Southern Interiors

[7ransport]

Why do some 377 units have 2 different seat types, particularly the /4s, and /1s from 377120 onwards? Thanks

 

[RichardKing]

Why do some 377 units have 2 different seat types, particularly the /4s, and /1s from 377120 onwards? Thanks

In terms of the /4s, I believe the original plan was to have the leading and trailing coaches (with the comfier seating) dedicated entirely to first class, with the two middle coaches (with the ironing board seating) remaining as standard. Of course, it was soon realised that capacity wouldn't allow for this and first class was subsequently reduced to what it is now.

The /1s (120-139) are high density units, hence the 3+2 ironing board seating featuring in all coaches.

It should also be noted that the /1s and /3s were ordered and specified by Connex and the /2s and /4s by Govia, which is why there are various differences between sub-classes.

 

[JonathanH]

Why do some 377 units have 2 different seat types, particularly the /4s, and /1s from 377120 onwards? Thanks

The units replaced some trains with 2+2 (eg class 421s) and others with 3+2 seating (eg class 423s) which in their latter years were often used together on the same services. To maintain capacity a mix of two seating types was fitted.

In terms of the /4s, I believe the original plan was to have the leading and trailing coaches (with the comfier seating) dedicated entirely to first class, with the two middle coaches (with the ironing board seating) remaining as standard.

That would be significant over provision of first class capacity and isn't true.

There was an original plan in Connex days to make a whole coach first class on 12-car trains and the remaining 11 coaches standard class. However the 377/4s were not ordered by Connex and the plan had already been abandoned as impractical by then.

That said, the divider in the main saloon of the 377/4 driving cars might have allowed more first class to be designated when necessary. They don't all still have that fitting. It is only on the 377/4s (and the later /5s) where there is a proper screen dividing off the first class area.

 

[RJ]

There are different layouts too - some have the declassified First seating in coaches 1 and 4, others have it at the ends of carriages except where the toilets are.

 

[JonathanH]

There are different layouts too - some have the declassified First seating in coaches 1 and 4, others have it at the ends of carriages except where the toilets are.

That is just a change in approach - presumably they found that the layout of 377120-377139 wasn't really that successful.

 

[7ransport]

In terms of the /4s, I believe the original plan was to have the leading and trailing coaches (with the comfier seating) dedicated entirely to first class, with the two middle coaches (with the ironing board seating) remaining as standard. Of course, it was soon realised that capacity wouldn't allow for this and first class was subsequently reduced to what it is now.

The /1s (120-139) are high density units, hence the 3+2 ironing board seating featuring in all coaches.

It should also be noted that the /1s and /3s were ordered and specified by Connex and the /2s and /4s by Govia, which is why there are various differences between sub-classes.

That would make sense, as the current first class seating is identical to the comfier seating.
But that leaves me with the question as to why the current first class seats have different armrests, and why 377101-119 are 2+2 in all 4 carriages.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Oct 2021 ==

The units replaced some trains with 2+2 (eg class 421s) and others with 3+2 seating (eg class 423s) which in their latter years were often used together on the same services. To maintain capacity a mix of two seating types was fitted.


That would be significant over provision of first class capacity and isn't true.
en
There was an original plan in Connex days to make a whole coach first class on 12-car trains and the remaining 11 coaches standard class. However the 377/4s were not ordered by Connex and the plan had already been abandoned as impractical by then.

That said, the divider in the main saloon of the 377/4 driving cars might have allowed more first class to be designated when necessary. They don't all still have that fitting. It is only on the 377/4s (and the later /5s) where there is a proper screen dividing off the first class area.

If that was the case, why didn't Southern use 3+2 seating throughout all cars for standard class?

 

[Bishopstone]

The 377s replaced 'slam door' VEPs with 2+3 seating, and CIGs with 2+2 seating, on some Metro work in London, but also runs as long as Victoria to Hastings (via Eastbourne) and Southampton.

Going for 2+2 seating throughout, on the 377s, would have significantly reduced the number of seats available on critical peak services, upsetting commuters at a time of growth.

Going for lower quality 2+3 seating throughout would have upset long-distance commuters and leisure travellers: much as the 'blue trains' (450s), 2+3 seated, did not find favour with Portsmouth line commuters on SWT.

So there were various running amendments to the configuration of the passenger saloons as the 377 builds progressed, which has resulted in most 377s having a mix of 2+2 and 2+3 seating, but in different parts of the unit dependent upon the build date or sub-class. There are some early-build 377/1s that are entirely 2+2 seated, and also (I recall) some later 377/1s that are entirely 2+3 seated in Standard Class, but by luck or astute diagramming, the latter don't seem to appear on East Coastway frequently.

In my view the solution was ingenious and works well. Long-distance travellers on Up trains tend to plump for the 2+2 seating which is more 'Inter City' in quality, leaving the 2+3 seating for those with journey times of an hour or less, boarding later. Most Southern services comprise two units coupled, so the random unit generator will ensure - almost always - a mix of seating types.

 

[JonathanH]

also (I recall) some later 377/1s that are entirely 2+3 seated in Standard Class

There aren't any entirely 2+3 seated in Standard Class. Only the Southeastern 375/9s have that.

 

[7ransport]

There aren't any entirely 2+3 seated in Standard Class. Only the Southeastern 375/9s have that.

I think Bishopstone was referring to 377120-139, which have 2+3 in the center of all carriages, with 2+2 at the ends of each carriage.

 

[JonathanH]

I think Bishopstone was referring to 377120-139, which have 2+3 in the center of all carriages, with 2+2 at the ends of each carriage.

Maybe, but they aren't entirely 2+3 seated and do appear on all of Southern's routes.

 

[7ransport]

The 377s replaced 'slam door' VEPs with 2+3 seating, and CIGs with 2+2 seating, on some Metro work in London, but also runs as long as Victoria to Hastings (via Eastbourne) and Southampton.

Going for 2+2 seating throughout, on the 377s, would have significantly reduced the number of seats available on critical peak services, upsetting commuters at a time of growth.

Going for lower quality 2+3 seating throughout would have upset long-distance commuters and leisure travellers: much as the 'blue trains' (450s), 2+3 seated, did not find favour with Portsmouth line commuters on SWT.

So there were various running amendments to the configuration of the passenger saloons as the 377 builds progressed, which has resulted in most 377s having a mix of 2+2 and 2+3 seating, but in different parts of the unit dependent upon the build date or sub-class. There are some early-build 377/1s that are entirely 2+2 seated, and also (I recall) some later 377/1s that are entirely 2+3 seated in Standard Class, but by luck or astute diagramming, the latter don't seem to appear on East Coastway frequently.

In my view the solution was ingenious and works well. Long-distance travellers on Up trains tend to plump for the 2+2 seating which is more 'Inter City' in quality, leaving the 2+3 seating for those with journey times of an hour or less, boarding later. Most Southern services comprise two units coupled, so the random unit generator will ensure - almost always - a mix of seating types.

That makes sense, as people make both short and long distance journeys on 377s, especially to the south coast.

 

[43096]

In terms of the /4s, I believe the original plan was to have the leading and trailing coaches (with the comfier seating) dedicated entirely to first class, with the two middle coaches (with the ironing board seating) remaining as standard.

It was nothing like that. It was a really rather clever way of replacing the VEPs (2+3 seating) and CIGs (2+2 seating) with a single train type that allowed maximum flexibility.

 

[Bishopstone]

There aren't any entirely 2+3 seated in Standard Class. Only the Southeastern 375/9s have that.

This will be why I don’t see them very often: they don’t exist!

 

[thedbdiboy]

In terms of the /4s, I believe the original plan was to have the leading and trailing coaches (with the comfier seating) dedicated entirely to first class, with the two middle coaches (with the ironing board seating) remaining as standard. Of course, it was soon realised that capacity wouldn't allow for this and first class was subsequently reduced to what it is now.

The /1s (120-139) are high density units, hence the 3+2 ironing board seating featuring in all coaches.

It should also be noted that the /1s and /3s were ordered and specified by Connex and the /2s and /4s by Govia, which is why there are various differences between sub-classes.

I was working for Connex at the time and that was never the plan. Bishopstone has the answer:

The 377s replaced 'slam door' VEPs with 2+3 seating, and CIGs with 2+2 seating, on some Metro work in London, but also runs as long as Victoria to Hastings (via Eastbourne) and Southampton.

Going for 2+2 seating throughout, on the 377s, would have significantly reduced the number of seats available on critical peak services, upsetting commuters at a time of growth.

Going for lower quality 2+3 seating throughout would have upset long-distance commuters and leisure travellers: much as the 'blue trains' (450s), 2+3 seated, did not find favour with Portsmouth line commuters on SWT.

So there were various running amendments to the configuration of the passenger saloons as the 377 builds progressed, which has resulted in most 377s having a mix of 2+2 and 2+3 seating, but in different parts of the unit dependent upon the build date or sub-class. There are some early-build 377/1s that are entirely 2+2 seated, and also (I recall) some later 377/1s that are entirely 2+3 seated in Standard Class, but by luck or astute diagramming, the latter don't seem to appear on East Coastway frequently.

In my view the solution was ingenious and works well. Long-distance travellers on Up trains tend to plump for the 2+2 seating which is more 'Inter City' in quality, leaving the 2+3 seating for those with journey times of an hour or less, boarding later. Most Southern services comprise two units coupled, so the random unit generator will ensure - almost always - a mix of seating types.

The VEPs were not comfortable when fully loaded but were prodigious people-movers - a 12 VEP could shift over 1000 people. The original all 2+2 layout of the Electrostars couldn't get close to this but 2+3 seating was (and is) not popular on longer runs hence the compromise.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

A bit OT but maybe of interest to the OP; most, if not all the 375/6 units operated by Connex South Eastern had one of the driving coaches entirely classified as First Class. It wasn't long until this arrangement was dropped

 

[RichardKing]

That would be significant over provision of first class capacity and isn't true.

There was an original plan in Connex days to make a whole coach first class on 12-car trains and the remaining 11 coaches standard class. However the 377/4s were not ordered by Connex and the plan had already been abandoned as impractical by then.

It was nothing like that. It was a really rather clever way of replacing the VEPs (2+3 seating) and CIGs (2+2 seating) with a single train type that allowed maximum flexibility.

I was working for Connex at the time and that was never the plan. Bishopstone has the answer:

My mistake, I think I misinterpreted what I was told previously.
Thinking about it, first class in 2 coaches would be ridiculous... I'm not sure what I was thinking!

 

[AM9]

In my view the solution was ingenious and works well. Long-distance travellers on Up trains tend to plump for the 2+2 seating which is more 'Inter City' in quality, leaving the 2+3 seating for those with journey times of an hour or less, boarding later. Most Southern services comprise two units coupled, so the random unit generator will ensure - almost always - a mix of seating types.

Which means that getting a 2+2 seat for a long down journey back is a bit of a lottery. It might involve standing to East Croydon or Gatwick before the shorter distance commuters vacate the better seats.