Thameslink Class 700 - lack of USB/power facilities

[Minstral25]

Same with Brighton which has a population of over 230,000. And it certainly is a "mainline" destination

Brighton also has high use of public transport and low car use compared to many places which is why it has higher proportion of rail passengers

 

[bramling]

Before the 700’s our 4 trains per hour all day to London Bridge were Southern 377’s exclusively. We had just 3 Thameslink services a day which were always 319s.

so yes the 700s replaced 377s directly along our line

It does seem that some people here forget that Thameslink has done more than just replace the 319s on the St Albans to London journey.

There’s plenty of routes which have gone over to 700 operation having been served by traction other than 319s, Electrostars as you say south of the river, and of course 365s on GN.

But as long as St Albans has what it wants...

 

[A0]

Brighton (& Hove) and Cambridge are cities. Would you care to confirm when Sleaford (for example) became one?

Cambridge may be a city, but so are Ely, St Albans and St David's.

Cambridge has a population of 125k, Bedford is about 110k, Northampton is 225k, Ipswich is 135k - these 3 aren't cities.

Being a city isn't necessarily an indicator of size or attraction.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jun 2021 ==

It does seem that some people here forget that Thameslink has done more than just replace the 319s on the St Albans to London journey.

There’s plenty of routes which have gone over to 700 operation having been served by traction other than 319s, Electrostars as you say south of the river, and of course 365s on GN.

But as long as St Albans has what it wants...

And 317 / 321s on GN - both of which were second hand and getting old - the 317s of course had been displaced from the Bedpan line by 319s.

700s are noticeably better than either of those - and it has also lead to 4 car outer-suburban services no longer being 4 cars and overcrowded on a Saturday.

 

[Failed Unit]

When I was a lad. Brighton was shown on the BR map as a mainline terminal (From Victoria). Thameslink didn’t exist then of course.

Cambridge at the time was shown as the Liverpool Street terminal. (no idea why Kings Lynn was just a branch)

But then they are not the only lines to downgrade. Portsmouth, Kings Lynn, Northampton to name 3 when they went over to modern EMUs could complain. Bedford and Luton are probably not happy their best trains are 360s.

progress always improves comfort and journey quality.

 

[AM9]

Brighton (& Hove) and Cambridge are cities. Would you care to confirm when Sleaford (for example) became one?

So that includes Chelmsford, Chichester, St Albans and Wichester then?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jun 2021 ==

You're confusing "main line" with "InterCity" destinations.

Brighton and Cambridge have always been main line destinations and always will be. Certainly main line enough to justify a table and a plug socket.

Thameslink is a mainline railway so every station served by Thameslink services is a 'Mainline Station', even the 'metro' ones.
All this discussion about 'mainline' and cities is not relevant to why the class 700 trains don't have USB and various other cosmetic embellishments.

 

[Mikey C]

Yes they did. The 700s replaced the 319s with more to allow the expansion of through the core services to other destinations. The 377s and 387s were loaned because the rapid increase in passenger numbers meant that the running of peak services comprising a single four-car unit was totally inadequate and bordering on dangerous in terms of overcrowding.

They may have been temporary, but the 377s operated for several years, and operated the longer distance services like Bedford to Brighton. Services like these went from 377 and 387 operation, to 700s, a massive reduction in comfort

Plus, as others have mentioned the services which were formerly Southern 377s, now 700s

 

[AM9]

They may have been temporary, but the 377s operated for several years, and operated the longer distance services like Bedford to Brighton. Services like these went from 377 and 387 operation, to 700s, a massive reduction in comfort

Plus, as others have mentioned the services which were formerly Southern 377s, now 700s

The 377s (/2s, /5s) and the 387s were parachuted in because the increased demand meant that even after clawing back the 319s run by Southern, Thameslink services were desperately short of capacity. The fact the loaned units were more comfortable than the then 25 year old 319s, and in some passengers' views the 700s, - that were to arrive in 2016, was coincidental.

 

[bramling]

So that includes Chelmsford, Chichester, St Albans and Wichester then?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jun 2021 ==


Thameslink is a mainline railway so every station served by Thameslink services is a 'Mainline Station', even the 'metro' ones.
All this discussion about 'mainline' and cities is not relevant to why the class 700 trains don't have USB and various other cosmetic embellishments.

You’re essentially right on the latter. Someone didn’t have the forethought to think that Thameslink passengers were worth such features. The 30-minute thing is quite interesting though, if the feeling is that such features aren’t worthwhile because people aren’t on the train long enough, then it does give a clue as to how this misjudgement might have arisen. What might be appropriate for St Albans isn’t for St Neots.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Jun 2021 ==

Cambridge may be a city, but so are Ely, St Albans and St David's.

Cambridge has a population of 125k, Bedford is about 110k, Northampton is 225k, Ipswich is 135k - these 3 aren't cities.

Being a city isn't necessarily an indicator of size or attraction.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jun 2021 ==



And 317 / 321s on GN - both of which were second hand and getting old - the 317s of course had been displaced from the Bedpan line by 319s.

700s are noticeably better than either of those - and it has also lead to 4 car outer-suburban services no longer being 4 cars and overcrowded on a Saturday.

The 317s and 321s were a bit of an irrelevance to most GN users. Their use off-peak was minimal, especially after the Connex 365s moved over. Certainly I could go many weeks without travelling on anything other than a 365. I do realise that if you happened to commute on a 317 or 321 service then this might have been a different matter. The 4-cars at weekends was a separate issue, and was partly an operational choice - half of the stopping service ran to Peterborough, and as such could have been 8-car with no issue.

 

[jon0844]

Not all mobile phones can take advantage of such high outputs though, some are limited to 15w which means even if you plugged it into a a power bank that can charge at 65w, the electric limits of the mobile phone means it will only take 15w plus some phones are faster at charging then others because not all phones are equal.

Regardless of power banks, the Class 717s are used on metro services which got power sockets so I can't see why standard class in the Class 700s couldn't have had them in a minor refurbishment.

Most will charge at 18W at least these days. Sure there are older, budget, phones with slow charging but I suspect they're in need of upgrading to take advantage of all the available 4G bands (and also perhaps 5G access too, which is rapidly appearing nationally) so if someone upgrades, they'll get faster charging.

Also most new phones should be offering much higher battery capacities, like 4,000mAh and above, and if you're looking like you'll be needing to conserve power then most power saving modes would give the average consumer a couple of days use - making charging even more unnecessary.

That's the thing - modern devices use less power, have larger batteries and can charge quicker.

As I said, I expect 700s will get power in standard class when they get a refresh - but they were introduced from 2016 onwards meaning a refresh will be some way off yet.

Besides some tagging inside the trains, they hardly look like they need any attention yet. They seem very resilient and the seats don't look worn out as some trains have suffered in less time.

 

[yorksrob]

Thameslink is a mainline railway so every station served by Thameslink services is a 'Mainline Station', even the 'metro' ones.
All this discussion about 'mainline' and cities is not relevant to why the class 700 trains don't have USB and various other cosmetic embellishments.

Well, it is because the trains serve passengers travelling comparatively long distances between London and Brighton. And it's not as though Thameslink are the Brighton stopper - they form the bulk of semi-fast services between London and Brighton these days, so it would have been sensible to specify the interior for such journeys. Things like USB chargers and tables aren't cosmetic embellishments - they make the journey potentially more comfortable and productive for passengers (remember those ?).

I come back to my point that the trains were always going to run London - Brighton/Cambridge services and their interiors should have been specified from the outset to reflect this. It stands to reason. You've spent the day walking on the seafront at Brighton, eating fish and chips, going for a paddle etc. You get the train back - to Kings Cross because it's handier. Your phones dead, so you want to charge it. You've bought one of those fancy salads and a sausage role from Marks and Sparks for the train back and possibly a beer. These are the sort of journeys real people make.

 

[Ianno87]

]


The 317s and 321s were a bit of an irrelevance to most GN users. Their use off-peak was minimal, especially after the Connex 365s moved over. Certainly I could go many weeks without travelling on anything other than a 365. I do realise that if you happened to commute on a 317 or 321 service then this might have been a different matter. The 4-cars at weekends was a separate issue, and was partly an operational choice - half of the stopping service ran to Peterborough, and as such could have been 8-car with no issue.

Except that Peterborough and Cambridge stoppers had to cross-form each other at King's Cross, due to the constraint on Platform capacity, which Thameslink now bypasses. So that was why Peterborough was also restricted to 4 car.

 

[AM9]

Well, it is because the trains serve passengers travelling comparatively long distances between London and Brighton. And it's not as though Thameslink are the Brighton stopper - they form the bulk of semi-fast services between London and Brighton these days, so it would have been sensible to specify the interior for such journeys. Things like USB chargers and tables aren't cosmetic embellishments - they make the journey potentially more comfortable and productive for passengers (remember those ?).

I come back to my point that the trains were always going to run London - Brighton/Cambridge services and their interiors should have been specified from the outset to reflect this.

... And I come back to the point that several have already made in this thread, they were specified in 2008 when smartphones had only just been introduced, charging on trains meant fitting mains outlets - the only ones that I can think of were on class 22x IC trains, the trains were specified for services where passenger numbers were rising so rapidly that there were emergency loans of stock (377/2) and two batches of new to try and bridge the gap (377/5 & 387) pending the delivery of the 700s - all of this on a route that despite receiving an over £5bn pounds upgrade, was ultimately limited to two tracks through the centre of the City.
Sure they will probably get some tarting up in their midlife refurb which should align with the type of use that post-COVID commuting justifies, so be patient because that won't happen until 2030'ish. Meanwhile they continue to ply their routes with relatively few problems carrying however many passengers they are asked to, swiftly and with far more reliabilty than the naysayers were continually predicting about 5 years ago.

 

[yorksrob]

... And I come back to the point that several have already made in this thread, they were specified in 2008 when smartphones had only just been introduced, charging on trains meant fitting mains ouitlets - the only ones that I can think of were on class 22x IC trains, the trains were specified for services where passenger numbers were rising so rapidly that there were emergency loans of stock (377/2) and two batches of new to try and bridge the gap (377/5 & 387) pending the delivery of the 700s - all of this on a route that despite receiving an over £5bn pounds upgrade, was ultimately limited to two tracks through the centre of the City.
Sure they will probably get some tarting up in their midlife refurb which should align with the type of use that post-COVID commuting justifies down to, so be patient because that won't happen until 2030'ish. Meanwhile they continue to ply their routes with relatively few problems carrying however many passengers they are asked to, swiftly and with far more reliabilty than the naysayers were continually predicting about 5 years ago.

That's no excuse for not having things such as seat back tables though. There was undoubtedly a lack of consideration for the needs of longer distance passengers in that respect.

Also, we've had sockets on trains for a lot longer than since 2008. It would have been worthwhile putting a few in standard even then to keep up with the obvious trends.

 

[CBlue]

That's no excuse for not having things such as seat back tables though. There was undoubtedly a lack of consideration for the needs of longer distance passengers in that respect.

Also, we've had sockets on trains for a lot longer than since 2008. It would have been worthwhile putting a few in standard even then to keep up with the obvious trends.

Were they obvious trends back in 2008, may I ask?

I find the 700s adequate on a Cambridge - London jaunt and would pick one (assuming I can nab a seat in the declassified first class) over the 387s they operate alongside simply as they ride so much better.

 

[Envy123]

I chose my town partly because of the Thameslink Programme extending to the ECML. I find the convenience of going direct to Farringdon mostly makes up for the relatively poor journey time to London, compared to Peterborough.

I wish there were more tables to put my laptop on and the seats could be comfier. But I do like that the class 700's go direct to the core stations and they are far more useful to me than King's Cross. And I like the ride quality a lot.

 

[yorksrob]

Were they obvious trends back in 2008, may I ask?

I find the 700s adequate on a Cambridge - London jaunt and would pick one (assuming I can nab a seat in the declassified first class) over the 387s they operate alongside simply as they ride so much better.

I think that there was an obvious trend that personal electronic and computing devices were becoming more widespread and commonplace, not less !

 

[CBlue]

I think that there was an obvious trend that personal electronic and computing devices were becoming more widespread and commonplace, not less !

At the time I'd argue such things were already very widespread, yes.

Yet such devices at the time happily lasted a few days on a charge. I never needed to carry a charger with me on a day out and about, apart from disastrous experiences with early iPhone and Android devices - although my 2020 era Samsung has never dropped below 20% even overnight when I've forgotten to charge it. If I needed to, I'd buy a power bank and rely on myself rather than hoping a train with the appropriate power source was available on a journey.

 

[Goldfish62]

Were they obvious trends back in 2008, may I ask?

Very much so.

 

[A0]

When I was a lad. Brighton was shown on the BR map as a mainline terminal (From Victoria). Thameslink didn’t exist then of course.

Cambridge at the time was shown as the Liverpool Street terminal. (no idea why Kings Lynn was just a branch)

But then they are not the only lines to downgrade. Portsmouth, Kings Lynn, Northampton to name 3 when they went over to modern EMUs could complain. Bedford and Luton are probably not happy their best trains are 360s.

progress always improves comfort and journey quality.

Slightly OT but - the reason why Kings Lynn was a branch is as I recall the majority of Liverpool St services terminated at Cambridge (there may have been a couple of 'peak hours' extensions to Kings Lynn) but the bulk of it was DMU shuttle. In those days Cambridge wasn't wired from either Bishops Stortford or Royston, so there was also DMU shuttles between Cambridge and those two - and there were no through Cambridge - Kings X services.

On your second point about "downgrade" - not sure I agree with 2 of those. Can't really comment on Portsmouth.

In Kings Lynn's case it received a couple of loco hauled services a day plus DMUs. When it was wired it then received Class 317s doing through runs to Kings Cross, then 365s and now Electrostars. So it's gone from old Mk2s, to 3+2 EMU, to two 2+2 EMUs.

Similar with Northampton - until sometime in the early 90s it was Class 310 EMUs, then 317s and 321s - along with a couple of peak hour only loco hauls - and then onto the 350s with both 2+2 and 3+2 - I'm not sure I consider the 350s a "downgrade" on what's gone before. They're quicker, quieter, ride better, are air-con'd and personally I find them far more comfortable.

 

[yorksrob]

At the time I'd argue such things were already very widespread, yes.

Yet such devices at the time happily lasted a few days on a charge. I never needed to carry a charger with me on a day out and about, apart from disastrous experiences with early iPhone and Android devices - although my 2020 era Samsung has never dropped below 20% even overnight when I've forgotten to charge it. If I needed to, I'd buy a power bank and rely on myself rather than hoping a train with the appropriate power source was available on a journey.

But they were clearly widespread enough to have sockets in 1st class.

I admit, the plug for every seat concept would have been overkill at the time, however having a few scattered throughout standard would have made sense at the time from a passenger comfort perspective.

 

[A0]

Very much so.

Not sure you can say that in 2008.

The first iPhone had only just hit the market a year before and was very much a high-end device. The first iPad didn't arrive until 2 years later. So whilst mobiles were very common, they were very much 'dumb' phones at the time - and had exceptionally good battery life e.g. Nokia 63xx which could last a couple of days without charging.

Laptops have only recently become the preferred issue in large companies in the last 5-7 years. Before then desktops were still much preferred. Part of that was driven by the growth of Smart phones which could provide wireless 'hotspots' without the need to add expensive peripherals.

And 3G had only been launched about 4 years earlier in the UK - and 4G was still 4 years away.

I think people forget quite how fast technology has moved in the last 10 or so years.

 

[Mikey C]

Were they obvious trends back in 2008, may I ask?

I find the 700s adequate on a Cambridge - London jaunt and would pick one (assuming I can nab a seat in the declassified first class) over the 387s they operate alongside simply as they ride so much better.

i.e. they're fine because you're not sitting in standard class!

 

[CBlue]

i.e. they're fine because you're not sitting in standard class!

Standard is still better than the 387 offers but by a far smaller margin!

 

[Failed Unit]

Now I have gotten used to the 700s they are better than the 317s on my morning commute. You are still crammed in, but nicer train. However give me a 365 any day (which wasn’t possible in the morning as they don’t have SDO)

To me I would make the following changes in this order.

1. increase seat pitch distance from side of coach so you don’t encroach on you neighbour because of lower duct.
2. Seat back tables. Always used when the set that has them shows up.
3. Armrests.
4. Power
5. WiFi.

nice list for midlife refurbishment. Never needed to charge my phone on my journey. But I guess if I was running flat I would head for the 717s. I am not aware of anyone at WGC that picks a 717 for the power and wi-fi. Most do to have a seat all the way to Moorgate.

 

[supervc-10]

I wouldn't say that plugs are *vital*, however the use of laptops by commuters has been around for a long time before these units were specified. I got my first laptop for school in 2004, and I remember taking the train to school and not being the only person using a laptop. And a short journey would absolutely destroy the battery, so plugs would definitely have been used.

Regarding tables though- I thought this was a specific decision not to provide them at first due to the potential impact on dwell times?

 

[Failed Unit]

I wouldn't say that plugs are *vital*, however the use of laptops by commuters has been around for a long time before these units were specified. I got my first laptop for school in 2004, and I remember taking the train to school and not being the only person using a laptop. And a short journey would absolutely destroy the battery, so plugs would definitely have been used.

Regarding tables though- I thought this was a specific decision not to provide them at first due to the potential impact on dwell times?

Apparently so. But this was proven to be nonsense as the later ones have them and they make no difference to dwell times. Just give the passengers a better environment.

 

[jon0844]

But they were clearly widespread enough to have sockets in 1st class.

I admit, the plug for every seat concept would have been overkill at the time, however having a few scattered throughout standard would have made sense at the time from a passenger comfort perspective.

I assume the power sockets were geared more towards laptop users. As has been said, in 2008 most phones were feature phones and people weren't glued to them 24/7 as the screens weren't great for media consumption (nor was 3G capable of streaming very well, especially on trains due to the massive limitations of the technology compared to how 4G and 5G works).

It would have been nice to have power throughout, and I am sure it will come - albeit almost certainly ONLY USB ports, not 240v plug sockets. Meanwhile, first class will probably retain the mains sockets and maybe USB as well. Who knows?

That's no excuse for not having things such as seat back tables though. There was undoubtedly a lack of consideration for the needs of longer distance passengers in that respect.

Also, we've had sockets on trains for a lot longer than since 2008. It would have been worthwhile putting a few in standard even then to keep up with the obvious trends.

I got the argument about the fear of tables getting people all tangled up when travelling in the core. I am not sure it turned out to be such a problem after all, but there was logic to it. In the core, the train is more like a tube train and having someone on the aisle seat setup with a laptop on a table (potentially plugged in too!) could make it hard for the person with the window seat to get out.

It would certainly be easier to retrofit tables than wire in power sockets, but the DfT has made it pretty clear that it has no intention of retrofitting anything to the first of the 700s built - meaning it is a complete lottery as to what you'll get.

Personally, I'd be happy with a very small table that is enough for a cup of coffee or soft drink, rather like the 365 tables. Not really big enough for a laptop, but a laptop likely won't fully open anyway.

 

[yorksrob]

I assume the power sockets were geared more towards laptop users. As has been said, in 2008 most phones were feature phones and people weren't glued to them 24/7 as the screens weren't great for media consumption (nor was 3G capable of streaming very well, especially on trains due to the massive limitations of the technology compared to how 4G and 5G works).

It would have been nice to have power throughout, and I am sure it will come - albeit almost certainly ONLY USB ports, not 240v plug sockets. Meanwhile, first class will probably retain the mains sockets and maybe USB as well. Who knows?



I got the argument about the fear of tables getting people all tangled up when travelling in the core. I am not sure it turned out to be such a problem after all, but there was logic to it. In the core, the train is more like a tube train and having someone on the aisle seat setup with a laptop on a table (potentially plugged in too!) could make it hard for the person with the window seat to get out.

It would certainly be easier to retrofit tables than wire in power sockets, but the DfT has made it pretty clear that it has no intention of retrofitting anything to the first of the 700s built - meaning it is a complete lottery as to what you'll get.

Personally, I'd be happy with a very small table that is enough for a cup of coffee or soft drink, rather like the 365 tables. Not really big enough for a laptop, but a laptop likely won't fully open anyway.

I sort of agree regarding sockets. However, it's worth noting that the class 185's, which were similarly built earlier on for a fairly intensive commuter service with a mixture of short and longer distance travellers, had electric sockets and tables in standard.

I don't really agree with the idea of tables being a problem. There's plenty of room to move once the seat back tables are folded back (as in the case with those that have had them installed) and small tables in seating bays for drinks etc, have been around since the days of the CEP's and CIG's.

I suspect penny pinching at the expense of the passenger was the real motivation.

 

[Failed Unit]

Were they obvious trends back in 2008, may I ask?

I find the 700s adequate on a Cambridge - London jaunt and would pick one (assuming I can nab a seat in the declassified first class) over the 387s they operate alongside simply as they ride so much better.

Seat back tables were on most fleets procured in the 1990s. The super sprinters and 365s to name 2. It would be interesting to know when power became standard. GNER did it (but they are really long distance anyway). It is one of those things but you expect seat back tables on the ex-RR routes. Not so much on NSE. Many coaches / buses have usb power now, whether it really works or not is a different issue. The 3 pin sockets have advantages here.

 

[Ken H]

Seat back tables were on most fleets procured in the 1990s. The super sprinters and 365s to name 2. It would be interesting to know when power became standard. GNER did it (but they are really long distance anyway). It is one of those things but you expect seat back tables on the ex-RR routes. Not so much on NSE. Many coaches / buses have usb power now, whether it really works or not is a different issue. The 3 pin sockets have advantages here.

cant charge a laptop off USB. Well not mine.