hexagon789
Veteran Member
I find plenty of 2+3 seating acceptable and certainly for suburban workings it's perfectly adequate in my view.
-
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!
WMR 'second hand' trains from TPE?
- Thread starter VT 390
- Start date
- Status
I find plenty of 2+3 seating acceptable and certainly for suburban workings it's perfectly adequate in my view.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
hexagon789
Veteran Member
I've been on well loaded ScotRail EMUs with2+3 seating and had people sitting both either side or two people to the left or right; its peak time I expect it to be like that.
VT 390
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 1,366
I think 3+2 seating is okay for local and suburban services but certainly not for anything where most passengers will be travelling for over about an hour such as the West Midlands Trains services from New Street/Crewe to London.
hexagon789
Veteran Member
There are lots of services of over two hours where the trains have 2+3 seating, at least 350s are designed for more than inner suburban all stops services which never see more than 50-60mph before braking for a station call.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Not quite. Crewe - Euston is a long journey of several hours which lots of people take throughout due to attractive pricing. We arent taking 20 minutes on a rush hour train!
hexagon789
Veteran Member
I wasn't either...
BucksBones
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 332
I know it's been said before but the new timetable makes it totally impossible to diagram the appropriate unit to each service; therefore the loss of the 350/2s looked like a heaven-sent opportunity to standardise the fleet. So what do LNR do? Order a mixture of 3+2 and 2+2 Aventras.....
Aye they are well suited between Crewe and Liverpool at the weekend as groups of leisure travellers can sit together in bays.
An armrest would be nice between the '2' part of the 3+2 but I am guessing the seats are too narrow.
When the full fleet of class 730s are in use, and the 350/2s gone, will that mean exclusively 350s on the Trent Valley?
As surely 5 cars would be a backwards step if a single Aventra was used down there, and a 10 car Aventra would surely be too long for Rugeley Trent Valley and Atherstone unless they used SDO or auto SDO?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Depends on your build. I cannot sit wholly within one seat on any UK 3+2 layout, a typical male's shoulders are wider than his backside (and I am no different), and my backside is pretty much exactly the width of a Class 350 seat within the armrests.
Despite being on the large side, I don't have particularly wide shoulders for my build. My observation is that only the skinniest adult males fit wholly within a 3+2 seat. There is no sense in having seating arranged so an average passenger cannot sit wholly within their seat.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Yes, the plan is that all Trent Valley services will be 8-car Class 350 formations.
So in terms of the long game it's a case of it will be worth it in the end for those down the Trent Valley.
They may be pleasantly surprised if it suddenly goes to 2+2 throughout double sets when 730s are fully introduced.
E6007
Member
Hopefully nobody will take offence at this but the seats in the 350/2's were designed for midgets! 3x2 is a squeeze at the best of times but I think we also know the 350 body width is quite conservative.
All the remainders except 350404 (on exam) out in service today.
As far as I'm aware 350403 is at Wolverton (non of it in Germany). I've had nothing to do with the unit since it left Ardwick but I believe it's coming back for a replacement transformer.
hexagon789
Veteran Member
Well I genuinely don't think I've ever felt 2+3 seating was too narrow, certainly something aren't well padded or a very hard but the width seems fine.
But anyway, I imagine they'll be retaining the 2+2 standard seating but likely altering the first class if they transfer.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
You must be fairly lightly built, then.
I wonder if they will also remove a bog, as TPE's units have one extra?
hexagon789
Veteran Member
Indeed they do, but can it be easily removed? (Considering LMR's issues with running trains in service without working loos, would it not actually be better to leave them in?
)Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Indeed they do, but can it be easily removed? (Considering LMR's issues with running trains in service without working loos, would it not actually be better to leave them in?
How many units are required for a self-contained set of Trent Valley diagrams? Could they use all the 350/4s as they are, including the improved First Class for the longer journey which might bring in more revenue?
I'd pay for proper 2+1 First for that journey.
OhNoAPacer
Member
The 350/2 3+2 seats are perfectly adequate, the problem is the passengers who will insist on having arms!
hexagon789
Veteran Member
That's a very good point, a premium offering might give Virgin a run for their money on some workings.
Silverlinky
Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2012
- Messages
- 686
I don't know how difficult/easy it would be to try and keep units in self-contained areas.
A quick look at a few today....
350370 for example was empty off Wolverhampton to work a service from Birmingham to Euston, then one back to Northampton, ECS to Milton Keynes to work a local service to Euston, then a Euston to Rugeley service, back from Rugeley to Euston and then finally a Euston to Crewe service via Birmingham and Wolverhampton ending up at Crewe LNWR for the night.
350231....Northampton to Euston, Euston to Milton Keynes, Milton Keynes to Euston, Euston to Rugeley, Rugeley to Euston, Euston to Tring, Tring to Euston, Euston to Milton Keynes, Milton Keynes ECS to Bletchley Carriage Sidings for the night.
350373....off Bletchley Carriage Sidings, Bletchley to Euston, Euston to Watford ECS, Watford to Euston, Euston to Milton Keynes, Milton Keynes to Euston, Euston to Rugeley, Rugeley to Birmingham international, International to Liverpool, Liverpool to Euston via Birmingham, Euston to Northampton, Northampton to Kings Heath.
Its a right old mix at the moment with a lot of cross pollination across the varying routes. To dedicate specific subclasses of units to specific areas/routes might be a bit of a challenge!
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I reckon they'd rake it in with extra 1st money on quite a lot of services. I'm simply not spending extra on seats that are worse and have less legroom than Standard. Put 2+1 in and keep the uplift to First about the same as it is and I'll choose it by default.
As it is the only decent 1st on LNR is on the Class 319s!
Even SWR have at least managed to put nicer seats in 1st than Standard even if they are 2+2.
hexagon789
Veteran Member
Fully agree.
I don't blame you, it's not that I'm inherently find of 2+3 seating, more I just don't have an issue with it on suburban trains.
One consolation.
In my mind it's a case of whether there is still sufficient capacity in the units by retaining the TPE layout.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
FWIW I think there could be quite a decent market for "it takes longer, but you can luxuriate along the way for less money than cramming yourself into Standard on a Virgin train". And TPE 1st is very nice indeed, particularly if they've put the new seat covers on the 350s.
ForTheLoveOf
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 6,416
The ambiance and decor in TPE 1st on the 185s is up with the highest out there, but the seats aren't all that comfortable at all. I'd much prefer an ergonomic ironing board or a Pendolino 1st seat over that, if it's a journey of more than 30 minutes or an hour or so.
Puffing Devil
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 2,766
- Status