have a point.
But a 12car 700 with 52 first and 614 standard (about seventh), before declassification might not be gaining all the premium revenue that customers are prepared to pay, so you do have a point.
I think there would be more premium revenue to go at if first was properly policed. As a London Bridge commuter, I know I’m more likely to get a seat in standard than first in the evening peak due to the lack of ticket inspections, so I don’t bother.
Will leave it there, as I’m aware I’m now going off-topic.
These “niceties” such as table-back seats and charging sockets do not come to the detriment of capacity and are really the bare minimum considering the long journeys that are made.
The more colourful vinyl in the toilets probably helps reduce those wannabe artists as it's not a blank canvas. Unless the GBR spec vinyls are different to what Govia started fitting a couple of months ago
Maybe improve access for the wheelchair users? (For those that do not know, the pole in the centre of the door area makes it hard for wheelchair users to access the train compared to units such as the 387)
Knowing whether a first class section is declassified is important to avoid penalties. Regulars may know the rule but others won't, especially as the units run via Gatwick. I'd support removing first completely for the 700s to do away with the current farce where those paying for first class in the expectation that it may be less crowded, etc,. are being served up a very poor product.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
An illuminated, bright permanent sign saying either 'first class in operation' or 'first class de-classified' or similar. As opposed to a fleeting scrolled message among the plethora of other stuff on the existing screens. Either bite the bullet and re-locate first to the units' centre or abolish it. As it is it's a mess.
No. If you have a standard ticket, are honest, and think it's first class you won't sit in it. If you have a standard ticket and sit in it thinking it's a bit cheeky, you won't get a penalty anyway. If you sit in it with a first class ticket, you won't get a penalty and you might not even know the difference, you're getting the facilities you paid for, just a bit busier.
And all station displays tell you "First Class accommodation at the front" so few real unsuspecting first class ticket holders should even end up 11 coaches away from where they've been clearly advertised to head for.
It may not seem fair, but if it's full (and it increasingly is) then it won't mean any more people getting a seat on that train. I can't believe it's hard for anyone to know if they're at the front or back of the train, that's even if they know "the hack". If it's full, an illuminated sign isn't going to magic up more free seats.
The only people who will get penalties are those in Coach 1 who believe someone told them it's all declassified, people who can't tell front from rear, or people who are chancing it on purpose, and I don't have much sympathy for any of those.
Declassified first has become the current forum hobbyhorse for those with a utopian outlook, but it's a pragmatic solution to a slightly flawed original specification, it adds standard capacity, provides complete predictability for first class passengers, and a bit of extra comfort and facilities for some knowledgable regulars.
First class in the middle of a walk through high capacity train doesn't work, and making people guess or walk 12 coaches won't work either. Even if you refitted one end as standard, it might buy you what, 4 seats? 8 seats? On a train that seats 427 or 666.
If it was empty and wasting space on full trains, then maybe act on it, but you try boarding the rear compartment at Hitchin or Finsbury Park in the peaks. It's full!
The Class 357 Wikipedia article says that when they were delivered in 2001, the vinyl cost about £40,000 per 4-car unit, so about £10,000 per car. There are 1,140 Class 700 vehicles, so that would mean it would cost about £11.4 million for the exterior vinyls, which is a lot more than the £3.6 million that this polishing and toilet vinyl project is costing, not even taking into account 25 years’ worth of inflation. I don’t know if the exterior livery vinyls have to be more resistant/higher-specification, and hence more expensive than the interior toilet vinyls? Perhaps the extra cost of the vinyls is why the toilets didn’t have them from new? I also don’t know if that exterior vinyl cost is just for the vinyl itself, or also includes the cost of fitting it. I guess this cost must be why only a single unit per TOC is getting the GBR branding at first.
Ah the wonders of nationalisation. £millions of OUR money spent on pointless crap that has zero impact on punctuality, capacity or safety. But it it's red white and blue, so that's all good then .
I agree that tables are important but not sure why specifically they are any more important between London and Brighton than they are between London and Bedford, Cambridge, and Peterborough?!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Again - London to Bedford, Cambridge, and Peterborough are all mainlines and longer distances (with the exception of Bedford which is roughly the same. So not sure why first class is less necessary for those travelling longer distances from places like Peterborough, Cambridge and Huntingdon.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Again - London to Bedford, Cambridge, and Peterborough are all mainlines and longer distances (with the exception of Bedford which is roughly the same. So not sure why first class is less necessary for those travelling longer distances from places like Peterborough, Cambridge and Huntingdon.
I agree that tables are important but not sure why specifically they are any more important between London and Brighton than they are between London and Bedford, Cambridge, and Peterborough?!
There is a perception by some that all journeys to/from Brighton travel no further than London, so as it's only an hour don't need comfort.
But using station origin destination matrix for Brighton, get some longer flows, eg :
Southampton Central 35,395
Finsbury Park 27,403
Cambridge 26,884
St Albans City 22,222
Bedford 17,119
West Hampstead Thameslink 16,059
Bristol Temple Meads 13,984
Luton Airport Parkway 13,679
Luton 12,896
Guildford 12,855
Reading 11,356
Bournemouth 10,277
Stevenage 9796
Manchester Piccadilly 9066
then if go below 9000 journeys per year, find lots of other places where route is part of longer journey.
So if look at it as an 1+ hour connecting train (with no alternative services unlike Bedford and Peterborough) then viewpoint of if tables should be provided is different
There is a perception by some that all journeys to/from Brighton travel no further than London, so as it's only an hour don't need comfort.
But using station origin destination matrix for Brighton, get some longer flows, eg :
Southampton Central 35,395
Finsbury Park 27,403
Cambridge 26,884
St Albans City 22,222
Bedford 17,119
West Hampstead Thameslink 16,059
Bristol Temple Meads 13,984
Luton Airport Parkway 13,679
Luton 12,896
Guildford 12,855
Reading 11,356
Bournemouth 10,277
Stevenage 9796
Manchester Piccadilly 9066
then if go below 9000 journeys per year, find lots of other places where route is part of longer journey.
So if look at it as an 1+ hour connecting train (with no alternative services unlike Bedford and Peterborough) then viewpoint of if tables should be provided is different
Yes but I’m just saying those travelling south from Peterborough, Cambridge, Bedford, and Huntingdon are no less likely to want tables than those travelling north from Brighton!
I agree that tables are important but not sure why specifically they are any more important between London and Brighton than they are between London and Bedford, Cambridge, and Peterborough?!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Again - London to Bedford, Cambridge, and Peterborough are all mainlines and longer distances (with the exception of Bedford which is roughly the same. So not sure why first class is less necessary for those travelling longer distances from places like Peterborough, Cambridge and Huntingdon.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Again - London to Bedford, Cambridge, and Peterborough are all mainlines and longer distances (with the exception of Bedford which is roughly the same. So not sure why first class is less necessary for those travelling longer distances from places like Peterborough, Cambridge and Huntingdon.
Yes, those are all important destinations which require more than a basic inner-suburban interior. The Brighton main line is the one Im most familiar with
Yes, those are all important destinations which require more than a basic inner-suburban interior. The Brighton main line is the one Im most familiar with
I agree that tables are important but not sure why specifically they are any more important between London and Brighton than they are between London and Bedford, Cambridge, and Peterborough?!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Again - London to Bedford, Cambridge, and Peterborough are all mainlines and longer distances (with the exception of Bedford which is roughly the same. So not sure why first class is less necessary for those travelling longer distances from places like Peterborough, Cambridge and Huntingdon.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Again - London to Bedford, Cambridge, and Peterborough are all mainlines and longer distances (with the exception of Bedford which is roughly the same. So not sure why first class is less necessary for those travelling longer distances from places like Peterborough, Cambridge and Huntingdon.
I’ve never been too fussed about tables, though as someone that tends to travel off-peak an adjacent seat essentially performs the same function. It never particularly bothered me in the days when a 317 turned up.
There’s other aspects of the 700 design that is annoying though. The lighting is too harsh, which is an easy fix. The seats in standard are too close together, and the ambience is beyond drab and dreary.
I would ditch first, and reseat the whole train to be essentially as first is, perhaps with only half tables like the 365s had.
I’ve never been too fussed about tables, though as someone that tends to travel off-peak an adjacent seat essentially performs the same function. It never particularly bothered me in the days when a 317 turned up.
There’s other aspects of the 700 design that is annoying though. The lighting is too harsh, which is an easy fix. The seats in standard are too close together, and the ambience is beyond drab and dreary.
I would ditch first, and reseat the whole train to be essentially as first is, perhaps with only half tables like the 365s had.
The 365 tables were awful - fine for a cup of coffee but useless for working on a laptop or tablet. Working is such a critical part of train travel for so many that I think tables are important. They always fill up first on trains. Agree with you about the lighting - a softer yellow/orange better than bright white. Creates a nicer ambience
No one seems to have suggested new and better-padded upholstery on the seats, despite the flood of complaints about 'ironing board seats' when first introduced and for some considerable while afterwards......
No one seems to have suggested new and better-padded upholstery on the seats, despite the flood of complaints about 'ironing board seats' when first introduced and for some considerable while afterwards......
No one seems to have suggested new and better-padded upholstery on the seats, despite the flood of complaints about 'ironing board seats' when first introduced and for some considerable while afterwards......
My suggestion about replacing the seats with those in first (with or without tables) covers that. I’d be content if the whole interior was like that. They still wouldn’t be the best trains, but it would change them from horrible to acceptable.
What about putting Wifi in all of them? Originally about half of the 12-car sets seemed to have wifi, and much fewer of the 8-car sets used on inner suburban services. Why not all of them - apparently the money ran out and nobody cared. But it seems to me that fewer and fewer sets now have working wifi, I guess because when they fail nobody can be bothered to replace them. I suppose it isn't quite as important now that 4g and 5g mobile services are more widespread, but there are lots of places where it doesn't work at all well on trains.
What about putting Wifi in all of them? Originally about half of the 12-car sets seemed to have wifi, and much fewer of the 8-car sets used on inner suburban services. Why not all of them - apparently the money ran out and nobody cared. But it seems to me that fewer and fewer sets now have working wifi, I guess because when they fail nobody can be bothered to replace them. I suppose it isn't quite as important now that 4g and 5g mobile services are more widespread, but there are lots of places where it doesn't work at all well on trains.
It was down to how they were "procured". They were procured a long time ago by the Thameslink Programme (Not GTR), which was heavily DFT involved, and not by the operator (first FCC, then GTR), and I assume someone either didn’t think it was important, forgot, or it was such a while back they didn’t even consider it. The almost identical 707, which was procured by SWT did have charging, and no toilets as that was what they chose. The 717 was procured by GTR, and as such as a different equipment list.
A similar situation somewhat exists with the Class 80x, where the IET programme procured trains can be different to operator procured ones.
Re graffiti in the toilets I wonder if a solution is to have a camera in the toilet that is turned on when the door is unlocked, and another one outside which records for a length of time after the door is opened.
Then a bit of AI to spot if the walls have changed from the last photograph, to alert if there has been a graffiti attack.
That way they might actually start to catch the criminals, rather than just repeatedly repair the damage.
(You’d obviously have to have something on the camera to show if it was active or not to reassure people that they were not being filmed.)
Re graffiti in the toilets I wonder if a solution is to have a camera in the toilet that is turned on when the door is unlocked, and another one outside which records for a length of time after the door is opened.
Then a bit of AI to spot if the walls have changed from the last photograph, to alert if there has been a graffiti attack.
That way they might actually start to catch the criminals, rather than just repeatedly repair the damage.
(You’d obviously have to have something on the camera to show if it was active or not to reassure people that they were not being filmed.)
It was down to how they were "procured". They were procured a long time ago by the Thameslink Programme (Not GTR), which was heavily DFT involved, and not by the operator (first FCC, then GTR), and I assume someone either didn’t think it was important, forgot, or it was such a while back they didn’t even consider it. The almost identical 707, which was procured by SWT did have charging, and no toilets as that was what they chose. The 717 was procured by GTR, and as such as a different equipment list.
A similar situation somewhat exists with the Class 80x, where the IET programme procured trains can be different to operator procured ones.
Adding wifi to existing trains is hardly difficult, seeing that trains as old as the Networkers have had the equipment installed. Indeed the 700s must be one of the few mainline trains without wifi on every unit.
Adding wifi to existing trains is hardly difficult, seeing that trains as old as the Networkers have had the equipment installed. Indeed the 700s must be one of the few mainline trains without wifi on every unit.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
.
