Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

[Emblematic]

I think you'll find its 2+1 in thar area to allow wheelchairs to have good access.

Correct - I think moving through the 'non-accessible' carriages will be tricky, but may just about be possible in the scenario given (wheelchair user 'helped' into wrong part of train.) Designated carriages have plenty of room.

 

[DerekC]

Ah so that is why the stop markers (boards ?), I have so far seen, for the two different lengths of class 700 unit appear to be neither four coaches apart or at the same position. Its so the centre of a class 700 will always stop at the same part of the platform regardless of unit length. I presume that is not so definite if a platform does not have the raised bit for the middle two coaches of 12/8 ?.:.

The units are symmetrical (1st class at the outer ends, accessible accommodation in the middle) so that positioning relative to the passengers waiting to board is always the same in the core stations, irrespective of unit length and which way round the units are. That and the need to minimise space for cabs and accessible toilets are a large part of the reason why the Class 700s are single units. Other options were considered (4, 5 or 6-car units operating in multiple). These obviously have advantages for off-peak working, but the need to accommodate the predicted peak flows won the day.

 

[itfcfan]

Trains lengths will be the same in peak as off peak. Trains lengths should be as follows;

All day

• Bedford to Brighton - 12 car
• Bedford to Gatwick/Three Bridges - 12 cars
• Cambridge to Brighton - 12 car
• Cambridge to Tattenham Corner - 8 car
• Peterborough to Horsham - 12 car
• Luton to Sevenoaks - 8 car
• Luton to Sutton via Wimbledon - 8 car
• Luton to Sutton via Mitcham Junction - 8 car

Peak

• West Hampstead to Littlehampton - 12 cars
• Bedford to East Grinstead - 12 cars
• Luton to Maidstone East - 8 car
• Welwyn Garden City to Caterham - 8 cars

Of course an 8 car may cover a 12 car diagram in case of failure.

That's really useful - thank you!

 

[Deepgreen]

The south end of the island platform at Redhill (1 and 2) now has a pair of "FLU T" ('Full Length Unit - Turnback' : i.e.12 car class 700 units) signs, plus a pair of "FLU" signs about two feet away from them! Is it really so crucial that reversing trains stop such a tiny distance from through trains to warrant this forest of signs!? Seems absolutely bizarre, but if there is a logical explanation I am all metaphorical ears. Of course, all this is in addition to the existing 12 car conventional stopping signs at the same spot, so we have six separate 12 car stopping point signs on posts here.

 

[Bald Rick]

Most likely Signal sighting both end, and every foot (or 305mm) counts.

 

[Deepgreen]

Most likely Signal sighting both end, and every foot (or 305mm) counts.

Possibly - I'll try to have a better look/take a photo or two tonight if my connection time is sufficient!

 

[Class377/5]

The south end of the island platform at Redhill (1 and 2) now has a pair of "FLU T" ('Full Length Unit - Turnback' : i.e.12 car class 700 units) signs, plus a pair of "FLU" signs about two feet away from them! Is it really so crucial that reversing trains stop such a tiny distance from through trains to warrant this forest of signs!? Seems absolutely bizarre, but if there is a logical explanation I am all metaphorical ears. Of course, all this is in addition to the existing 12 car conventional stopping signs at the same spot, so we have six separate 12 car stopping point signs on posts here.

Different signals, different stopping points. You may think its bizzare, but as Bald Rick points out it can make a lot of difference. The modern railway is built on making sure things are properly marked up properly to ensure mistakes are reduced to the lowest possible level.

 

[mirodo]

700110 passed through East Croydon at 1006 this morning and was held briefly in P2.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/L07130/2016/02/23/advanced

Quite a few seats still poly wrapped and the delivery signs as posted by urpert still in the windows.

 

[jon0844]

I think the plan is to keep the seat covers on in service, so coffee and other food/drink won't ruin the seat covers when passengers use the seats as tables.

 

[southern442]

I saw a class 700 at East Croydon today around 10 past 4, looked very smart, but I can't remember the unit number. I think it might have been 106?

 

[AM9]

I think the plan is to keep the seat covers on in service, so coffee and other food/drink won't ruin the seat covers when passengers use the seats as tables.

... and footrests.

 

[southern442]

Apparently the new Moorgate line stock is going to be classed as 700/2.

A problem arises here that they are using the same trains for short distance metro services as they are long distance services. Designed as a compromise, eh?

 

[Class377/5]

Apparently the new Moorgate line stock is going to be classed as 700/2.

A problem arises here that they are using the same trains for short distance metro services as they are long distance services. Designed as a compromise, eh?

I believe there's no official classification for them yet but a certain wiki article that someone has guessed because they are said to be class 700 variants and the person ignored the 707 are also class 700 variants (and also toiletless like the GN replacement stock).

 

[southern442]

I believe there's no official classification for them yet but a certain wiki article that someone has guessed because they are said to be class 700 variants and the person ignored the 707 are also class 700 variants (and also toiletless like the GN replacement stock).

It did seem a bit strange, perhaps 701 would be more appropriate for the class.

 

[Bald Rick]

Apparently the new Moorgate line stock is going to be classed as 700/2.

A problem arises here that they are using the same trains for short distance metro services as they are long distance services. Designed as a compromise, eh?

A bit like, say, LM using 350s on Tring stoppers and Crewe services?

Or Southern using 377s between London Bridge and Victoria, and also London to Southampton?

Etc.

 

[jopsuk]

Apparently the new Moorgate line stock is going to be classed as 700/2.

A problem arises here that they are using the same trains for short distance metro services as they are long distance services. Designed as a compromise, eh?

Until that's confirmed treat it with a pinch of salt- more likely to be a separate class designation like the SWT fleet.

The interior of the Moorgate fleet will be pretty different- they're being ordered after all as an exclusively Metro fleet, like the SWT batch, and will have no first class or toilets (ie the same as the 313s they replace). The cab is going to be different to both the TL and SWT fleet, as the tight Northern City Line tunnels mean it really does need an emergency exit on the end; the artists impressions last week showed this.

 

[southern442]

A bit like, say, LM using 350s on Tring stoppers and Crewe services?

Or Southern using 377s between London Bridge and Victoria, and also London to Southampton?

Etc.

You could say that, but the 377's were designed as the longer distance stock for South Central/Southern. These new trains are designed for metro duties, and the 700's for mainline duties, but there is hardly a difference.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Until that's confirmed treat it with a pinch of salt- more likely to be a separate class designation like the SWT fleet.

The interior of the Moorgate fleet will be pretty different- they're being ordered after all as an exclusively Metro fleet, like the SWT batch, and will have no first class or toilets (ie the same as the 313s they replace). The cab is going to be different to both the TL and SWT fleet, as the tight Northern City Line tunnels mean it really does need an emergency exit on the end; the artists impressions last week showed this.

Apart from the lack of first class and toilets (isn't it about time toilets were universally fitted? Just a thought) there doesn't seem to be much of a difference interior wise compared to the 700's.

 

[jon0844]

... and footrests.

And someone might also consider the plastic seat covers as effectively doubling the seat padding....!

 

[po8crg]

(isn't it about time toilets were universally fitted? Just a thought)

Not inclined to agree. They're not fitted on Underground trains, and there are plenty of commuter services that are similar to LU.

As long as there are toilets on the stations and frequent stops, anyone that's "caught short" can hop off at the next station and catch a later train.

 

[Emblematic]

Not inclined to agree. They're not fitted on Underground trains, and there are plenty of commuter services that are similar to LU.

As long as there are toilets on the stations and frequent stops, anyone that's "caught short" can hop off at the next station and catch a later train.

I agree. If you have one toilet it has to be accessible, and that takes a lot of space. Not really welcome on packed commuter routes where seats, and even standing room, are at a premium. Example, Class 387/1 PTOSL, each end from doors to gangway, has either 16 seats, or an accessible toilet with 4 full seats plus two tip-ups. Not an ideal area for standing either, and a crush load would make the toilet almost unusable, or just used as more standing room.

 

[GodAtum]

I agree. If you have one toilet it has to be accessible, and that takes a lot of space. Not really welcome on packed commuter routes where seats, and even standing room, are at a premium. Example, Class 387/1 PTOSL, each end from doors to gangway, has either 16 seats, or an accessible toilet with 4 full seats plus two tip-ups. Not an ideal area for standing either, and a crush load would make the toilet almost unusable, or just used as more standing room.

Will they ever use them on the Brighton route though?

 

[Emblematic]

Will they ever use them on the Brighton route though?

The space taken is going to be much the same in any unit, I referenced the 387/1 only because I had the diagram to hand so could give accurate figures.
The 700s have the advantage that they only need one of these per eight or twelve carriage train.
For comparison, the non-accessible toilets take about the same space as two seats.

 

[168lover]

When is the estimate for the first 700 to enter passenger service?

 

[absolutelymilk]

When is the estimate for the first 700 to enter passenger service?

According to Thameslink the target date is 16th April, however they haven't said anything about it recently so liable to change.

 

[Brian Aylott]

For comparison, the non-accessible toilets take about the same space as two seats.

There doesn't seem much point in having non-accessible toilets!
Brian

 

[southern442]

There doesn't seem much point in having non-accessible toilets!
Brian

Agreed. There are 2 toilets in a 4-car 377, and most of the time they work in multiple. I'm sure a lot of people would support adding in a couple of extra seats on the trains, it would make enough of a difference.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Agreed. There are 2 toilets in a 4-car 377, and most of the time they work in multiple. I'm sure a lot of people would support adding in a couple of extra seats on the trains, it would make enough of a difference.

I think one loo for four coaches is too few. In my experience on an eight coach 377 from Victoria there can be one or two loos out of use. That is because either someone might be locked in there or, in the case of the accessible loo the door is stuck open !. Even in the evening the trains can be busy enough to make walking through up to eight coaches difficult. I prefer to use the accessible loo since the ordinary loo is so small btw. They are rather non-accessible - which was what I assumed "Brian Aylott" was driving at !.

 

[southern442]

I think one loo for four coaches is too few. In my experience on an eight coach 377 from Victoria there can be one or two loos out of use. That is because either someone might be locked in there or, in the case of the accessible loo the door is stuck open !. Even in the evening the trains can be busy enough to make walking through up to eight coaches difficult. I prefer to use the accessible loo since the ordinary loo is so small btw. They are rather non-accessible - which was what I assumed "Brian Aylott" was driving at !.

The 377/3's only have one toilet, the accessible one. When they are in a 12-car formation, they have 4 all-accessible toilets, which I think would be an ideal amount.

 

[tsr]

The 377/3's only have one toilet, the accessible one. When they are in a 12-car formation, they have 4 all-accessible toilets, which I think would be an ideal amount.

Apart from the fact that those toilet modules appear to have been built from a combination of dysfunctional bits of Duplo and work just about as well. It's a good concept, but sadly hopelessly unreliable execution. And when the doors go wrong it's really hard to lock them shut, so you get people thinking the toilet is working but all it's doing is just sliding around on the frame...

(There are also other problems - for example, the random electrical fault on the 377/3s which means the sliding gangway door closest to the toilet does not work on many of them.)

 

[Class377/5]

700102 currently being delivered as 6X66 02+29 Dollands Moor to Three Bridges Depot