WMT Class 730 impressions

[Bletchleyite]

Managed to get two rides today, from Tring into Euston and back out.

In summary, these are basically 720s without the extra seat. Or in more detail:

• Ride good, though some rattles, most notably from the overhead PIS
• Acceleration good and quiet
• Didn't use the toilet, but I'm sure it was fine! Seemed to be in use.
• Look quite good in the livery. Indeed, I think there is something particularly good looking about the gangwayed version of these, particularly with the dead flies not visible as the gangway is in black!
• Headlights appear to be halogen rather than LED which is surprising given how new these are.
• Fake wood on end bulkheads looks good, a slightly darker colour than the 720s I think.
• PIS setup inside and out a bit cack handed. Inside scrolling is very jerky and some things are "paged" without any thought a bit like TrainFX, e.g. the "3 Ss" was split over two pages in a slightly confusing way. Outside it scrolls "London Euston" rather than putting it over two lines, and inexplicably scrolls "Carriage N" in a small width rather than just putting "Car N" or the little carriage picture. All fixable though. Automatic announcements almost identical to 350s.
• Lighting a pleasant colour (slightly warm white similar to how the 350/2s were brand new) but way too bright. Sadly WMT have gone for direct rather than indirect lighting (per the 345 which is a seriously classy setup), and it's horribly glary. Hopefully it can be adjusted in software as otherwise this will be quite unpleasant. I don't quite know why most photos seem to show it as bluish, though, it really isn't.
• Like other Aventras and CAF stock the door windows are inexplicably single-glazed so you get some steaming up. At least kids will be able to draw smiley faces in it I suppose
• Temperature a bit cold (and I like it cold normally) - I reckon it must have been about 19 degrees. Needs knocking up a degree or two. The 350/2 I changed onto at Tring was lovely and warm in comparison.
• Aisle very wide but see below. (The whole thing feels quite wide, which is odd as it's actually quite a narrow* unit with quite thick sidewalls).
• Seat back tables provided and quite solid.
• Door operation EXTREMELY slow. It was taking upwards of 30 seconds to get the doors released. This really needs looking at - dare I suggest driver release would work better?

*2.77m wide against the 350 which is 2.80.

With that mixed but not terrible bag, onto the seating. And, oh dear, like Greater Anglia and Merseyrail they've stuffed up a perfectly good unit

• Seats are VERY narrow (per the 720). I reckon about 1.5" narrower than the 350/2, and there are no spacers either between the seats or at the wall. I can - just - fit within a seat on a 350/2, on these I take up about one and a third, even skinny looking people seemed to go over a bit onto the second seat. This is a terrible design decision, as a wide aisle is all very well but no good if it's full of bits of bloke who can only fit one "cheek" on the seat. Seriously, WMT? Did you even test this out with anyone? This is basically the same as a 3+2 "schoolkid road coach" and not designed for adults.
• Legroom poor (basically the same as the 2 side of the 350/2 in the middle section). So knees in the aisle too! Priority seat had acceptable legroom but nothing special unlike 350s.
• Layout is downright cack-handed, there are random standing spaces but not proper standbacks, and no partition behind the last row of seats so it feels like someone is reading the paper over your shoulder. I'd question if this was even designed, or rather chucked together at 4:55pm on a Friday. It was easy to imagine how it could be done much better without losing any capacity - possibly even gaining some!

As a whole I'd say I'd take a 350/2 any day, let alone other 350s, unless it was very lightly loaded so nobody had to sit next to me in which case they'd probably be on a par. Though I'm hoping the "IC spec" LNR ones will be better, I don't hold out too much hope on legroom!

Compared to a 777? I think I'd take these, but not by much, and the level boarding on the 777 might pip them, but all in all it seems the City Regions have both specified pretty bad interiors (unlike London's Class 345 which basically has few if any of the issues of either). I wonder what Manchester will come up with?

Compared to a 319? More modern, clearly, but the seat comfort level is markedly worse on the new unit, and the 319 is hardly a high bar!

Compared to a 323 (which they'll largely replace)? Probably acceptable, but the 323 is pretty poor to start with, 3+2 should never be done in 23m units.

6/10. Do better next time. Think I'll find a new preferred London train in the morning peak that's a 350 turn.

 

[J-2739]

It's interesting you thing the 730s ride well like the 720s. I don't think the 720s ride well at all.

 

[stadler]

Managed to get two rides today, from Tring into Euston and back out.

In summary, these are basically 720s without the extra seat. Or in more detail:

• Ride good, though some rattles, most notably from the overhead PIS
• Acceleration good and quiet
• Didn't use the toilet, but I'm sure it was fine! Seemed to be in use.
• Look quite good in the livery. Indeed, I think there is something particularly good looking about the gangwayed version of these, particularly with the dead flies not visible as the gangway is in black!
• Headlights appear to be halogen rather than LED which is surprising given how new these are.
• Fake wood on end bulkheads looks good, a slightly darker colour than the 720s I think.
• PIS setup inside and out a bit cack handed. Inside scrolling is very jerky and some things are "paged" without any thought a bit like TrainFX, e.g. the "3 Ss" was split over two pages in a slightly confusing way. Outside it scrolls "London Euston" rather than putting it over two lines, and inexplicably scrolls "Carriage N" in a small width rather than just putting "Car N" or the little carriage picture. All fixable though. Automatic announcements almost identical to 350s.
• Lighting a pleasant colour (slightly warm white similar to how the 350/2s were brand new) but way too bright. Sadly WMT have gone for direct rather than indirect lighting (per the 345 which is a seriously classy setup), and it's horribly glary. Hopefully it can be adjusted in software as otherwise this will be quite unpleasant. I don't quite know why most photos seem to show it as bluish, though, it really isn't.
• Like other Aventras and CAF stock the door windows are inexplicably single-glazed so you get some steaming up. At least kids will be able to draw smiley faces in it I suppose
• Temperature a bit cold (and I like it cold normally) - I reckon it must have been about 19 degrees. Needs knocking up a degree or two. The 350/2 I changed onto at Tring was lovely and warm in comparison.
• Aisle very wide but see below. (The whole thing feels quite wide, which is odd as it's actually quite a narrow* unit with quite thick sidewalls).
• Seat back tables provided and quite solid.
• Door operation EXTREMELY slow. It was taking upwards of 30 seconds to get the doors released. This really needs looking at - dare I suggest driver release would work better?

*2.77m wide against the 350 which is 2.80.

With that mixed but not terrible bag, onto the seating. And, oh dear, like Greater Anglia and Merseyrail they've stuffed up a perfectly good unit

• Seats are VERY narrow (per the 720). I reckon about 1.5" narrower than the 350/2, and there are no spacers either between the seats or at the wall. I can - just - fit within a seat on a 350/2, on these I take up about one and a third, even skinny looking people seemed to go over a bit onto the second seat. This is a terrible design decision, as a wide aisle is all very well but no good if it's full of bits of bloke who can only fit one "cheek" on the seat. Seriously, WMT? Did you even test this out with anyone? This is basically the same as a 3+2 "schoolkid road coach" and not designed for adults.
• Legroom poor (basically the same as the 2 side of the 350/2 in the middle section). So knees in the aisle too! Priority seat had acceptable legroom but nothing special unlike 350s.
• Layout is downright cack-handed, there are random standing spaces but not proper standbacks, and no partition behind the last row of seats so it feels like someone is reading the paper over your shoulder. I'd question if this was even designed, or rather chucked together at 4:55pm on a Friday. It was easy to imagine how it could be done much better without losing any capacity - possibly even gaining some!

As a whole I'd say I'd take a 350/2 any day, let alone other 350s, unless it was very lightly loaded so nobody had to sit next to me in which case they'd probably be on a par. Though I'm hoping the "IC spec" LNR ones will be better, I don't hold out too much hope on legroom!

Compared to a 777? I think I'd take these, but not by much, and the level boarding on the 777 might pip them, but all in all it seems the City Regions have both specified pretty bad interiors (unlike London's Class 345 which basically has few if any of the issues of either). I wonder what Manchester will come up with?

Compared to a 319? More modern, clearly, but the seat comfort level is markedly worse on the new unit, and the 319 is hardly a high bar!

Compared to a 323 (which they'll largely replace)? Probably acceptable, but the 323 is pretty poor to start with, 3+2 should never be done in 23m units.

6/10. Do better next time. Think I'll find a new preferred London train in the morning peak that's a 350 turn.

What i really like about these 730s is just how wide the aisles are. One of the reasons i like the 700/707/717 so much is that the wide aisles that make it feel very spacious. The aisle is wide enough that a wheelchair could probably wheel down the carriage. These new 730s seem to be the only other trains that have these Desiro City style wide aisles. So i really like this. But of course one downside of this is that the seats are very small and narrow as you say.

For the automated announcements they appear to be using the same exact script and sound files from the 350s and it is still Julie Berry too. So as you say they are identical. It is nice to have larger screens compared to the 350s but i agree the setup could be improved. Bit overall i found the screens quite good. I like how they have the Desiro City capacity indictor showing how busy each carriage is.

One odd thing is that there are no door close buttons. I know that the doors close automatically after a certain amount of seconds but it is nice to have door close buttons too. Especially on a very cold winter day it is nice to be able to shut the door straight away after boarding. Other classes of Aventra trains have door close buttons so i am not sure why these do not.

I agree that releasing the doors is very slow. On the 730s that i went on i also noticed the same. But unfortunately there is nothing much that can be done as this is a result of these trains having very non standard Guard panels. These trains were originally designed with Electrostar style panels that just have a door close button and a bell button but no local door controls or door open buttons. But it was only decided after they were ordered that they would be Guard Open Guard Close operated so they had to modify the panels and fit in full local door controls and door open controls in the space provided. So what has resulted is a very odd and non standard control panel that takes ages to operate. No other train in the UK has this type of panel.

To open the doors on the 730s the Guard has to first turn the key switch to the local door position and then use the controls to open their local door and step out to check the platform. Then the Guard has to turn the key switch again to the all doors position and use the controls to release all of the other doors. So this is a much more complicating and time consuming process compared to the 350s (and most other trains in the UK were Guards open the door) where the Guard simply presses the local door open button and steps out to check and then presses the two release buttons together. The method the 730s use is probably the most time consuming method of any train. Even the Door Deselect method for Short Platforms on the 170s and 171s is a bit quicker.

Using the Driver Open Guard Close method would speed things up but i highly doubt that the unions would agree to that. I would imagine that ASLEF and RMT would have issues and after all the recent strikes i doubt LNWR would want any more issues. Although saying that it is interesting how some TOCs (GWR and LNER and TPE) have had no issue moving to the Driver Open Guard Close method when new trains were introduced but others (LNWR and Northern and TFW and WMR) have insisted on keeping the Guard Open Guard Close method on newer trains. So maybe it is a possibility but i doubt it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, the wide aisles are good, but to do that properly you really need to be using 20m x 2.82m bodies. Not making seats so narrow an average adult male can't sit entirely within one.

 

[stadler]

Yes, the wide aisles are good, but to do that properly you really need to be using 20m x 2.82m bodies. Not making seats so narrow an average adult male can't sit entirely within one.

I guess it is different for everyone but the seats on the 730s seemed wide enough to me. No different to the 700/707/717 really. Although i had nobody sitting next to me on any journeys so i suppose that made it seem much better. I guess if you have someone sitting next to you on the 730s then it will be an issue and the person on the aisle will probably be quite uncomfortable and partially hanging over the edge of the seat. So i would probably notice it a lot more on full and standing peak hour trains.

I think it may also be the lack of spacing between the seats that makes them appear to be more narrow. Seats of the same width are used on other trains but there is normally spacing between them which makes them appear to be larger as the seats are not all cramped together. So the lack of spacing between the seats (which is needed if you want an extra wide aisle) probably makes it a lot worse.

But this is the issue with the UK having such a narrow loading gauge. You can either have narrow seats close together without any spacing and a large wide aisle. Or you can have wider seats with spacing between them but a narrow aisle. In places like Russia and the former USSR countries they have 3+3 seating (three seats on each side of the aisle) and the aisle is still as wide as a Desiro City train. Even in our neighbouring Mainland European countries such as France and Germany the loading gauge seems to be a lot wider allowing wider seats while maintaining wider aisles. So i guess this is an issue with how our railways in the UK were designed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The actual seats are narrower, spacer or not. I'll take a tape measure next time but I reckon about 1.5" difference from 350/2 to 730.

Edit: it's the Kiel Vario Relax, which according to their website is 435mm wide. The E3000 comes in a few widths (though all LNR ones are the same width*), but can be ordered up to 460mm wide. If the Desiros do use that one that would tally with my observations.

* Edit: I didn't think they were, but I've since seen /2 cushions on a /1 and vice versa. The headrest shape does differ, though.

 

[stadler]

The actual seats are narrower, spacer or not. I'll take a tape measure next time but I reckon about 1.5" difference from 350/2 to 730.

Edit: it's the Kiel Vario Relax, which according to their website is 435mm wide. The E3000 comes in a few widths (though all LNR ones are the same width), but can be ordered up to 460mm wide. If the Desiros do use that one that would tally with my observations.

That would certainly be interesting to measure it with a tape measure to see the exact measurements. I thought that the 730 seats seemed the same width as the 350/2 but it seems maybe not. I will try and measure the 700/707/717 seats at some point too as it would be interesting to see if they are same width as the 730 seats.

I wonder if the LNWR 730s will use the same seats as these WMR 730s but just with spacing and armrests added. Or if they will actually get wider seats than these ones. I look forward to seeing what they are like when they enter service.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Await the IC version with interest

 

[Bletchleyite]

Await the IC version with interest

Same. I worry slightly about legroom, but if they use the long distance version of that seat it will be both wider and have armrests, which should make it similar in comfort terms to the venerable Grammer or even the Fainsa Sophia minus the issues with the base.

 

[Kite159]

Maybe operators should move from 2+2 (or "3-1+2" in the case of the 730/0s to 2+1 seating (with spacers on the seats on the 2 side). For trains designed for short distances of under an hour.

That way there is a wide aisle and the seats are useable for the average + above average person without hanging over.

I hope the gangway is available for use as some LNR guards lock it out of use (can't have those pesky passengers come knocking) even if the bog(s) in one unit are out of order.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To be honest for this sort of route I think TfL's Class 345 layout would work directly, i.e. three sets of doors, a facing bay with armrests in the middle of each section, otherwise longitudinal seats and proper standbacks. For Birmingham I'd probably have gone for fixed 5 car formations.

TBH it's hard to criticise the 345 for this sort of service other than the lack of level boarding, it really is very well designed in my book.

 

[Kite159]

To be honest for this sort of route I think TfL's Class 345 layout would work directly, i.e. three sets of doors, a facing bay with armrests in the middle of each section, otherwise longitudinal seats and proper standbacks. For Birmingham I'd probably have gone for fixed 5 car formations.

TBH it's hard to criticise the 345 for this sort of service other than the lack of level boarding, it really is very well designed in my book.

I guess the issue within Birmingham is the mix between the Cross City line which needs 6 coaches and the Wolverhampton - Walsall + Rugeley services which will only take 3 coaches (or a single 350) due to platform lengths (especially at the Wolverhampton end).

Also can Soho depot take fixed formation trains without major works?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I guess the issue within Birmingham is the mix between the Cross City line which needs 6 coaches and the Wolverhampton - Walsall + Rugeley services which will only take 3 coaches (or a single 350) due to platform lengths (especially at the Wolverhampton end).

True. But either way, the interior of the 730 seems quite haphazard. It does deal with crowds, but it's not optimal for a number of reasons.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I hope the gangway is available for use as some LNR guards lock it out of use (can't have those pesky passengers come knocking) even if the bog(s) in one unit are out of order.

On Monday I was able to walk through between 730 007 and 730 010 on the 15.54 off Euston, so yes - it's available.

 

[JW4]

On Monday I was able to walk through between 730 007 and 730 010 on the 15.54 off Euston, so yes - it's available.

It wasn’t available on the 17:35 off Euston, toilet was also broken on 007

 

[cactustwirly]

It's interesting you thing the 730s ride well like the 720s. I don't think the 720s ride well at all.

None of the Aventras ride well, they are a bit better than pacers but really crash over point work.
350s are much better units in every way I imagine. I am dreading the 701s as I know they are a downgrade over the 458s, which have comfortable seats and ride really smoothly

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

which have comfortable seats and ride really smoothly

which have translucent windows due to sealed in moisture, permanently broken toilets and the filthiest Lino floors west of the Southeastern Networkers.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

It's interesting you thing the 730s ride well like the 720s. I don't think the 720s ride well at all.

They don't, but there is a marked improvement over the poorly-riding 345s.

 

[cactustwirly]

They don't, but there is a marked improvement over the poorly-riding 345s.

I don't think the 720s ride any better they are still very harsh.

People complain about the 800 ride quality, but that is a Rolls Royce in comparison to Aventras

 

[cactustwirly]

which have translucent windows due to sealed in moisture, permanently broken toilets and the filthiest Lino floors west of the Southeastern Networkers.

I don't think they are that bad, I'd rather have a comfortable train with a slightly dirty floor than an uncommon train with a pristine floor (bet the 701s will be filthy after a few months anyway)

 

[43096]

which have translucent windows due to sealed in moisture, permanently broken toilets and the filthiest Lino floors west of the Southeastern Networkers.

Which is all down to SWR’s lack of care of the fleet. The 701s will soon be the same.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Which is all down to SWR’s lack of care of the fleet. The 701s will soon be the same.

Quite possibly yes. The 458s were lovely before they turfed the carpet up.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Been on two today and having tried the single seats (the non priority one of these aligned to the window has more legroom than some of the priority double seats) I'm warming to them a bit. Lighting still too bright and seats too narrow though (still not been on a 350/2 to measure those).

Used the loo, and it worked but has a very confusing lock indicator design (both the green and red light up) and the sink seems specifically designed to flood the floor. Not great there. Do they actually test these designs?

It also seems that, very oddly, a rough stop causes the toilet to get confused and briefly lock itself out!

 

[Kite159]

I wonder if the sink in the toilet has that slight annoyance in shutting off the tap water as soon as a hand gets removed from the sensor (rather than allowing it to run for a few seconds to allow for better hand washing)

 

[778]

To be honest for this sort of route I think TfL's Class 345 layout would work directly, i.e. three sets of doors, a facing bay with armrests in the middle of each section, otherwise longitudinal seats and proper standbacks. For Birmingham I'd probably have gone for fixed 5 car formations.

TBH it's hard to criticise the 345 for this sort of service other than the lack of level boarding, it really is very well designed in my book.

Would you really want to go all the way from Euston - Milton Keynes in a longitudinal seat?

Having fixed 5 car formations would make things difficult for guards checking tickets if trains are made up of two 5 car units.

Still concerned that they could revert back to 3+2 seating for the 5 car 730s. It seems to good to be true to be having trains with 2+2 seating and tables for services to Tring.

 

[Blindtraveler]

That's probably not much difference between MK or bletchley to London then there is from some of the GW stations or Essex into the likes of bond Street or Canary wharf

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would you really want to go all the way from Euston - Milton Keynes in a longitudinal seat?

Not particularly, but I was more talking about where they're being intended to be used, i.e. the Cross City and similar, not their temporary home. Having said that I don't see a huge difference between the Trings and a fast Amersham other than history.

Though it'd be a lot more use to me than rows of airline seats I don't fit in

Having fixed 5 car formations would make things difficult for guards checking tickets if trains are made up of two 5 car units.

10 car sets are never going to run in the West Midlands.

Still concerned that they could revert back to 3+2 seating for the 5 car 730s. It seems to good to be true to be having trains with 2+2 seating and tables for services to Tring.

You get that now, plenty of non /2 350s run on the Trings, they're just diagrammed as a single pool.

 

[cactustwirly]

Not particularly, but I was more talking about where they're being intended to be used, i.e. the Cross City and similar, not their temporary home. Having said that I don't see a huge difference between the Trings and a fast Amersham other than history.

Though it'd be a lot more use to me than rows of airline seats I don't fit in



10 car sets are never going to run in the West Midlands.



You get that now, plenty of non /2 350s run on the Trings, they're just diagrammed as a single pool.

It doesn't make sense to have a tiny microfleet for just Tring services

 

[Bletchleyite]

It doesn't make sense to have a tiny microfleet for just Tring services

I'm not proposing doing that, though the previous proposal was to pretty much do that, having a 3+2 subfleet for the Trings and MKC locals, though they'd no doubt have ended up everywhere.

All I'm saying is that if these had been built more like the 345s for Birmingham locals (on the Cross City that layout very much would make sense) using them on the Trings for a bit wouldn't have been a problem, as someone else was alleging.

 

[778]

10 car sets are never going to run in the West Midlands.

Sorry, I thought you was talking about the LNR 5 car 730s.