Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

[Minstral25]

Seeing the comments on 2+2 earlier in the thread. The passenger problems with 3+2 is that the seats are exceptionally narrow to fit 5 seats wide. In the 700s they have used the narrow 3+2 in a 2+2 formation.

When passengers say they want 2+2 its that they want the wider seats of 2+2 not that they want narrow 3+2 seats in a 2+2 set up. They don't want to be in narrow seats touching the person next to them for an hour or more

Its duplicitous of the railway industry to say they have listened by putting narrow 2+2, its a complete lie!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The discussion was over the seats, not the spacing. Interesting most of the Thameslink stock had no arm rests.



I never said that did I. Of course it depends on what your comparing against as it's clear that on Thameslink such things (seat back tables etc) are not there for most people anyway (try finding them on most 319s).

Most of the Thameslink stock was metro on the Wimbledon route. When they ended up on Brighton trains they were extremely unpopular.

Brighton line is Inter-City and should have tray tables and arm rests as normal.

 

[AM9]

Here we go again, the Thameslink line is one of the busiest railways in the country, comparable with many real 'metro' lines. There is a problem of how to provide a service for such large numbers of passengers within very limited infrastructure.
The option taken seems to address the following as a priority:

Reliability of timetable - ATO in the core, uniform formations, rapid boarding and alighting, easy distribution of (passenger) load
Reduced travelling time - Fast, lightweight stock, short bogie wheelbase
Maximum passenger capacity - adequate seating for average journey times with generous standing room for peak loadings, efficient heating/air conditioning, better lighting

Inevitably there will be those who complain that it isn't as good as xxx other new trains (envy) or worse than the old days (nostalgia), but that's the way it goes. If the line hadn't been electrified in the '80s and the old Bedpan stock was replaced they could have been lumbered with 150s or even pacers.Then the 700s would be more appreciated.
And the myths about MKI stock perpetuate. The real MKI LHCS stock had interior sprung cushions as the track and the trains that ran on them had poor riding. Later MKI vehicles, (e.g. BIG/CIG) had hard based seats with soft foam that rapidly became compressed. The rides wasn't much better though. Apart from the nostalgia trip, I would rather travel regularly in a 700 for 30 minutes at 100mph than a CIG at 80-90mph for 40 minutes. Chances are there would be passengers left on the platforms with the CIG as their standing capacity was not good, but those who boarded near the start of the train s journey got their seats. The thread is dominated by personal wants, it's all me me me!

 

[fusionblue]

Well actually, this longest journey from Aldgate to Chesham will take 68 minutes. The journey from the opposite of the Thameslink core i.e. Blackfriars to Bedford mostly takes between 61 and 72 minutes. So where's the significant difference?

The 1000 service from Sevenoaks to Bedford is 2 hours 19.

(There is 2 other branches south of Blackfriars that Thameslink serves too, dont forget!)

With the 319s now and 3/2 seats it's easy to find a space at certain times, but when that shrinks to 2/2 with the 700s it's likely it's going to become standing room half way up the catford loop towards london, possibly even around bromley. So if my journey regresses from "sometimes get a seat" to "not likely to get a seat" combined with a 0% increase in frequency or length (which has already been confirmed) then it is going to look quite the 700s wasn't exactly designed for the sutton/catford loops correctly.

Adopting a "one size fits all" solution for all three routes, while not actually changing anything on two of the three sounds like the 700s was designed to fit the infrastructure that was already there as opposed to making the investment (even if its over time) to support what is needed there anyway - the 378s is a great example of how it caught TFL off guard (admittedly they had no data to work on!) and the demand placed upon them.

 

[Minstral25]

Here we go again, the Thameslink line is one of the busiest railways in the country, comparable with many real 'metro' lines. There is a problem of how to provide a service for such large numbers of passengers within very limited infrastructure.
The option taken seems to address the following as a priority:

Reliability of timetable - ATO in the core, uniform formations, rapid boarding and alighting, easy distribution of (passenger) load
Reduced travelling time - Fast, lightweight stock, short bogie wheelbase
Maximum passenger capacity - adequate seating for average journey times with generous standing room for peak loadings, efficient heating/air conditioning, better lighting

Inevitably there will be those who complain that it isn't as good as xxx other new trains (envy) or worse than the old days (nostalgia), but that's the way it goes. If the line hadn't been electrified in the '80s and the old Bedpan stock was replaced they could have been lumbered with 150s or even pacers.Then the 700s would be more appreciated.
And the myths about MKI stock perpetuate. The real MKI LHCS stock had interior sprung cushions as the track and the trains that ran on them had poor riding. Later MKI vehicles, (e.g. BIG/CIG) had hard based seats with soft foam that rapidly became compressed. The rides wasn't much better though. Apart from the nostalgia trip, I would rather travel regularly in a 700 for 30 minutes at 100mph than a CIG at 80-90mph for 40 minutes. Chances are there would be passengers left on the platforms with the CIG as their standing capacity was not good, but those who boarded near the start of the train s journey got their seats. The thread is dominated by personal wants, it's all me me me!

"adequate seating for average journey times" My legs are too long to fit in the space, my Shoulders are 4 inches wider than the seat and my average journey time is 45-60 minutes. These seats are not adequate for that journey daily.

I appreciate the "Core" argument but London - Brighton and London - Cambridge is a service between two Cities so the trains should be of Higher Standard.

I presume you will argue that Birmingham to London on the HS2 should be on trains with comparable seats/standing arrangements as Thameslink because that journey will be 43 minutes. Much shorter than many Thameslink services!

 

[AM9]

"adequate seating for average journey times" My legs are too long to fit in the space, my Shoulders are 4 inches wider than the seat and my average journey time is 45-60 minutes. These seats are not adequate for that journey daily.that journey will be 43 minutes. Much shorter than many Thameslink services!

Clearly you are not the 'average' passenger, but the railway has to compromise with a limited infrastructure and the majority of passengers fall within the 'average' bracket.

I appreciate the "Core" argument but London - Brighton and London - Cambridge is a service between two Cities so the trains should be of Higher Standard.that journey will be 43 minutes. Much shorter than many Thameslink services!

Let's not get bogged down with the 'city' soubriquet, unless you want to provide 'inter-city' passenger conforts for St Albans travellers. The number of passengers travelling from these places do not take the 'average' travelling time.

I presume you will argue that Birmingham to London on the HS2 should be on trains with comparable seats/standing arrangements as Thameslink because that journey will be 43 minutes. Much shorter than many Thameslink services!

HS2 will not, (or certainly shouldn't be) limited by its infrastructure. In addition, I imagine that standing on high speed services will be disallowed on H & S grounds. As far as seating goes, the seats will probably be fairly basic, possibly 3 + 2 within the larger loading gauge to maximise the capacity at some point in the future is demand justifies it. Forget the time that the service takes per trip, the train has no problem running for hours. 100% of drivers travel the full length of each run but a very limited number of passengers (throughout the day) travel the length of the runs. Trains on commuter lines are run for the majority of journey types and those doing less common journeys will of necessaity may get less appropriate accomodation.

When the 387s disappear and the 700s are the only choice, I can hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth of those who currently get their regular seat at Bedford, Peterborough, Cambridge etc. and (inwardly) gloat at the unfortunates who can't always even get on at later stops. Get used to it.

 

[FOH]

"adequate seating for average journey times" My legs are too long to fit in the space, my Shoulders are 4 inches wider than the seat and my average journey time is 45-60 minutes. These seats are not adequate for that journey daily.

I appreciate the "Core" argument but London - Brighton and London - Cambridge is a service between two Cities so the trains should be of Higher Standard.

I presume you will argue that Birmingham to London on the HS2 should be on trains with comparable seats/standing arrangements as Thameslink because that journey will be 43 minutes. Much shorter than many Thameslink services!

I'd just accept it and get over it. There was a huge campaign when SWT put 450s on the Portsmouth route instead of 444s. SWT got some H&S chap in who declared the seats safe for posture and that was that.

 

[Class377/5]

I'm already surprised at the lack of Wifi - How will those Civil Servants and MPs who claim to travel by train connect to their work with no Wifi?...

But being serious for a moment, I am rather surprised at this omission, given the various older fleets, including the HSTs, which will soon have Wifi if not fitted already.

Good Train, Poor Specification?

One thing to remember is Siemens offered the Desiro City back in 2008. Wifi is an opional extra as the DfT didn't suggest they wanted it.

Seeing the comments on 2+2 earlier in the thread. The passenger problems with 3+2 is that the seats are exceptionally narrow to fit 5 seats wide. In the 700s they have used the narrow 3+2 in a 2+2 formation.

When passengers say they want 2+2 its that they want the wider seats of 2+2 not that they want narrow 3+2 seats in a 2+2 set up. They don't want to be in narrow seats touching the person next to them for an hour or more

Its duplicitous of the railway industry to say they have listened by putting narrow 2+2, its a complete lie!

Think you need to check your facts. It was the DfT stated that. Seems your more interested in pointing the finger.

Most of the Thameslink stock was metro on the Wimbledon route. When they ended up on Brighton trains they were extremely unpopular.

Brighton line is Inter-City and should have tray tables and arm rests as normal.

The original service was never to Wimbledon. Brighton came first of course with the Wimbledon Loop added much later.

Thameslink is not the actually main fast service for Brighton. Same goes for Cambridge.

Here we go again, the Thameslink line is one of the busiest railways in the country, comparable with many real 'metro' lines. There is a problem of how to provide a service for such large numbers of passengers within very limited infrastructure.

You can argue that Thameslink had metro services from Luton to Brighton on current frequencies (4tph on ELL is confused a metro). Distance however Brighton to Bedford are around 50 miles from London. Met line is just over 40 miles. Of course future routes will be much further out.

The option taken seems to address the following as a priority:

Reliability of timetable - ATO in the core, uniform formations, rapid boarding and alighting, easy distribution of (passenger) load
Reduced travelling time - Fast, lightweight stock, short bogie wheelbase
Maximum passenger capacity - adequate seating for average journey times with generous standing room for peak loadings, efficient heating/air conditioning, better lighting

Inevitably there will be those who complain that it isn't as good as xxx other new trains (envy) or worse than the old days (nostalgia), but that's the way it goes. If the line hadn't been electrified in the '80s and the old Bedpan stock was replaced they could have been lumbered with 150s or even pacers.Then the 700s would be more appreciated.
And the myths about MKI stock perpetuate. The real MKI LHCS stock had interior sprung cushions as the track and the trains that ran on them had poor riding. Later MKI vehicles, (e.g. BIG/CIG) had hard based seats with soft foam that rapidly became compressed. The rides wasn't much better though. Apart from the nostalgia trip, I would rather travel regularly in a 700 for 30 minutes at 100mph than a CIG at 80-90mph for 40 minutes. Chances are there would be passengers left on the platforms with the CIG as their standing capacity was not good, but those who boarded near the start of the train s journey got their seats. The thread is dominated by personal wants, it's all me me me!

Of course people complain that things aren't as good add they used to be. Well new trains are less likely to catch fire (and if they do, they have systems to help you escape unharmed) and much more safe if an accident were to happen. Modern seating is designed to be supportive while robust.

That's without the fact trains address the needs of people by bring more accessible (wheelchair acessible for just one example).

Overall Im not sure what people expect, is getting to the point now where there are just so many people travelling you have to make comprises. Simple fact is so many are traveling in the Core area you need standing areas that allow people to travel between the coaches in peak. 2+3 seating is hated and was removed yet some people have attacked the trains for having less seats. Whatever you do people compressing about the units. The best bet is increasing seating capacity for those making the longer trips and improve the conditions for those having to stand. You cannot provide seats for all, that is reality.

There are huge increases in capacity to come about because of the 700. But the Thameslink Programme was supposed to bring enough capacity for around 50 years when it was begun. The rate at which is increasing now looks like it's only going to improve the situation and during the 2030s capacity will be at a similar point again. And the anti HS2 groups claim home working is making the train less revelant!

 

[Via Bank]

I'd just accept it and get over it. There was a huge campaign when SWT put 450s on the Portsmouth route instead of 444s. SWT got some H&S chap in who declared the seats safe for posture and that was that.

Hah! I take it you've never seen any of their Tweet the Manager or webchat events? Various people on various lines (principally local MP Penny Morduant) are still bleating about the "narrow" 2+3 seating to this day.

I can see similar complaints about the 700s from the same rose tinted nostalgia-fetish element, but I suspect the majority of passengers will be perfectly fine with them (as they're perfectly fine with 450s.) Much more important will be ensuring that it runs on time, doesn't break down and that the fare isn't unreasonable.

 

[Class377/5]

Lots of 700 news in the new Rail out today. Including confirming the batches of the 700 to be delivered starting in August.

1. 11x 12 car (700/1)
2. 6x 8 car (700/0)
3. 4x 12 car
4. 40x 8 car
5. 30x 12 car
6. 12x 8 car
7. 10x 12 car
8. 2x 8 car

• First unit, 700107, expected in early August
• Last unit expected June 2018
• By the end of the year there will be a 700 delivery every week
• 200 bodyshells completed
• 13th unit to be built is the second 8 car delivery (700002)
• ATO is installed and working on the track
• The 700s have been changing power on the move even (not planned to do this on Thameslink)
• 700101 has done over 15,000 miles

h and the 707 fleet build starts in June.

 

[Stompehh]

Regarding the WiFi - this will likely be added by the operator afterwards as they supply their own WiFi systems (although might be tricky in the core?)

The IEP trains are the same - the spec calls for provision to be in place for the equipment (rack space, power supply etc.) but stops short of specifying the equipment itself. FGW will fit their WiFi kit when the trains arrive (probably transferred from the HSTs).

 

[Blamethrower]

I can see similar complaints about the 700s from the same rose tinted nostalgia-fetish element, but I suspect the majority of passengers will be perfectly fine with them (as they're perfectly fine with 450s.)

By the same token, I am perfectly fine with my job, I absolutely hate it but unless I move to improve my situation, you just have to put up with it and be British.

It is British to just put up and shut up, which is what everyone will eventually do, and that is NOT a way to win an argument. Realistically, as the only country in the world never to have a revolution, we will always just put up and shut up.

That's why this country sucks so much

 

[hwl]

Lots of 700 news in the new Rail out today. Including confirming the batches of the 700 to be delivered starting in August.

1. 11x 12 car (700/1)
2. 6x 8 car (700/0)
3. 4x 12 car
4. 40x 8 car
5. 30x 12 car
6. 12x 8 car
7. 10x 12 car
8. 2x 8 car

• First unit, 700107, expected in early August
• Last unit expected June 2018
• By the end of the year there will be a 700 delivery every week
• 200 bodyshells completed
• 13th unit to be built is the second 8 car delivery (700002)
• ATO is installed and working on the track
• The 700s have been changing power on the move even (not planned to do this on Thameslink)
• 700101 has done over 15,000 miles

h and the 707 fleet build starts in June.

With the first UK arrival in August, first handover to GTR in December then first unit in service in Feb '16 that sounds like a huge amount of testing and driver training in advance of introduction. So reliability should hopefully be very good.

I assume the first units to be displaced by the 700s will still be the first batch of 10x 387s to FGW and then some 377/5s transferring to GN to allow the release of 365/321/317s.

The first batch being 12 car presumably means a number of services get lengthen from 8 to 12 car?

 

[jon0844]

Providing a working Wifi service in the core shouldn't be too hard to implement. It would quite possibly work better than trying to provide a good service in rural areas, although by 2018 800MHz LTE should be nationwide on all 4 (or 3) networks.

 

[southern442]

Clearly you are not the 'average' passenger, but the railway has to compromise with a limited infrastructure and the majority of passengers fall within the 'average' bracket.



Let's not get bogged down with the 'city' soubriquet, unless you want to provide 'inter-city' passenger conforts for St Albans travellers. The number of passengers travelling from these places do not take the 'average' travelling time.



HS2 will not, (or certainly shouldn't be) limited by its infrastructure. In addition, I imagine that standing on high speed services will be disallowed on H & S grounds. As far as seating goes, the seats will probably be fairly basic, possibly 3 + 2 within the larger loading gauge to maximise the capacity at some point in the future is demand justifies it. Forget the time that the service takes per trip, the train has no problem running for hours. 100% of drivers travel the full length of each run but a very limited number of passengers (throughout the day) travel the length of the runs. Trains on commuter lines are run for the majority of journey types and those doing less common journeys will of necessaity may get less appropriate accomodation.

If HS2 really does get 3+2 seats (which it won't) then the DfT will really be taking the p***.

 

[AM9]

If HS2 really does get 3+2 seats (which it won't) then the DfT will really be taking the p***.

Then there will be a choice, a c1hour trip to Brum on HS2 in 2+3 seating in a large loading gauge car or 1.5-2hours in a Pendolino. The choice will be there for those who want to make their point.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

By the same token, I am perfectly fine with my job, I absolutely hate it but unless I move to improve my situation, you just have to put up with it and be British.

It is British to just put up and shut up, which is what everyone will eventually do, and that is NOT a way to win an argument. Realistically, as the only country in the world never to have a revolution, we will always just put up and shut up.

That's why this country sucks so much

Sounds like you need to find somewhere more to your taste to live in.

 

[Class377/5]

With the first UK arrival in August, first handover to GTR in December then first unit in service in Feb '16 that sounds like a huge amount of testing and driver training in advance of introduction. So reliability should hopefully be very good.

I assume the first units to be displaced by the 700s will still be the first batch of 10x 387s to FGW and then some 377/5s transferring to GN to allow the release of 365/321/317s.

The first batch being 12 car presumably means a number of services get lengthen from 8 to 12 car?

Driver training has already started. Don't forget by the time the first unit is over there will be 12 Thameslink drivers passed out on training duties with 12 more Southern shortly afterwards.

The first batch could just replace the all day 12 cars 377s with the 377s replaying the 387s. Haven't seen the actual plan.

Regarding the WiFi - this will likely be added by the operator afterwards as they supply their own WiFi systems (although might be tricky in the core?)

The IEP trains are the same - the spec calls for provision to be in place for the equipment (rack space, power supply etc.) but stops short of specifying the equipment itself. FGW will fit their WiFi kit when the trains arrive (probably transferred from the HSTs).

The wi f i will be , installed and maintained by Siemens. The TOC does no maintenance on the class 700, simply rent the trains daily. Siemens/XLT are paid for units completing a day in service with deductions made for short forms, toilet out of use etc etc.

 

[D365]

Going by current progress on the GW electrification scheme, when will the Class 387 and 365 fleets be required? Bearing in mind that there will be 8 additional 387s built brand-new for the route.

 

[Stompehh]

The wi f i will be , installed and maintained by Siemens. The TOC does no maintenance on the class 700, simply rent the trains daily. Siemens/XLT are paid for units completing a day in service with deductions made for short forms, toilet out of use etc etc.

That's interesting, thanks. Is the WiFi being installed from day 1 then or is it coming later?

 

[Class377/5]

That's interesting, thanks. Is the WiFi being installed from day 1 then or is it coming later?

Later I believe. Not yet agreed fully.

Going by current progress on the GW electrification scheme, when will the Class 387 and 365 fleets be required? Bearing in mind that there will be 8 additional 387s built brand-new for the route.

The initial 387s will run to Hayes which is already electrified. The 365s don't come over until later. New build aren't due until later in 2016.

 

[jon0844]

If HS2 really does get 3+2 seats (which it won't) then the DfT will really be taking the p***.

But it probably could (but as you say, it won't) as the non classic trains will have ample room.

Take an X60 commuter train in Sweden. 3+2 and still stacks of room.

One reason to support HS2 that a lot of people haven't got a clue about.

 

[Bishopstone]

With regard to the seat comfort, tables, armrests etc, it will be interesting to see whether those who have a choice - eg passengers from Brighton, Haywards Heath etc - migrate to Southern services in any great numbers. That will kind of prove whether all the pre-launch moans/concerns are shared by the wider public, or not.

 

[Mikey C]

The initial 387s will run to Hayes which is already electrified. The 365s don't come over until later. New build aren't due until later in 2016.

That won't need many units though, don't 4 or 5 360s cover the Heathrow Connect routes?

 

[neilm]

With regard to the seat comfort, tables, armrests etc, it will be interesting to see whether those who have a choice - eg passengers from Brighton, Haywards Heath etc - migrate to Southern services in any great numbers. That will kind of prove whether all the pre-launch moans/concerns are shared by the wider public, or not.

Indeed I see people on here defending no arm rests/tables because the 319s do not have them, however the 700s are going replace 377s from places like Worthing, Hove, Horsham and East Grinstead. However I think people will just get on with it.

But considering must of us have laptops and tablets it does seem strange not have a flip down table :roll:

 

[67018]

Indeed I see people on here defending no arm rests/tables because the 319s do not have them, however the 700s are going replace 377s from places like Worthing, Hove, Horsham and East Grinstead. However I think people will just get on with it.

But considering must of us have laptops and tablets it does seem strange not have a flip down table :roll:

There's a good business opportunity there for someone to flog portable lap tables for use on the new stock. Or maybe even cardboard disposable ones...

 

[neilm]

There's a good business opportunity there for someone to flog portable lap tables for use on the new stock. Or maybe even cardboard disposable ones...

lol a clip on table, but that would increase dwell times

 

[hwl]

There's a good business opportunity there for someone to flog portable lap tables for use on the new stock. Or maybe even cardboard disposable ones...

I've been working on the idea for a couple of months already...


The tables on the identical seats in the recent southern stock are all easily fitted with an allen key so TSGN could easily get the standard class 700 seats retrofitted with the drop down tables if they wanted.

 

[Class377/5]

I've been working on the idea for a couple of months already...


The tables on the identical seats in the recent southern stock are all easily fitted with an allen key so TSGN could easily get the standard class 700 seats retrofitted with the drop down tables if they wanted.

Its possible to put tables in but is not easily done. DfT ordered them without tables and there is no business case for putting them in now. Any mods requires someone to fund it but no one will. Not to mention the recent quote from GTR MD saying they were happy with the 700s.

 

[hwl]

Its possible to put tables in but is not easily done. DfT ordered them without tables and there is no business case for putting them in now. Any mods requires someone to fund it but no one will. Not to mention the recent quote from GTR MD saying they were happy with the 700s.

I think the business case the rest of us had been thinking of was selling personal tables to commuters that the passengers clamped to the seat in front at the start of their journey and took with them on leaving.
Why not have an option to add a large battery pack in the table to charge usb powered devices as well?

 

[AM9]

I think the business case the rest of us had been thinking of was selling personal tables to commuters that the passengers clamped to the seat in front at the start of their journey and took with them on leaving.
Why not have an option to add a large battery pack in the table to charge usb powered devices as well?

And a space for name and address when so many of them will be left behind. Oh of course that will spoil the business case for selling more.

 

[hwl]

And a space for name and address when so many of them will be left behind. Oh of course that will spoil the business case for selling more.

I suspect GTR would confiscate them and try to fine the individuals rather than return them as lost property for destroying performance in the core if they had a name and address on them

I wonder if any of the thameslink programme people will read this and how much coffee will get splattered while reading this