• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

Status
Not open for further replies.

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
5,633
Location
Croydon
With the current trend for standing desks in offices it might be their preferred option.
Yes the person looked comfortable enough. I used to stand on the tube even off peak because I got used to not bothering to find a seat:|. However those were short-ish journeys and I am now of an age where I feel the need for a priority seat :(.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

MML

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2015
Messages
587
I don't think it's entirely true that 700s are utilized as a common fleet.
Luton and St.Albans terminating all stations services tend to be 8-car 700/0 as do the Sevenoaks to Blackfriars terminators.
There are about 6 daily diagrams for fast/semi-fast services which should be 12-car 700/1 but which operate using 8-cars.
This is due to lack of sidings at Bedford and the fact they ordered too few 700/1.
Additional coaches could be ordered to make 6 x 700/0 into 700/1, thereby making all express, semi fast services 12-car.
They could purchase 6 x new 700/1 and cascade some 700/0 to Southern for East Croydon-Milton Keynes, releasing 377 to strengthen Southern services.
Ultimately they would be best making the entire fleet 12-car and selecting routes where this train length can be accomodated, perhaps with SDO at selected stations such as Norwood Jctn.
Sutton loop would be better served by Southern 8-car units, while East Grinstead can benefit from 12-car.
Only then will capacity in the core be maximised.
And yes I know 5 years ago some services used to be operated by a single 319.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
I don't think it's entirely true that 700s are utilized as a common fleet.
Luton and St.Albans terminating all stations services tend to be 8-car 700/0 as do the Sevenoaks to Blackfriars terminators.
The reversing siding at St Albans can only accommodate 160m trains and there isn't any option to extend it.
There are about 6 daily diagrams for fast/semi-fast services which should be 12-car 700/1 but which operate using 8-cars.
This is due to lack of sidings at Bedford and the fact they ordered too few 700/1.
Additional coaches could be ordered to make 6 x 700/0 into 700/1, thereby making all express, semi fast services 12-car.
They could purchase 6 x new 700/1 and cascade some 700/0 to Southern for East Croydon-Milton Keynes, releasing 377 to strengthen Southern services.
Ultimately they would be best making the entire fleet 12-car and selecting routes where this train length can be accomodated, perhaps with SDO at selected stations such as Norwood Jctn.
Sutton loop would be better served by Southern 8-car units, while East Grinstead can benefit from 12-car.
Only then will capacity in the core be maximised.
And yes I know 5 years ago some services used to be operated by a single 319.
I believe that some services on the GN side can only be operated with 8-car units. WGC would need significant layout changes to permit 12-car units. Judging by some of the posts from GN side regulars, there are some services on that side that could soon need 12-car units. As far as the single 4-car 319s go, yes there were even peak runs like that. It took several phases of additional stock on Thameslink to remove the last of the 4-car working: 1) the repatriating of 7 units from 'Brighton Express' service (319/2), the loan of class 377/2 units from Southern services, the supply from new of 23 class 377/5 units and the supply of 28 new class 387/1 units. The latter allowed the release od some class 319s to Northern and the return of the 377/2s to Southern. All of these units have been replaced by class 700s and services extended to cover many more routes.
 

387star

On Moderation
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
6,653
Could the Milton service become London north western using an add on for their aventras or salvaged 319s?
 

MML

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2015
Messages
587
The reversing siding at St Albans can only accommodate 160m trains and there isn't any option to extend it.

There was once talk of a new bay platform at Leagrave presumably so the Luton terminators would move to Leagrave. But I'm still not sure you could achieve a bay suitable for a 12-car unit. And then some or all the St Albans terminators could move to Luton.
I notice there is a loop just north of West Hampstead which is never used. It doesn't seem to have a connection to the southbound platform 1, so cannot be used as a reversal. There does seem to be space for a bay platform on the east side, but I guess it's just as easy to terminate trains in Kentish Town platform 3 albeit without the connections possible at West Hampstead.

I believe that some services on the GN side can only be operated with 8-car units. WGC would need significant layout changes to permit 12-car units. Judging by some of the posts from GN side regulars, there are some services on that side that could soon need 12-car units. As far as the single 4-car 319s go, yes there were even peak runs like that. It took several phases of additional stock on Thameslink to remove the last of the 4-car working: 1) the repatriating of 7 units from 'Brighton Express' service (319/2), the loan of class 377/2 units from Southern services, the supply from new of 23 class 377/5 units and the supply of 28 new class 387/1 units. The latter allowed the release od some class 319s to Northern and the return of the 377/2s to Southern. All of these units have been replaced by class 700s and services extended to cover many more routes.

The Peterborough - Horsham services are 12-car. But I think some of the Cambridge-Brighton might be 8-car.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
There was once talk of a new bay platform at Leagrave presumably so the Luton terminators would move to Leagrave. But I'm still not sure you could achieve a bay suitable for a 12-car unit. And then some or all the St Albans terminators could move to Luton.
I notice there is a loop just north of West Hampstead which is never used. It doesn't seem to have a connection to the southbound platform 1, so cannot be used as a reversal.
Isn't that to do with ECS access to the Cricklewood stablings via the loop that runs behind platform 1? It would provide somewhere to wait clear of the down slow whilst access to cross the up slow via the ladder just south of Cricklewood platforms is given.
 

Ethano92

Member
Joined
26 Jun 2017
Messages
415
Location
London
At what point do we stop squeezing passenger comfort and instead start paying out for longer platforms, more cross-rail and more flexible hours of work.

The answer is probably down the line 25 odd years when all seats have been changed to longitudinal on the 700s causing people to sit on a tube train from the likes of Brighton and Bedford etc and yet trains are still full and standing from 2 stops in. Wait no silly me, they'll introduce standing only carriges first, THEN we will maybe look at other options.(I understand it's not so simple)
I do feel that including the Sutton loop in the Thameslink route is a waste of capacity - that is running 8-car trains through a congested core that can handle 50% longer (12-car) trains.

Agreed, maybe it's ok as a gap fill but in the long run it would be nice to see a 30tph core with a succession of 12 car trains, one day...

Journey times on the Sutton loop are just so slow because of all the junctions it crosses it just isn't the most appealing service unless you can walk to work from one of the Thameslink core stations, otherwise Southern, SWR and the northern line take most of its patronage away.

On another note, a lot of people seem to be talking about poor climate control on the 700s but the last dozen or so 700 journeys I've had have been fine, seats are softening also or at least they're softer than GWRs 387s (not southerns 377s though)
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
... On another note, a lot of people seem to be talking about poor climate control on the 700s but the last dozen or so 700 journeys I've had have been fine, seats are softening also or at least they're softer than GWRs 387s (not southerns 377s though)
I don't know how often this 'lot of people' actually do encounter ac problems, but in the years since I travelled on the first public class 700 running unđer OLE, I have never seen problems with faulty climate control.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
I don't know how often this 'lot of people' actually do encounter ac problems, but in the years since I travelled on the first public class 700 running unđer OLE, I have never seen problems with faulty climate control.

Don’t know whether it’s defective or just set too hot, however it’s definitely not effective. Shouldn’t be sweating in a train in the kind of weather we’ve been having recently.
 

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
Don’t know whether it’s defective or just set too hot, however it’s definitely not effective. Shouldn’t be sweating in a train in the kind of weather we’ve been having recently.

It’s defective because it’s set too hot, I can understand if it’s the middle of winter with frost, ice, snow etc to ensure the air con is set at a reasonable temperature but at the moment we’re heading into the summer and they’re still set to winter mode!

I fully agree with @bramling which is rare but for once they are quite right that the air con is faulty!
 

Hadders

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
12,980
Don’t know whether it’s defective or just set too hot, however it’s definitely not effective. Shouldn’t be sweating in a train in the kind of weather we’ve been having recently.

I agree. The 700s always appear ‘stuffy’ although the 387s are worse in my opinion.

The best for climate control is the 365 with its opening windows
 

thewaistcoat

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2018
Messages
51
I haven't worked out how the AC on a working 700 (through the core) seems to make the air fridge cold and humid at the same time. AC usually makes the air cold and dry... Haven't noticed this on the GN routes though.
 
Last edited:

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
I agree. The 700s always appear ‘stuffy’ although the 387s are worse in my opinion.

The best for climate control is the 365 with its opening windows

Absolutely agreed. Miles better, even on really cold days (as long as the hearing is on). So much for progress.

We’ve gone from being too hot on the small handful of really hot days every year, to being too hot 95% of the time.
 

philjo

Established Member
Joined
9 Jun 2009
Messages
2,884
I agree. The 700s always appear ‘stuffy’ although the 387s are worse in my opinion.

The best for climate control is the 365 with its opening windows
I have found that the 700s are generally too cold though they are still humid. On a few journeys to Cambridge recently I have had to keep my coat on to keep warm.
In contrast on the 365s I normally can put my coat onto the overhead rack unless it is very cold outside and I happen to be in one of the coaches without heating....

I agree that the 387s are airless - particularly when there are several people standing
 

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
I have found that the 700s are generally too cold though they are still humid. On a few journeys to Cambridge recently I have had to keep my coat on to keep warm.
In contrast on the 365s I normally can put my coat onto the overhead rack unless it is very cold outside and I happen to be in one of the coaches without heating....

I agree that the 387s are airless - particularly when there are several people standing

I'm the opposite, I find the majority of the 700s are fine with the AC with none being THAT cold that I need my jacket on to keep warm - what is a issue is the fact that only a handful of them seem to have cool AC in warm weather working with the majority in such weather blasting out hot air!
 

387gwr

Member
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
28
Location
Surrey
I rather stand than sitting on the fainsa horribus (Latin name)
I wish the class 365 was the main traction for Thameslink and Great Northern. we can dream...
 

Hadders

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
12,980
I took the train from Mallaig to Fort William earlier today. The 156s have got ironing boards fitted (same variety as on the 387s so a bit more width than those on the 700s).

I was glad I was only going to FTW rather than all the way to Glasgow.

As for the seats on the Great Northern I think the best order is:

365s
700s (first class)
387s
700s (Standard Class)
 

Skimble19

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2009
Messages
1,487
Location
London
I took the train from Mallaig to Fort William earlier today. The 156s have got ironing boards fitted (same variety as on the 387s so a bit more width than those on the 700s).

I was glad I was only going to FTW rather than all the way to Glasgow.

As for the seats on the Great Northern I think the best order is:

365s
700s (first class)
387s
700s (Standard Class)
I'd agree with that order, although 365 First Class would have to be top<D

Regarding the air con, for me the majority of units I travel on are far too warm for my liking but not to an uncomfortable level. Agree that many seem very humid / stuffy.
 

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
I'd agree with that order, although 365 First Class would have to be top<D

Regarding the air con, for me the majority of units I travel on are far too warm for my liking but not to an uncomfortable level. Agree that many seem very humid / stuffy.

Can the air con only be adjusted on depot or can the driver set the temperature?

Good to see someone else agrees that the temperature is too warm!
 

G_A_C_C_C

Member
Joined
11 Dec 2008
Messages
117
Location
High Wycombe
I don't think it's entirely true that 700s are utilized as a common fleet.
Luton and St.Albans terminating all stations services tend to be 8-car 700/0 as do the Sevenoaks to Blackfriars terminators.
There are about 6 daily diagrams for fast/semi-fast services which should be 12-car 700/1 but which operate using 8-cars.
This is due to lack of sidings at Bedford and the fact they ordered too few 700/1.
Additional coaches could be ordered to make 6 x 700/0 into 700/1, thereby making all express, semi fast services 12-car.
They could purchase 6 x new 700/1 and cascade some 700/0 to Southern for East Croydon-Milton Keynes, releasing 377 to strengthen Southern services.
Ultimately they would be best making the entire fleet 12-car and selecting routes where this train length can be accomodated, perhaps with SDO at selected stations such as Norwood Jctn.
Sutton loop would be better served by Southern 8-car units, while East Grinstead can benefit from 12-car.
Only then will capacity in the core be maximised.
And yes I know 5 years ago some services used to be operated by a single 319.
If a fleet of almost identical 5 car units happened to become available then couldn't 10 car set be used on some services releasing 8 car sets to be used on more appropriate services and 5 car units could be used on EC-MK to free up 377s?
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
Indeed, which is what I've done!

As to seat back tables and onboard wifi, the limit of 50MB is really poor - can't they raise that?

There is no actual limit, just a speed cap once you reach 50MB. Given the speed is managed anyway, I've not really noticed a significant difference.
 

ijmad

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2016
Messages
1,810
Location
UK
Sutton loop would be better served by Southern 8-car units, while East Grinstead can benefit from 12-car.
Only then will capacity in the core be maximised.

It seems plausible that in the coming years, Network Rail may float terminating all the Sutton/Wimbledon loop services at Blackfriars again. Perhaps citing service reliability and increased demand on the BML. That would open the door for sending more 12 cars through the core to various 12 car capable destinations.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
If a fleet of almost identical 5 car units happened to become available then couldn't 10 car set be used on some services releasing 8 car sets to be used on more appropriate services and 5 car units could be used on EC-MK to free up 377s?
Do the 707s have the performance for that? I know they are a bit stunted compared to the 700s...
 

ijmad

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2016
Messages
1,810
Location
UK
Do the 707s have the performance for that? I know they are a bit stunted compared to the 700s...

If figures from Wikipedia are accurate:
  • 8 coach Class 700/0 produces 3.3MW, 0.37MW per coach
  • 12 coach Class 700/1 produces 5.0 MW, 0.42MW per coach
However:
  • 5 coach Class 707 produces 1.2 MW, 0.24MW per coach
They'd need pantograph equipment fitted as well, although I know two of them were built with this, presumably it's fairly easy to add later.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
It seems plausible that in the coming years, Network Rail may float terminating all the Sutton/Wimbledon loop services at Blackfriars again. Perhaps citing service reliability and increased demand on the BML. That would open the door for sending more 12 cars through the core to various 12 car capable destinations.

Doesn’t seem to resolve two obstacles though, one being the relative scarcity of 12-car units (there’s more RLUs than FLUs), and secondly the situation with stabling.

Bedford in particular is very lacking in 12-car stabling, hence there’s some ostensively odd stabling arrangements like RLUs running up to Bedford to stable balanced by FLUs running down to Cricklewood. Meanwhile Cambridge has also been tight, although this may have been eased as I believe alterations have recently come on stream here. Elsewhere on the GN side Welwyn has no chance of stabling 12-cars, and I’m pretty sure same applies at Letchworth.

None of this is particularly impressive for a programme which allegedly had capacity as its main deliverable.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
Doesn’t seem to resolve two obstacles though, one being the relative scarcity of 12-car units (there’s more RLUs than FLUs), and secondly the situation with stabling.

Bedford in particular is very lacking in 12-car stabling, hence there’s some ostensively odd stabling arrangements like RLUs running up to Bedford to stable balanced by FLUs running down to Cricklewood. Meanwhile Cambridge has also been tight, although this may have been eased as I believe alterations have recently come on stream here. Elsewhere on the GN side Welwyn has no chance of stabling 12-cars, and I’m pretty sure same applies at Letchworth.

None of this is particularly impressive for a programme which allegedly had capacity as its main deliverable.

I've heard rumours of plans for the eastern side of WGC (next to platform 1) to be modified to allow the stabling of trains - and I think the length would be ample for 12 car trains. Would obviously need electrification and a beefing up of security.

No idea of any timeframes and if it's anything more than a back of fag packet plan.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
I've heard rumours of plans for the eastern side of WGC (next to platform 1) to be modified to allow the stabling of trains - and I think the length would be ample for 12 car trains. Would obviously need electrification and a beefing up of security.

No idea of any timeframes and if it's anything more than a back of fag packet plan.

I guess there’s probably no immediate need, as naturally there’s the more pressing issue that there wouldn’t be enough FLUs to fill them! As well as what they would need to do to extend platforms, I think all of us on here came to the same conclusion that the current SDO arrangements are okay for the odd FLU, but not really adequate for a full service. It would also be necessary to match to a 12-car route south of the river; Rainham stands out to me as being the one where 8-cars is particularly wasteful.

Personally I’d just get those 365s out of store and use them to make half of either the Cambridge and/or Peterborough service into a KX service, and put the displaced FLUs elsewhere.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
Sooner or later the 365s will have to go and I expect we'll see a run on order of 700s. It makes little sense to keep such a small fleet that requires driver training and different dispatch procedures.
 

ChiefPlanner

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
7,768
Location
Herts
Sooner or later the 365s will have to go and I expect we'll see a run on order of 700s. It makes little sense to keep such a small fleet that requires driver training and different dispatch procedures.

As said before - the 700's are good trains - very good trains compared to the 319's - just need that standard class seating either replaced - or eased out to stop aisle spread or squashed against the heating duct. See Ian Walmsley's comments in "Modern Railways" ....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top