Reconfiguring 720s for Stansted Express?

[Bletchleyite]

From https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/greater-anglia-class-755s-regional-trains.148431/page-276

Compared to reconfiguring standard class to first class, or 3+2 searing to 2+2 seating, tables are trivial.

I *think*, though may be wrong as I'm just going from memory, that like e.g. the 165 the third seat is just effectively bolted onto the second, with the cantilever device being the same width both sides. If this is the case converting to narrow 2+2 as per the 730/0 would, like Merseyrail did for the middle coach of the 50x years ago to improve access for prams and wheelchair users, be somewhere between trivial (an afternoon unbolting seats) and fairly easy (unbolting seats, angle grinding the end of the frame off and fitting a fairing).

For an airport service narrow 2+2 is ideal as it means there's easy access with trolley cases.

 

[Topological]

This image suggests that the third seat is indeed floating. Seems drastic cutting them out, but then it would produce an ideal airport train as you say.

There does seem to be a panel near the door that would need cutting as well, but again it should be doable.

The seats nearest to the gangway show what a 2+2 would be like

(Got the image from Google search, so do not know the origin.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thanks. From that pic it looks like the second option (take the seat off and lop the end of the frame off) but still fairly trivial and would be a serious improvement for these units.

 

[Topological]

I got a bit nervous seeing there is a bit of a funny effect on the right of the image. However, it does appear that is just something the processing of the image did.

There is a blog about the 720 here: Anonymous Widower Blog

Notes and questions.

1. Are all of the individual seats identical and can they be arranged as ones, twos or threes as required?
2. Could this mean, that Greater Anglia could create a 2 + 2 version with tables. if they felt such a train was necessary for some routes?
3. The details like luggage racks, wheelchair spaces and power sockets seem to be of a high standard.
4. The ride seemed smooth. But if I was going between Liverpool Street and Norwich, I’d prefer to ride in one of Greater Anglia’s Stadler trains.
5. The last picture is of the seats in a Class 345 train, as I wanted to judge a comparison.
6. The Class 720 seat appears to my posterior to be slightly more comfortable, than the Class 345 seat.

This train is more than just a high-capacity suburban trundler.

Sorry that there is not really a lot of text to quote. There are some answers to similar points further down the page from other contributors.

Also from that site:

 

[Crithylum]

IIRC when I had a look underneath it was not possible to remove the third seat without significant modification or replacement of the the cantilever arm. Addition of tables would also be very nice. Armrests may be quite difficult to add to the current seats , as well as narrowing the aisle. Anyways, I find armrests a bit redundant if I am actually using the tables.
I think the entire fleet needs these modifications, and then ~8 should have a row of seats on one side at each door removed for a luggage rack for the Stansted route.

 

[Harpo]

The seats nearest to the gangway show what a 2+2 would be like

Assuming the aim is a lot of standing space (e.g. 357 metro) and to only seat 3 UK (fewer US) standard bum cheeks per side rather than full normal sized 2+2 seats.

 

[Topological]

Assuming the aim is a lot of standing space (e.g. 357 metro) and to only seat 3 UK (fewer US) standard bum cheeks per side rather than full normal sized 2+2 seats.

That was the aim form @Bletchleyite which makes a lot of sense on an airport service. Part of the motivation is that chopping seats off is very low cost relative to new seats.

It is worth noting that because Ryanair try to stop you bringing anything on their flights, Stansted is not a standard airport for luggage. So whilst the longitudinal seating on the 345s helps for Heathrow, it is not necessary to go so extreme on a Stansted train. Heathrow express is a more standard 2+2, but has more luggage space and the premium price means it is not full.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Longitudinal seating is not good for airport services. Luggage ends up blocking the way. 345s are longitudinal because the Liz is basically an express Tube line and most journeys are very short and will involve standees in high numbers, not because of Heathrow.

The Class 700 is in a similar role to what these would be (StanEx is no more a dedicated airport service than Thameslink is) and has narrow 2+2 as I'm proposing creating here.

Add removing a socket to the work, by the way...

 

[Instinct04]

I think all of Greater Anglia 720s should be 2+2 units, and the StanEx units specifically (how many of them would there be?) should have luggage racks and tables, and armrests at every seat.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think all of Greater Anglia 720s should be 2+2 units, and the StanEx units specifically (how many of them would there be?) should have luggage racks and tables, and armrests at every seat.

Refitting them to the 730/2 2+2 interior (but minus the first class) would be one way to make them acceptable for what they do. More expensive than just unbolting the third seat and angle grinding the end of the frame off though.

 

[Crithylum]

I've taken a photo of the seat underside showing that a new cantilever beam would be required to remove the third seat. There are structural parts that would need to be cut off.

 

[Instinct04]

Refitting them to the 730/2 2+2 interior (but minus the first class) would be one way to make them acceptable for what they do. More expensive than just unbolting the third seat and angle grinding the end of the frame off though.

Why werent they designed like the 730s anyway? The class 730 interior layout and top speed seems really good.

Only downside is the cabs with the carriage connectors.

 

[JonathanH]

Why werent they designed like the 730s anyway? The class 730 interior layout and top speed seems really good.

The original plan for a fair number of 5-car 730s was to give them a 3+2 layout like the 720s to maximise seating. A variation in the order led to all the 5-car units being specified as their delivered layout.

 

[Alfie1014]

The original plan for a fair number of 5-car 730s was to give them a 3+2 layout like the 720s to maximise seating. A variation in the order led to all the 5-car units being specified as their delivered layout.

Indeed, all of the longer distance 730 were changed after it was realised how cramped the 720 layout actually was.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The original plan for a fair number of 5-car 730s was to give them a 3+2 layout like the 720s to maximise seating. A variation in the order led to all the 5-car units being specified as their delivered layout.

Yep, we dodged a proper bullet there. The 730/2 is quite decent (though a bit tight in pitch terms) and they seem to be quite popular (at least I've heard almost no complaints about them), the /1 would have been an awful cattle truck. People don't seem to hate the /0s either even on longer runs to MKC even though those are suburban spec.

 

[martin2345uk]

As a regular 720 user I like them, I like the additional seats, they get very busy in peak times and the seats almost all get taken. For commuting to London I prefer them over the 745/755s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As a regular 720 user I like them, I like the additional seats, they get very busy in peak times and the seats almost all get taken. For commuting to London I prefer them over the 745/755s.

I'm assuming you are both skinny and short? An average male's shoulders are wider than a 43.5cm wide seat as used on these, and the legroom is poor too.

 

[martin2345uk]

I am 6'2! Average build I guess. I would rather have a slightly cramped seat than no seat at all.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am 6'2! Average build I guess. I would rather have a slightly cramped seat than no seat at all.

I'd rather stand than sit next to someone in a 2.7m wide 3+2 layout. FWIW I also find that because I can't sit centrally on the seat due to it not being wide enough it twists my back in a way that is painful after not too long.

But the greater issue for Stansted use is that the aisle is too narrow for wheeled luggage.

 

[martin2345uk]

Oh yes I agree they are totally unsuitable for airport use, I hope they just leave them where they are tbh.

 

[jon0844]

This image suggests that the third seat is indeed floating. Seems drastic cutting them out, but then it would produce an ideal airport train as you say.

There does seem to be a panel near the door that would need cutting as well, but again it should be doable.

The seats nearest to the gangway show what a 2+2 would be like

(Got the image from Google search, so do not know the origin.)

Every time I see the interior (either in person or a photo) I wonder what the hell they were thinking on an open gangway train that should encourage people to move along inside to find a seat and make better use of the space.

Of course there is no space I suppose, because of all the seats!

 

[Russel]

This photo has just reminded me of a question I had on these units a while ago that I forgot to ask on here...

What is the reason for the rubber/foam bumper type thing on the bottom of certain rows of seats, as seen on the first row of 3 seats closest to the camera in this photo? I've noticed them fitted to seats at what appear to be random positions within these units...

 

[Bletchleyite]

What is the reason for the rubber/foam bumper type thing on the bottom of certain rows of seats, as seen on the first row of 3 seats closest to the camera in this photo? I've noticed them fitted to seats at what appear to be random positions within these units...

They are fitted to seats which are slightly misaligned to the row in front. I assume that's to avoid knee injuries in case of a rapid deceleration. They are odd though!

 

[Russel]

They are fitted to seats which are slightly misaligned to the row in front. I assume that's to avoid knee injuries in case of a rapid deceleration. They are odd though!

Can't say I've seen them on any other stock, even other Avertras.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Can't say I've seen them on any other stock, even other Avertras.

No, they do seem to only be on these. But equally I'm not sure there are any misaligned* rows on other Aventras, or not that I've noticed.

That said, do some FLIRTs have something similar where you'd hit the seat back in the "wrong" place? I half recall they do?

* In terms of where your knees would hit the seat in front in a rapid deceleration, not in terms of window alignment.

 

[Russel]

No, they do seem to only be on these. But equally I'm not sure there are any misaligned* rows on other Aventras, or not that I've noticed.

That said, do some FLIRTs have something similar where you'd hit the seat back in the "wrong" place? I half recall they do?

* In terms of where your knees would hit the seat in front in a rapid deceleration, not in terms of window alignment.

To be honest the seats on these don't look to be misaligned by more than an inch or two, I'm struggling to see how much of an issue it really is, but I guess a risk assessment box had to be ticked!

Might have to take a closer look next time I visit the family in Clacton.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To be honest the seats on these don't look to be misaligned by more than an inch or two, I'm struggling to see how much of an issue it really is, but I guess a risk assessment box had to be ticked!

Might have to take a closer look next time I visit the family in Clacton.

I don't think it's much of an issue either, not least because not everyone will have their knees hit the seat in front in the same place because it rather depends on the width of their pelvis, but someone obviously thought it important! They are only on the misaligned seats, not on any others, though I agree they are not very misaligned!

730/2s don't have any misaligned seats (no need as they are spaced from the sidewall, the space is just smaller where the body gets narrower at the ends), I don't recall about /0s but don't recall seeing these things, never been on the SWR units.

 

[Instinct04]

As a regular 720 user I like them, I like the additional seats, they get very busy in peak times and the seats almost all get taken. For commuting to London I prefer them over the 745/755s.

I’m assuming you’ve never been on the 07:36 Hertford East to Liverpool Street train then…

The 720s are not good at handling large passenger numbers. (I should know, as I commute on them all the time.) The aisles are too narrow, and there aren’t many handles to grab on the seats and ceilings in the aisles.

I can’t even believe that there is talk of them going on to airport services anyway..

 

[jon0844]

I can’t even believe that there is talk of them going on to airport services anyway..

If you're flying with Ryanair, I guess these seats get you prepared for the plane.

Actually, there's more space in the aisles on a Max 8 so forget that. Perhaps it's a way to make people think Ryanair is more spacious!

 

[Russel]

I’m assuming you’ve never been on the 07:36 Hertford East to Liverpool Street train then…

The 720s are not good at handling large passenger numbers. (I should know, as I commute on them all the time.) The aisles are too narrow, and there aren’t many handles to grab on the seats and ceilings in the aisles.

I can’t even believe that there is talk of them going on to airport services anyway..

Agreed on the points you raise, they aren't really great at anything, they seem a bad compromise in most ways.

Though regarding your last point, in bold, the thread is about reconfiguring them, so less seats, more luggage space etc.