Class 345 progress

[J-2739]

Wow, they've designed trains without toilets to run all the way to Reading ?

Major mistake, you mark my words.

Why?

It's not like there is too much demand for people to travel from Reading to Shenfield. Crossrail is going to be a capacity reliever bringing many people to the centre of the capital.

Commuters could always take GWR main line services from Reading to Paddington, at least they guarantee a toilet.

 

[AM9]

Wow, they've designed trains without toilets to run all the way to Reading ?

Major mistake, you mark my words.

55 minutes maximum to central London is no longer than some tube routes. Why should a mainline metro service be any different?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why?

It's not like there is too much demand for people to travel from Reading to Shenfield. Crossrail is going to be a capacity reliever bringing many people to the centre of the capital.

Commuters could always take GWR main line services from Reading to Paddington, at least they guarantee a toilet.

If the on-board ones are busy then they can pay to use the Paddington toilets.

 

[yorksrob]

Why?

It's not like there is too much demand for people to travel from Reading to Shenfield. Crossrail is going to be a capacity reliever bringing many people to the centre of the capital.

Commuters could always take GWR main line services from Reading to Paddington, at least they guarantee a toilet.

These trains will be used by people going home to places like Twyford after a night out, or a couple of beers after work. The idea that there won't be several of them who aren't desperate for the toilet at some stage during the journey is laughable.

The people who've specified these trains clearly have no clue as to how modern people live their lives.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

55 minutes maximum to central London is no longer than some tube routes. Why should a mainline metro service be any different?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


If the on-board ones are busy then they can pay to use the Paddington toilets.

Arguably places like Amersham are outliers and it's a wonder how people manage going that far.

Saying it's a fifty minute journey assumes all passengers will have had a chance to go to the bog immediately before getting on the train in central London, which on a busy evening or a complicated journey is a massive assumption to make.

 

[Domh245]

These trains will be used by people going home to places like Twyford Amersham after a night out, or a couple of beers after work. The idea that there won't be several of them who aren't desperate for the toilet at some stage during the journey is laughable.

The people who've specified these trains clearly have no clue as to how modern people live their lives.

is something that could have been levelled at the S stock, but the people of Amersham seems to be coping alright...

 

[yorksrob]

is something that could have been levelled at the S stock, but the people of Amersham seems to be coping alright...

Well, Amersham has always justified specialist provision in terms of seat layout, compared to most underground routes so arguably it would justify other special treatment as well. Has anyone ever done any surveying of users of the outer reaches of the Met to gauge their views in the subject, or do we continue as we do because we've always done it that way ?

 

[Harbornite]

These trains will be used by people going home to places like Twyford after a night out, or a couple of beers after work. The idea that there won't be several of them who aren't desperate for the toilet at some stage during the journey is laughable.

The people who've specified these trains clearly have no clue as to how modern people live their lives.
[

These people are adults, why can't they use the bogs in the station or pub? The only people with genuine cause for concern are those with medical problems regarding going to the toilet.

 

[J-2739]

Well, Amersham has always justified specialist provision in terms of seat layout, compared to most underground routes so arguably it would justify other special treatment as well. Has anyone ever done any surveying of users of the outer reaches of the Met to gauge their views in the subject, or do we continue as we do because we've always done it that way?

I'd go with the second one. If there has never been a toilet on a Metropolitan line train in it's history before, and with little complaint from some vocal minority, then why do it.

 

[yorksrob]

These people are adults, why can't they use the bogs in the station or pub? The only people with genuine cause for concern are those with medical problems regarding going to the toilet.

Do they have bogs in the station these days ? When are they open ?

What if they've come from somewhere with a tight connection on a tube train with no bogs ? What about people with genuine medical conditions, now you mention it ?

LU is to an extent constrained by history, but this is a major infrastructure upgrade when problems should have been headed off from the start. Instead, problems have been built in for the next generation.

 

[Harbornite]

Do they have bogs in the station these days ?

Do they not have bogs in pubs and nightclubs? Problem solved, surely?

 

[Class377/5]

It was sat in the up goods at Melton Mowbray at about 0640 today. Here's a poor quality picture (attached) - just to confirm and expel any misinformed niggling doubts, I'm a guard and so most definitely wasn't taking a picture when driving!

Nice grab. Thanks for sharing.

 

[AM9]

Well, Amersham has always justified specialist provision in terms of seat layout, compared to most underground routes so arguably it would justify other special treatment as well. Has anyone ever done any surveying of users of the outer reaches of the Met to gauge their views in the subject, or do we continue as we do because we've always done it that way ?

Well there haven't been any major modifications to the human body since the mid 19th century so people are as capable of going over 1 hour between visits as they always were. Maybe the change has been in them taking less responsibility for their actions, including excessive liquid intake.

It goes without saying that those with genuine medical issues are excepted from the above.

 

[yorksrob]

Well there haven't been any major modifications to the human body since the mid 19th century so people are as capable of going over 1 hour between visits as they always were. Maybe the change has been in them taking less responsibility for their actions, including excessive liquid intake.

It goes without saying that those with genuine medical issues are excepted from the above.

Even though those with genuine medical conditions will also be greatly disadvantaged by this step backwards (which you somehow fail to recognise).

And it is a step backwards, as the turbo's introduced by NSE had loo's, so arguably ordinary passengers on the route (whether they "take responsibility for their actions" or not in your world), have a right to expect basic standards and facilities to be maintained.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What will the journey time be approximately end-to-end for the XRail assuming no delays?

 

[J-2739]

What will the journey time be approximately end-to-end for the XRail assuming no delays?

Here=http://www.crossrail.co.uk/

You can calculate the journey time (near the bottom).

 

[swt_passenger]

What will the journey time be approximately end-to-end for the XRail assuming no delays?

Reading to Shenfield 102 mins.

Heathrow to Abbey Wood 60 mins

Not guesses, I just used the Crossrail website journey planner.

Post crossed with the one above...

 

[coppercapped]

Even though those with genuine medical conditions will also be greatly disadvantaged by this step backwards (which you somehow fail to recognise).

And it is a step backwards, as the turbo's introduced by NSE had loo's, so arguably ordinary passengers on the route (whether they "take responsibility for their actions" or not in your world), have a right to expect basic standards and facilities to be maintained.

I agree with you. In future some trains calling at Twyford, Maidenhead and so on will have toilets (the Class 387s to London and to Oxford) and some won't (the Class 345s to London and points East). Yet another case of 'the railway' making life for the normal punter more complicated than it need be, thereby shooting itself in the foot again.

Essentially, in the facilities it offers, Crossrail is the Central Line on steroids...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well there haven't been any major modifications to the human body since the mid 19th century so people are as capable of going over 1 hour between visits as they always were. Maybe the change has been in them taking less responsibility for their actions, including excessive liquid intake.

It goes without saying that those with genuine medical issues are excepted from the above.

So, taking your argument to its conclusion, if intercity stock makes journeys of an hour or a bit more, toilets aren't needed on them either.

The DfT could have saved quite a bit of money on the IEPs for the Bristol run then.

 

[yorksrob]

I agree with you. In future some trains calling at Twyford, Maidenhead and so on will have toilets (the Class 387s to London and to Oxford) and some won't (the Class 345s to London and points East). Yet another case of 'the railway' making life for the normal punter more complicated than it need be, thereby shooting itself in the foot again.

Essentially, in the facilities it offers, Crossrail is the Central Line on steroids...

Indeed. Hopefully they can retrofit these units with standard facilities at some stage in the future.

 

[AM9]

I agree with you. In future some trains calling at Twyford, Maidenhead and so on will have toilets (the Class 387s to London and to Oxford) and some won't (the Class 345s to London and points East). Yet another case of 'the railway' making life for the normal punter more complicated than it need be, thereby shooting itself in the foot again.

Essentially, in the facilities it offers, Crossrail is the Central Line on steroids...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


So, taking your argument to its conclusion, if intercity stock makes journeys of an hour or a bit more, toilets aren't needed on them either.

The DfT could have saved quite a bit of money on the IEPs for the Bristol run then.

The situation has arisen because the project has been expanded into something that it wasn't originally meant to be. Those travelling from Reading will have 387s with toilets. Crossrail is TFL! If the trains all turned at Maidenhead, the western arm of Crossrail would resemble many of the other metro routes in London except that it is double-ended. The average journey time on Crossrail will between 15 and 30 minutes. Even if all journeys not including the core were averaged, it would still be well under 30 minutes. The railway is a mass transport system that is intended to cater for the majority. This can't be compromised for a (relatively) small proportion who might want toilet facilities very frequently or the few who travel the length of the route end to end. The route should be considered as two metro routes, each with an overlapping core section, not a line to serve the major tourist route from the Thames Valley to the TOWIE* highlights of commuter belt Essex. How many people travel from West Ruislip to Epping, or Cockfosters to Uxbridge as a proportion of the total.
Think of the 455/466 services with SWT and Southern, the Windsor 707 trains, the 476 trains to SE London, the LO trains around the city and of course the longer LU journeys. . As metro services, the majority of their passengers will be regular travellers who will quickly adjust their travelling pattern to all the facilities, frequencies and durations of services on offer.

* for those who haven't heard of it, 'TOWIE' = The Only Way Is Essex. I couldn't start to describe it here, - just Google it.

 

[Goldfish62]

Well there haven't been any major modifications to the human body since the mid 19th century so people are as capable of going over 1 hour between visits as they always were. Maybe the change has been in them taking less responsibility for their actions, including excessive liquid intake.

It goes without saying that those with genuine medical issues are excepted from the above.

So are you suggesting that we should stop going out for a few beers in the evening? What is your definition of excessive liquid intake?

 

[AM9]

So are you suggesting that we should stop going out for a few beers in the evening? What is your definition of excessive liquid intake?

I would suggest that those who can't control their bodily functions like urinating in public places (typically multi-storey staircases) have consumed more liquid than should have. Drink according to the situation that you need to be in not as you might wish it to be, - that is if you still have sufficient self-control.

 

[yorksrob]

If TfL wanted a metro system, they should have built another tube to Acton. It's not enough to say that "only a small percent" of people will travel from places like Twyford. This will be an inter-regional rail link, not a tube and TfL should have specified the rolling stock to take account of it.

 

[NotATrainspott]

If TfL wanted a metro system, they should have built another tube to Acton. It's not enough to say that "only a small percent" of people will travel from places like Twyford. This will be an inter-regional rail link, not a tube and TfL should have specified the rolling stock to take account of it.

No, it's a tube line. It's a TfL project to relieve the Central Line and to expand the reach of the TfL network to places which are now economically part of London.

There's all of 2tph that are going as far as Reading, and another 2tph turning back at Maidenhead. The main justification for the extension is not that folk in Reading would actually use Crossrail to get to London, but that it wouldn't be necessary to run a shuttle from Reading to Slough. The Reading rebuild was kept off of Crossrail's budget, as it would have put the scheme in jeopardy.

 

[AM9]

If TfL wanted a metro system, they should have built another tube to Acton. It's not enough to say that "only a small percent" of people will travel from places like Twyford. This will be an inter-regional rail link, not a tube and TfL should have specified the rolling stock to take account of it.

TfL is funded by London to provide travel for London. If Twyford wants trains of a certain spec, then Berkshire should talk to the DfT. Crossrail is not an 'inter-regional rail link', it is a double ended metro railway, primarily for commuters with a core that will take a fair amount of tourist short journeys, plus of course an airport shuttle, like a faster Piccadilly line. There are outer suburban services on the GWML, which will be served by the 387s.
If TfL had made a play for the Luton-Sutton Loop services before the Thameslink trains were confimed, it is likely that they would have specified something like the class 707 stock which SWT has ordered for the Windsor line.

 

[LeeLivery]

The situation has arisen because the project has been expanded into something that it wasn't originally meant to be. Those travelling from Reading will have 387s with toilets. Crossrail is TFL! If the trains all turned at Maidenhead, the western arm of Crossrail would resemble many of the other metro routes in London except that it is double-ended. The average journey time on Crossrail will between 15 and 30 minutes. Even if all journeys not including the core were averaged, it would still be well under 30 minutes. The railway is a mass transport system that is intended to cater for the majority. This can't be compromised for a (relatively) small proportion who might want toilet facilities very frequently or the few who travel the length of the route end to end. The route should be considered as two metro routes, each with an overlapping core section, not a line to serve the major tourist route from the Thames Valley to the TOWIE* highlights of commuter belt Essex. How many people travel from West Ruislip to Epping, or Cockfosters to Uxbridge as a proportion of the total.
Think of the 455/466 services with SWT and Southern, the Windsor 707 trains, the 476 trains to SE London, the LO trains around the city and of course the longer LU journeys. . As metro services, the majority of their passengers will be regular travellers who will quickly adjust their travelling pattern to all the facilities, frequencies and durations of services on offer.

* for those who haven't heard of it, 'TOWIE' = The Only Way Is Essex. I couldn't start to describe it here, - just Google it.

Quoting other units to justify doesn't mean much. I just have to then say what about all the 377s, Desrios and Networkers with loos in the suburban area? Everyone has been caught short at least once and these loos do get usage in the suburbs. The 377 loos have seen me a few times in London. The same thing was said about the 700s and tables - "Passengers will adjust" Now look, the twitter feed for Thameslink is full of them saying they are looking to add tables...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No, it's a tube line. It's a TfL project to relieve the Central Line and to expand the reach of the TfL network to places which are now economically part of London.

There's all of 2tph that are going as far as Reading, and another 2tph turning back at Maidenhead. The main justification for the extension is not that folk in Reading would actually use Crossrail to get to London, but that it wouldn't be necessary to run a shuttle from Reading to Slough. The Reading rebuild was kept off of Crossrail's budget, as it would have put the scheme in jeopardy.

Is Thameslink a tube line then?

 

[yorksrob]

TfL is funded by London to provide travel for London. If Twyford wants trains of a certain spec, then Berkshire should talk to the DfT. Crossrail is not an 'inter-regional rail link', it is a double ended metro railway, primarily for commuters with a core that will take a fair amount of tourist short journeys, plus of course an airport shuttle, like a faster Piccadilly line. There are outer suburban services on the GWML, which will be served by the 387s.
If TfL had made a play for the Luton-Sutton Loop services before the Thameslink trains were confimed, it is likely that they would have specified something like the class 707 stock which SWT has ordered for the Windsor line.

It will be an inter-regional link between Berkshire and Essex because it links Berkshire and Essex. Sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "London London" won't alter the fact that people will use it as part of the wider regional transport network.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Is Thameslink a tube line then?

No.

It will be an inter-regional link between Berkshire and Essex because it links Berkshire and Essex. Sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "London London" won't alter the fact that people will use it as part of the wider regional transport network.

It will be used as such by a tiny number of people. Benefiting them by providing toilets would dis-benefit many others by reducing the amount of space available for short-distance travellers.

It's no different to the London Midland service to Crewe or the ScotRail services between Helensburgh and Edinburgh. The total end-to-end length is longer than many InterCity services with catering and first class but it exists as a suburban service all the way because that's its role.

 

[J-2739]

Quoting other units to justify doesn't mean much. I just have to then say what about all the 377s, Desrios and Networkers with loos in the suburban area? Everyone has been caught short at least once and these loos do get usage in the suburbs. The 377 loos have seen me a few times in London. The same thing was said about the 700s and tables - "Passengers will adjust" Now look, the twitter feed for Thameslink is full of them saying they are looking to add tables...

The difference is that the 377s, 450s (I assume) and Networkers are made to be interchangeable between other routes, and are sometimes pathed for longer distance routes, thus need the toilets in them

Is Thameslink a tube line then?

Thameslink is more of a longer distance Crossrail. The Brighton mainline is more than half the length the whole of Crossrail added together and the 700s are going to undertake journeys to far-flung Peterborough also, so need extra luxuries.

 

[AM9]

Quoting other units to justify doesn't mean much. I just have to then say what about all the 377s, Desrios and Networkers with loos in the suburban area? Everyone has been caught short at least once and these loos do get usage in the suburbs. The 377 loos have seen me a few times in London. The same thing was said about the 700s and tables - "Passengers will adjust" Now look, the twitter feed for Thameslink is full of them saying they are looking to add tables...

The 377s and Desiros (not City) are primarily there as outer suburban units but are sometimes deployed in a metro role. You might as well say that the Norwich trains (LH MKIII CS with buffet etc,) stop at Stratford therefore that sets a 'norm' for all trains in the London area.
I wouldn't hold your breath for the tables on Thameslink, they are fulfiling a particular role which has been assessed with and without tables. In a years time, they will be in full service, probably as they are today, - maybe with wi-fi added IAW the government's recent statement.

Is Thameslink a tube line then?

Why do you ask that?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It will be an inter-regional link between Berkshire and Essex because it links Berkshire and Essex. Sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "London London" won't alter the fact that people will use it as part of the wider regional transport network.

Essex and Berkshire are not regions. They are both in the London commuter region so you could call it intra-regional. It was a joke about travel between the Thames Valley and Essex, (maybe I should have put a few more smileys there).
'London' (in the financial sense) has paid for over 80% of Crossrail, the rest is national funding. If Berkshire residents think that their needs are different then they need to speak to their County representatives. Note, I do not live in London, nor do I contribute directly to any of it's local government funds so I have no financial interest in who funds the TfL controlled system. I just accept that if London funds the majority of a railway upgrade, it can expect the provision of what it needs to be the priority. If outside areas benefit from the provision as is then they are free to use it.

 

[yorksrob]

The 377s and Desiros (not City) are primarily there as outer suburban units but are sometimes deployed in a metro role. You might as well say that the Norwich trains (LH MKIII CS with buffet etc,) stop at Stratford therefore that sets a 'norm' for all trains in the London area.
I wouldn't hold your breath for the tables on Thameslink, they are fulfiling a particular role which has been assessed with and without tables. In a years time, they will be in full service, probably as they are today, - maybe with wi-fi added IAW the government's recent statement.



Why do you ask that?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Essex and Berkshire are not regions. They are both in the London commuter region so you could call it intra-regional. It was a joke about travel between the Thames Valley and Essex, (maybe I should have put a few more smileys there).
'London' (in the financial sense) has paid for over 80% of Crossrail, the rest is national funding. If Berkshire residents think that their needs are different then they need to speak to their County representatives. Note, I do not live in London, nor do I contribute directly to any of it's local government funds so I have no financial interest in who funds the TfL controlled system. I just accept that if London funds the majority of a railway upgrade, it can expect the provision of what it needs to be the priority. If outside areas benefit from the provision as is then they are free to use it.

It isn't a question of going to your county council. If London is going to run trains into deepest Berkshire, it should specify trains that are fit for that purpose

 

[D365]

If London is going to run trains into deepest Berkshire, it should specify trains that are fit for that purpose

If there weren't any other services operating along the same corridor I would agree, but that's not the case. It's been said before that the main reason that Crossrail will reach out to Reading is for operational convenience.