Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

[bramling]

Why is it more likely to be delayed? Will it be more delayed than the rolling stock that made up the same or similar service when that rolling stock was first introduced?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

For the Great Northern side, Thameslink introduces the possibility of a delay anywhere south of King's Cross affecting reliability, which simply isn't an issue today. Indeed, one can see on the GTR live updates right now there's a problem on the Brighton line, which would be affecting the Brighton-Cambridge and Horsham-Peterborough future service.

So a problem at Three Bridges, for example, will now affect a northbound passenger on the Great Northern route. With the proposed service patterns being half-hourly, and many destinations only being served by one such service group, this introduces the likelihood of some quite long waits. Not to mention the problem of delayed passengers crowding out the platforms, which won't do overall performance and dwell times any good either. And, of course, add in the fact that if a train arrives out-of-path onto the Great Northern, there's a high likelihood it will incur further delay and/or delay other services, for example on the double-track Cambridge branch.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Slightly off topic, but, what about the Gatwick Express class 387's? Absolutely no difference between first and standard class, yet it's a whole lot more expensive. On GatEx, most trains you are pretty much guaranteed a seat anyway that argument doesn't work.

One suspects many passengers don't realise this until they reach the train, by which time they've already bought their ticket. Then maybe some don't notice or others have their tickets paid for by business etc.

 

[jon0844]

Can we just lay to rest once and for all the idea that in the rush hour southbound Thameslink trains currently arrive at St Pancras virtually empty and then a zillion people cram onto them to travel between St Pancras and Blackfriars. Southbound trains fill up to standing capacity+ between Bedford & St Albans, then a few people cram on at St Albans for the non-stop journey to St Pancras.

At St Pancras, around half the passengers get off the train and a few get on. Then the train runs between St Pancras & Blackfriars. Upon leaving Blackfriars, the train is around one quarter full.

The reverse happens in the evening rush. Northbound evening trains leave St Pancras full to bursting and then most of the standing passengers alight at St Albans.

I presume there's a similar pattern for northbound trains from Brighton into and out of London, with it being virtually impossible to get on a northbound am peak train at E Croydon.

Of course, RMT willing, there are a number of alternative ways passengers can get into London from places like E Croydon, Wimbledon etc. If you live in Harpenden or St Albans you've only Thameslink.

Most of the seated passengers using the trains do so for considerably longer than 25 mins. Its the standing passengers who use the trains for 25 mins or less currently and they'll still be standing on the class 700s because they have no more seats.

Crush loading doesn't happen THROUGH the core, it happens either side of it.

I'd go along with that. Many people with onward tube connections will likely stand on those, so having 20-25 minutes standing on a train isn't the end of the world. Especially for anyone who will be sitting down all day in an office.

 

[swt class 450]

The 13.24 BD - BI yesterday (formed of 700104) was originally announced (at Harpenden) to be 20mins late but was subsequently cancelled - reason given "due to a train defect". Yet, 20mins later it must have been doing line speed as it literally bombed though on the Up Fast heading south. Boy I would have liked to have been riding on that one....

That doesnt sound good that two trains (700 104 and 700 107) both had train faults on the same day. Hopefully they are nothing too serious.

 

[Hadders]

One way or other, they've basically made it uncomfortable for everyone. Perhaps the exception is if you're in a facing aisle seat and haven't got someone sitting opposite - although even then the seats are still hard and upright.

Meanwhile, of course, many people who currently board at King's Cross and today often get to sit on their train waiting to depart, will now find themselves standing on a crowded core platform, for a train that's more likely to be delayed compared to today. Another downgrade from today.

Spot on.

I worry about St Pancras being able to cope. The low level platforms aren't that wide and there will be lots of passengers waiting for trains - it certainly won't be like the Underground where everyone just gets on the next train. The gateline to the low level platforms doesn't seem big enough to cope and there are only 3 escalators and no way to add any more. When one gets taken out for refurbishment for months on end I suspect it'll become impossible (knowing GTR this will probably coincide with GN services starting to run through the core).

It's an awful thing to say but there's a part of me that hopes that when the GN services start to run through the core it all falls over Operation Princess style and most of the GN services end up running into and out of Kings Cross.

 

[jon0844]

Spot on.

I worry about St Pancras being able to cope. The low level platforms aren't that wide and there will be lots of passengers waiting for trains - it certainly won't be like the Underground where everyone just gets on the next train. The gateline to the low level platforms doesn't seem big enough to cope and there are only 3 escalators and no way to add any more. When one gets taken out for refurbishment for months on end I suspect it'll become impossible (knowing GTR this will probably coincide with GN services starting to run through the core).

It's an awful thing to say but there's a part of me that hopes that when the GN services start to run through the core it all falls over Operation Princess style and most of the GN services end up running into and out of Kings Cross.

I am pretty much planning to end my trips to London at Finsbury Park and switch to the tube. That way I get the chance to take a slow from Moorgate if things go tits up (such as delayed enough to miss paths and get further delayed, possibly even cancelled).

Indeed, I wonder what stops will get cut so the train can run fast to make up time if it gets really screwed up. Or if the trains will end early and reverse? There's presumably a recovery plan, and I bet I'll be affected by it.

I don't envy trying to wait on those low-level platforms with other people stressing, and all congregating by the escalators even with all the signs telling people to spread out.

The 700s are likely to be very reliable, but there are so many other things that can go wrong. I really want to be proved wrong, but I have very little faith and never really have.

 

[Abpj17]

Hadders: “The low level platforms aren't that wide and there will be lots of passengers waiting for trains” - for one-sided platforms they are very wide. They are also very long as well many of the trains be. I’d agree that the pinch point are the dateline and escalators (specifically the up escalators for trains arriving from the north in the morning rush hour).

I can’t imagine many can justify the extra couple of thousand for the first class season ticket. It’s cheaper, regrettably to buy power banks - that doesn’t compensate for lack of being able to use laptop easily tho The journey isn’t long enough; from the current stock it’s not worth it. I guess it might be more of a consideration for those from St Albans/Harpenden who pay less fares and might be able to afford it if their houses weren’t so expensive. Luton and before you tend to get a seat.

 

[AM9]

The idea that anyone is "happy" to pay an extra thousand or two, per year, just to get the chance of a seat is a misnomer. Some do it because it makes sense in the form of the extra productivity, whilst for others the extra might not impact too heavily on their personal finances, but I don't think anyone's "happy" being in that position.

OK, maybe 'happy' is not the best word. Let's say:

'Many passengers decide to pay the additional fare ...'

Maybe they think that even a first-class season fare can be less than an off-peak fare walk-up so the more exclusive environment is worth it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Hadders: “The low level platforms aren't that wide and there will be lots of passengers waiting for trains” - for one-sided platforms they are very wide. They are also very long as well many of the trains be. I’d agree that the pinch point are the dateline and escalators (specifically the up escalators for trains arriving from the north in the morning rush hour).

I can’t imagine many can justify the extra couple of thousand for the first class season ticket. It’s cheaper, regrettably to buy power banks - that doesn’t compensate for lack of being able to use laptop easily tho The journey isn’t long enough; from the current stock it’s not worth it. I guess it might be more of a consideration for those from St Albans/Harpenden who pay less fares and might be able to afford it if their houses weren’t so expensive. Luton and before you tend to get a seat.

For years, there have been complaints here about the Thameslink 3 + 2 seating on the 319s and the 377/5s, how so many passengers won't take the centre seat and how everything would be better if that third seat was removed. So that is just what has been done with 2 + 2 seats throughout standard class. The additional space has been made for better standing given the rapid increase in passenger numbers even since the introduction of the 377/s. The seats are better than the '80s types on the 319s, yet there still complaints about the seats?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd pay First on LM if it was 2+1 (and sometimes do on the 319s as they are). The 1 seat is the seller to me. I refuse to pay extra for 2+2 "First Class" and will just sit in the 2 side of the 3+2 in that case.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Bald Rick]

Can we just lay to rest once and for all the idea that in the rush hour southbound Thameslink trains currently arrive at St Pancras virtually empty and then a zillion people cram onto them to travel between St Pancras and Blackfriars. Southbound trains fill up to standing capacity+ between Bedford & St Albans, then a few people cram on at St Albans for the non-stop journey to St Pancras.

At St Pancras, around half the passengers get off the train and a few get on. Then the train runs between St Pancras & Blackfriars. Upon leaving Blackfriars, the train is around one quarter full.

The reverse happens in the evening rush. Northbound evening trains leave St Pancras full to bursting and then most of the standing passengers alight at St Albans.

I presume there's a similar pattern for northbound trains from Brighton into and out of London, with it being virtually impossible to get on a northbound am peak train at E Croydon.

Of course, RMT willing, there are a number of alternative ways passengers can get into London from places like E Croydon, Wimbledon etc. If you live in Harpenden or St Albans you've only Thameslink.

Most of the seated passengers using the trains do so for considerably longer than 25 mins. Its the standing passengers who use the trains for 25 mins or less currently and they'll still be standing on the class 700s because they have no more seats.

Crush loading doesn't happen THROUGH the core, it happens either side of it.

My experience is slightly different (13 years commuting TL north).

Morning Peak:

Trains fill up north of St Albans; fast trains arrive there with all seats taken and some standing. Fast trains leave St Albans very well loaded - some crush loaded, some have space for more people. A few trains leave people behind, but this depends on the day and any service disruption.

Semi fast trains leave St Albans with seats, some standing from Radlett or Elstree, crush loaded from Mill Hill. A number of people use these from St Albans to get a seat.

All stations trains fill up along the way, and people are able to board at Kentish Town, it leaves there full and standing.

At St Pancras, around a third of people alight. Usually, a similar number of people get on (certainLy more than 'a few'). Loading depends on whereabouts in the train you are: the front two and back two coaches will be crush loaded on departing St P, the middle coaches will have more space (but still standing). This is because the exits for City TL and Blackfriars are at the front and back of the platforms there. Net effect is that there are perhaps 90% of the number of people on board departing St P as arriving. However the important point at St P is dwell time: about 400 people alighting a 12 coach trains, and not far off the same boarding.

South of St P, people alight in roughly similar proportions at Farrigndon, City TL and Blackfriars, with City TL having the most. The calling pattern of the train south of the core determines how busy it will be - the Brightons will leave about 25% full, trains to the loop or Sevenoaks maybe 10%, and there is one hardy commuter who appears to go to Beckenham Junction on the 0816 ex Blackfriars every day.

Now the important point is that is today with the current service levels. The peak service level of 15tph is delivered in one hour, in one direction, in one peak only (the hour from 0816 southbound).

When the frequency is raised to 24tph, and 2/3 of that is routed via London Bridge, and the interchange with Crossrail at Farrigndon is opened, it is expected that there is a significant transfer of people from LU, particularly the Northern (City Branch), Jubilee and top side of the Circle / Met. That's not me 'expecting', but the TfL passenger demand models. Clearly this won't all happen overnight, and will take a while for people to adjust their routeing.

 

[AM9]

... I refuse to pay extra for 2+2 "First Class" and will just sit in the 2 side of the 3+2 in that case.

That's assuming the seats on the '2 side of the 3+2' aren't all occupied, given that this thread is about Thameslink stock which will need to be suitable for the expected increase above the current crush load levels. 3+2 stock clearly won't cope in the future which is why 2+2 has been specified.

 

[43074]

When the frequency is raised to 24tph, and 2/3 of that is routed via London Bridge, and the interchange with Crossrail at Farrigndon is opened, it is expected that there is a significant transfer of people from LU, particularly the Northern (City Branch), Jubilee and top side of the Circle / Met. That's not me 'expecting', but the TfL passenger demand models. Clearly this won't all happen overnight, and will take a while for people to adjust their routeing.

... In which case as much as possible should have been planned to prevent this from happening, e.g. pick up/set down restrictions through the core in peak hours, an Oyster premium on journeys between the Core stations etc. I don't see why these people who don't actually use TL at the moment should have had so much influence over the design of the fleet, especially as it is to the detriment of those travelling long distances. Trips wholly between the Zone 1 stations are what TfL are there for, not Thameslink.

 

[bramling]

... In which case as much as possible should have been planned to prevent this from happening, e.g. pick up/set down restrictions through the core in peak hours, an Oyster premium on journeys between the Core stations etc. I don't see why these people who don't actually use TL at the moment should have had so much influence over the design of the fleet, especially as it is to the detriment of those travelling long distances. Trips wholly between the Zone 1 stations are what TfL are there for, not Thameslink.

Yes the more I read about Thameslink the more negative about it I become!

The big problem is that it's too much of a trade-off between the longer distance journeys out to Cambridge, Peterborough and Bedford, and the inner journeys. As if it's not bad enough that passengers for five different busy northbound service groups will be sharing the same platform space, it's even worse to consider a mix of short-distance journeys added into this mix.

Ideally Thameslink would take over the Welwyn, Luton and Hertford routes, with a metro-design train, giving much-needed extra capacity. The problem is that there's nowhere obvious to terminate the Bedford services, whilst on the GN side the inner services already go to Moorgate.

However drop the 24tph core frequency to something which allows more realistic dwell times, and the issue goes away. No one has yet provided a convincing reason why this can't happen. In reality this will probably be the eventual outcome once the planned service becomes unworkable, but with a lot of pain and disruption along the way.

 

[The Box Photter]

... In which case as much as possible should have been planned to prevent this from happening, e.g. pick up/set down restrictions through the core in peak hours, an Oyster premium on journeys between the Core stations etc. I don't see why these people who don't actually use TL at the moment should have had so much influence over the design of the fleet, especially as it is to the detriment of those travelling long distances. Trips wholly between the Zone 1 stations are what TfL are there for, not Thameslink.

This is exactly what has happened. Thameslink was never designed as and should never have become a relief for overcrowding on the Underground. Funneling additional trains and passengers into St Pancras LL is a recipe for disaster on a monumental scale.

At present, passenger access to St Pancras LL has to be restricted because of overcrowding due to delays caused by late running, driver shortages, infrastructure failure and now Class 700 failure.

What's going to happen when GN services are shoehorned in at the same time as ATO is being introduced and all the services are formed of 700s?

You don't have to be a clairvoyant to predict what's going to happen. The frustrating thing is that railway management and engineers won't listen. They've been taken in (as they always are) by the snake-oil salesmen from the train & signals manufacturers - "Just let us show you our latest piece of kit...no this one will definitely work better than the last piece of **** we foisted on you...technology and computers will make it all work"

Don't believe it. I've been proved right with the Class 700s and I'll continue to be proved right until someone sees sense and prunes back the monstrous cluster**** that's about to happen.

 

[AM9]

... Don't believe it. I've been proved right with the Class 700s ...

In what way?

 

[jon0844]

For years, there have been complaints here about the Thameslink 3 + 2 seating on the 319s and the 377/5s, how so many passengers won't take the centre seat and how everything would be better if that third seat was removed. So that is just what has been done with 2 + 2 seats throughout standard class. The additional space has been made for better standing given the rapid increase in passenger numbers even since the introduction of the 377/s. The seats are better than the '80s types on the 319s, yet there still complaints about the seats?

I've done St Pancras to Brighton and Blackfriars to Bedford and the seats aren't terrible. I've even sat in a window seat, and found a way to get comfy with your foot up or down.

People will get used to them.

More to the point, now they're being used by ordinary people more and more as services increase, I am not seeing ordinary people moaning or sighing. I think by and large they're chuffed to board, find a seat and be able to shove their bags pretty much anywhere without causing obstructions.

By having the 2+2 seats so tight up to the windows, there's oodles of room in the aisle. I am convinced that once these are let loose on the busiest services, most people will NOT be moaning even if they have to stand. Far better to stand without being squashed up and having to try and figure out how to make way for someone wishing to walk through the train, or get by you to alight.

And in the current spec, first class actually does offer a few extra benefits in the form of a table and power.

Don't believe it. I've been proved right with the Class 700s and I'll continue to be proved right until someone sees sense and prunes back the monstrous cluster**** that's about to happen.

I think the trains will be fine by the end of 2018. It's really not the rolling stock that worries me. 8 out of 8 700s I've travelled on have operated. One was delayed inbound for a reason unknown, and another due to problems unrelated to the train. The only problems I've had have been the PIS messing up.

It's the other things, and why I really do think I'll be bailing out of my train at Finsbury Park for onward travel via the tube.. and back to FPK. When the lifts are installed, it will be even more pleasant to interchange there than have some trains going to Moorgate, some to King's Cross and some to St Pancras - and when things go tits up, I'll have no idea where I should be.

At FPK I can just take the first train that turns up.

I can't be the only one that will soon come to that conclusion, so I wonder how that station is going to cope? If more people decide to go there, that's a lot of people on the platform that might have been predicted to already be on the train.

 

[physics34]

Yes the more I read about Thameslink the more negative about it I become!

The big problem is that it's too much of a trade-off between the longer distance journeys out to Cambridge, Peterborough and Bedford, and the inner journeys. As if it's not bad enough that passengers for five different busy northbound service groups will be sharing the same platform space, it's even worse to consider a mix of short-distance journeys added into this mix.

Ideally Thameslink would take over the Welwyn, Luton and Hertford routes, with a metro-design train, giving much-needed extra capacity. The problem is that there's nowhere obvious to terminate the Bedford services, whilst on the GN side the inner services already go to Moorgate.

However drop the 24tph core frequency to something which allows more realistic dwell times, and the issue goes away. No one has yet provided a convincing reason why this can't happen. In reality this will probably be the eventual outcome once the planned service becomes unworkable, but with a lot of pain and disruption along the way.

i think its more likely that the 24tph will be scaled back after the first few months on woe....Remember that for this to run efficiently, all trains from the south and the north have to arrive at the start of the core "on time" and there to be NO delays in the core whatsoever...or there will have to be a very sharpish contingency where trains are turned around quickly, short of their destination.

I predict that

 

[AM9]

i think its more likely that the 24tph will be scaled back after the first few months on woe....Remember that for this to run efficiently, all trains from the south and the north have to arrive at the start of the core "on time" and there to be NO delays in the core whatsoever...or there will have to be a very sharpish contingency where trains are turned around quickly, short of their destination.

I predict that

I don't think that much can be drawn from current core performance that will be relevant to the full TL service. London Bridge works forces Brighton trains through the mess that is Herne Hill et al, the mish mash of trains not really suitable for current core loadings, the new trains that are going through quite normal teething troubles and of course GTR's ongoing fight with their staff. None of these issues 'should' exist when the TL TOC, (whoever that is) launches the full service in 2019 so all this speculation laden with more than a dash of schadenfreude really may be wide of the mark.

 

[Class 466]

TOPS is showing both 700002 & 700010 as out today, can anyone confirm this?

 

[hwl]

I don't think that much can be drawn from current core performance that will be relevant to the full TL service. London Bridge works forces Brighton trains through the mess that is Herne Hill et al, the mish mash of trains not really suitable for current core loadings, the new trains that are going through quite normal teething troubles and of course GTR's ongoing fight with their staff. None of these issues 'should' exist when the TL TOC, (whoever that is) launches the full service in 2019 so all this speculation laden with more than a dash of schadenfreude really may be wide of the mark.

Indeed I suspect we will see a good performance improvement at London Bridge when the down sussex slow opens after Christmas reducing a pinch point that will improve performance across the SN network.

 

[bramling]

I don't think that much can be drawn from current core performance that will be relevant to the full TL service. London Bridge works forces Brighton trains through the mess that is Herne Hill et al, the mish mash of trains not really suitable for current core loadings, the new trains that are going through quite normal teething troubles and of course GTR's ongoing fight with their staff. None of these issues 'should' exist when the TL TOC, (whoever that is) launches the full service in 2019 so all this speculation laden with more than a dash of schadenfreude really may be wide of the mark.

It's not so much the core that's the day-to-day issue - although of course it will cause chaos of a scale we haven't seen before when it does go down.

What do you think the effect will be of a late-running Thameslink to Cambridge train, for example? Remember that the railway it will be running on north of St Pancras will be pretty much unchanged from today, where the effects of such delays (more likely under Thameslink than today) are plain for all to see. Remember also with half-hourly service groups, any non-stopping or turning short will cause hour gaps to many destinations.

For most passengers, despite certain people here saying performance won't matter because there will be more services, the reality is the service will still be infrequent enough that the timetable will matter very much. I simply hate the idea of having to play a lottery at somewhere like Farringdon or St Pancras, will my train be delayed by (for example) speed restrictions at Gatwick Airport (impossible today) and how long will I have to wait on a crowded platform? And when the train does arrive, is my stop going to be removed to make up time, and/or is the train going to be delayed further on route having lost its path?

Do you really think it's "wide of the mark" that my train will have a greater chance of delay coming from Brighton or Horsham than starting at King's Cross? The same no doubt will apply to Southern passengers, a Horsham train is likely to get caught behind an all-stations service leaving Cambridge, or get delayed through Hitchin, for example.

All this is the real world, not the Thameslink Programme dreamworld where they think everything's wonderful and will suddenly start working well because it's got the Thameslink Programme blessing. The rocky class 700 introduction and widely expressed dissatisfaction with the seating are real examples of railway reality dashing the Thameslink Programme dreamworld, sadly more is to come.

 

[philjo]

Spot on.

I worry about St Pancras being able to cope. The low level platforms aren't that wide and there will be lots of passengers waiting for trains - it certainly won't be like the Underground where everyone just gets on the next train. The gateline to the low level platforms doesn't seem big enough to cope and there are only 3 escalators and no way to add any more. When one gets taken out for refurbishment for months on end I suspect it'll become impossible (knowing GTR this will probably coincide with GN services starting to run through the core).

It's an awful thing to say but there's a part of me that hopes that when the GN services start to run through the core it all falls over Operation Princess style and most of the GN services end up running into and out of Kings Cross.

The escalators & gateline to the Thameslink platforms at St Pancras are a bottleneck, when passengers arrive off 2 trains close together in the morning peak.
Is there any scope to put an additional link from either the mid-level or another point in the Low level platforms to the tunnel from the Underground Northern ticket hall to save having to come up and down again. It would ease the flow of passengers & make a shorter walk to the Underground.

I would expect many of the passengers to change at Farringdon instead when crossrail opens and some will go to London Bridge when they probably use the Northern line at the moment?

I think GN passengers who currently get the circle/H&C lines at Kings Cross will probably change at Farringdon instead - the platforms there are quite narrow in places which is probably more of an issue (& the curve means there are large gaps on the northbound platform which will slow boarding/alighting)
I currently use GN into Kings Cross then use Thameslink to Blackfriars for change on the circle/District line so would be able to go straight through in future. But coming back in the other direction not sure where I would board as Blackfriars is a bit draughty in winter and doesn't have much in the way of facilities!

Will the departure boards at STP be integrated with Kings Cross - i.e. so in the evening peak you can easily see if the next train to your destination leave from STP low level or from Kings Cross ? I can see times when you are sent back & forth from STP to KGX

Mods - wondering if this discussion should be in a separate thread?

 

[bramling]

Will the departure boards at STP be integrated with Kings Cross - i.e. so in the evening peak you can easily see if the next train to your destination leave from STP low level or from Kings Cross ? I can see times when you are sent back & forth from STP to KGX

Another daft aspect of the Thameslink Programme's current plans is that the Cambridge and Peterborough proposed services are split between St. Pancras and King's Cross. Either there should be a split where every destination has the choice whether to use Thameslink or not, or if this is not feasible then it should be one or other.

Removing Cambridge from Thameslink would avoid the a major performance risks on the Great Northern side, as the Peterborough route is much better setup for the fragile Thameslink service, having 4-tracks all the way to Huntingdon and much less mixing of stopping patterns. None of this helps with the inferior trains, uncomfortable seating, gross lack of leroom, and delays imported from south London though.

 

[Bishopstone]

What's the settled position with First Class on the 700s? Is it coach 1 or 12 which is permanently declassified? (I seem to have read conflicting information via various sources).

 

[AM9]

The escalators & gateline to the Thameslink platforms at St Pancras are a bottleneck, when passengers arrive off 2 trains close together in the morning peak.
Is there any scope to put an additional link from either the mid-level or another point in the Low level platforms to the tunnel from the Underground Northern ticket hall to save having to come up and down again. It would ease the flow of passengers & make a shorter walk to the Underground.

I would think that to be prohibitively expensive as it would involve closing the retail area for an extended period or use a TBM, and there wouldn't be much saving in distance anyway, - maybe they could squeeze another escalator in and have a staggered gateline. It might even be possible to have another escalator exit from the mid level rising to just beyond the MML booking office into the retail area. There could probably be an extra escalator from the mid level down to platform B and maybe A as well.

I would expect many of the passengers to change at Farringdon instead when crossrail opens and some will go to London Bridge when they probably use the Northern line at the moment?

I think GN passengers who currently get the circle/H&C lines at Kings Cross will probably change at Farringdon instead - the platforms there are quite narrow in places which is probably more of an issue (& the curve means there are large gaps on the northbound platform which will slow boarding/alighting)

I agree with you that Farringdon may present difficulties when Crossrail is operational. The narrow platforms will need widening somehow. That will be expensive on the Northbound side particularly. The unevenness of the width may in part be mitigated by the ease of moving through the trains once boarded or before alighting. Passengers travelling southbound on TL wanting Crossrail will probably congregate near the front of the train as the platform space ismuch better where the access down to crossrail is (one would hope that this was to address just this problem).

I currently use GN into Kings Cross then use Thameslink to Blackfriars for change on the circle/District line so would be able to go straight through in future. But coming back in the other direction not sure where I would board as Blackfriars is a bit draughty in winter and doesn't have much in the way of facilities!

For commuting I'm not sure what 'facilities' are needed, (maybe wi-fi) but I agree that appreciating the view from Blackfriars platforms in the winter can be a little chilling.

Will the departure boards at STP be integrated with Kings Cross - i.e. so in the evening peak you can easily see if the next train to your destination leave from STP low level or from Kings Cross ? I can see times when you are sent back & forth from STP to KGX

That would seem a no brainer anyway and any official online applications for mobile devices should offer a composite departure list of trains to those destinations that are covered by both stations. Not that expensive to fix once the timetables are launched especially given that the core traffic should be ordered by ERTMS and controlled by ATO. Advance boards for the common destinations could be located in both the Met/Circle and Northern ticket halls.

Mods - wondering if this discussion should be in a separate thread?

I think it sould as there is much more to this than just moaning about train teething troubles and their seating.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What's the settled position with First Class on the 700s? Is it coach 1 or 12 which is permanently declassified? (I seem to have read conflicting information via various sources).

Somebody suggested that it was the front one in both directions, the possible exception might be trains into London Bridge where it could be the London end all the time as is conventional on single ended routes into the capital.

 

[BelleIsle]

Pair of 319s, Deceased Barn Owl found in the pan well. Suspect it was over done though, prefer mine still a little red.

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.

 

[Class377/5]

Finally getting back to people. However before I do that, the next two 700 deliveries should be 700101 and then 700018.

Garbage. Staff taking industrial action doesn't make a train break down, poor design, inadequate testing and mis-handling by operators causes trains to fail.

I know 377/5 has wittered on about how much testing the door mechanisms have been put through. Its of no use if the driver is unable to stop the train in the correct position for the GPS to unlock all the doors. Nor has that testing involved having the whole carriage subject to the hammering meted out by what is laughingly called track in 3rd rail land. My point is that vital peak hour crowd-shifting trains shouldn't be turned over to class 700s until all the "bugs" have been ironed out.

I never mentioned the doors, just general testing. Please stick to the facts.

As for the units being self-diagnosing, that's only useful if it means that the faults are fixed quickly and the unit returned to traffic. Current experience suggests that the self-diagnosis program might be something of a hypochondriac.

So far the units have all been fixed quickly, just not quick enough for them to remain in service on that service which is minutes.

I agree that the country is swarming with the products of Bombardier (and that they've had reliability problems too). Do you know what, I'd rather ride home in a Class 310 with slam-doors and opening windows than stand on a packed platform waiting for a train that never arrives because its sitting at Hassocks and only one set of doors will open.

That's nice but the hundreds of people not able to get on trains home because your nice little fantasy means lower capacity doesn't suit the majority.

The 313s (which are generally now considered 'simple') reportedly suffered from a far worse introduction than that of the 700s.

But that's a fact that doesn't suit their argument! Opinions matter more than facts to some on here.

Question for 377/5 (no agenda here, just interest from a signaller)

The faults that are happening day in/day out. Is it stuff that generally wouldn't/couldn't of been tested during the testing stage, or is it that now they are in service they are 'busier'/being used in a different way, and thus the testing wouldn't of picked it up?

I find the whole testing/reliability thing quite interesting. I see these trains everyday, and have grown on me!! I am yet to use one, but colleagues that have are overally impressed (apart from usual complaints)

If you rather, stick it in a PM

Sorry for the delay getting back to you but been a busy week.

Some of the issues have never cropped up during testing in either Germany or in the UK. It seems some of the issues is the combination of UK infrastructure and the way drivers drive not mixing well.

The reliability is climbing now as driver are getting used to them and the different driving style they require. That's no different from going from 319s to 377s.

Yesterday I alighted an 8 carriage 377 at St Pancras LL in order to get an EC train from Kings Cross. Alighting was very slow as was people boarding. From my couple of times on a 700, they do as they're designed to do and vastly superior in this regard

What worries me more than any train or infrastructure problems is the ability of the stations to actually cope with the number of passengers. Even off-peak at St Pancras LL, queues for the escalators and stairs regularly tail back on to the platform. I really can't imagine it dealing well with 24tph.

When built, St Pancras was build to cope with x amount of years growth. What's happened is the growth is a lot further ahead. I *think* its nearer a decade of growth ahead.

Are they still just doing Brighton - Bedford and London Bridge? What will be the next route to receive them?

One way or other, it's quite appropriate to blame a combination of the rail industry, GTR and/or the Thameslink Programme for these issues, ultimately resulting in the passenger not being provided with their published timetable.

Early days yet, but so far things could have gone a lot better.

No, any negative opinions about the trains are all figments of the imagination, and in the Thameslink Programme dreamworld the trains are wonderful and everyone loves everything about them.

In the real world, the seats are uncomfortable and legroom is awful, and a downgrade compared to the existing trains.

The next element of the Thameslink Programme to deliver misery to passengers will of course be the 2018 timetable, when many users will find their service is now more likely to suffer delays and disruption. Given the mess of the 700 introduction so far, and the wider GTR shambles, it seems the powers that be think this is all acceptable for passengers.

Things are not ideal but that's the real world. No-one expected the 700s to be faultless but some like yourself with an axe to grind has seemed to believe anything minor is the end of the world. Its hard to judge a finished project when its in the interim stages properly.

As for negative opinions not existing, your taking your own opinion to be a fact. It isn't. Its not even shared by everyone. The 700s have spilt opinions and on here its clear. There is no train that will magically make everyone happy. But the 700s are built to a spec that isn't what you want so your never going to be happy.

Issues in neutral sections.

Lots of work going into that as it seems to be a singe location that's an issue. And its not just a train fault but the interaction of train, driving style and infrastructure that is impossible to replicate in testing.

Sat now at St Pancras Thameslink, looks like I'm here till gone 6pm as 1W45 isn't running. However a 700 has just gone North when I want a Southbound one. Typical. I'm never going to catch one, why are they honestly so lacking in reliability?!!

They aren't. They are performing higher than the 387s did on service introduction, maybe better than the 377s on TL. And last week they were out performing the 319s massively.

Will there be any extra 700 services added next week?

None this week folks.

None of the 8 car units are in service, IIRC.

Not yet. Soon. Final testing ongoing this week.

Can anyome explain why the Class 387 trains needed to have plug sockets for every one to two seats but the class 700s don't? Apologies if it's already been asked.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

700s spec is 6 years older than the 387s despite the former being more technically advanced.

So how long is the average journey onone of these 387 trains likely to be once they move on?

Do many people travel from Brighton to City Thameslink? That's longer than 25 minutes.

I'm not saying plug sockets are the most essential thing, just surprised some trains have time and others don't.

Average time has been quoted as 45 minutes.

However drop the 24tph core frequency to something which allows more realistic dwell times, and the issue goes away. No one has yet provided a convincing reason why this can't happen. In reality this will probably be the eventual outcome once the planned service becomes unworkable, but with a lot of pain and disruption along the way.

The dwell times are realistic. I've had 319s work almost within these times regular in peak a few years ago. The problem is the 319s cannot cope with being faster between stops nor the accelerated passenger numbers.

This is exactly what has happened. Thameslink was never designed as and should never have become a relief for overcrowding on the Underground. Funneling additional trains and passengers into St Pancras LL is a recipe for disaster on a monumental scale.

At present, passenger access to St Pancras LL has to be restricted because of overcrowding due to delays caused by late running, driver shortages, infrastructure failure and now Class 700 failure.

What's going to happen when GN services are shoehorned in at the same time as ATO is being introduced and all the services are formed of 700s?

You don't have to be a clairvoyant to predict what's going to happen. The frustrating thing is that railway management and engineers won't listen. They've been taken in (as they always are) by the snake-oil salesmen from the train & signals manufacturers - "Just let us show you our latest piece of kit...no this one will definitely work better than the last piece of **** we foisted on you...technology and computers will make it all work"

Don't believe it. I've been proved right with the Class 700s and I'll continue to be proved right until someone sees sense and prunes back the monstrous cluster**** that's about to happen.

The TLP was always designed with Underground relief. TfL has been a partner in the TLP since day one and one of its supporters.

As for the railway being taken in by salesmen, that's complete fiction. BR suggested doing it and then asked those salesmen to develop products to achieve that! Nice way to rewrite history there.

Lets not forget those supporting the old days, BR wanted to run all Kings Lynn services through he Core with Networkers! Something everyone agrees is not sensible today.

You do realise that 700 introduction on GN happens a year before running through to the Core right? Introducing ATO is expected at a different point to the May timetable IIRC so your trying to suggest multiple things are happening together that actually are months apart.

The 700s are not being shoehorned in. The term means squeezing things in. Not sure how putting 8 and 16 into a max capacity of 32 (24 paths out of the available 32 is not shoehorning anytbing) is shoehorning anything in. In fact its making sensible use of the available capacity.

However what have you been proven right with the 700s then? I'm unclear of your meaning so can you please expand and explain your claim please?

i think its more likely that the 24tph will be scaled back after the first few months on woe....Remember that for this to run efficiently, all trains from the south and the north have to arrive at the start of the core "on time" and there to be NO delays in the core whatsoever...or there will have to be a very sharpish contingency where trains are turned around quickly, short of their destination.

I predict that

Who said there will be do delays in the Core ever? That is impossible. Still things like ill passengers, bridge strikes etc that can never be avoided. Not everything that causes delays on the railway is the railways fault.

TOPS is showing both 700002 & 700010 as out today, can anyone confirm this?

Should have been 102/110 I believe. No 8 cars out at present. None have been signed over to GTR yet for passenger service (as per the plan).

What's the settled position with First Class on the 700s? Is it coach 1 or 12 which is permanently declassified? (I seem to have read conflicting information via various sources).

Rear of the train is declassified from what I've been shown. I asked about this last week. However this is not a 100%. Sorry I can't be more helpful but its not my area.

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.

It was a 319 that that came into contact with a train. The incident then brunt a hole into the roof of the 319 near the pan. very wise to get train out of passenger service after that.

 

[BelleIsle]

My experience is slightly different (13 years commuting TL north).

Morning Peak:

Trains fill up north of St Albans; fast trains arrive there with all seats taken and some standing. Fast trains leave St Albans very well loaded - some crush loaded, some have space for more people. A few trains leave people behind, but this depends on the day and any service disruption.

Semi fast trains leave St Albans with seats, some standing from Radlett or Elstree, crush loaded from Mill Hill. A number of people use these from St Albans to get a seat.

Going back t'other way I usually find it difficult to get on at St Pancras. However, as soon as you hit St Albans I inevitably get a seat. Chatting to SAC passengers about why they would rather stand to save ten minutes or so than take a slower train and get a seat is very enlightening

When the frequency is raised to 24tph, and 2/3 of that is routed via London Bridge, and the interchange with Crossrail at Farrigndon is opened, it is expected that there is a significant transfer of people from LU, particularly the Northern (City Branch), Jubilee and top side of the Circle / Met. That's not me 'expecting', but the TfL passenger demand models. Clearly this won't all happen overnight, and will take a while for people to adjust their routeing.

Back in the heady days of '88 the change in journey patterns took us all by surprise. As soon as people realised they could stay on the train four a few more stops and get a better connection than SP/KX they did. Credit to NSE who were quick off the mark in improving signage, maps etc. and changing the ticketing scheme.

 

[Bishopstone]

Rear of the train is declassified from what I've been shown. I asked about this last week. However this is not a 100%. Sorry I can't be more helpful but its not my area.

Thanks, that's what I'd gathered from the latest reports although 2-3 months ago I read some suggestions that it was coach 1 which would be declassified.

I hope to (finally) sample a moving 700 this week, and spend some time in 'first class' without buying a first class ticket. Hopefully the internal displays will be working, and make the position clear.

 

[BelleIsle]

... In which case as much as possible should have been planned to prevent this from happening, e.g. pick up/set down restrictions through the core in peak hours, an Oyster premium on journeys between the Core stations etc. I don't see why these people who don't actually use TL at the moment should have had so much influence over the design of the fleet, especially as it is to the detriment of those travelling long distances. Trips wholly between the Zone 1 stations are what TfL are there for, not Thameslink.

If Ken Livingstone had got his way this would have happened in the reverse direction. He wanted longer distance services removed from Thameslink and returned to their traditional termini. The rationale was twofold: firstly, Thameslink was a metro service and should not be used for long distance services with all the issues this could ensure; secondly, it was his opinion that a project causing major disruption to London should be benefitting the people of London and not commuters from out of town.

Whilst there are some posters on here who would agree with the above, you only have to look at the experience on the Loop. When first connected to Thameslink there were howls of 'you are going to make my journey unreliable', 'who wants to go to North London anyway' etc. When they go to return the Loop to its former form as a terminating service it is 'how dare you force me to change trains' etc. I do not know whether it is just that the people feeling aggrieved that are the ones to make themselves heard or there has been a change of views over the years.

The only thing I know is that if there are issues post launch requiring a change to the service pattern there will be someone who takes it as a personal sleight they their train has been removed/retimed/rerouted. I have a lot of respect for the people trying to make this project happen as I know how difficult it is to keep everyone happy.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It was a 319 that that came into contact with a train. The incident then brunt a hole into the roof of the 319 near the pan. very wise to get train out of passenger service after that.

Since when did an incident being either not about a 700 or being not a technical issue with a 700 get in the way of a rant about the manufacturer/TOC/NR etc :roll:

 

[jon0844]

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 hope they've also been designed to cope with tractor strikes in the Fens...