Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

[Class377/5]

Why would they have to be in the ceiling? The edges of the luggage rack as on other trains would suffice, unless you are expecting exceptionally tall people.

The er not quite sure what your saying, however the wiring needs to be accessible so you can't just hide it away. Note there isn't that much space there anyway and it spans most of the roof already.

 

[ert47]

I know there is a myriad of differences between the models, but some of the C2C 357 units have additional handrails along the ceiling

IMAGE

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Is much of the electronics of a 700 of a nature where one is required per coach or can the functionality of some of the electronics be shared between coaches? Looking at a vid of a 700 some coaches possibly would have the room underneath for a cabinet to be bolted in place to house electronics

 

[D365]

Looking at a vid of a 700 some coaches possibly would have the room underneath for a cabinet to be bolted in place to house electronics

Underneath, where? Are you an engineer?

 

[Domh245]

The er not quite sure what your saying, however the wiring needs to be accessible so you can't just hide it away. Note there isn't that much space there anyway and it spans most of the roof already.

I think that the suggestion was to have handrails that are attached to the bottom of the overhead luggage racks, I imagine somewhat like this:

The problem with that is that people who can reach those would already be able to reach the seatback handles, so it doesn't really add anything

 

[J-2739]

Nobody likes a hand near their head.

Nice edit, by the way. Perhaps strap handles should be fitted out also?

 

[Islineclear3_1]

The problem with that is that people who can reach those would already be able to reach the seatback handles, so it doesn't really add anything

And standees holding on to the luggage rack handrails would be leaning over those sat in the aisle seats - heaven forbid smelly armpits....

So yes, not much value from my perspective

 

[AM9]

I think that the suggestion was to have handrails that are attached to the bottom of the overhead luggage racks, I imagine somewhat like this:

The problem with that is that people who can reach those would already be able to reach the seatback handles, so it doesn't really add anything

Just looking at the picture, there are 11 visible seats, 12 independent hand holds on the backs of those seats, 3-4 hand holds on the left gangway vertical rail and probably two maximum on the right side one. That's a total of 18 safe and reasonably comfortable positions for standees in about one quarter of the car length, i.e. well on the way to being full. Add another 10 in crush loading and there will be a bit of sharing/leaning on things but that's far better than the intimacy that would be needed for the same total number of passengers in an Electrostar (including seated). The aisle width is about 1.5m compared with 600mm or thereabouts of a 387.

 

[Class377/5]

I know there is a myriad of differences between the models, but some of the C2C 357 units have additional handrails along the ceiling

IMAGE

The 357 ceiling is not designed to move like on the 700s, so your idea is not comparing like with like.

Is much of the electronics of a 700 of a nature where one is required per coach or can the functionality of some of the electronics be shared between coaches? Looking at a vid of a 700 some coaches possibly would have the room underneath for a cabinet to be bolted in place to house electronics

On one or two coaches yes. Other no so that's idea is not feasible. This equipment has to be on every coach. And still needs to connected to the roof as it powers the PIS.

I think that the suggestion was to have handrails that are attached to the bottom of the overhead luggage racks, I imagine somewhat like this:

The problem with that is that people who can reach those would already be able to reach the seatback handles, so it doesn't really add anything

That picture shows the area for wheelchairs users to access the toilet, hence the 2+1 seating. It's a design to stop too many people standing there so those in wheel chairs can still access the loo.

 

[jon0844]

I challenge you to stand at the rear of an 8 or 12 car 387 heading north from St Pancras, with the driver on the back end of his shift with his new girlfriend waiting for him at home.

Just before Scratchwood services you will be on the floor.

Can't the driver contain himself a bit longer?

 

[D365]

Can't the driver contain himself a bit longer?

Plot twist; the 387 is his girlfriend but he's eloping to Three Bridges.

 

[Goldfish62]

I think that the suggestion was to have handrails that are attached to the bottom of the overhead luggage racks, I imagine somewhat like this:

The problem with that is that people who can reach those would already be able to reach the seatback handles, so it doesn't really add anything

No, I didn't mean that at all. I meant the same as in the Class 458/5s. Vertical grab poles that are attached at the top to the luggage rack. Overall there is much more surface area to hold on to than seat back handles.

 

[bramling]

Meanwhile, to bring things back just slightly towards (or should that be lower towards?) the topic in hand, not a good moment to be travelling northwards from St Pancras International on Thameslink right now. As per Thameslink's live departure board, 1948 to Bedford - cancelled. 2004 to Bedford - due 2036. 2018 to Bedford - due 2021. So, if I turn up for the 1948 to Bedford, I'm standing on St Pancras platform for over half an hour. Wonderful advert for Thameslink - not!

 

[Failed Unit]

Sitting on the sidelines I don't think any of the post cross the unacceptable line, my advice to anyone that feels something posted is not acceptable hit the report button and leave it to the moderators.

I am like looking forward to the 700s onto WGC but only because it will end 4 car running and severe overcrowding. That said considering great northern right time performance is less than 50% at the moment. Heaven help us. I just can't see how the timetable will work. More trains on a route which already has serious performance issues.

 

[MatthewRead]

I wish they'd use them on the London Bridge-Brighton runs because that would release a Southern 377 for use elswhere

 

[asylumxl]

I wish they'd use them on the London Bridge-Brighton runs because that would release a Southern 377 for use elswhere

Wait, what? I believe the London Bridge to Brighton services were the first to see 700s. They are used on the following diagram, as posted by Class 377/5 a few pages ago:

TB501
5Y91 02+14 Jowett Sidings to Bedford
2W91 02.40 Bedford to Brighton
1B00 05.47 Brighton to London Bridge
1B05 07.12 London Bridge to Brighton
1B10 08.27 Brighton to London Bridge
1B15 09.42 London Bridge to Brighton
1B22 11.02 Brighton to London Bridge
1B25 12.12 London Bridge to Brighton
5B25 13+29 Brighton to Down Yard
5B38 14+42 Down Yard to Brighton
1B38 15.02 Brighton to London Bridge
1B41 16.12 London Bridge to Brighton
1B48 17.32 Brighton to London Bridge
1B51 18.42 London Bridge to Brighton
5W51 20+06 Brighton to Three Bridges Depot

Unless of course I'm misunderstanding you. Do you mean in the future?

 

[Class377/5]

I wish they'd use them on the London Bridge-Brighton runs because that would release a Southern 377 for use elswhere

The in peak Thameslink doesn't current go to London Bridge. Those are Southern services using Southern stock. Off peak Thameslink uses a handful of Southern DC only stock due to my running via Herne Herne for all Brighton services requiring far more units.

The Thameslink services will be completely replaced with 700s before they start taking over Southern routes. Brighton to London Bridge in peak falls under the latter not the former.

Wait, what? I believe the London Bridge to Brighton services were the first to see 700s. They are used on the following diagram, as posted by Class 377/5 a few pages ago:

Unless of course I'm misunderstanding you. Do you mean in the future?

The 1Bxx services are 2tph so require more than one unit for 2.5hr round trip.

 

[asylumxl]

The 1Bxx services are 2tph so require more than one unit for 2.5hr round trip.

Fair enough. I admit I am not very familiar with the current service to Brighton from London Bridge nor the planned future service.

While I used to regularly use the TL services from it, I stopped paying attention to London Bridge after they began routing trains via Elephant & Castle.

 

[jaig]

Any 700 workings today?

Sent from my SM-J500FN using Tapatalk

 

[jbqfc]

saw 700113 today one of its windows looked like it was held in with tape
got to travel on my first one today from redhill to three bridges
seats hard and not very comfortable
very quick off the mark smooth ride
PIS working but was changing pages so fast it was useless

 

[John1975]

Starting Monday 31st October

(401) 8 700
5W78 03+38 Three Bridges Depot to Three Bridges
1W78 03.46 Three Bridges to Bedford
1V83 06.14 Bedford to Sutton
2V12 08.08 Sutton to St Albans
2O37 09.44 St Albans to Sutton
2O38 11.07 Sutton to Luton
2V67 13.14 Luton to Sutton
2V68 15.08 Sutton to St Albans
2O93 16.44 St Albans to Sutton
2O94 18.11 Sutton to Luton
2V41 20.20 Luton to Sutton
2O48 22.47 Sutton to Bedford
5G48 01+10 Bedford to Bedford CS

 

[MatthewRead]

The in peak Thameslink doesn't current go to London Bridge. Those are Southern services using Southern stock. Off peak Thameslink uses a handful of Southern DC only stock due to my running via Herne Herne for all Brighton services requiring far more units.

The Thameslink services will be completely replaced with 700s before they start taking over Southern routes. Brighton to London Bridge in peak falls under the latter not the former.



The 1Bxx services are 2tph so require more than one unit for 2.5hr round trip.

Did actually see a Thameslink 387 on a Brighton-London Bridge service yesterday though!

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Has Brighton-London Bridge always been run by Thames Link? It seems strange to come under TL and not Southern as I tend to think of TL as being only services that run through the "core"

 

[D365]

Has Brighton-London Bridge always been run by Thames Link? It seems strange to come under TL and not Southern as I tend to think of TL as being only services that run through the "core"

The service exists because Thameslink trains between Blackfriars and London Bridge have been diverted during building works at the latter.

 

[Ianno87]

The service exists because Thameslink trains between Blackfriars and London Bridge have been diverted during building works at the latter.

Prior to Jan 2015, it effectively used to "join up" with the 2tph Bedford-Three Bridges to give a the third and fourth hourly Bedford-Brighton trains, all via London Bridge.

It was split in two to retain an off peak Brighton-London Bridge link (that would otherwise be lost with the diversions), but also keeping 4tph Gatwick-Croydon-Thameslink

 

[Class377/5]

Starting Monday 31st October

(401) 8 700
5W78 03+38 Three Bridges Depot to Three Bridges
1W78 03.46 Three Bridges to Bedford
1V83 06.14 Bedford to Sutton
2V12 08.08 Sutton to St Albans
2O37 09.44 St Albans to Sutton
2O38 11.07 Sutton to Luton
2V67 13.14 Luton to Sutton
2V68 15.08 Sutton to St Albans
2O93 16.44 St Albans to Sutton
2O94 18.11 Sutton to Luton
2V41 20.20 Luton to Sutton
2O48 22.47 Sutton to Bedford
5G48 01+10 Bedford to Bedford CS

As per my diagrams I posted a few days ago.

Did actually see a Thameslink 387 on a Brighton-London Bridge service yesterday though!

Disruption caused by lack of drivers means stock does moves around.

Has Brighton-London Bridge always been run by Thames Link? It seems strange to come under TL and not Southern as I tend to think of TL as being only services that run through the "core"

The service exists because Thameslink trains between Blackfriars and London Bridge have been diverted during building works at the latter.

Prior to Jan 2015, it effectively used to "join up" with the 2tph Bedford-Three Bridges to give a the third and fourth hourly Bedford-Brighton trains, all via London Bridge.

It was split in two to retain an off peak Brighton-London Bridge link (that would otherwise be lost with the diversions), but also keeping 4tph Gatwick-Croydon-Thameslink

Remember that Thameslink, not Southern provides the main non peak service for Three Bridges to Brighton for all stations and has done for many years.

Southern provided the peak service due to Thameslink cutting it's peak service to 2tph rather than the off peak 4tph. This was because most of the peak services could not go via London Bridge so there wasn't the paths via Herne Hill. So the (Southern) 1Bxx exist to keep the link between Brighton and London Bridge.

Note the 1Bxx service is really the old 1Txx type service with the 1Wxx beng more the 2Txx all stations service. The 2Wxx Three Bridges service keeps up the 4tph from MML to Gatwick (and long term it becomes a Gatwick terminator). As Ian states, the existence of the 1Bxx off peak service is to provide the only London Bridge link to the BML off peak.

Come (May) 2018 the 1Bxx will be extended to Cambridge North as a Thameslink service run by 700s. (Peterborough is other service scheduled to start running through the Core in May 2018).

Once the Thameslink programme is finished Southern mainline services will be aimed at Victoria (mostly) with London Bridge services generally provided by Thameslink for BML passengers.

 

[Kite159]

How did the 700 get on around the Sutton loop today?

 

[Islineclear3_1]

How did the 700 get on around the Sutton loop today?

I was going to ask this exact same question earlier as don't have access to RTT or NRE at work. Looks like the 20.20 LUT-SUO is running to time at the moment

 

[Class 466]

How did the 700 get on around the Sutton loop today?

From the looks of it 700002 did a rather good job!

 

[Class377/5]

700014 was the unit that started the diagram I'm told. Guessing from nothing being mentioned everything went right.