Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

[Class377/5]

Let's look at the alternatives you put forward:

17.40 ex Sevenoaks - Calls W Hampstead, Mill Hill, Elstree & Radlett before St Albans & all station to Bedford - would actually get me home AFTER the 17.56 ex Beckenham Jcn (see below) - also 2x319 so no aircon.

17.52 ex Brighton - Usually cancelled or so late it ends up behind the 17.56 (see below).

17.56 ex Beckenham Junction - Usually reliable and usually 2x387/1. Aircon mostly working but often gets platformed at Blackfriars BEFORE late running 17.52, so then has to soak up the 12-car passengers as well as its own at City, Farringdon & St Pancras.

18.06 ex Sevenoaks - Currently 2x377/5 on which the aircon is patchy at best at present.

18.10 ex Three Bridges - Too late & only 8 cars, the delayed 17.52 will be just behind (if running) - I wouldn't be getting home until around 19.30, having left the office at 17.00. I think 2.5 hours to get home is a bit much, don't you.

I expect working airconditioning in the summer, so a ratty well-past its sell-by date 319 doesn't seem like value for £5,172 per annum.

So now you want a 12 car 700?? I thought you hated them?

 

[Bletchleyite]

There isn't much 1st on the trains proportionally, so I really don't understand why it doesn't just stay as 1st.

 

[Bald Rick]

I expect working airconditioning in the summer, so a ratty well-past its sell-by date 319 doesn't seem like value for £5,172 per annum.

How did you manage before 2009?

As an aside, I have yet to go on a 700 with faulty air con (on about 30 trips so far, including 2 today). In the seven summers of operation of 377s / 387s on TL north I can count the number of trips I have had with failed or 'patchy' aircon on the fingers of one hand. To suggest that you would deliberately avoid a train on the basis that the aircon might not be working is beyond me.

Also, I also usually catch the 1752 from Blackfriars. If it is late or cancelled, you are guaranteed a seat on the 1756.

 

[Hadders]

I expect working airconditioning in the summer, so a ratty well-past its sell-by date 319 doesn't seem like value for £5,172 per annum.

Good job you don't commute on Great Northern then - none of our trains have air conditioning.

Although we'd be quite happy to keep the non air-conditioned 365s

 

[jaig]

True - the air conditioning on class 465 is amazing! Have you tried it on southeastern?

Sent from my SM-J500FN using Tapatalk

 

[AM9]

I expect working airconditioning in the summer, so a ratty well-past its sell-by date 319 doesn't seem like value for £5,172 per annum.

At about £10 each way for an Anytime ticket, that's a bargain. It's subsidised by those who pay the full fare (about double) and even helped by those that don't travel when the railway is stressed to its maximum on off-peak trains.
Why do season ticket holders think that they are paying a lot for their travel and should have additional privileged treatment?

 

[infobleep]

At about £10 each way for an Anytime ticket, that's a bargain. It's subsidised by those who pay the full fare (about double) and even helped by those that don't travel when the railway is stressed to its maximum on off-peak trains.
Why do season ticket holders think that they are paying a lot for their travel and should have additional privileged treatment?

Who do rial companies make the most amount of money off? I actually don't know but suspect it's commuters.

If so, they may be subsidised but the sheer volume of numbers outweighs the day tickets purchased at a far higher price.

Of course I'm only talking about the above example. Other examples exist where buy tickets daily at anytime rate is cheaper than an annual season ticket.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[AM9]

Who do rial companies make the most amount of money off? I actually don't know but suspect it's commuters.

If so, they may be subsidised but the sheer volume of numbers outweighs the day tickets purchased at a far higher price.

Of course I'm only talking about the above example. Other examples exist where buy tickets daily at anytime rate is cheaper than an annual season ticket.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Quite the opposite actually. If it wasn't for the commuters, Thameslink would be quite capable of managing using normal trains, (e.g. Electrostars or Desiros with tables, sockets, - maybe even end doors) and far fewer of them.

 

[grid56126]

This is completely unacceptable. Siemens should not be putting trains into service before they are ready. How dare they not foresee the problem of avian fowling of the pan well. A specialist bird of prey test rig should have been set up at Sandy in cooperation with the RSPB to derisk such issues. On this basis it is a safe bet they have not planned for swans nesting on the line, fox hunts shorting the third rail with their beagles and the surge of passengers going out to celebrate when England win a major football tournament. This would have never have happened when we had National Service.

I sort of agree, however, it was a 319. So the question should really be did the BR Research department at Derby have any RSPB lunches at Sandy in 1986? Did BREL York have an Avian test rig in the construction hall in 1987?

 

[infobleep]

Quite the opposite actually. If it wasn't for the commuters, Thameslink would be quite capable of managing using normal trains, (e.g. Electrostars or Desiros with tables, sockets, - maybe even end doors) and far fewer of them.

But with fewer trains would surely come less income from passengers or is it that full fault fare paying passengers are paying enough to buy rolling stock but the vast numbers or passengers o season tickets are not paying enough to subsidise their rolling stock?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[YorkshireBear]

But with fewer trains would surely come less income from passengers or is it that full fault fare paying passengers are paying enough to buy rolling stock but the vast numbers or passengers o season tickets are not paying enough to subsidise their rolling stock?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Commuters cause there to be a few hours a day where massive capacity is needed. Without commuters all travel would be spread more evenly and they wouldn't have to be permanently resourced for the few heavy periods....

I think that is the point he is making anyway.

 

[jon0844]

But with fewer trains would surely come less income from passengers or is it that full fault fare paying passengers are paying enough to buy rolling stock but the vast numbers or passengers o season tickets are not paying enough to subsidise their rolling stock?

Fewer passengers travelling in the peaks would likely increase profits, as it would have saved the need for new signalling, platform upgrades and other capacity increases, more rolling stock (much of which sits empty in a siding for most hours of the day) and other station upgrades.

If you could spread things out, by having staggered working hours (more likely than ever believing we'll all work from home) then that could massively help too.

So much money is invested for a few hours in the morning and a few in the afternoon.

 

[Bald Rick]

Who do rial companies make the most amount of money off? I actually don't know but suspect it's commuters.

If so, they may be subsidised but the sheer volume of numbers outweighs the day tickets purchased at a far higher price.

Don't confuse profit / subsidy with price / income.

London commuter TOCs make most of their income from season ticket holders. (As an aside, when more than half the annual season ticket holders renew in the 2 weeks before the January prices rises, this presents quite a cash flow problem).

However, as said by others, most of the cost of the railway is spent on providing peak capacity for about 10% of the week. The infrastructure, the trains and to an increasing extent the staff, ie the need to provide lots of drivers, platform, ticket office staff etc, for about 2 hours each morning and evening, but needing to give them a 35 hour working week.

So, the railway will make profit (or reduce subsidy) by filling that spare capacity in the off peak.

A surprising number of commuter operations are not profitable. For example the SWT, Southern and Southeastern inner suburban networks barely wash their faces despite the huge numbers of people that use them. London Overground requires a huge subsidy.

 

[infobleep]

Don't confuse profit / subsidy with price / income.

London commuter TOCs make most of their income from season ticket holders. (As an aside, when more than half the annual season ticket holders renew in the 2 weeks before the January prices rises, this presents quite a cash flow problem).

However, as said by others, most of the cost of the railway is spent on providing peak capacity for about 10% of the week. The infrastructure, the trains and to an increasing extent the staff, ie the need to provide lots of drivers, platform, ticket office staff etc, for about 2 hours each morning and evening, but needing to give them a 35 hour working week.

So, the railway will make profit (or reduce subsidy) by filling that spare capacity in the off peak.

A surprising number of commuter operations are not profitable. For example the SWT, Southern and Southeastern inner suburban networks barely wash their faces despite the huge numbers of people that use them. London Overground requires a huge subsidy.

So without if the whole day only had the average hourly off peak loadings, the train companies would make a better profit or require less subsidy than they do.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Bald Rick]

So without if the whole day only had the average hourly off peak loadings, the train companies would make a better profit or require less subsidy than they do.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

In the long run yes, assuming those average off peak loadings saw most seats filled (like happens on my line). And were charged peak fares

The most profitable railways carry a large amount of people on full trains on simple infrastructure for a decent amount of time / distance.

 

[jon0844]

It's why some TOCs have been wise to the idea of offering good off-peak ticket prices, super off peak tickets and other promotions.

The profit is filling the emptier trains, not trying to accommodate more commuters.

 

[infobleep]

In the long run yes, assuming those average off peak loadings saw most seats filled (like happens on my line). And were charged peak fares

The most profitable railways carry a large amount of people on full trains on simple infrastructure for a decent amount of time / distance.

So full paying passengers before off peak and off peak passengers would fund the railway, less carriages being required of course.

It's funny how things are not as clear cut as one imagines! Anyway didn't mean to drag this too off topic.

Normal emergency service can resume!

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[The Box Photter]

So now you want a 12 car 700?? I thought you hated them?

I just want a train to turn up as advertised that has adequate seating for a 1 hour plus journey that doesn't involve me having to share the body warmth of the commuter sitting next to me.

If all that's on offer is a 700, I'll take it. I haven't managed to "enjoy" a 700 for the past three weeks except on one occasion. The rest of the time, GTR failed to deliver.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

How did you manage before 2009?

As an aside, I have yet to go on a 700 with faulty air con (on about 30 trips so far, including 2 today). In the seven summers of operation of 377s / 387s on TL north I can count the number of trips I have had with failed or 'patchy' aircon on the fingers of one hand. To suggest that you would deliberately avoid a train on the basis that the aircon might not be working is beyond me.

Also, I also usually catch the 1752 from Blackfriars. If it is late or cancelled, you are guaranteed a seat on the 1756.

I didn't enjoy commuting much in the summer, thanks very much. Let's not forget that the 319s were inadequate too.

And, yes, I do avoid a 319 formed train now. I think that's allowed. Even the refurbished ones are rubbish.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

At about £10 each way for an Anytime ticket, that's a bargain. It's subsidised by those who pay the full fare (about double) and even helped by those that don't travel when the railway is stressed to its maximum on off-peak trains.
Why do season ticket holders think that they are paying a lot for their travel and should have additional privileged treatment?

We think we're paying a lot because we are. Could you rustle up £5000 all in one go? Don't forget we're paying all that cash up front from taxed earnings and we don't get a refund when we're on holiday.

If you don't want to "subsidise" me, go by car instead and leave more room for people who need to get to work. Your off-peak travel is voluntary.

 

[DerekC]

Who do rail companies make the most amount of money off? I actually don't know but suspect it's commuters.

On the one hand commuters are a complete pain - peak loads, rolling stock standing idle the rest of the day, complaints .... On the other hand, if there weren't any commuters there wouldn't be a railway and if there wasn't a railway there wouldn't be any commuters ... I think that's called a symbiotic relationship.

 

[nidave]

<SNIP>

We think we're paying a lot because we are. Could you rustle up £5000 all in one go? Don't forget we're paying all that cash up front from taxed earnings and we don't get a refund when we're on holiday.

Most companies offer a season ticket loan where they fund the money then its taken directly from pay spread over a year. All travel from home to a main place of business is taxable. It comes out of the net pay. You are making out you are paying more than others when that's not strictly true.
Plus all off peak travel comes from peoples net pay where they have already paid tax on it.

 

[bILLOO]

Tried one today. Rather enjoyed it. Everything was working and the train ran on time. Lovely.

 

[asylumxl]

Most companies offer a season ticket loan where they fund the money then its taken directly from pay spread over a year. All travel from home to a main place of business is taxable. It comes out of the net pay. You are making out you are paying more than others when that's not strictly true.
Plus all off peak travel comes from peoples net pay where they have already paid tax on it.

Do you have any statistics regarding the number of companies providing loans? My work only started offering loans for season tickets in the past year or so.

It's worth adding that the season ticket from St Albans to London Thameslink is significantly more than a similar journey such as Hatfield to London Terminals, £3,320.00 vs £2,584.00 per year. I think this may be what The Box Photter means when he says he is paying more.

 

[AM9]

We think we're paying a lot because we are. Could you rustle up £5000 all in one go? Don't forget we're paying all that cash up front from taxed earnings and we don't get a refund when we're on holiday.

If you don't want to "subsidise" me, go by car instead and leave more room for people who need to get to work. Your off-peak travel is voluntary.

If I was still working and had a job that needed travel costing £5000 pa, it would be part of the overall decision i.e. job, house location, mode of travel. When I used to commute, I did Colchester to Ilford, I didn't get central London pay, I had to use monthly seasons and it took 3 trains each way to do the journey. My employer didn't offer advance purchase loans so I just bought the ticket that I could afford.
I rarely travel on anytime tickets so I don't really subsidise you, - this is not a 'poor me' discussion. I do feel for those who do have to fund their own anytime travel though and pay double the rate per mile that those with season tickets do. And the season ticket holders still moan about their cheaper travel.



I've heard from a friend travelling home from London to Harpenden that 1W56 (diagrammed as a class 700) that they caught at St Pancras, stopped at West Hampstead with no power. After after about 10 minutes the driver announced that the trains was proceeding on half power. At Harpenden the delay had stretched to 20 minutes.

 

[nidave]

Do you have any statistics regarding the number of companies providing loans? My work only started offering loans for season tickets in the past year or so.

It's worth adding that the season ticket from St Albans to London Thameslink is significantly more than a similar journey such as Hatfield to London Terminals, £3,320.00 vs £2,584.00 per year. I think this may be what The Box Photter means when he says he is paying more.

I work for a payroll software provider so only really have my experience with my customers (as it does not need to be reported) but its more common in London than other places and a lot of employers will provide one if prompted by employees. Some employers make a bigger deal out of it than others.

Some areas to offer a Salary Sacrifice scheme where the employee gets reduced tax & ni by the loan amount but that is very regional and may be limited to a specific mode of transport.

 

[Class 466]

I think this may have swayed way off topic... Am I right in saying 9 units have been in service?

 

[Class377/5]

I think this may have swayed way off topic... Am I right in saying 9 units have been in service?

As previously posted, 9 units have been in service.

 

[southern442]

I don't believe my question was answered from a while ago - what services will next have class 700's?

 

[bramling]

If I was still working and had a job that needed travel costing £5000 pa, it would be part of the overall decision i.e. job, house location, mode of travel. When I used to commute, I did Colchester to Ilford, I didn't get central London pay, I had to use monthly seasons and it took 3 trains each way to do the journey. My employer didn't offer advance purchase loans so I just bought the ticket that I could afford.
I rarely travel on anytime tickets so I don't really subsidise you, - this is not a 'poor me' discussion. I do feel for those who do have to fund their own anytime travel though and pay double the rate per mile that those with season tickets do. And the season ticket holders still moan about their cheaper travel..

I don't see how one can reliably arrive at any figure for what a season ticketholder actually pays relative to those buying daily tickets, as any such figure makes an assumption as to how many days the season ticket actually gets used, and at what times.

Not everyone travels Mon-Fri peak times.

For example, I tend to travel around 1300, returning around 2100. This may also include weekends, except that with GTR's recent shambolic delivery I can't remember the last time I chanced not going by car on a weekend. I'm also off 3 weeks out of every 11, and have over 60 annual leave days. However on the plus side I do sometimes use the season ticket for leisure or local travel.

All this will of course come to an abrupt end in November when it runs out. I'm tired of GTR and the prospect of Thameslink and its unreliability and inferior trains. Car wins the day. I know another doing likewise. So two empty seats on an off-peak class 700.

 

[AM9]

I don't see how one can reliably arrive at any figure for what a season ticketholder actually pays relative to those buying daily tickets, as any such figure makes an assumption as to how many days the season ticket actually gets used, and at what times.

Not everyone travels Mon-Fri peak times.

For example, I tend to travel around 1300, returning around 2100. This may also include weekends, except that with GTR's recent shambolic delivery I can't remember the last time I chanced not going by car on a weekend. I'm also off 3 weeks out of every 11, and have over 60 annual leave days. However on the plus side I do sometimes use the season ticket for leisure or local travel.

All this will of course come to an abrupt end in November when it runs out. I'm tired of GTR and the prospect of Thameslink and its unreliability and inferior trains. Car wins the day. I know another doing likewise. So two empty seats on an off-peak class 700.

The structure of fares including season tickets has evolved in line with the travel patterns of the majority of passengers. Those using trains for their usual peak hour return journeys five days per week force the railway to provide infrastructure and rolling stock that meets that demand at great cost. The selection of class 700 type rolling stock and an integrated high-performance infrastructure in the core is a consequence of this need. My point has always been that the cost of that provision is unfairly allocated across ticket types. Many passnegers whose travel is done at times that better use spare capacity pay an unfair price to subsidise those who travel in the peaks. Comparing the relative costs endured by individual passengers can only really be done by using costs per mile for a particular journey.
Increasingly, work-life patterns may not match the current ticket offerings so there will be those who don't see rail as their most cost-effective option. It seems that you will be making such a choice which of course is your perogative. You are fortunate to have the choice, - many don't.

 

[Goldfish62]

A surprising number of commuter operations are not profitable. For example the SWT, Southern and Southeastern inner suburban networks barely wash their faces despite the huge numbers of people that use them. London Overground requires a huge subsidy.

London Overground is close to break even. Bit of an exaggeration saying it requires a huge subsidy. From 2018 TfL's day to day operations across all modes will need to operate commercially as there will be no subsidy