The Sunday Times: 'Ironing board' seats

[sefton]

My point was made about those that are in denial of the subsidy they get.

Because commuters do not receive a subsidy from off-peak travellers, they are subsidising off-peak travellers who are traveling on those services which trundle up and down with only a few people on board.

Off-peak travellers should be forced to pay the real cost of their journey and if that means they stop traveling then cut those services leaving the economic commuter services.

 

[yorksrob]

Because commuters do not receive a subsidy from off-peak travellers, they are subsidising off-peak travellers who are traveling on those services which trundle up and down with only a few people on board.

Off-peak travellers should be forced to pay the real cost of their journey and if that means they stop traveling then cut those services leaving the economic commuter services.

Which, incidentally would kill of the railway for everyone - commuters and non-commuters.

This is more of a conundrum in the South East as most commuter flows elsewhere are contained in roughly the same amount of rolling stock as the all-day passenger flow.

 

[sefton]

Depends where you are in the uk. Some area the trains are busier off peak than in the peak as nobody can afford the peak fares.

Then that is fine, as the calculation of the fare by dividing number of passengers on that train by that train's cost will keep the price down.

It is the ludicrous notion that packed commuter services are subsidised by empty off-peak trains with customers being charged below cost for tickets that I was challenging.

 

[GodAtum]

Straw poll, do you like the seats on a class 700?

 

[dorsetdesiro]

Like this, you mean?

e144 interior with ironing boards

Haha! Very good!

 

[cactustwirly]

Really? Using Peterborough to London Terminals as an example the annual Any Permitted season on that route is £7,752 which equates to a return journey cost of £33.40 (that calculation assumes 232 return journeys per year). That's less than Any Permitted Off-Peak Day Return of £36.20. Even using the Great Northern and Thameslink Only annual season (£6,540) its the same story the season comes to £28.20 for a return journey whilst the equivalent Off-Peak Day Return is £29.20. Want a Travelcard as part of your season? Same story. Any Permitted annual valid in Zones 1 - 6 is £8,412 giving a return journey of £36.25 compared to £41.00 for an Off-Peak Travelcard.

You'll forgive me but I do not think that it is the commuters that are doing the subsidising of Off-Peak travellers.

I disagree, the price differences are relatively small.
The season ticket is like a bulk buy offer, it makes train travel more attractive and it acts as loyality for a year.
The most profitable franchises, are the ones with a significant number of season tickets into London: like SWR, TSGN (before the RMT strikes), Chiltern etc

 

[Dr_Intoxicated]

Yes - this is exactly what happens. Meanwhile, don't think longitudinal seating is immune from this issue either - try walking through an S stock and it's guaranteed outstretched legs will be intruding into the aisle.

I was not actually arguing the case for longitudinal seating just having some decent lateral spacing between the 2x2 seats so that people could sit in them comfortably. This would not effectively reduce the aisle width as people spillover the current seat widths anyway.

 

[43096]

Would it?

Hard to see how running fewer loss making off-peak services put things in danger.

There is a benefit, though, to running a regular-interval timetable - it attracts more passengers. Start messing with that, and you'd lose passengers. The actual cost of running the off-peak service isn't as high as you might think - the peak service requirement largely dictates how many staff are needed and how many trains you need (leasing cost), so that has to be paid anyway. The only costs you'd save by axing off-peak services are some maintenance costs (lower mileage), track access and fuel/electricity.

That all presupposes that off-peak trains are quiet. The example of Great Northern has already been given. I'm always surprised at how busy off-peak trains out of Waterloo are, especially on the Reading line, which is always well loaded.

 

[Failed Unit]

I was not actually arguing the case for longitudinal seating just having some decent lateral spacing between the 2x2 seats so that people could sit in them comfortably. This would not effectively reduce the aisle width as people spillover the current seat widths anyway.

Must admit width is my personal problem. 1.9m tall and leg room isn’t an issue even with the tables.

Shoulder width is. Cramped in the window seat and needing to overhang the isle. But that is an issue on the middle seat of a 313 (which is actually more comfortable as it is seems wider or not as much requirement to encroach your neighbours.)and most aircraft.

 

[hwl]

I was not actually arguing the case for longitudinal seating just having some decent lateral spacing between the 2x2 seats so that people could sit in them comfortably. This would not effectively reduce the aisle width as people spillover the current seat widths anyway.

But there is a lot less spill over if you go for underfloor heating like on the aventra in 2+2 or 2+3 sections vs the ducts in the 700s and the new DfT methodology looks at spill over which is one reason for the departure of the 707s from SWR and is factored into the SE ITT. Minimising Dwell Times (or not) has a huge effect on the BCR of "Digital Railway" schemes when you run the numbers - Vauxhaul P7&8, London Bridge P1-3 and Lewisham as a shining examples.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Must admit width is my personal problem. 1.9m tall and leg room isn’t an issue even with the tables.

Shoulder width is. Cramped in the window seat and needing to overhang the isle. But that is an issue on the middle seat of a 313 (which is actually more comfortable as it is seems wider or not as much requirement to encroach your neighbours.)and most aircraft.

The 700 has a bigger problem with that than other stock because of the high windows. If you look at a Pendolino, the seat is pretty much right up against the wall with no proper armrest on the window side - but this is mitigated, assuming you're not next to a blank wall, by your shoulders and arm being able to "expand" into the window cavity. Same with Class 170s and Electrostars, and by the looks of it Aventras.

Buses often have a similar issue at least in the low floor bit.

 

[sefton]

Really? Using Peterborough to London Terminals as an example the annual Any Permitted season on that route is £7,752 which equates to a return journey cost of £33.40 (that calculation assumes 232 return journeys per year). That's less than Any Permitted Off-Peak Day Return of £36.20. Even using the Great Northern and Thameslink Only annual season (£6,540) its the same story the season comes to £28.20 for a return journey whilst the equivalent Off-Peak Day Return is £29.20. Want a Travelcard as part of your season? Same story. Any Permitted annual valid in Zones 1 - 6 is £8,412 giving a return journey of £36.25 compared to £41.00 for an Off-Peak Travelcard.

You'll forgive me but I do not think that it is the commuters that are doing the subsidising of Off-Peak travellers.

But that doesn't take account of how busy each service is.

The underlying cost of running a train on a journey is the same. So if you compare the per passenger cost of heavily loaded commuter service with the almost empty off-peak then the cost falling on the commuter is at least 10 if not 20 times higher than the off-peak traveller.

Sure some of those services may be for repositioning, but even taking that into account the commuter is still massively subsidising the under-priced off-peak services.

As for commuters not using the service if an off-peak service didn't exist, I don't believe that to be a credible arguement. You could cancel all the services after 9am from Peterborough and run nothing back until 4.30 and the 7 to 8 am trains would be just as full.

 

[yorkie]

Just a reminder this is to discuss seating; if anyone wishes to discuss anything else please either create a new thread or use an existing one (as appropriate).

If you spot anyone else go off topic and wish to respond, please create a new thread (you can quote them in the new thread and the person you are quoting will be automatically alerted).

There is absolutely nothing to stop anyone creating a thread with a suitable title e.g. Viability of off-peak services on commuter railways, Optimum stock density for commuter railways or whatever.

Thanks.

 

[sefton]

Well I am sat on a peak 700 service now.

Nobody is standing in the entire train, so the extra wide aisles are pointless.

All those customers sat in the aisle seats I can see are sat at an angle so their knees are pointed into the aisle.

It is really hard to see the point of this terrible design.

 

[Failed Unit]

Well I am sat on a peak 700 service now.

Nobody is standing in the entire train, so the extra wide aisles are pointless.

All those customers sat in the aisle seats I can see are sat at an angle so their knees are pointed into the aisle.

It is really hard to see the point of this terrible design.

Yes it was the same on my train this evening, which I expected to be quieter as a result of the train. Lots standing but not crush loaded (everyone would have got a seat on the 365s) The 2 end coaches showing green (as they are first class) the rest red.

The lady next to me at a 45 degree angle with her legs in Aisle.

 

[Hadders]

I'm sure that mechanically the 700s are excellent trains but the interiors are not suitable.

There's nothing wrong with fewer seats so that more can stand - I get that but if the seats had a bit more pitch and the seats spaced a little further from the side wall of the train then many of the complaints would disappear.

I get that there's lots of development taking place and that passenger numbers continue to grow but further adjustments could be made to cater for this at a mid life refurbishment. The Great Northern wasn't broken - it could've coped with several years more growth simply by lengthening all services to 8 and 12 cars without the need to install the bargain basement interior we've ended up with.

 

[physics34]

I'm sure that mechanically the 700s are excellent trains but the interiors are not suitable.

There's nothing wrong with fewer seats so that more can stand - I get that but if the seats had a bit more pitch and the seats spaced a little further from the side wall of the train then many of the complaints would disappear.

I get that there's lots of development taking place and that passenger numbers continue to grow but further adjustments could be made to cater for this at a mid life refurbishment. The Great Northern wasn't broken - it could've coped with several years more growth simply by lengthening all services to 8 and 12 cars without the need to install the bargain basement interior we've ended up with.

the alterations could be started now. Not all units are needed in service and the work could be undertaken starting tomorrow. Seats moved 3 inches from the side wall, new cushioning including softer thicker base and a slightly thicker back with lumber support. (i fail to see why many people dont realise that the seat base and back can be replaced..not the whole seat.)... and if possible more legroom for the airline seating. May mean a slight reduction in seats overall.

 

[physics34]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...king-cushioning-will-get-comfortable-used-jo/

More rubbish

 

[Bletchleyite]

the alterations could be started now. Not all units are needed in service and the work could be undertaken starting tomorrow. Seats moved 3 inches from the side wall, new cushioning including softer thicker base and a slightly thicker back with lumber support. (i fail to see why many people dont realise that the seat base and back can be replaced..not the whole seat.)... and if possible more legroom for the airline seating. May mean a slight reduction in seats overall.

And 6" off the aisle, making access less easy. The wide aisle really does make a difference.

You could do 2+1 with better legroom as well and gain the same benefit but then there would be even more standees.

 

[jon0844]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...king-cushioning-will-get-comfortable-used-jo/

More rubbish

Yet many people still want to hand the entire railway management back to these people!

 

[bramling]

And 6" off the aisle, making access less easy. The wide aisle really does make a difference.

You could do 2+1 with better legroom as well and gain the same benefit but then there would be even more standees.

The wide aisle does no good at all when it’s compromised with legs and feet, as well as many people choosing aisle seats because of the ducting issue. There might be a case for it on inner suburban journeys, but not on stuff going further out.

I tried a 700 tonight, just for a laugh really. The person sitting opposite me chose an aisle seat for a start, and was a good 10 inches off the side of the seat. There’s your wide aisle gone - it’s now back to 317/321 width.

The simple reality is these trains are utterly unfit for purpose. Their design is poor, and putting 8 car versions on hitherto 8 car services of outer-suburban stock has been a disaster. A complete redesign of the interiors is needed and an admission that massive errors of judgement have been made. Anyone who thinks this isn’t the case needs to make a journey on Great Northern and see just how obvious it is that they’re unfit for the task - simple as.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The wide aisle does no good at all when it’s compromised with legs and feet, as well as many people choosing aisle seats because of the ducting issue. There might be a case for it on inner suburban journeys, but not on stuff going further out.

The Thameslink core creates a requirement for an innersuburban layout anyway. If you want an InterCity service from Bedford to Brighton, at least for now, change at St P and London and use EMT and Southern. Thameslink is a suburban commuter service that happens to run a long way out.

I tried a 700 tonight, just for a laugh really. The person sitting opposite me chose an aisle seat for a start, and was a good 10 inches off the side of the seat. There’s your wide aisle gone - it’s now back to 317/321 width.

As those have 3+2 seating it clearly is not. Someone who would overhang 700 seating by ten inches would also overhang regular 2+2, and wouldn't even be able to sit down in an IC70 seat as they would be wedged atop the armrests.

Anyone who thinks this isn’t the case needs to make a journey on Great Northern and see just how obvious it is that they’re unfit for the task - simple as.

I have no idea about Great Northern but I have made a number of Thameslink journeys and they appear comparable with the Cityflyer Class 319s which they replace.

 

[jon0844]

If someone sits outside the confines of an aisle seat (I've done the same), it's rather a lot easier to get by as someone will usually move their body temporarily to assist.

It's a lot easier than squeezing by a fixed seat.

 

[bramling]

If someone sits outside the confines of an aisle seat (I've done the same), it's rather a lot easier to get by as someone will usually move their body temporarily to assist.

It's a lot easier than squeezing by a fixed seat.

It’s not just a case of simply moving the body - if someone is sitting diagonally opposite in the window seat then that person - or at least their legs - will be splayed out at an angle because of the ducting. So there isn’t simply room to move in - and it’s not just a case of everyone being polite as the person in the window seat simply doesn’t have anywhere else to move their legs out the way.

I was paying attention to what was going around me earlier. With everyone being on their own there wasn’t any chatter, however the facial and body language told its own story - painful looks on faces. People sitting down in a seat then moving. The only window seats occupied were in the bays of four - everyone else within sight was in an aisle seat. Bodies and legs intruding well into the aisle. Shuffling of legs. Bays of four being taken first. It was also noticeable how the few longitudinal tip-up seats filled very quickly.

All in all, not a quality travel experience at all. No wonder there has been criticism - I hear MPs have been taking a lot of grief in Herts, Beds and Cambs. When before has a train design been got so badly wrong?

 

[jon0844]

I can honestly say I've never seen any of this. Sure people moan about the firmness of the seats but I've walked through 12 car trains and not seen people sit like you say.

What's more, many people seem able to sit in a window seat without having to twist their legs in a very awkward fashion. They're not ideal but people seem to be coping.

GN users will sadly have to adapt as TL users have.

It would of course be great if the 717s got different seating, even if they do shorter journeys, with the DfT having a last minute change of heart but it is rather unlikely.

Meanwhile I'm pretty sure that going forward there will be a desire to get rid of the remaining 365s for reasons that may become more apparent in the coming year.

 

[Failed Unit]

The Thameslink core creates a requirement for an innersuburban layout anyway. If you want an InterCity service from Bedford to Brighton, at least for now, change at St P and London and use EMT and Southern. Thameslink is a suburban commuter service that happens to run.

Often see these quotes. What if you live in Huntingdon for example? Or Kings Lynn? How do you avoid this exceptionally uncomfortable seats then apart from use another form of transport. For the poor person from Kings Lynn you want even go first class.

I can see Jon’s point. I can’t see GTR wanting to keep the last remaining 365s. They have had many micro fleets in the past but it must be a pain for the drivers and fitters having small fleets. Not that I want to see the 365s go. My only criticism of both of the new sets of stock is the uncomfortable seating.

 

[AM9]

Often see these quotes. What if you live in Huntingdon for example? Or Kings Lynn? How do you avoid this exceptionally uncomfortable seats then apart from use another form of transport. For the poor person from Kings Lynn you want even go first class.

They're in a similar boat to those who have been travelling from Flitwick and Harlington, the time difference between those two flows will be about 10-15 minutes. Travel patterns will settle down well within a couple of years of any train type's introduction, and the individual's seat preferences are just one of the factors in deciding those patterns.

 

[G_A_C_C_C]

 

[Hadders]

They're in a similar boat to those who have been travelling from Flitwick and Harlington, the time difference between those two flows will be about 10-15 minutes. Travel patterns will settle down well within a couple of years of any train type's introduction, and the individual's seat preferences are just one of the factors in deciding those patterns.

They are unsuitable for Flitwick and Harlington passengers too, in my opinion.

 

[AM9]

They are unsuitable for Flitwick and Harlington passengers too, in my opinion.

But from a TOC point of view, there is no shortage of passengers and the seats get used all the time. I doubt that there are many regular travellers who would now trade the class700's firm seats for the uncomfortable ride, soggy seats and overcrowded class319s that they endured for the past three decades. Thameslink is a high-volume outer-suburban commuter railway that carries far more than it did even just before the financial crisis. Likewise, the GN services that are being absorbed into Thameslink will soon have similar volumes of passengers, needing the same high-capacity rolling stock. The majority of passengers don't obsess about the seats on Thameslink, and unless those commuting from dormitory towns located up the lines to Cambridge and Peterborough are physiologically different from the existing TL passengers, they will just get on with their lives (maybe a few will go elsewhere but it won't be significant in the volume of passengers travelling).