The Sunday Times: 'Ironing board' seats

[Bletchleyite]

I sometimes work in Croydon and have a choice of the 1710ish and 1810ish (some of them are xx11) Southern (when GTR can be bothered to run them) or Thameslink via London. I often stay for the 1810ish in order to take a 387, as I prefer a well-spaced airline seat over a table (only 2+2 airlines on an older Electrostar are priority seats or 1st) and I don't like the seats[1] in those anyway, the armrests are somewhere up near my ears and I'm tall.

[1] Those seats are the reason why the 350s (/4 excepted) are in my "would pay extra to sit in Standard" list, and even on a /2 if it's not busy (i.e. being used as 2+1) it's no way worth any extra.

 

[bramling]

More importantly, three more seats for the 'poor commuters' waiting at Hitchin and/or Stevenage. Then a few more will decide that the A1 & A1(M) is getting beyond a joke and a (subsidised) 30 minute trip in a firm seat (or even standing) is better than the ever-increasing time in the personal luxury of their car sat in a queue.

Unfortunately your logic lets you down. Most days it will simply be three unused seats.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

String of anti 700 seats comments in the SE version of the Metro . some alleging backache issues.

 

[AM9]

Unfortunately your logic lets you down. Most days it will simply be three unused seats.

With the class 700/0s having fewer seats than a pair of class 365s, surely those poor passengers worried about not getting one for themselves will be grateful for the seats so graciously vacated by those who have fled to join the traffic queues.

 

[3141]

I've never sat on an ironing board, so I'm unable to compare one with any of these seats. I'm surprised how many others do claim to have the necessary experience to make the comparisons.

 

[Hadders]

I've never sat on an ironing board, so I'm unable to compare one with any of these seats. I'm surprised how many others do claim to have the necessary experience to make the comparisons.

They're known as ironing boards because they look exactly like ironing boards.

 

[Ianno87]

I'm going to be controversial. Having ridden a 365 yesterday (first proper time in a while), compared to normally being on 387s, I found the 365s (airline seat) hideously uncomfortable. And my hour and a bit on a 700 this morning was not noticeably uncomfortable at all.

Must be my posture or something...

 

[physics34]

I'm going to be controversial. Having ridden a 365 yesterday (first proper time in a while), compared to normally being on 387s, I found the 365s (airline seat) hideously uncomfortable. And my hour and a bit on a 700 this morning was not noticeably uncomfortable at all.

Must be my posture or something...

4 arguments with the 700 fainsa seats

1. Hardness
2. Uprightness (posture)
3. Legroom
4. Shoulder-room/width

Ive seen many more complaints about points 1,3, and 4 than i have about 2.

I also find the uprightness ok, but the other 3 points awful.

 

[takno]

It is worth saying that if you have a double seat to yourself on a half-empty off-peak train the 700s are only too hard and upright. If that's the only experience you have then the complaints might seem a bit indulgent (although they are *really* hard). The cramp I got trying to sit on the window seat with somebody sitting next to me though, that stayed with me all day

 

[47802]

Looks like a case of moaning Southerners as usual to me. Well a variant of the Ironing Boards will be coming to the North soon admittedly it is supposed to be the more comfortable version but I expect there will be a lot less complaints up North after all we are used to Bus Seats on Pacers.

 

[Failed Unit]

With the class 700/0s having fewer seats than a pair of class 365s, surely those poor passengers worried about not getting one for themselves will be grateful for the seats so graciously vacated by those who have fled to join the traffic queues.

If we ignore the captive market of peak passengers. Surely off-peak discretionary spend will suffer. Who would willingly pay for a leisure journey on such horrendous trains. Saying that weekend travel from WGC will probably increase as people will no longer be left on the platform.

If the trains are designed for capacity why didn’t they give the the London Overground treatment? Speaking of which was on the metropolitan line today. Comfortable seats that meet the fire regulations are possible.

 

[bramling]

Looks like a case of moaning Southerners as usual to me. Well a variant of the Ironing Boards will be coming to the North soon admittedly it is supposed to be the more comfortable version but I expect there will be a lot less complaints up North after all we are used to Bus Seats on Pacers.

So all the moaning about 319s is a figment of the imagination? By the sound of things GN passengers would be quite content to have the 317s and 321s back.

 

[bramling]

If we ignore the captive market of peak passengers. Surely off-peak discretionary spend will suffer. Who would willingly pay for a leisure journey on such horrendous trains. Saying that weekend travel from WGC will probably increase as people will no longer be left on the platform.

If the trains are designed for capacity why didn’t they give the the London Overground treatment? Speaking of which was on the metropolitan line today. Comfortable seats that meet the fire regulations are possible.

And of course the S stock doesn't have the intrusion of the ducting. The 700s are simply completely unfit for purpose.

 

[Ianno87]

If we ignore the captive market of peak passengers. Surely off-peak discretionary spend will suffer. Who would willingly pay for a leisure journey on such horrendous trains. Saying that weekend travel from WGC will probably increase as people will no longer be left on the platform.

If the trains are designed for capacity why didn’t they give the the London Overground treatment? Speaking of which was on the metropolitan line today. Comfortable seats that meet the fire regulations are possible.

Is there a safety issue with *everybody* going sideways at 100mph?

 

[Failed Unit]

Is there a safety issue with *everybody* going sideways at 100mph?

Let’s take all the seats out then. .

The good thing about this story is it dispells the myth that it is only rail enthusiasts that don’t like the 700s. We should get with the times as the 700s are the best train to hit the uk.

The fact it has made the news shows that normal people dislike them. Lots of them.

Yes you can’t blame the train for the seat. But unfortunately it is viewed as a package. Will the reseat they 700s of course they won’t. Put hopefully it will stop the railway thinking they can keep treating passengers so poorly.

Although I suspect the revised timetable will drive more people to the A1. I did take the train to Peterborough- not after May with a 22 min connection at Stevenage. I can suffer an ironing board for 1 hour off peak. An extended journey time and an ironing board i won’t.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

And of course the S stock doesn't have the intrusion of the ducting. The 700s are simply completely unfit for purpose.

I have to say that the Met Line S stock might be a bit challenging for the peaks (less seats than the now scrapped A stock - RIP) , but off peak on the usual quite busy trains that one sees these days , are an absolute joy. Proper , well cushioned seats , and in the 4 seat bays , almost luxcerious.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

And of course the S stock doesn't have the intrusion of the ducting. The 700s are simply completely unfit for purpose.

The ducting - as I have said before - is more than a pain.

 

[Hadders]

Looks like a case of moaning Southerners as usual to me. Well a variant of the Ironing Boards will be coming to the North soon admittedly it is supposed to be the more comfortable version but I expect there will be a lot less complaints up North after all we are used to Bus Seats on Pacers.

Trust me, the ironing board seats you're getting aren't as bad as the ones on the 700s.

The ironing boards on the 387s are acceptable but the ones on the 700s are simply not fit for purpose.

 

[physics34]

Yes you can’t blame the train for the seat. But unfortunately it is viewed as a package. Will the reseat they 700s of course they won’t. Put hopefully it will stop the railway thinking they can keep treating passengers so poorly.

Needs 2 inches of extra foam on the bases and seats need to be moved away from the sidewall by 3 inches. Easily done i reckon.

 

[Ianno87]

Needs 2 inches of extra foam on the bases and seats need to be moved away from the sidewall by 3 inches. Easily done i reckon.

And then you've just stuffed dwell times and ability to spread people down middle of train.

Wide aisle came into own earlier - punter alighting at Foxton could simply wheel his back down the length of the train to get off the correct coach.

 

[Failed Unit]

And then you've just stuffed dwell times and ability to spread people down middle of train.

Wide aisle came into own earlier - punter alighting at Foxton could simply wheel his back down the length of the train to get off the correct coach.

But that is the whole problem with the train. Supposed to appeal for passengers travelling over 1 hour in comfort and crush loadings. It doesn’t do its primary purpose well. (Moving people off peak in comfort which the railway needs more of)

 

[HowardGWR]

Surely the problem with the Thameslink services is that they are trying to cater for airline pax and commuters. Not easy to design an interior, including seats, that satisfy both markets.

 

[kristiang85]

For me hardness isn't too much of an issue, its more the width available for shoulders - I'm not a large person at all, but on so many journeys these days, if I sit on the aisle seat, I have to sit a bit off it so I'm not touching the person next to me, and if I'm by the window it is super tight. I guess armrests help to define personal space, but these seem to be on their way out.

 

[johnkingeu]

Surely the problem with the Thameslink services is that they are trying to cater for airline pax and commuters. Not easy to design an interior, including seats, that satisfy both markets.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting it is easy, but if you are going to make perfectly sensible design decisions like maximising the size of the aisle, it is important to follow through with the consequences of that decision, like moving the heating to under the floor.

 

[AM9]

... The fact it has made the news shows that normal people dislike them. Lots of them. ...

There is no basis for assuming any such thing. The media, both press and broadcast, are only too keen to pickup a packaged 'news' item, - especially that they can present as if they are with the 'poor downtrodden' public. The Sunday Times article had no additional information for me than the broken record message that has been rattling atround this forum for months. The BBC London article was just a series of rants from 'representative' passenger vox pops together with a few words by an osteopath (I suppose they couldn't get a physiotherpist to support the story), conflating commuters sitting in office seats and train seats. He was probably eager to get the plug on regional TV.

 

[Failed Unit]

There is no basis for assuming any such thing. The media, both press and broadcast, are only too keen to pickup a packaged 'news' item, - especially that they can present as if they are with the 'poor downtrodden' public. The Sunday Times article had no additional information for me than the broken record message that has been rattling atround this forum for months. The BBC London article was just a series of rants from 'representative' passenger vox pops together with a few words by an osteopath (I suppose they couldn't get a physiotherpist to support the story), conflating commuters sitting in office seats and train seats. He was probably eager to get the plug on regional TV.

But you are the other extreme view that no-one can criticise these trains and they are the best in the uk. (Actually I don’t mind the trains just don’t like the fact they have gone for the cheapest seat on the market). I guess people are more likely to voice negative views but more people seem to dislike them then like them on great northern. I expect great northerns ratings to drop again in the next passenger focus survey, may even take the bottom spot from Southern. I just can’t see these trains (or proposed timetable) getting people out of their cars and onto trains off peak. Something the railway should be attempting to do.

 

[bramling]

But you are the other extreme view that no-one can criticise these trains and they are the best in the uk. (Actually I don’t mind the trains just don’t like the fact they have gone for the cheapest seat on the market). I guess people are more likely to voice negative views but more people seem to dislike them then like them on great northern. I expect great northerns ratings to drop again in the next passenger focus survey, may even take the bottom spot from Southern. I just can’t see these trains (or proposed timetable) getting people out of their cars and onto trains off peak. Something the railway should be attempting to do.

It doesn't help that GN has dipped terribly in terms of reliability since GTR took over. Under WAGN and FCC cancellations were very rare (especially on the outer suburban services) and punctuality was generally pretty good. Things will only get much worse when Thameslink introduces further sources of delay.

I've already as good as ditched using the train to London. Performance on the route has become sufficiently poor in the last couple of years that car is now simply a superior option for me. First this was a weekend thing, now I'm in the car most weekdays too. Others are doing the same. The undesirable class 700s and the prospect of Thameslink levels of reliability and punctuality simply reinforce all this.

As for certain people defending the 700s to the last, I find it hard to take one particular poster seriously when they preach about how good the 700s are, yet we find that the poster concerned tries to make use of the declassified first-class section where possible. Says it all really.

 

[Failed Unit]

Does anyone have any positive stories in the press or evidence that anyone has contacted GTR to praise the trains?

For me personally.
Q. Do you find the seats more comfortable than the 365s
A. No.

Q. Considering they are the same seat as the 387s which would you rather use.
A. The 387. More general space for seated passengers.

Q. Do you like the increase in capacity on the 1722 London - Cambridge service.
A. When it was 2x 321 everyone got a seat at Finsbury Park. When it was 2x 365s everyone wanting a seat got one. Now it is a 700 no body boarding at Finsbury Park gets one. (Makes the uncomfortable seat argument irrelevant) so for this train I see it as a capacity reduction. (Despite the railway definition of capacity meaning standing and seating passengers more passengers standing is because of less seats not more passengers using the service)

Q. Would you have wished a 700 had turned up on 0825 WGC - London service yesterday?
A. That would be interesting. Less seats means more passengers standing to begin with, but would people have got left behind. We will never know.

 

[yorksrob]

Surely the problem with the Thameslink services is that they are trying to cater for airline pax and commuters. Not easy to design an interior, including seats, that satisfy both markets.

Surely the way to do this is to have a largish space near the door which can accommodate either standing commuters or suitcases, rather than an unnecessarily wide aisle.

 

[shredder1]

The original railways had wooden seats, we progressed from that to more comfortable seats and now appear to have gone backwards, in Europe they still have comfortable seats on the railways, in railways, we seem to be good at inventing things, but not very good at manageging them long term.