Class 730/2 (LNR) experiences and opinions

[Bletchleyite]

Starting this one off having made a last-minute decision (helped by the slight delay) to go to Northampton and back this evening to try out the 730/2.

I did have quite high hopes for these, and indeed by appearance they look quite good - the livery really suits them (though you can tell it's mostly vinyl over "dealer white" which cheapens it a bit) and the interior feels spacious if a bit cold compared to the warmer colours of the /0s which I think I prefer. The ride is also good with not too many rattles.

The actual seats are the same as the 730/0 but the 45mm wide variant with armrests. They are quite hard but no "metal bars" and a shape that fits the shape of my back quite well.

However, they really have crammed the seats in - the legroom is atrocious*. Add to that that unfortunately the armrest mounts are roughly where your knees go, which takes a further 0.5-1cm or so off. This really was very disappointing - I did wonder if it might be the case with people mentioning that there are 12 rows in the centre section. I think it should probably have been 11 for a comfortable layout similar to the Pendolino or 80x. I wonder if it was just one compromise too far to create an interior that would work for both Tring semifasts (a very short journey) and Crewes (a fairly long one). There are priority rows but unfortunately these are mostly or all against blank walls rather than windows. I do wonder if they should actually have ordered more /0s for the Trings (for which the large amount of standing space would be good) and a smaller fleet of /2s with a lower density layout for Crewe?

I also tried the "first class" and this is fairly good - it's not of First Class standard, but it is the TfW variant of the Fainsa Sophia with the thicker base and no metal bar I can discern. I think I will be sitting here to be honest. A unit with this seating throughout would be seriously nice and make a great regional express unit for something like post-electrification TPE, with the doors at quarters dealing with the commuter loads better than 80x. Probably also better than the abomination that is "First Class" in the Class 444, the legroom is certainly significantly better.

Anyway, a bit good and bad I guess. Not as good as I expected, but kind of OK. Don't think I'll be going out of my way to track them down.

* Well, it is actually very slightly better than the mostly-airline middle section of a 350, but there are plenty of seats with more legroom in 350s, so I don't think this compares.

 

[Russel]

I'm looking forward to trying these when they are introduced on the Crewe services.

I do think the livery looks better on these than it does on the Desiros.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I do think the livery looks better on these than it does on the Desiros.

It does suit them, though using "dealer white" as the base looks a bit cheap, as per the Avanti livery.

 

[RealTrains07]

It does suit them, though using "dealer white" as the base looks a bit cheap, as per the Avanti livery.

Yeah, the white colour really dosen’t suit the 730s at all and as you say, same with avanti. It kinda ruins the livery for both fleets.

 

[778]

However, they really have crammed the seats in - the legroom is atrocious*. Add to that that unfortunately the armrest mounts are roughly where your knees go, which takes a further 0.5-1cm or so off. This really was very disappointing - I did wonder if it might be the case with people mentioning that there are 12 rows in the centre section. I think it should probably have been 11 for a comfortable layout similar to the Pendolino or 80x. I wonder if it was just one compromise too far to create an interior that would work for both Tring semifasts (a very short journey) and Crewes (a fairly long one). There are priority rows but unfortunately these are mostly or all against blank walls rather than windows.

Even with the crammed in seating, do you still think they are an upgrade over the 350/2s?

I do wonder if they should actually have ordered more /0s for the Trings (for which the large amount of standing space would be good) and a smaller fleet of /2s with a lower density layout for Crewe?

A 5 car version of the /0s would have been the perfect train for the Tring/MK services.

I also tried the "first class" and this is fairly good - it's not of First Class standard, but it is the TfW variant of the Fainsa Sophia with the thicker base and no metal bar I can discern. I think I will be sitting here to be honest.

I would expect the seats in the "first class" areas get taken straight away by the regular passengers when they start to get familiar with the trains. Does this happen with the 350s?

Anyway, a bit good and bad I guess. Not as good as I expected, but kind of OK. Don't think I'll be going out of my way to track them down.

Does that mean you don't think they are as good as the the 350s?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Even with the crammed in seating, do you still think they are an upgrade over the 350/2s?

Debatable. The /2s seem to have more seats with good legroom, particularly the bays.

They're not 3+2 but to be fair on /2s I normally sit in a 2+2 bit.

They're not worse than /2s but I think considering the pros and cons of each I'd put them about the same. They are definitely not right for three hour journeys to Crewe in my book; I'd seriously look to see if it would be feasible to run them on the Birminghams instead. Fine for the Trings.

Comfort level to me in Standard is comparable to the 2+2 areas of a Chiltern 165.

I would expect the seats in the "first class" areas get taken straight away by the regular passengers when they start to get familiar with the trains. Does this happen with the 350s?

It seems to have its regulars but doesn't fill that quickly. But then it is in my view inferior to Standard on all but the /2s.

Does that mean you don't think they are as good as the the 350s?

They are definitely not as good in Standard as 2+2 seated 350s in my view. The First Class area is close to 350 Standard if maybe a tiny bit better. The 350/1 I got home was without any doubt a better experience all round.

 

[778]

They're not worse than /2s but I think considering the pros and cons of each I'd put them about the same. They are definitely not right for three hour journeys to Crewe in my book; I'd seriously look to see if it would be feasible to run them on the Birminghams instead. Fine for the Trings.

I agree with you that the Crewe and Tring/MK services need different interiors instead of an interior that is a compromise. Do you think a 5 car version of a 730/0 (that could work in multiple with the 3 car trains) would have been good for Tring/MK services?

I think the best thing about them is that if they run as 10 car trains every passenger should be able to get a seat. I don't think there are many (if there are any at all) LNR services that have more than 812 passengers on them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree with you that the Crewe and Tring/MK services need different interiors instead of an interrior that is a compromise. Do you think a 5 car version of a 730/0 (that could work in multiple with the 3 car trains) would have been good for Tring/MK services?

Yes, I'm inclined to think that. Or just more /0s.

I think the best thing about them is that if they run as 10 car trains every passenger should be able to get a seat. I don't think there are many (if there are any at all) LNR services that have more than 812 passengers on them.

They are certainly capacious.

 

[778]

Yes, I'm inclined to think that. Or just more /0s.

I don't think the /0s have enough seats for Tring/MK services. If you had a 5 car version (with a 110 mph top speed) a 10 car train would have around 650 seats. Not as many as the 730/2s but more that an 8 car 350.

 

[E B]

I don't think the /0s have enough seats for Tring/MK services. If you had a 5 car version (with a 110 mph top speed) a 10 car train would have around 650 seats. Not as many as the 730/2s but more that an 8 car 350.

But the /0s have a lot of standing room, which can allow for more passengers to board in rush hour.

 

[Railperf]

From a traction performance point of view ;
Departure delayed by late arrival of the train conductor. As a result left @1630 and sandwiched in between Avanti 1630 Glasgow and 1633 Manchester - which caused a slow start as we waited the 1630 to get far enough ahead for signals to clear.
Alstom personnel say the traction package is identical to Class 720 – but with authority to do 110mph. I hoped the late start would prompt full power acceleration from the pickup stop at Watford Junction - but this turned out to be no faster than an averagely driven Class 350 – so possibly being handled in a restrained manner.

Dwell times are longer than Greater Anglia class 720's due to train conductor having to open and close doors and the dispatch procedure taking longer than driver only operation. But then the same applies to Class 360 conductor Vs DOO operation . Top speeds of 110mph maintained consistently en-route where allowed - unlike Hitachi Class 80x Evero units which barely exceed 109mph.

 

[Bletchleyite]

From a traction performance point of view ;
Departure delayed by late arrival of the train conductor. As a result left @1630 and sandwiched in between Avanti 1630 Glasgow and 1633 Manchester - which caused a slow start as we waited the 1630 to get far enough ahead for signals to clear.
Alstom personnel say the traction package is identical to Class 720 – but with authority to do 110mph. I hoped the late start would prompt full power acceleration from the pickup stop at Watford Junction - but this turned out to be no faster than an averagely driven Class 350 – so possibly being handled in a restrained manner.

To be honest the south WCML in the evening peak is always a bit sloppy in terms of timings - there's just a lot crammed in with the peak extras too. Of which of course this train is one!

Isn't the 90mph 730/0 geared differently? Those go like absolute stink.

Dwell times are longer than Greater Anglia class 720's due to train conductor having to open and close doors and the dispatch procedure taking longer than driver only operation. But then the same applies to Class 360 conductor Vs DOO operation . Top speeds of 110mph maintained consistently en-route where allowed - unlike Hitachi Class 80x Evero units which barely exceed 109mph.

Isn't this because the 80x specify their speed limiter in km/h and thus the mph speeds are actually very slightly under? Presumably as a wholly British product built only for Britain the Aventra is using mph? I'm sure I remember some snotty newspaper article about the GWML being slower than in the HST era because the limiters on the 80x are set in km/h and thus end up limiting to 124 rather than 125mph?

FWIW the door cycles on these seem slightly quicker than the 350s, but that wouldn't exactly be hard. I like 350s, but the doors really are exceptionally slow.

 

[Nippy]

I travelled on the 06:56 ex Bletchley this morning in the declassified 1st Class bit.

Joining at Tring. Approx 10 late from Bletchley, further delayed at Berko for about 5 minutes with doors failing to open, then a further 3 minute delay at Hemel with an unbooked passenger assist. Meaning that from Tring we were picking up passengers for the following train as well. By the time we got to Watford the train was absolutely rammed. I bailed and got the following train about 3 minutes behind - an almost empty 8 car 350.

I agree with @Bletchleyite, I prefer the 2+2 standard class in the 350/1,3,4s and I’m always happy to see them allocated to my train to/from work.

 

[Railperf]

Yesterday's run ended up delaying the 1633 to Manchester by 8 mins at Milton Keynes and that service ended up 16 late at Manchester. Staffing issues caused the delay. Alstom and WMTb will be pleased the unit seemed to fault free or at least no serious faults that caused any delays. The Alstom chaps with laptops had a relaxed journey.

 

[507016]

How long till theyre rolled out on other lines

 

[87015]

How long till theyre rolled out on other lines

Third diagram should be elsewhere.

 

[AJDesiro]

Third diagram should be elsewhere.

Birmingham-Liverpool is my understanding for that, albeit only temporarily.

 

[507016]

Birmingham-Liverpool is my understanding for that, albeit only temporarily.

How long would ‘temporary’ be?

 

[Bletchleyite]

How long would ‘temporary’ be?

Hopefully permanent. The tight seating layout is only suitable for short journeys - these are really the wrong units for the Crewe service which should in my eyes stick with 12 car 350s.

 

[E B]

Hopefully permanent. The tight seating layout is only suitable for short journeys - these are really the wrong units for the Crewe service which should in my eyes stick with 12 car 350s.

Agreed, although the 730’s provide the benefit of a fifth carriage for those who are going to Atherstone and Rugeley.

 

[AJDesiro]

Hopefully permanent. The tight seating layout is only suitable for short journeys - these are really the wrong units for the Crewe service which should in my eyes stick with 12 car 350s.

Introduction onto the Crewe's allows for an extra 352 seats rather than a typical 8 car 350/1, 122 more seats than a 12 car 350/1. AFAIK the plan for Liverpool's is 8 car 350s long-term. Some of the displaced 350s from Euston-Crewe are to be used to bolster all weekend Euston-Birmingham services to 12 cars. I don't really think the 730/2 legroom in the middle bits is any worse than on a 350 in the middle section (we had a conversation yesterday about this on Twitter), indeed it seemed ever-so-slightly better, unfortunately I didn't measure it with my tape measure. It's a shame that the airline seats in the end sections with better legroom don't have the best window views.

 

[Kite159]

Some of the displaced 350s from Euston-Crewe are to be used to bolster all weekend Euston-Birmingham services to 12 cars.

Seems a bit of a waste having 12 coaches between Birmingham & Northampton where there will only be a few stations which can take all 12 coaches [mainly the ones served by Avanti] So the guard will be restricted to being still for the SDO stops. Probably a better idea to run 8 coaches north of Northampton and 12 south, the timetable certainly would allow an attachment/detachment to take place

 

[AJDesiro]

Seems a bit of a waste having 12 coaches between Birmingham & Northampton where there will only be a few stations which can take all 12 coaches [mainly the ones served by Avanti] So the guard will be restricted to being still for the SDO stops. Probably a better idea to run 8 coaches north of Northampton and 12 south, the timetable certainly would allow an attachment/detachment to take place

This is of course a generalisation, but it's rare to see the guard anyway on those services. There's 5 stations north of Northampton on that route which can't take a full 12, but there's 4 (inclusive of New St) which can. One of the ideas behind it is that it eliminates all splitting and joining at Northampton if I remember correctly from my conversation with a WMT executive. The Birmingham's get very busy, especially with passengers from Coventry, so 12 is a welcome upgrade (you should check out the LNR capacity checker to get an idea of the crowds on weekends: https://www.londonnorthwesternrailw...estination=Coventry&times=0&week_day=saturday).

 

[Kite159]

And there was me thinking the Coventry massive only used XC & Avanti and wouldn't be seen dead on the stopper

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed, although the 730’s provide the benefit of a fifth carriage for those who are going to Atherstone and Rugeley.

As 350s are fully gangwayed there's the option of all 12 if you want, you just need to walk through to get off.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't really think the 730/2 legroom in the middle bits is any worse than on a 350 in the middle section (we had a conversation yesterday about this on Twitter), indeed it seemed ever-so-slightly better, unfortunately I didn't measure it with my tape measure. It's a shame that the airline seats in the end sections with better legroom don't have the best window views.

I'd agree it's similar if slightly better, but as you say there isn't the nice end bit (also two of the 350 centre sections per unit are better spaced).

Putting the priority seats against a blank wall is a bit miserly and arguably discriminatory for those who use them for reasons of disability rather than just legroom. But WMT has form for that, the 196s are the same (and similarly unpleasantly tight). I think whoever specs this for WMT is just short!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I'd agree it's similar if slightly better, but as you say there isn't the nice end bit (also two of the 350 centre sections per unit are better spaced).

Putting the priority seats against a blank wall is a bit miserly and arguably discriminatory for those who use them for reasons of disability rather than just legroom. But WMT has form for that, the 196s are the same (and similarly unpleasantly tight). I think whoever specs this for WMT is just short!

That’s ridiculous. A view out of the window is not a human right.

I do however agree with you that 720s are not pleasant for anything more than a quick hop, so I’m glad these 730s have 2+2 configuration with armrests and tables. I think I’ll find these an enormous upgrade on 350/2s having suffered some truly dire journeys from London to Crewe in the past.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That’s ridiculous. A view out of the window is not a human right.

If one is available to able bodied passengers but not disabled ones then I think there is at least a case.

See also the wheelchair space on 80x.

 

[Russel]

Stop and look around next time you're on a train, look at how many people are glued to a mobile phone and how infrequently they look up and out of a window...

I'm not sure window alignment as much of an issue to the average passenger as it is to people on here.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Stop and look around next time you're on a train, look at how many people are glued to a mobile phone and how infrequently they look up and out of a window...

I'm not sure window alignment as much of an issue to the average passenger as it is to people on here.

General alignment perhaps not, but if the only option for a disabled person is "no window" then I don't think that is an acceptable situation.