Are Class 700’s really that bad?

[Goldfish62]

Generally I think they're good trains. The ironing board seats and lack of tables and charging points are the fault of the DfT. What Siemens have produced is a very competent product built to specification.

 

[43066]

They are fine. A couple of issues - seat pitch a fraction to short in airline format for taller people, and too much first class. But otherwise great.

Funnily enough I was on one earlier through the core and thinking exactly that earlier re. the (airline) seat pitch. The fact I had cause to reflect on it at all was because I was on an airline seat, with someone sat next to me “off peak”. That basically hasn’t happened since circa. Jan 2020 and underlines how numbers are continuing to pick up.

Re. 1st class, I suppose it isn’t really that much when you consider the length of the units, especially the 12 cars, and the sheer number or standard passengers who can be carried when you include standees. I also seem to remember there were polls done by GTR (and southeastern?) a few years ago which concluded passengers wanted to retain 1st class, so I suppose the DfT wasn’t being completely tone deaf in that aspect of the specification.

And yes, I do largely use them for 30 minute trips from St Albans to London, but I also use them for regular trips from St Albans to Gatwick and Brighton, and I don’t have any problem with the seats in Standard on that journey.

London to Brighton or longer is about the cutoff for where I really start to notice the difference between 700/387 seats and low density “classic” 377s, which is reasonable considering that’s a lot longer than the average TL journey length. London - Peterborough and straight back on the same train (which I have done but virtually nobody else will have been daft enough to!), I can confirm they become decidedly unpleasant.

 

[Bald Rick]

The first class was provided for two reasons:

1) Brighton - London passengers
2) ORCATs share of MML, ECML and London - Gatwick traffic.

The former has largely disappeared, the latter is now irrelevant. If capacity gets tight again I’d expect it to go. Although to be honest, in the peaks these days you’ll be hard pressed to find a passenger in the (official) first class with a paid for first class ticket.

 

[bramling]

The first class was provided for two reasons:

1) Brighton - London passengers
2) ORCATs share of MML, ECML and London - Gatwick traffic.

The former has largely disappeared, the latter is now irrelevant. If capacity gets tight again I’d expect it to go. Although to be honest, in the peaks these days you’ll be hard pressed to find a passenger in the (official) first class with a paid for first class ticket.

The problem with first is more that there’s the same amount on both 8 and 12 car versions, which leads to over-provision on the 8s - a problem on a train which has significantly fewer seats than what they replaced.

But I suppose it shouldn’t really be knocked, as if it wasn’t for the overprovision then there wouldn’t be the declassified first, which we know is quite popular with some people!

 

[Bald Rick]

The problem with first is more that there’s the same amount on both 8 and 12 car versions, which leads to over-provision on the 8s - a problem on a train which has significantly fewer seats than what they replaced.

But I suppose it shouldn’t really be knocked, as if it wasn’t for the overprovision then there wouldn’t be the declassified first, which we know is quite popular with some people!

Lots of overprovision on the 8s, given that they mostly run on outer where first class fares aren’t even available.

Even on the 12s, first class is more than 10% of the train length. Or put another way, without it you could increase standard capacity by 10% without any infrastructure works.

 

[43066]

1) Brighton - London passengers

I suppose there will still be a residual market for longer distance business travellers from Brighton, Horsham, etc. who will be travelling in for meetings a couple of days per week and still might plump for first, if only to comfortably use a laptop!

Lots of overprovision on the 8s, given that they mostly run on outer where first class fares aren’t even available.

Yes a very fair point re. the 8s (inners obviously meant). I wonder why they didn’t restrict 1st to the FLUs?

 

[K.o.R]

I rarely use them but I always make sure to take advantage of declassified First Class when I do.

 

[AM9]

I rarely use them but I always make sure to take advantage of declassified First Class when I do.

Me too, but contrary to some beliefs here I've also travelled from St Albans to Brighton in standard and it was OK, at least the posture was better than a soggy worn-out MKI's seat. They might be lacking any emotional appeal to some here, but they are functional, good riders over indifferent track, fast accelerating (even on DC), have very good window views, plenty of luggage space, good PIS, and according to the MTIN figures, nearly twice as reliable as even the 'wonderful' 365s.
In fact, Siemens again delivered what was needed, which is why they got the order.

 

[F Great Eastern]

For me the 700s are excellent trains let down by a poor interior specification that was dictated to Siemens by the Government. The interior was not the choice of the manufacturer and in some cases the manufacturer even offered certain things that some people are calling for that the DfT outright rejected as they thought they knew better.

People say they hate the privatised railway and having everything under the control of the state is a good thing, but the interiors we have on the 700/800 fleets is exactly what you get when you leave the DfT to order trains by themselves without any input from people who actually run trains.

 

[fgwrich]

For me the 700s are excellent trains let down by a poor interior specification that was dictated to Siemens by the Government. The interior was not the choice of the manufacturer and in some cases the manufacturer even offered certain things that some people are calling for that the DfT outright rejected as they thought they knew better.

People say they hate the privatised railway and having everything under the control of the state is a good thing, but the interiors we have on the 700/800 fleets is exactly what you get when you leave the DfT to order trains by themselves without any input from people who actually run trains.

Very much this. A big case of be careful what you wish for, as the seat cover debacle in the GW 800s has already shown (dft specified flat cloth changed for GWR moquette after staining of the flat cloth).

 

[supervc-10]

Were BR similarly overruled by the DfT?
I genuinely don't know- I was 6 years old when rail privatisation came in. A state operated organisation does not necessarily have to be run completely from Whitehall.

Anyway- back on topic of the 700s- I think they're fine. As people have said, the Northern Civity layout can be a great people eater too so that excuse for the poor interior fitout doesn't really hold much water. But the seats are *fine* - not good, but *fine*, and bright and airy if slightly clinical interiors can be great if you're a vulnerable person traveling alone, for example, and a lot of people like the sense of security they get.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Anyway- back on topic of the 700s- I think they're fine. As people have said, the Northern Civity layout can be a great people eater too so that excuse for the poor interior fitout doesn't really hold much water. But the seats are *fine* - not good, but *fine*, and bright and airy if slightly clinical interiors can be great if you're a vulnerable person traveling alone, for example, and a lot of people like the sense of security they get.

I think the Northern Civity proves that a few inches off the aisle for armrests (there are already 1" spacers) wouldn't be a killer, in some ways it would be an improvement as most people would fit fully within their seat. I've been in a packed 2-car (!) and it was the door standbacks that made all the difference, not the exact width of the seats.

 

[F Great Eastern]

Were BR similarly overruled by the DfT?
I genuinely don't know- I was 6 years old when rail privatisation came in. A state operated organisation does not necessarily have to be run completely from Whitehall.

Anyway- back on topic of the 700s- I think they're fine. As people have said, the Northern Civity layout can be a great people eater too so that excuse for the poor interior fitout doesn't really hold much water. But the seats are *fine* - not good, but *fine*, and bright and airy if slightly clinical interiors can be great if you're a vulnerable person traveling alone, for example, and a lot of people like the sense of security they get.

People need to stop harping back to BR. Those were completely different times and all those people who think that it is going to some back are completely deluded. The DfT wants more power, not less, anyone who knows anyone at the high end of the rail industry knows that and it is never going to give that power up I'm afraid even when the audit office finds they're utterly incompetent in rolling stock procurement.

The whole way the railways are structured here effectively uses the private operators as shields to the DfT. The DfT have always had the ability to make many many decisions behind the scenes and watch the operators take the blame for something that they never had a say in. The way that the new system is going to be that set-up on steroids. The operators have even less say of what is going on, but you can bet your bottom dollar that when the **** hits the fan, the DfT will turn around and point to the operators rather than taking any of the blame itself.

I'm not sure what relevance the Northern Civity layout has here. Both the Thameslink rolling stock contracts and IEP contracts were fully under the control of the DfT. They were not like other train procurement exercises for virtually every other train order, where the operators actually had a say as they placed the orders themselves.

 

[modernrail]

I would guess the lack of seat back tables and WiFi is now an even bigger issue. Some people are probably choosing to work from home rather than train plus office as 2 hours dead time on the train is a pain.

The seats are awful but would be better with a spacer.

The DfT should never be allowed anywhere near interior design on trains. They have more than proven they are not very good at it. Why would they be. They are civil servants, not experts in design. You don’t ask an amateur accountant to design a car interiors so why let them design trains.

I often hope DfT people are on here, so I can plead with them with them personally to put their crayons and arrogance away and stick to funding an organisation that is actually capable of making sensible design choices.

 

[Milo T.K]

What is your view on the ironing boards in 700s? The 720 seats are both harder and narrower.

Seats were a bit on the firm side at first however after a while it does get comfier. Legroom is pretty decent. The 720 seats I feel are definitely slightly wider although it should have been 2+2 rather than a 3+2 layout

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Graffiti needs to be removed from the toilets when on depot, getting very bad on some units

 

[Fincra5]

Graffiti needs to be removed from the toilets when on depot, getting very bad on some units

Oh they do try...

The black canvas of an offwhite wall everywhere is too tempting to some!

 

[AM9]

Oh they do try...

The black canvas of an offwhite wall everywhere is too tempting to some!

How can an off-white wall be a black canvas?

 

[NSE]

Positives

1. I like the walk through. It’s easier if I have my bike.
2. Mechanically they seem reliable enough (not my area of expertise!).
3. They eat up people.

Negatives

1. Not enough legroom. I can’t sit forward without my knees pressing against the seat in front.
2. The table trays (if there are any) do not allow me to put my laptop on.
3. It has a clinical and unwelcoming atmosphere.

Something that always gets me is people going ‘yeah, but such a small number of people go Cambridge to Brighton’ yes, I agree, most punters boarding Cambridge will have alighted before Haywards Heath, if not before, but while Thameslink reduces end to end journey times, I now spend longer on the 700. I regularly go between East Croydon and St. Neots/Cambridge and my end to end time is shorter, but I spend all that time on one train. I travel off peak so I can sprawl over many seats but I wouldn’t want to do that in the peak times. I appreciate that they are a Jack of all trades and I would suggest keeping the larger areas at boarding points for standing pax works well, but by carpeting, adding full tables in the four bays, just increasing leg room by a few inches and moving a few centimetres into the aisle and adding warmer lighting, the whole train would become so much better. As others have said the 707’s are welcoming and I love travelling on them. Perfect for what they do.

 

[43096]

How can an off-white wall be a black canvas?

I suspect it should be “blank” rather than “black”.

 

[Hadders]

As a regular user for years of the GN side of Thameslink the main issue with the class 700 is the seats are too close to the side wall, they are too close together and the leg room is too poor.

Also the lack of tables in the bay seating is a but of an issue. Now full sized tables aren't required but a little triangular table as on the 365s would do the trick perfectly.

The much missed class 365s had an absolutely perfect layout. If that could have been copied on the 700s then they'd be perfect.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Seats were a bit on the firm side at first however after a while it does get comfier. Legroom is pretty decent. The 720 seats I feel are definitely slightly wider although it should have been 2+2 rather than a 3+2 layout

How tall are you? The only trains I have ever been on with worse airline seat legroom than the 720 are the 153 and 150/2.

The 720 seats are NOT wider.

How can an off-white wall be a black canvas?

Blank.

Every TOC should put the sticky backed pictures covering the bog walls. It not only looks cool but significantly reduces vandalism.

 

[py_megapixel]

I suppose re. the 720, the narrow seats are what one gets by insisting on having one's cake and eating it too (five seats across and a wide aisle)

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suppose re. the 720, the narrow seats are what one gets by insisting on having one's cake and eating it too (five seats across and a wide aisle)

It doesn't have a wide aisle. It has the narrowest aisle of any UK train. I can barely even pass sideways.

It's what you get if you have a 24m body (and so narrower than 20m), thick sidewalls and 3+2. 3+2 is only suitable for 20m vehicles so you can at least get the full 2.8m width.

 

[py_megapixel]

Is it narrower than the 3+2 sections of a Cl.323 (that being most of it), those being I think the narrowest I've personally been on? It doesn't really look like it from photos, though I've not been on a 720 myself.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is it narrower than the 3+2 sections of a Cl.323 (that being most of it), those being I think the narrowest I've personally been on? It doesn't really look like it from photos, though I've not been on a 720 myself.

Yes, considerably so. 323s are 2.80m wide (same width as most 20m stock, though I'm not sure how that was achieved) and have sidewalls about 1" thinner. 720s are 2.77m wide. 700s are also 2.80m, so these would be suitable for 3+2 if that was seen as appropriate.

 

[AM9]

Yes, considerably so. 323s are 2.80m wide (same width as most 20m stock, though I'm not sure how that was achieved) and have sidewalls about 1" thinner. 720s are 2.77m wide. 700s are also 2.80m, so these would be suitable for 3+2 if that was seen as appropriate.

a) firstly, 323s have their bogie centres set much less than is normal for a 23m car - this reduces the overhang* at the centre
b) the ends of the cars are tapered to reduce the absolute maximum outswing* on curves of the longer than normal projection

It is by these measures that class 80x cars of 26m length can also be cleared for most mainlines in the UK.

* I may have the terms wrong but I think the above explains the issue.

 

[Taunton]

I would guess the lack of seat back tables and WiFi is now an even bigger issue. Some people are probably choosing to work from home rather than train plus office as 2 hours dead time on the train is a pain.

Contrary to much internal railway opinion, "working on trains" is not really practical. Maybe it was with Mk 3 stock and tables at all bays, but to do proper work nowadays needs a laptop, your notes etc to work from, and sufficient elbow room to be able to actually type, or turn pages.

As, on a recent Pendolino trip, I couldn't even get my ticket out of my pocket for the conductor without the chap next to me having to stand into the aisle while I did so, doing any practical work is generally a no-no nowadays.

 

[QSK19]

What Siemens have produced is a very competent product built to specification.

After trying to buy the bogie design from Bombardier given that they didn’t have a sufficient one of their own (this came from discussions I had with staff in the “Passengers” and “Bogies” divisions when I worked there about 10 years ago) - Bombardier’s answer was, quite understandably, “you won the contract, go off and design your own!”

 

[43096]

After trying to buy the bogie design from Bombardier given that they didn’t have a sufficient one of their own (this came from discussions I had with staff in the “Passengers” and “Bogies” divisions when I worked there about 10 years ago) - Bombardier’s answer was, quite understandably, “you won the contract, go off and design your own!”

Although Siemens have used the Bombardier bogie on the DB ICE4 units as part of the work share. Interesting to note that an issue found with that fleet was the quality of welding on some bodyshells that had been built by… Bombardier.