Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

[bramling]

Glass half full then.... Having travelled on one for almost three hours I was pleasantly sursprised by their comfort, performance and quality of build and roominess (and I need that!) . Please do not run away with the idea that this makes me an apologist. One thing that the vast majority of critics on here have not done is actually been on one yet.

I accept there are issues around trinket trays / tables but that aside I cannot see any major issues with their introduction.

On a different note, one hopes these trains won't be involved in a serious collision or derailment where the vehicles are thrown about at high speed (for example as happened at Potters Bar). The lack of solid ends at one or both ends of the vehicles won't exactly help contain passengers within the protection of the bodyshell, nor help prevent external items entering the bodyshell.

 

[AM9]

On a different note, one hopes these trains won't be involved in a serious collision or derailment where the vehicles are thrown about at high speed (for example as happened at Potters Bar). The lack of solid ends at one or both ends of the vehicles won't exactly help contain passengers within the protection of the bodyshell, nor help prevent external items entering the bodyshell.

They have been type approved for their role. Clearly those experts with sufficient accurate information to determine their suitability are satisfied to put their signatures on the line.

At least cups of hot coffee will be in passengers' hands rather than launched from tables and trays.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

When people can get a seat or walk around more freely to find one, or they can stand with some space, or get through the aisles to get off, they're going to like these trains.

You are probably right, but there are always some who still want to whinge about something whatever has been provided.

 

[jon0844]

Of course, and I'm sure I'll whinge over some things. I also wish there were seat back tables, but in the grand scheme of things these trains are just fine.

 

[Class377/5]

Its curious to see such comments from someone yet to actually try. You'd wonder with an attitude like that how would human's have ever left the cave. Well it won't be long now until people actually try and see what all the fuss is about.

Back to the units, 700110 was working under its own power for the first time yesterday.

 

[bramling]

It's not every poster on RUK that actually wants to see either the trains or the service breakdown, but some here clearly just want to say "well I told you so!".
It's not unusual for new trains to have a few teething problems, (even the fourth batch of Desiros (350/3 & 350/4) had a bad patch on introduction) so any sensible observer shouldn't gloat at the first in-service sit-down of a new generation train.
As far as the infrastructure goes, virtually all the route with OLE is blessed with headspans, so logically, those inadequate constructs of the 1980s will be no more robust with shiny new trains with their BR/BW pantographs than they are at present. Any cat calling about wires coming down will be non-news.

The reality is people won't be impressed stuck waiting on a platform waiting for a train delayed by, for example, third-rail icing at Brighton. A problem down that end simply wouldn't affect a Great Northern journey today.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

When people can get a seat or walk around more freely to find one, or they can stand with some space, or get through the aisles to get off, they're going to like these trains.

One might struggle to get greater chance of a seat on the 8-car routes given the trains won't be any longer than today. Stations like Knebworth or Hatfield apparently won't see any benefit from 12-car trains, with seemingly no plans to lengthen these platforms.

 

[jon0844]

There's loads more internal room so there's going to be a lot more standing room. For me, a 25 minute journey standing won't be a real issue if I can perch somewhere comfortably and use my phone!

 

[Hophead]

Pretty sure that's a new date, I think my printed copy says March

The linked article promises "Dec 2015: Target date for 108 new carriages on the Gatwick Express" and that clearly hasn't happened.....

 

[Bishopstone]

Its curious to see such comments from someone yet to actually try. You'd wonder with an attitude like that how would human's have ever left the cave.

Cave-dwellers had primitive tables.

But seriously, speaking from the outer reaches of the network, as 700s replace 387s I will be interested to see whether the total number of Standard seats provided goes up or down, and hence whether long distance standing becomes more of an issue.

 

[gtr driver]

The reality is people won't be impressed stuck waiting on a platform waiting for a train delayed by, for example, third-rail icing at Brighton. A problem down that end simply wouldn't affect a Great Northern journey today.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


One might struggle to get greater chance of a seat on the 8-car routes given the trains won't be any longer than today. Stations like Knebworth or Hatfield apparently won't see any benefit from 12-car trains, with seemingly no plans to lengthen these platforms.

Since the 700s are coming anyway, could we not follow 377/5's advice and actually wait until we've been on the things before speculating on anything else? Or wait and see what happens after the infrastructure work is complete? And do you REALLY think they'd be designed to offer less protection than a 20 year old 365 in a crash?

 

[Bald Rick]

The more delay before they arrive the better. I for one would be quite happy if these awful trains never enter service.

I for one can't wait for them.

There are now 6 morning peak trains at St Albans that leave with some people unable to board, including all three of the 12 car services. I would much rather be able to stand on the train than not get on it in the first place.

 

[D365]

The linked article promises "Dec 2015: Target date for 108 new carriages on the Gatwick Express" and that clearly hasn't happened.....

This is certainly the first time I've heard it mentioned, that all Class 387/2s were expected in service by 2015-end.

 

[The Box Photter]

Cave-dwellers had primitive tables.

But seriously, speaking from the outer reaches of the network, as 700s replace 387s I will be interested to see whether the total number of Standard seats provided goes up or down, and hence whether long distance standing becomes more of an issue.

The total number of standard class seats in each 12-car unit will be fewer than in the current 12-car 377 or 387 formation. But at least there'll be more room for you to stand in if you can no longer get a seat on your regular train, so that's all good then.

I've heard all the spin about there being "X million more seats through the Core during the peak than before" but that's no good if there are the same number (or fewer) trains running than before from your particular part of the Thameslink megastructure at THE TIME WHEN YOU NEED TO TRAVEL.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I for one can't wait for them.

There are now 6 morning peak trains at St Albans that leave with some people unable to board, including all three of the 12 car services. I would much rather be able to stand on the train than not get on it in the first place.

Why don't you get on one of the services that start from St Albans? They always leave with plenty of seats available.

 

[Bald Rick]

Why don't you get on one of the services that start from St Albans? They always leave with plenty of seats available.

I tend to use the semi fast services, but even they are leaving with people standing (including me, today).

But that's not the point. I don't mind standing, and to be fair anyone commuting from St Albans is pretty well used to it. I do mind not being able to get on the train at all. My point is that the new trains will enable everyone to get on, as there's much more space on each train, and many more trains will be 12 car.

 

[The Box Photter]

I tend to use the semi fast services, but even they are leaving with people standing (including me, today).

But that's not the point. I don't mind standing, and to be fair anyone commuting from St Albans is pretty well used to it. I do mind not being able to get on the train at all. My point is that the new trains will enable everyone to get on, as there's much more space on each train, and many more trains will be 12 car.

Yes, your point is well made and it does look like the conditions for passengers aiming to get on at St Albans might be a little more civilised than currently. I do hope that Thameslink manage to run as many trains as 12 car as possible. Obviously there are platform constraints at some of the inner-suburban stations.

Is there any indication that the introduction of the 700s will coincide with a recast of the Bedford - London timetable to give a more even spacing of trains in the peaks? Currently its too easy for a fast to catch up with a semi-fast. At Flitwick in the mornings there are two London-bound trains that leave at 07.04 and 07.08, with nothing then until 07.26, 07.40, 07.44 and 07.58. The xx.44 and xx.58 are just a little too late to give a pre-09.00 arrival time for most office workers.

The 07.40 seems to be very popular and has recently seen an increase in patronage from Bedford since the 07.22 Bedford - Sevenoaks was withdrawn. This has coincided with the use of 3x387s in place of 3x377s on the 07.40 with a reduction in the number of standard class seats. People are finding that they now have to stand all the way from Flitwick and Luton into London. That's a 50 minute stand from Flitwick on a fast or an hour on a semi fast.

 

[Bald Rick]

Is there any indication that the introduction of the 700s will coincide with a recast of the Bedford - London timetable to give a more even spacing of trains in the peaks? Currently its too easy for a fast to catch up with a semi-fast.

Our definitions of fast and semi fast differ: for Albanistas 'Fast' is anything that is non stop to St Pancras (or calls intermediate.y only at West Hampstead), and 'semi fast' are the peak only services that call Radlett, Elstree, Mill Hill, and then fast to W Hampstead. These tend to start at Luton.

There will be a recast of the MML TT in May 18, but don't expect much change in MML pathing arrangements. The big gaps have to be left for the EMT services.

I'm pretty sure the former 0722 ex Bedford is what forms the semi fast 0800 from St Albans, now starting at Luton. This is what I had to stand on today. If anything, it has got even busier since it started at Luton rather than Bedford; counter intuitively.

 

[bramling]

I for one can't wait for them.

There are now 6 morning peak trains at St Albans that leave with some people unable to board, including all three of the 12 car services. I would much rather be able to stand on the train than not get on it in the first place.

I think this is the root of the issue. What may be good news for St Albans, with its 20-minute journey to London and 4tph off-peak fast service, is not such good news for other locations. Likewise passenger loadings on the Midland side may be skewed towards St Albans being the majority destination.

On other parts of the network passengers will be on the train for longer, and such passengers are currently generally used to getting a seat. On the Great Northern side (still largely an 8-car railway during the peaks) there aren't any trains to my knowledge on the outer-suburban part of the railway where not being able to board is an issue. There is one shoulder-peak 4-car train, the main overcrowding being on the Moorgate services. So what might seem good for St Albans with its 20-minute journey time and 4tph turn-up-and-go service ios not a good thing for many other locations, with longer journey times and lesser frequencies, eg Huntingdon, Baldock, etc.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think this is the root of the issue. What may be good news for St Albans, with its 20-minute journey to London and 4tph off-peak fast service, is not such good news for other locations. Likewise passenger loadings on the Midland side may be skewed towards St Albans being the majority destination.

It's not just St Albans though. Passengers are often unable to board at Mill Hill, and occasionally Cricklewood and Kentish Town. That's just the am peak.

In the PM peak the problem isn't so acute, but there are still regular instances of passengers unable to board trains at St Pancras. And this affects passengers to every Thameslink destination.

All this is under normal operation, ie without significant delays or cancellations.

You are quite correct that currently there is broadly sufficient capacity on the GN side today. But these trains are here for the next 40 years, and many towns up the GN have some pretty significant housing developments on the blocks. It will be good for once to be ahead of the demand curve, rather than doing what this country is brilliant at, and that's building transport capacity about 10 years after it is needed (Airdrie - Bathgate excepted).

 

[bramling]

Since the 700s are coming anyway, could we not follow 377/5's advice and actually wait until we've been on the things before speculating on anything else? Or wait and see what happens after the infrastructure work is complete? And do you REALLY think they'd be designed to offer less protection than a 20 year old 365 in a crash?

So do you think the walk-through design offers more, less or the same level of protection to passengers in a high-speed violent derailment than a conventional design? The issue is not so much about how the design compares to a class 365, but how it might compare to a conventional design. Surely there is no way it could be as safe, in the class 700 those positioned near the ends of the vehicle must be at greater risk of ejection from the vehicle, and from outside objects entering. Thankfully such incidents are rare, but it seems a backwards step especially considering not so long ago there was a desire to eliminate Mk1s as quickly as possible partly due to crashworthiness weaknesses. Even during the lifespan of the class 365 there have been two high-speed (one at 115 mph and one at 100mph) derailments on the section of ECML which will be used by the class 700, which involved separation and roll-over of vehicles.

 

[petersi]

I tend to use the semi fast services, but even they are leaving with people standing (including me, today).



But that's not the point. I don't mind standing, and to be fair anyone commuting from St Albans is pretty well used to it. I do mind not being able to get on the train at all. My point is that the new trains will enable everyone to get on, as there's much more space on each train, and many more trains will be 12 car.

If there is pent up demand in a couple of years the class 700 could be just the same

Are all midland thameslink stations 12 car?

From your description should all midland thameslink be 12 car ?

Is the Sutton loop 12 car platforms ?

 

[bramling]

It's not just St Albans though. Passengers are often unable to board at Mill Hill, and occasionally Cricklewood and Kentish Town. That's just the am peak.

In the PM peak the problem isn't so acute, but there are still regular instances of passengers unable to board trains at St Pancras. And this affects passengers to every Thameslink destination.

All this is under normal operation, ie without significant delays or cancellations.

You are quite correct that currently there is broadly sufficient capacity on the GN side today. But these trains are here for the next 40 years, and many towns up the GN have some pretty significant housing developments on the blocks. It will be good for once to be ahead of the demand curve, rather than doing what this country is brilliant at, and that's building transport capacity about 10 years after it is needed (Airdrie - Bathgate excepted).

The main limiting factor on today's GN is not enough trains and not enough paths. Likewise some of the 8-car platforms are not being extended, with some of the Thameslink routes being confined, same as today, to 8-car trains. There's also not much benefit coming if you're currently used to trying to find space on a crowded Moorgate train at somewhere like Palmers Green or Enfield Chase.

A 12-car peak service on the GN would provide plenty of capacity. If still more was required, by all means have some services running onto the Thameslink network. If the 24tph core requirement is taken away then the class 700 could have had an internal design more akin to the class 365.

In a perfect world KX platforms 9 to 11 would have been extended using part of the space occupied by the new concourse, which would instead have needed to be projected further out towards Euston Road. Might have been less sympathetic to the old station, but would have provided immense capacity benefits.

I've wondered if some class 700s going to Hertford North wouldn't be more appropriate, providing relief to the chronically overcrowded Moorgate service. I'm not sure how much of an alternative Farringdon, City TL or London Bridge would provide for Moorgate, but it would relieve the worst overcrowding. Needless to say some Peterborough or Cambridge services would go to KX instead and be formed of 12-car 365 or 377.

 

[jon0844]

I am not particularly worried about a 700 crashing. At the moment, plenty of people sit in the luggage racks of the 365s, which I always thought were designed to absorb some of the impact, and I doubt if that were true and you told anyone they'd care.

In the peaks, many people are used to standing and may continue to do so, but with a bit more breathing room. And if the aisles are wider, people can and will move down as they have a chance to get off - so less of the packed vestibules that stop people boarding, when there's space inside.

So that's a win.

And at quieter times, getting a seat should be easy.

I'm looking forward to the trains despite their 'dumbed down' design, as I accept that what was once a service for many akin to an Intercity service has become something more like London Overground, or the S-Stock on the Met line. And it's only going to get busier.

My concerns, as I've stated many times, is the infrastructure issues.

Going forward, it would be nice to see more stations extended to 12 cars, and I'm sure that will be considered in the next 10-20 years if necessary.

 

[DerekC]

So do you think the walk-through design offers more, less or the same level of protection to passengers in a high-speed violent derailment than a conventional design? The issue is not so much about how the design compares to a class 365, but how it might compare to a conventional design. Surely there is no way it could be as safe, in the class 700 those positioned near the ends of the vehicle must be at greater risk of ejection from the vehicle, and from outside objects entering. Thankfully such incidents are rare, but it seems a backwards step especially considering not so long ago there was a desire to eliminate Mk1s as quickly as possible partly due to crashworthiness weaknesses. Even during the lifespan of the class 365 there have been two high-speed (one at 115 mph and one at 100mph) derailments on the section of ECML which will be used by the class 700, which involved separation and roll-over of vehicles.

Class 700s are designed to current crashworthiness standards - and if you think about it the large section gangway is probably stronger and an 8 or 12-car fixed unit more likely to stay upright and intact in a derailment than a string of 4-car units. I don't think I will be losing any sleep over their safety.

 

[Bald Rick]

There's also not much benefit coming if you're currently used to trying to find space on a crowded Moorgate train at somewhere like Palmers Green or Enfield Chase.

Apart from the new fleet which will have far higher capacity per train, and more trains.

 

[D365]

At the moment, plenty of people sit in the luggage racks of the 365s, which I always thought were designed to absorb some of the impact, and I doubt if that were true and you told anyone they'd care.

Hold on... are you pulling my leg here?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

For Bramling. You'll find these easier to clutch at.

With love.

 

[jon0844]

Hold on... are you pulling my leg here?

The ones at the ends of the carriages, not the overhead ones.

(The same ones that nobody ever uses to store bags as just about nobody even knows they're there!)

 

[bramling]

Apart from the new fleet which will have far higher capacity per train, and more trains.

So just how much extra capacity will this provide? Moorgate is constrained by the crossover and terminal protection.

Bit of extra space from doing away with the middle cabs, the rest presumably comes from reducing seats. Worthwhile and welcome no doubt, but there's only so much capacity that can be provided within a 6-car constrained length. Some form of partial 8-car service should be the aspiration on this line, same with the all-stations Welwyn trains.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am not particularly worried about a 700 crashing. At the moment, plenty of people sit in the luggage racks of the 365s, which I always thought were designed to absorb some of the impact, and I doubt if that were true and you told anyone they'd care.

In the peaks, many people are used to standing and may continue to do so, but with a bit more breathing room. And if the aisles are wider, people can and will move down as they have a chance to get off - so less of the packed vestibules that stop people boarding, when there's space inside.

So that's a win.

And at quieter times, getting a seat should be easy.

I'm looking forward to the trains despite their 'dumbed down' design, as I accept that what was once a service for many akin to an Intercity service has become something more like London Overground, or the S-Stock on the Met line. And it's only going to get busier.

My concerns, as I've stated many times, is the infrastructure issues.

Going forward, it would be nice to see more stations extended to 12 cars, and I'm sure that will be considered in the next 10-20 years if necessary.

Oh yes, compared to the timetable, the design of the rolling stock pales into insignificance. I hope alternatives have been considered should the proposed GN timetable prove unreliable.

I used Thameslink for 7 years and hated it. Travelling north from KXTL (as was) to St Albans, despite an advertised 4 fast trains per hour, waits of 20-25 minutes at KXTL were not uncommon due to late running off the Southern Region. Then you would crawl through the Kentish Town area awaiting a path on the fast line. The effect will be far worse on the GN side if something runs late. Thankfully I tended to travel contra-peak, but I can see issues with overcrowding on the core platforms. It's all very well saying that some of the platforms are wide (meanwhile some like Farringdon aren't), but passengers will want to stand near the edge so they will be first on when their own train arrives. This can be seen all over the south-east every morning. Short of installing PEDs there's not much that can be done to mitigate against this.

 

[jon0844]

So just how much extra capacity will this provide? Moorgate is constrained by the crossover and terminal protection.

Bit of extra space from doing away with the middle cabs, the rest presumably comes from reducing seats. Worthwhile and welcome no doubt, but there's only so much capacity that can be provided within a 6-car constrained length. Some form of partial 8-car service should be the aspiration on this line, same with the all-stations Welwyn trains.

I can't see those platforms being extended into Moorgate, so the only solution I can think of is a higher service frequency.

I know in the peak you can have a train every five minutes or so, but whether you could increase that frequency further I have no idea.

With the open nature of the trains, no intermediate cabs and wider doors/aisles I do think many of the problems will be eradicated in the short term though. The total number of people that could fit on a 6 car 70n will be far greater than a 6 car 313 - even if most won't be seated.

 

[D365]

The ones at the ends of the carriages, not the overhead ones.

(The same ones that nobody ever uses to store bags as just about nobody even knows they're there!)

Are these located in the first class compartments then? Because I've been using Class 365s all my life (they're just a handful of years older than me) and have never observed any luggage storage facilities beyond the overhead racks...

So just how much extra capacity will this provide? Moorgate is constrained by the crossover and terminal protection.

Historically, I understand Moorgate P9/10 has had the capacity to support (at least) a 16tph turnaround.

 

[Skimble19]

Are these located in the first class compartments then? Because I've been using Class 365s all my life (they're just a handful of years older than me) and have never observed any luggage storage facilities beyond the overhead racks...




Historically, I understand Moorgate P9/10 has had the capacity to support (at least) a 16tph turnaround.

If you've used them all your life I am truly amazed you haven't seen them... They're at the ends of the carriages, in standard. Great big things right next to the doors between the carriages.