Commuter seating

317666 · 15 Apr 2013

One thing that you have to remember with sideways seating compared with 3+2, is that sideways may offer more standing space - but think about how many more people end up having to stand, so it isn't as much space as it seems at first.

RailUK Forums

Goldfish62 · 15 Apr 2013

swt_passenger said:
A very vocal public in the London and SE area (possibly led by the Evening Standard?) has for many years routinely demanded seats for everyone on every train; and they've always been much louder than the people arguing about seat layout details.

I think is the same bunch of cretins who have, unbelievably, been demanding a seat for every tube passenger. Whatever next, a buffet and trolley service?

wintonian · 15 Apr 2013

I know, how about creating some units with mixed 2+2 & 3+2 seating in standard so people can choose where to sit or stand, we could even put up a few window stickers at one end of a coach and call it first class. Oh wait in minute....

broadbander · 15 Apr 2013

Could staggered seating in a concept something like this work?
http://www.thompsonaero.com/index.php/products/cozy-suite
http://www.thompsonaero.com/uploads/pdf/COZY 2012.PRINT.FINAL.pdf

Delta Air Lines looked at using these seats to enable 8-abreast cabins on their 767s that gave similar comfort/space levels to the more usual 7-abreast cabin on the 767. But it seems as though Delta have dropped the idea.

wintonian · 15 Apr 2013

broadbander said:
Could staggered seating in a concept something like this work?
http://www.thompsonaero.com/index.php/products/cozy-suite
http://www.thompsonaero.com/uploads/pdf/COZY 2012.PRINT.FINAL.pdf

Delta Air Lines looked at using these seats to enable 8-abreast cabins on their 767s that gave similar comfort/space levels to the more usual 7-abreast cabin on the 767. But it seems as though Delta have dropped the idea.

How would you get in and out with out the 2 people on the outside standing up and moving out first?

I know we kind of do that with 2+2 but that's only 1 person and I expect its far quicker than waiting for 2 people to repack their handbags.

Fine on a plane when you are stuck there but not on a train IMO.

bronzeonion · 15 Apr 2013

317666 said:
One thing that you have to remember with sideways seating compared with 3+2, is that sideways may offer more standing space - but think about how many more people end up having to stand, so it isn't as much space as it seems at first.

Standing gets more people on, shorter dwell times and personally I prefer it to cramming into a row of 3

WelshBluebird · 15 Apr 2013

yorksrob said:
and as people have pointed out, you're not forced to take the middle seat if you don't want to.

Problem with that is you have people taking up the aisle and the window seats, so if anyone does want to sit down, they can't actually get to the free seat in the middle. Also, at least with the 3+2 seating on the FGW 150's, it is a nightmare to actually walk down the train if people are sat in both aisle seats.

jon0844 · 15 Apr 2013

It's the narrow aisles that make things worse in my opinion. It becomes a real hassle to move down, and to get out from a seat at a station where those in the aisle aren't getting off.

Our trains just aren't wide enough for 3+2 compared to other countries where you can easily fit them and still have plenty of room.

yorksrob · 16 Apr 2013

WelshBluebird said:
Problem with that is you have people taking up the aisle and the window seats, so if anyone does want to sit down, they can't actually get to the free seat in the middle. Also, at least with the 3+2 seating on the FGW 150's, it is a nightmare to actually walk down the train if people are sat in both aisle seats.

I've only really found that to be a problem with airline seats, which I agree are pointless in3+2 layout. With regard to isle width, I have seen a buffet trolly get down a train with 3+2 seating

jon0844 · 16 Apr 2013

Trolleys are very narrow, but it must be hard to get a trolley through if people are standing in it, as well as people keeping bags in the aisle as also seems quite common.

I presume that on services where regular users know there's a trolley, they don't block the aisles as much? Because on a FCC service, the aisles are regularly obstructed and if trolleys ever came back, they'd struggle.

WelshBluebird · 17 Apr 2013

yorksrob said:
I've only really found that to be a problem with airline seats, which I agree are pointless in3+2 layout. With regard to isle width, I have seen a buffet trolly get down a train with 3+2 seating

I'd love to see anyone get a buffet trolley down a 150 that has 3+2 seating! Because I certainly don't think it is possible.

Mikey C · 17 Apr 2013

My impression of 3-2 Networkers is that all the seats are used during busy times, and that people have no issue with squeezing into the middle seats.

Indeed on those line, you have 2 completely different layouts operating on the same routes, the Networkers with high density cramped seating, and the 376s with low density seating, 2-2 with more legroom. Perfect for a comparison.

pemma · 17 Apr 2013

Mikey C said:
My impression of 3-2 Networkers is that all the seats are used during busy times, and that people have no issue with squeezing into the middle seats.

The 3+2 seating on those is better than that on other types of trains and also the trains run more smoothly than some of the DMUs with 3+2 seating so there's less of a comfort issue. You're not going to suddenly get someone's shoulder hitting your face because the train's gone over a section of welded track as might happen on a Merseytravel Pacer.

The routes that get Networkers also seem to empty out much quicker than on other routes so people don't tend to spend an hour or 90 minutes crammed on to a row of 3 with 2 other people.

yorksrob · 17 Apr 2013

WelshBluebird said:
I'd love to see anyone get a buffet trolley down a 150 that has 3+2 seating! Because I certainly don't think it is possible.

I admit, this was on a VEP back in the day. I've never seen it attempted on a 3+2 150

pemma · 17 Apr 2013

jonmorris0844 said:
Trolleys are very narrow, but it must be hard to get a trolley through if people are standing in it, as well as people keeping bags in the aisle as also seems quite common.

On TPE services I've seen guards make a fuss about suitcases or luggage that's only very slightly sticking out in to the aisle - by less than one inch in some cases.

Mojo · 17 Apr 2013

I'm always clonking my head on the straps fitted to the S Stock and Class 378s so wish they were removed!

317666 · 19 Apr 2013

Mojo said:
I'm always clonking my head on the straps fitted to the S Stock and Class 378s so wish they were removed!

Hear hear!

Class83 · 19 Apr 2013

Outside of the former NSE area the solution to overcrowding is more carriages, not more seats per carriage. The only route that's approaching the limits there is Edinburgh-Glasgow which is 6 carriages every 15 minutes and is being upgraded to 8 carriages every 15 minutes. I assume Trans-Pennine North will be similar when the 350s free up more 180s. 3+2 seating on a 2 carriage train is just annoying.

In the South East there will be a balance as beyond the london under/over ground where crush loading designs are optimum there will be a lot of 10/12 carriage trains where passenger numbers exceed seating capacity. Presumably Crossrail will ease the situation for east-west travel, perhaps a new bypass line bringing Southampton/Portsmouth expresses into the old Eurostar platforms at Waterloo would help, and free up space for more local services.

Chrisgr31 · 20 Apr 2013

The layout of Southerns Class 171s is one of the reasons why commuters on the Uckfield line arent necessarily keen on electrification. They are a lot more comfortable than on the electric trains on the East Grinstead lines and only 2+2.

I generally tend to travel backwards, apparently its safer if the train hits anything!

swt_passenger · 21 Apr 2013

Class83 said:
...perhaps a new bypass line bringing Southampton/Portsmouth expresses into the old Eurostar platforms at Waterloo would help, and free up space for more local services.

Except it's been explained quite explicitly by NR that it isn't going to happen.

London and SE RUS option F3 on page 131, some extracts:

A flat crossing move into London Waterloo International would be impractical from the SWML, since the 16-car platforms are only readily accessible from the Windsor lines. The option therefore requires additional grade separation. Trains would most likely run as two eight-car trains joining at a location such as Woking or Basingstoke from separate origin points. Such splitting and joining would significantly increase operational complexity. Junction margins would increase at locations throughout the route, due to the low speeds and the length of a 16-car train, which would be a new operational constraint.

The RUS anticipates that an extra 2,600 peak hour seats would be possible on a total of 11 identified main line services into London Waterloo. This would reduce standing to a certain degree.

This option is not capable of providing enough additional capacity to come close to resolving the forecast gap.
Due to the anticipated high cost and failure to address the gap this option is not recommended.

What they seem to be saying is that extending even that many trains from 12 car to 16 car (ie by 11 four car units) is insignificant. They'd get the same capacity benefit with four extra 12 car trains, and that's easier to provide for with capacity released either by Crossrail 2, or by the alternative 5th track from Surbiton scheme on the mainline side running into the middle of the station. The ex-international platforms would then be used for the Windsor line service groups.

Class83 · 21 Apr 2013

swt_passenger said:
Except it's been explained quite explicitly by NR that it isn't going to happen.

London and SE RUS option F3 on page 131, some extracts:

What they seem to be saying is that extending even that many trains from 12 car to 16 car (ie by 11 four car units) is insignificant. They'd get the same capacity benefit with four extra 12 car trains, and that's easier to provide for with capacity released either by Crossrail 2, or by the alternative 5th track from Surbiton scheme on the mainline side running into the middle of the station. The ex-international platforms would then be used for the Windsor line service groups.

I wasn't thinking of using the longer platforms to make the current services longer, but to build a new line from Woking to Waterloo so extra services could be run into the ex-Eurostar platforms, yes that would be expensive, but most improvements in London now are. It looks like Crossrail 2 will achieve a similar effect the other way round by taking local stopping services off the mainline which could then allow extra longer distance services to be run. Essentially, if you can't get any more 12 car trains on the number of lines available then you need to build another line. Given the journey times to Portsmouth/Southampton I don't think it's unreasonable for travellers to expect 2+2 seating.

swt_passenger · 21 Apr 2013

But the only logical reason for using the international platforms for main line trains is to make use of their additional length. If you don't want/need that extra length, then there is no point whatsoever in building the necessary flyover to switch sides on the approach, you just move the normal platform allocations to the left (looking into the station), by putting four or five platforms worth of the Windsor side into the former international station and any extra long distance services then run into the middle of the station. They already have a plan to allow for this increase (if Crossrail 2 doesn't render it obsolete), with a single bi-directional extra line from Surbiton to Clapham Jn, so there's no need for a new line from Woking.

However if the DfT's priority remains to provide such and such an absolute number of seats on the overall route, I'm afraid there's no way they'll revert to 2+2 seating on Portsmouth trains. They won't want the massive criticism - and in any case, Portsmouth is no special case - they use the same basic trains on runs from Euston to Crewe.

Pumbaa · 21 Apr 2013

swt_passenger said:
They won't want the massive criticism - and in any case, Portsmouth is no special case - they use the same basic trains on runs from Euston to Crewe.

No more, just 1tpd in each direction runs via Northampton. And even then they're commuter times so no through travellers I'd imagine. Not convenient times anyway. All other journeys are now /1 so 2+2 seating.

Commuter seating

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member