Class 387 to GN

[158722]

Noticed what looked like a FCC/GN liveried 321 in Ilford CS this afternoon. There was a move from Hornsey to Clacton on RTT for this afternoon but it is shown cancelled, could the two be connected I wonder?

402/410/418 have been quoted elsewhere as having moved to IL.

 

[notverydeep]

Posteye has kindly confirmed (in the TOPS thread on the Allocations board) what was on the earlier 'fastish' services today from Welwyn Garden City as:

2p91 (the 0655) 321401/321420
2c29 (the 0727) 317339/317347
2c91 (the 0755) 317340/317342

The second two were late this morning, 2C29 by 30 + minutes and 2C91 about 15 minutes. I'm not sure what the disruption was. Hopefully these two will remain 317s for the time being. These two both serve the villages. 2P91 is a Peterbrough train which I have observed 2 x 365 on the odd occasions I have caught it. Clearly it won't stay 321s...

2C93 (the 08:25 ex WGC) has presumably gone 387s permanently, or well at least until the 700s arrive. These two sets split and form other workings during the day, but rejoin for the 1822 King's Cross - Cambridge (2C32), so presumably my homebound train has gone over as well.

 

[387star]

The 387s aren't bad trains ... good leg room power sockets reading lights armrests tables good windows alignment
.. A lot there to make a good train

I find the seats are comfier when slouching !

 

[notverydeep]

The 387s aren't bad trains ... good leg room power sockets reading lights armrests tables good windows alignment
.. A lot there to make a good train

Absolutely, they have some good features and would be fine on the correct services, but they are being deployed on services which do not take advantage of the good points and for which they have other features making them less suitable.

No train service with 584 seats already carrying some standing passengers is ever improved in the perception of its passengers by reducing the seating capacity to 447.

Class 387s don't make up for the reduction in seating capacity by providing an internal layout that makes space for comfortable standing and lack the stand-backs that would deliver shorter dwell times. At least the class 700s will have these features, which will be essential through the Thameslink core.

The stand-back is the space between the door itself and the adjacent partition into the saloon. Providing more space here is particularly important as this is where passengers stand first. Without good stand-back space (on 317s or 387s), these passengers become an obstruction to boarding and alighting passengers, effectively enforcing single file on and off.

I know I've said this before, but this change has a material adverse impact on my quality of life. Either I will have get up earlier and get home later, taking the slower trains and losing half an hour per day with my children, or I have to stand for half an hour when previously I could sit. I know other people have long had to do this and I know that capacity has to be added. I plan train services on other commuter routes, so I fully understand the issues! But the fact remains that the 'Thameslink Upgrade' will give many other stations on GN far more 12 car trains to make up the number of seats, despite their having far fewer passengers than Welwyn Garden City. WGC on the other hand will have to lump the same train frequency, not just with fewer seats, but with added stops and a slower run time into London. Not really an upgrade.

 

[Failed Unit]

The 387s aren't bad trains ... good leg room power sockets reading lights armrests tables good windows alignment
.. A lot there to make a good train

I find the seats are comfier when slouching !

I don't think anyone will say they are bad trains - a seat can be changed as can the bizarre first class location. It is the serious reduction in crush loading capacity that has upset people. I am not sure on the seats but legroom is much better. Power points are no use if you can't physically get on board. If you put a 387 next to a 375 and asked passengers which they prefer the 375 will win. But they are basically the same train. Look at the 317/2 following a decent refurb.

I am sure I saw a 387 on 1235 London - Peterborough today but can't be certain. It could also be a driver train run in WGC at about the same time.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I know your pain notverydeep. I used the 1653 kx - Cambridge pre 387. Moved to 1722 for a more comfortable journey. Now it is a 387.

Looks like I will be moving around until things settle down.

All I want is a service I can be certain to get on. I avoid the 0755 WGC - London for that reason as any disruption such as the 0742 is cancelled and it is mobbed. I have high hopes the 700s with less seats will be an improvement. I don't mind standing, but the 387s will be a total disaster at weekends. 321/317s leave people behind as they are crush loaded. A smaller train will not be welcome.

The 387s are not configured as commuter trains. They will be liked on London - Cambridge fast and the seat reduction isn't as extreme.

 

[jon0844]

That's the thing. The 387s are being used in the wrong environment because, amazing as it sounds to someone who hasn't been on one, the 2+2 seating doesn't actually seem to give any extra room.

The 700s are what are needed in the peaks.

In an ideal world, you'd have nothing but 700s rolled out for the peaks and 387s all used for off-peak, where people can enjoy more comfort. If only that was possible!!

 

[Failed Unit]

1658 London - WGC was a 387 this evening. Looks like 1822 Cambridge will be.
1758 London - WGC was 2x 317
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
8 car 321 on platform 10 at Kx. Not sure what it is covering

 

[notverydeep]

1658 London - WGC was a 387 this evening. Looks like 1822 Cambridge will be.
1758 London - WGC was 2x 317
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
8 car 321 on platform 10 at Kx. Not sure what it is covering

1822 was 387s as predicted. I missed it however (just), because 2W52 1705 Three Bridges - Bedford (1810 departure) was inexplicably platformed at Blackfriars 6 minutes early ahead of 1E98 1700 - Sevenoaks (1806 departure) which was only a minute late arriving at Blackfriars Junction. I've ended up with a taste of the future for WGC commuters, 2V92 1828 King's Cross - WGC (2 x 313), which has just pulled up in a heap a couple of coach lengths after leaving Alexandra Palace. I do have a seat however...

 

[Starmill]

Never before have I heard someone suggest the use of a 387 for comfort!

 

[jon0844]

Never before have I heard someone suggest the use of a 387 for comfort!

Okay, the seats are considered hard by many but I actually quite like firm seats. And off peak, they have a nicer interior to a 700 or refreshed 365.

The best train would have been a 365 as it was.

 

[Hadders]

8 car 321 on platform 10 at Kx. Not sure what it is covering

This did the 1843 KGX-PBO. There was an 8-car 317 in platform 11 which I think covered the 1852 to Cambridge.

 

[bramling]

I'd also be grateful if anyone could confirm whether 1P47 is going to be 2x387 or 2x321 today...

It produced 2x321, the London end unit being 321408.

A nice pleasant, comfortable and spacious journey. Very much preferable to the 387s.

 

[Spamcan81]

Okay, the seats are considered hard by many but I actually quite like firm seats. And off peak, they have a nicer interior to a 700 or refreshed 365.

The best train would have been a 365 as it was.

Travelled on a 387 from KGX to ARL on Sunday. 1st was deristricted so gave it a try. Quite simply the most uncomfortable 1st Class seats it's been my misfortune to sit in. Far too hard. Had a numb bum well before SVG.

 

[bramling]

Travelled on a 387 from KGX to ARL on Sunday. 1st was deristricted so gave it a try. Quite simply the most uncomfortable 1st Class seats it's been my misfortune to sit in. Far too hard. Had a numb bum well before SVG.

I find the hard seats are made worse because the ride quality on the 387s is poor. Every time the train passes over a set of points or a bump in the track, the train makes a sharp lurch from side to side. This makes the hard seats even more conspicuous, and on top of this I find my arms/elbow keep uncomfortably knocking into the armrests on these frequent occasions when the train jolts, the armrests themselves being hard and too high. The armrest adjacent to the windows is unfortunately fixed in the downward position.

(Actually, the latter feature can be found on earlier Electrostars too, but doesn't seem quite so irritating).

I took a 387 home on Friday night. During the journey three others in the carriage could be heard commenting on how uncomfortable they found the seats. Another person could be seen to keep shuffling and adjusting himself throughout the journey. I've only ever before seen this level of obvious complaint on the Merseyrail-interior Pacers.

These seats really should be consigned to the dustbin, and those responsible for procuring them should be dismissed for their incompetence.

I intend to raise this matter with my local MP, and I know a few others who plan to do the same.

 

[Skimble19]

Travelled on a 387 from KGX to ARL on Sunday. 1st was deristricted so gave it a try. Quite simply the most uncomfortable 1st Class seats it's been my misfortune to sit in. Far too hard. Had a numb bum well before SVG.

Not really any point in trying out 1st class on a 387, the only difference is a bit of cloth on the back of the seat

 

[bramling]

This did the 1843 KGX-PBO.

If they stick to diagram, this means they return on 2P65 2016 Peterborough-KX, and then back north on 1P32 2207 KX-Peterborough, which in turn means they finish for the day at Peterborough Nene ..

.. which if so means it's likely they will end up on one of the two substitution diagrams tomorrow.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not really any point in trying out 1st class on a 387, the only difference is a bit of cloth on the back of the seat

Yep you can have exactly the same accommodation if you sit at the other end of the train. Complete joke.

 

[Hadders]

The best train would have been a 365 as it was.

I absolutely agree with this.

 

[Failed Unit]

2207 London - Peterborough is 2x bin tonight. I guess that is one service 387 free in the morning

 

[notverydeep]

Yep you can have exactly the same accommodation if you sit at the other end of the train. Complete joke.

This morning, the first class was in the rear vehicle on the 08:25 from Welwyn Garden City (2C93). I was surprised to find that quite a few of the normal and almost certainly standard class passengers were happy to sit there anyway - they wouldn't be used to 1st class here. This tended not to happen in 317s first class sections, which were rarely had more then two or three occupants on these services. Comments I heard were scornful and annoyed at the abnormal position of first class. Whether this will carry on after the first appearance from the revenue remains to be seen. All of the reduction in seats is standard class. The 387s have 22 first class seats per unit, exactly the same as a 317.

 

[jon0844]

I've so far been on three 387s on GN, and one had a full ticket check. The RPO said it was very annoying about the random positioning of first class, but I assume they were enforcing it.

If so, I wonder how many previously 'law abiding' passengers will now be caught and be rather upset.

 

[Failed Unit]

I must admit that people are much happier to sit in first class of the 387s than they are in other classes. (But still do) suspect it is a combination of it isnt really first class in terms of seat quality and it is hard to avoid as you never know where it will show up! At least Thameslink announce such thinks.

 

[bramling]

I've so far been on three 387s on GN, and one had a full ticket check. The RPO said it was very annoying about the random positioning of first class, but I assume they were enforcing it.

If so, I wonder how many previously 'law abiding' passengers will now be caught and be rather upset.

Last night I took the 2134 train ex KX in order to avoid the 387s, and in consequence had a nice comfortable ride on 317s. How pathetic that the 1980s interior, which isn't particularly wonderful but does the job, is so much more comfortable than a new class 387.

Whilst sitting on my comfortable 1980s class 317 seat, I could see the 387s loading on the adjacent platform. The first class was at the country end of the front unit. What was noticeable was the isolated standard class section immediately north of the first class was almost empty, the first class was also empty, whilst the rest of the train could be seen to be quite heavily loaded - almost all seats taken and a few standing. It's ridiculous that GTR's bizarre first class positioning has now provided a complete carriage which is not being effectively used -- especially as the seating capacity on the remainder of the train is reduced compared to 365s.

The first class positioning *needs* to be re-thought. At the very least turn the trains so the first class faces London. But ideally it really *needs* to be at the vehicle ends. GTR's stupid decision to put it where they have is causing problems on a daily basis.

 

[notverydeep]

I'm on 387125, on Its own forming 2C32 1822 King's Cross - Cambridge. Already rammed even before Finsbury Park - should be load 8. Short formed after a PIOT delayed the previous working of the other half (2V86). Better news for those wanting space to Peterborough, as the 1843 is 321408 (I think as it was dark) + 321420...

 

[notverydeep]

Another pair of dusty bins was on 1P75 1754 Peterborough - London King's Cross, which unusually called additionally at Welwyn Garden City vice the very late 2C61 1755 Cambridge - London King's Cross. There seemed to be a lot of disruption this evening, but no particular large failure. According to Real Time Trains, 2C61 eventually passed several stations non stop, but recovered little time by doing so. Additional stops like the one made by 1P75 when other trains are cancelled or late hardly ever happen in my experience...

 

[jon0844]

I came in to London from King's Cross and earlier there was a significant delay with someone taken ill on a train to Cambridge that ended up at Hatfield platform 3 for some considerable time. This was around 1749 (at WGC) as the train from Moorgate overtook on the fast and turned back to KGX a few minutes late.

 

[387star]

Regarding first class it is bombardier who decided the interior spec no doubt as there is zero difference on the gwr variant

Not sure why 379s were made so luxurious pressure from the Stansted airport ?

 

[Failed Unit]

Regarding first class it is bombardier who decided the interior spec no doubt as there is zero difference on the gwr variant

Not sure why 379s were made so luxurious pressure from the Stansted airport ?

I doubt that. The manufacture what is specified. It was either the leasing company or whoever ordered them. Electrostar is modular so no reason it could not be equipped like the Scotrail turbos. With 1st behind the cabs. Or in the centre like the 350. Both of which are more suitable configurations when units frequently appear in different directions.

 

[jon0844]

It is mad not to have simply had first at either end (and if necessary, declassified one end as done on the 377/5s and 700s on a temporary basis as needed). You'd then have consistency for rail users.

365s - first at either end.
387s - first at either end.
700s - first at either end.

Pretty easy to understand, not only for those wanting to find first class but also for those who want to avoid it!

If one end was to be declassified temporarily, you'd need consistency there but could just state that it's the rear of the train (in direction of travel) or something.

And I realise that an 8 or 12 car 365/387 also throws a spanner in the works, but you'd still have the front/end consistency, just with additional first class sections.

 

[Failed Unit]

It is mad not to have simply had first at either end (and if necessary, declassified one end as done on the 377/5s and 700s on a temporary basis as needed). You'd then have consistency for rail users.

365s - first at either end.
387s - first at either end.
700s - first at either end.

Pretty easy to understand, not only for those wanting to find first class but also for those who want to avoid it!

If one end was to be declassified temporarily, you'd need consistency there but could just state that it's the rear of the train (in direction of travel) or something.

And I realise that an 8 or 12 car 365/387 also throws a spanner in the works, but you'd still have the front/end consistency, just with additional first class sections.

Do you know another unit that used to have 1st behind the cabs.

The 387! when they were on thameslink - some still have the stickers as such.

Which make the current GN situation even more bizarre. They used to be behind both cabs put thameslink declassified on end a while back.

*preaching to the converted and person that knows thameslink as well as me *

 

[Class377/5]

It is mad not to have simply had first at either end (and if necessary, declassified one end as done on the 377/5s and 700s on a temporary basis as needed). You'd then have consistency for rail users.

365s - first at either end.
387s - first at either end.
700s - first at either end.

Pretty easy to understand, not only for those wanting to find first class but also for those who want to avoid it!

If one end was to be declassified temporarily, you'd need consistency there but could just state that it's the rear of the train (in direction of travel) or something.

And I realise that an 8 or 12 car 365/387 also throws a spanner in the works, but you'd still have the front/end consistency, just with additional first class sections.

387's on Thameslink only had first class at one end not both. Thameslink is unusual that it turns units in service so having first class at either end make sense (for the 8 cars). Logic then dictates that carries over the the 12 car as well.