Class 700 - Removal Of Rear 1st Declassifed Section

But

Bletchleyite said:

TBH I'd decomplicate it and stop declassifying on the Sutton loop, it's silly and unnecessary. 1st at the front only at all times is clear enough. Or bin it off entirely.

Click to expand...

But then since only 2 stations on that route are out of the oyster zone (radlett and St Alban's the majority of the time) you get 52 seats of no use.

My suggestion would be to get some more 12 cars, enough to avoid sending 8 cars on mainline diagram, and have first class on those trains (perhaps remove 8 seats of first both sides and have both front and back in First class ticket holder use). As for the 8 cars, no first class would be needed as they'd stick to metro services.

Of course this includes new stock but I'd be surprised if more 12 cars aren't ordered in the new franchise as there simply aren't enough of them.

I would say first class isn't truly necessary on any Thameslink route as it's a very commuter based network however I know some will want the option to pay more to not sit on the 700s standard seats

A few observations from a regular class 700 user:

- the rear 1st class compartment being declassified was because the 8 car 700s have far fewer standard class seats but the same number of 1st class seats than the trains they replaced (blame DfT)
- GTR’s answer is to declassify the rear 1st class compartment to provide an appropriate number of seats for standard class ticket holders.
- You can’t expect passengers to count the number of carriages to know whether or not the rear 1st class compartment is declassified so they have sensibly declassified the rear 1st class area on all the 700s.
- At peak times the whole train is often standing room only. If 1st class at the rear was enforced then the standing in standard would be worse.
- At Off Peak time’s the rear 1st class compartment is usually a civilised space but increasing numbers of passengers (unfortunately often the chav variety are wising up)
- Most normal passengers cannot be bothered to walk up to 240 metres to the rear 1st class compartment.
- If signage is needed on the train (rather than relying on the PIS screen then it could simply say ‘this area may be used by standard class ticket holders if it is at the rear of the train’)
- Introducing 1st class on Sutton Loop services (which are limited to 8 cars) would mean a significant reduction in the number of seats available for standard class passengers.
- Auto announcements at stations when a train which is totally declassified arrives says that ‘there is no 1st class on this train.’ It might be better if it said ‘standard class ticket holders may use the 1st class areas on this train’)
- Similarly when announcing ‘1st class is at the front of the train’ a better alternative might be ‘standard class ticket holders may use the 1st class compartment at the rear of the train’.

Having said all of this, it really isn’t an issue to the overwhelming majority of passengers.

Class 700 - Silly Train

Prestige15 said:

Class 700 - Silly Train

Click to expand...

It was roasting last weekend. Stepped into a 700 and literally sighed with pleasure. It's a decent train.

Hadders said:

- Introducing 1st class on Sutton Loop services (which are limited to 8 cars) would mean a significant reduction in the number of seats available for standard class passengers.

Click to expand...

Did the Sutton Loop generally have shorter 4 car trains most of the time originally? [I only ever went at the weekend though...]

Prestige15 said:

Class 700 - Silly Train

Click to expand...

ComUtoR said:

It was roasting last weekend. Stepped into a 700 and literally sighed with pleasure. It's a decent train.

Click to expand...

They go off like a scalded cat - particularly on AC, and absorb a hell of a lot of passengers through the core.

Ianno87 said:

They go off like a scalded cat - particularly on AC, and absorb a hell of a lot of passengers through the core.

Click to expand...

Exactly, they are now reliable, cool in the summer and they have lots of capacity in the peaks. Yes, the seats are awfully thin, but that said, it wasn't that long ago that FCC or for that matter the original Thameslink couldn't provide trains were the cushions/bases of the seats didn't fall off.

centraltrains said:

Did the Sutton Loop generally have shorter 4 car trains most of the time originally? [I only ever went at the weekend though...]

Click to expand...

Not at the peak times which is when any loss of standard class capacity would be noticed most.

Can confirm it was a PIS Error. Went back to work this morning - and returned this evening
Both journeys were Declass at rear...

gazthomas said:

Exactly, they are now reliable, cool in the summer and they have lots of capacity in the peaks. Yes, the seats are awfully thin, but that said, it wasn't that long ago that FCC or for that matter the original Thameslink couldn't provide trains were the cushions/bases of the seats didn't fall off.

Click to expand...

This is the sad thing...better seating overall and tables in the 12 car sets and they would virtually be perfect, especiallywith wifi. As they are they are pretty much perfect for exMetro routes, with a tad more legroom and wifi. A missed opportunity.

If they had a class 365 style layout they would be perfect.

Hadders said:

If they had a class 365 style layout they would be perfect.

Click to expand...

Not really, that would be bad for standing space. I'd go for something like the Crossrail stock - decent-width 2+2 bays for longer journeys but also some longitudinal for shorter ones. Maybe slightly more bays than the Crossrail stock due to the longer journeys some people make.

Another option would be say "proper" 2+2 in the end 3 vehicles at each end, but longitudinal in the centre 6, with the PIS directing people to the middle for shorter journeys.

Bletchleyite said:

Not really, that would be bad for standing space

Click to expand...

It really wouldn't be. The 365s are a perfect compromise.

2+2 seats. No armrests which saves a few inches
Plenty of room for standing in the aisles
Triangular tables in the bays of seats - aids speedy boarding and alighting
Small seats back tables. Effective and do the job well.

By all means remove some seats near to the doors to create larger standing areas etc. I just feel that the awful ironing board seats in standard class are just awful, not at all fit for purpose and simply the worst seat on any train in Britain.

Hadders said:

It really wouldn't be. The 365s are a perfect compromise.

2+2 seats. No armrests which saves a few inches

Click to expand...

They don't have actual armrests, but like Merseyrail (and unlike 700s) they are spaced as if they did have. The wide aisle is simply due to the stock being quite wide.

Bletchleyite said:

They don't have actual armrests, but like Merseyrail (and unlike 700s) they are spaced as if they did have. The wide aisle is simply due to the stock being quite wide.

Click to expand...

The seats are an inch or so from the wall if the train, this is essential and one of the failings of the 700s.
There is an gap of about an inch between the seats. The seats nearest to the doors in the 365s don't have this gap and it could go saving an inch
There is no aisle arm rest on the 365s saving an inch.
So across the width of the train you could gain 4 inches of aisle width over the 365 layout and dramatically improve the comfort.