3+2 seating

[ess]

3+2 seating is just awful. what percentage of carriages have 3+2?

 

[Badger]

I don't mind it on urban lines (i.e. Wolverhampton to Birmingham). The increased capacity makes up for the apparent discomfort (of a 20 minute journey). They have their place.

 

[WestCoast]

The three seater bench on some 142s physically cannot hold 3 people of a larger size! :roll:

 

[ert47]

The three seater bench on some 142s physically cannot hold 3 people of a larger size! :roll:

Try 3 men on a 3 seater in winter on a 377/455 xD

 

[WestCoast]

Try 3 men on a 3 seater in winter on a 377/455 xD

It doesn't work, but at least you have a vague idea of "your space". You don't on these.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It doesn't work, but at least you have a vague idea of "your space". You don't on these.

The inside picture (in your link) of a Class 142 Pacer fitted with the dreaded 3 + 2 bus seats tells more than a thousand words could ever do.....

 

[LE Greys]

It doesn't work, but at least you have a vague idea of "your space". You don't on these.

That looks like 2+1 to me. :?

3+2 on the 317s isn't too bad, well if you're skinny like me maybe. The old compartment units used to have 6-a-side, which must have been interesting when wedged solid. They could empty themselves in 30 seconds, however.

 

[plannerman]

My experience on the old un-refurbished Merseyrail sets was that the middle seat of the three usually went unoccupied. The frequently-stopping, short distance nature of the service meant a lot of people preferred to stand.

And of course upon refurbishment the 3+2 seating was done away with

 

[WestCoast]

That looks like 2+1 to me. :?

Without taking this thread on a tangent, as a Pacer commuter I can tell you that it's supposed to be 3-2 and it becomes extremely cramped when they get to this stage in the peaks. They are the "bus seats". To prove it, here's another interior with individual seats.

 

[thelem]

The 3+2 seating shown in the photo isn't too bad on an actual bus, because the reduced width of the vehicle means it's 2+2 and one of the occupants will use some of the space from the aisle.

3+2 on trains is utterly pointless, because the middle seats are generally left unoccupied and therefore it actually reduced capacity compared to full width 2+2 which includes a wider aisle with more standing space.

One layout I'm surprise I've not see more widely used is narrow seat 2+2: i.e. use the same seats as you would on a 3+2 layout, but leave a wide aisle. This would have the same effect that you get on a bus while leaving more standing space.

Of course I'm only referring to routes that are running at capacity and where it's very expensive to increase capacity (through longer trains, improved signalling or more lines). There's no excuse for installing narrow seats on line that has plenty of platform space, like Southern have done with the 313s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:313205_Southern_Interior.jpg

 

[LE Greys]

Without taking this thread on a tangent, as a Pacer commuter I can tell you that it's supposed to be 3-2 and it becomes extremely cramped when they get to this stage in the peaks. They are the "bus seats". To prove it, here's another interior with individual seats.

Yes, I know it isn't 2+1, it just looks like it.

Which reminds me, if they had 2+1 seated buses, could they fit through the lanes better?

 

[swt_passenger]

Without taking this thread on a tangent...

I wouldn't worry, the whole thread is already on a tangent, as this is the infrastructure forum...

 

[jopsuk]

For all their faults, Pacers are as wide as 317s etc.

Mindyou, not being as skinny as LE Greys clearly is, I'm no fan of the 3+2 seating on 317s

 

[aspierail]

I am not really a fan of 3+2 seating however as long they do short journeys then it fine but on medium or long journeys its a big no.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

As a matter of interest, what is the longest service that Northern Rail operate that regularly uses Class 142 Pacers with 3 + 2 bus seating?

 

[Karl]

As a matter of interest, what is the longest service that Northern Rail operate that regularly uses Class 142 Pacers with 3 + 2 bus seating?

Blackpool to Colne?

 

[jon0844]

Besides the fact that the middle seats are often left empty, the narrower aisle makes it harder for people to get on/off, and discourages people from moving down to leave room by the doors.

I'm surprised anyone ever thought high density seating on commuter routes was a good idea. On paper, drawn by someone who has probably never been on a train, it probably looks great - but in reality?

Now if we had wider trains it would of course be a lot different. 3+2 works fine elsewhere, with aisles that are still bigger than 2+2 here. But, even though HS2 when fully completed might allow wider trains, these are the services that would probably have 2+2 and 2+1 seating anyway.

 

[First class]

As a matter of interest, what is the longest service that Northern Rail operate that regularly uses Class 142 Pacers with 3 + 2 bus seating?

142s can appear occasionally on Cumbria Coast workings.

Carlisle to Preston looks the longest at 4h06

Blackpool-Colne is only 1h30 - 1h50.

1526 Carlisle to Middlesbrough can be regularly a 142, just shy of 3 hours.

Nunthorpe to Hexham is just over 2h15.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

As a matter of interest, what is the longest service that Northern Rail operate that regularly uses Class 142 Pacers with 3 + 2 bus seating?

At my depot it would be Chester or Sheffield. 1 hour 20 - 1 hour 30

 

[Eagle]

As a matter of interest, what is the longest service that Northern Rail operate that regularly uses Class 142 Pacers with 3 + 2 bus seating?

Not bus seating, but 350s with 3+2 seating sometimes turn up on London to Crewe services, which are almost three hours long.

 

[stut]

Not only is the aisle narrower, but people spill out into it - in my case, a narrow 3+2 style seat (e.g. on the back-breaking 321s we now get up this way) has, at the top, approximately half the width of my shoulders!

 

[Nym]

Anyone who says that the middle seats on 3+2 is never regularly used has obiously never been on a 150 Manchester bound in an AM peak, well and truely every seat, nook, cranny, luggage rack and grab rail used on them...

 

[LE Greys]

Anyone who says that the middle seats on 3+2 is never regularly used has obiously never been on a 150 Manchester bound in an AM peak, well and truely every seat, nook, cranny, luggage rack and grab rail used on them...

Same on a rush-hour pair of 317s out of King's Cross. I swear they manage to get 1,000 people on every train for two hours.

 

[WillPS]

Scunthorpe - Lincoln is a long haul on a pacer.

 

[Nym]

I did a rough count of standees on a 150/2 the other morning with the old seating, it has ~80 seats IIRC (Ex. CT Unit) and there where another 70-90 standing in each carriage. 300pax on a 2 car unit I've seen it up near 500pax on a single 185 before...

 

[Ivo]

Without taking this thread on a tangent, as a Pacer commuter I can tell you that it's supposed to be 3-2 and it becomes extremely cramped when they get to this stage in the peaks. They are the "bus seats". To prove it, here's another interior with individual seats.

When/where is that from? I can't say I recognise those seats...

Where I grew up everything is 3+2. You get used to it, but it's not great when there are standees wedged around you because of the minimal standing room between the rows of seats.

I haven't yet (knowingly) seen a 150/1 on the Cardiff to Portsmouth runs thankfully

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not bus seating, but 350s with 3+2 seating sometimes turn up on London to Crewe services, which are almost three hours long.

Ah yes, but my specific comments referred to BUS-type seating on Class 142 Pacer units, which are not comparable to any normal train seating. Even many bus companies now have better quality passenger seating than these arcane monstrosities from a past age and I wonder for how many years that passengers will still have to endure these seats.

 

[Nym]

Nothing wrong with the bus seats on quieter services, much more comfy to lay out on and get some shuteye on the late nights off airport...

 

[jon0844]

Anyone who says that the middle seats on 3+2 is never regularly used has obiously never been on a 150 Manchester bound in an AM peak, well and truely every seat, nook, cranny, luggage rack and grab rail used on them...

I should probably come in and confess that when things do get very busy, people will eventually fill the empty seats - but are clearly uncomfortable doing so. Usually the person in the middle ends up sitting far back, or forward, as it's not possible to all sit back.

I'd rather stand, but I think people take the seats only because they are forced to in order to allow more people on (and not be squashed while standing). If there was a wider aisle, I am sure you'd get more people in overall.

 

[lookingforit35]

I'm surprised anyone ever thought high density seating on commuter routes was a good idea. On paper, drawn by someone who has probably never been on a train, it probably looks great - but in reality?

As ever though, nothing in life is quite that clear cut. From my station, most folk like the 2+2 seating of the 375/3/6/7/8 as it's reasonably comfortable. But in the peak, people actively look out for the 375/9s (not that they know the type, just that it's 3+2!) because of the extra seats available, whether middle or not. You'll find people walking down the train where possible to find an empty seat.

Usual journey time is 35 minutes.

So no-ones right or wrong here. But it's simply not possible to have a unit that's designed specifically for each station at each point in the peak period. A blanket "2+2 is better than 3+2" is as wrong as trying to argue the reverse.