Class 345 progress

[Class377/5]

The idea of extension to 11 cars has been around for a long while. I haven't seen the article and am not disputing what's being said but I find it astounding that the ability to extend a design to 11 cars isn't assured. That sounds like a contract dispute in the making to me given extension to 11 cars is likely to be TfL's first step up in capacity rather than moving to more tph in the peak. I suspect signalling enhancements are harder than buying some more carriages. I'm assuming there is provision in sidings and depots to handle 11 car trains being built in now. Still, as you suggest, it's no shock that a supplier is hinting that it will need wheelbarrows full of money to possibly, perhaps, maybe extend the customer's nice new trains.

Couldn't agree more. Seem arrange to build the nice new stations with 11 car platforms and not actually have a clause in your train contract to give 11 car trains!

 

[507 001]

Anybody seen any photos of the cab interior?

 

[Mordac]

Anybody seen any photos of the cab interior?

There's one on p. 9 of September Modern Railways.

 

[ScotGG]

The Plumstead sidings are being built for 11 car trains aren't they?

Incidentally does anyone know much more about the Plumstead site. Almost complete?

 

[samuelmorris]

Some unusual sounds in this video - trying to work out what I'm hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgpP4xadPv8
not that it's of any relevance to the travelling public but unless I'm mistaken both the transformers and traction package sound entirely different from all the Electrostar units that preceded them, suggesting there might finally have been some ground-up changes underneath after all these years...

 

[J-2739]

Some unusual sounds in this video - trying to work out what I'm hearing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgpP4xadPv8
not that it's of any relevance to the travelling public but unless I'm mistaken both the transformers and traction package sound entirely different from all the Electrostar units that preceded them, suggesting there might finally have been some ground-up changes underneath after all these years...

I'm not sure if I would base the transformer and traction sound on this video, since it's moving at such low speed, though it does sound rather different. I'd wait for the final result.

 

[Via Bank]

Obviously it's low speed, and there's a lot of wind noise and rail noise in that clip, but it does seem to have a different sound to an Electrostar. I'm reminded of the Movia traction package (ie the 2009 stock and S stock) with a high-pitched Desiro-like whirring and another Electrostar-like tone underneath that.

 

[whoosh]

Anybody seen any photos of the cab interior?

A couple here:
Cab view 1
Cab view 2

 

[phoenixcronin]

These drawings of the Class 345 obtained via a FOIA request bring up some interesting questions:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/requ...ach/3/Q234 BMB R1 XMO CR001 50011 Rev 3.0.pdf

The first and last cars (the DMS) have all longitudinal seating, with no transverse seats!. This seems very bizarre. Why should they be different to the other cars?

Of course, I understand that the middle car (the TS) needs all longitudinal seats due to the wheelchair bays, but the DMS's should have transverse seats

 

[jopsuk]

but the DMS's should have transverse seats

Why? with many of the stations "double ended" it's possible that despite the wide gangways the front and baclk may be more crowded, so makes sense to maximise standing space there, encourage people to move through if a transverse seat is so important to them

 

[Fincra5]

These drawings of the Class 345 obtained via a FOIA request brings up some interesting questions:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/requ...ach/3/Q234 BMB R1 XMO CR001 50011 Rev 3.0.pdf

The first and last cars (the DMS) have all longitudinal seating, with no transverse seats!. This seems very bizarre. Why should they be different to the other cars?

Of course, I understand that the middle car (the TS) needs all longitudinal seats due to the wheelchair bays, but the DMS's should have transverse seats

Thats an awful lot of longitudinal seating. Not great if you commute from outside the M25!

 

[phoenixcronin]

Thats an awful lot of longitudinal seating. Not great if you commute from outside the M25!

Indeed, especially if you're used to an 8 car 315 with 3+2 and 2+2 seating. At the very least I was hoping for every car to have some transverse seats, with the exception of the wheelchair car. Also Heathrow passengers may be disappointed
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why? with many of the stations "double ended" it's possible that despite the wide gangways the front and baclk may be more crowded, so makes sense to maximise standing space there, encourage people to move through if a transverse seat is so important to them

But does the removal of transverse seats make that much of a difference? In terms of floor space its not that much of a difference, especially when the car ends are already all longitudinal?

 

[Hophead]

These drawings of the Class 345 obtained via a FOIA request bring up some interesting questions:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/requ...ach/3/Q234 BMB R1 XMO CR001 50011 Rev 3.0.pdf

The first and last cars (the DMS) have all longitudinal seating, with no transverse seats!. This seems very bizarre. Why should they be different to the other cars?

Of course, I understand that the middle car (the TS) needs all longitudinal seats due to the wheelchair bays, but the DMS's should have transverse seats

I'd suggest that there's a lot of electrical kit under those seats, which is much simpler to pack in with the seats arranged in that fashion

 

[samuelmorris]

Personally I think the all-longitudinal seating at the front and rear coaches is a very intelligent move - those vehicles are always the ones that fill with people rushing to make the train in time, so it makes sense for them to have capacity prioritised - it's not like if there is space that you can't walk further down the train to the transverse seats. Of course as much longitudinal seating as the units have will be a downgrade from 315s, especially in the 7-car guise, but anyone who's used a 315 at Stratford in the peak knows that what is needed right now is more capacity, not more seats. The route has become one where letting full trains pass due to not standing in the optimal place to get ahead of the queue is commonplace. It couldn't be any other way really.

 

[dubscottie]

I'd suggest that there's a lot of electrical kit under those seats, which is much simpler to pack in with the seats arranged in that fashion

God, I hate that term "kit" or "package'.. Its equipment.

Traction equipment, electrical equipment etc..

A kit is something you put together.

A package is something you are given, most of it useless.

Equipment is something you use.

Just getting it off my chest!

 

[D365]

God, I hate that term "kit" or "package'.. Its equipment.

Traction equipment, electrical equipment etc..

A kit is something you put together.

A package is something you are given, most of it useless.

Equipment is something you use.

Just getting it off my chest!

As an understudy of electrical engineering, I salute you.

 

[AM9]

Personally I think the all-longitudinal seating at the front and rear coaches is a very intelligent move - those vehicles are always the ones that fill with people rushing to make the train in time, so it makes sense for them to have capacity prioritised - it's not like if there is space that you can't walk further down the train to the transverse seats. Of course as much longitudinal seating as the units have will be a downgrade from 315s, especially in the 7-car guise, but anyone who's used a 315 at Stratford in the peak knows that what is needed right now is more capacity, not more seats. The route has become one where letting full trains pass due to not standing in the optimal place to get ahead of the queue is commonplace. It couldn't be any other way really.

I think that we can expect to see a lot more 'passive coercion' in commuter train design. Despite repeated pleas for passengers to not crowd around the front or rear cars of trains, they still persist in trying to be the first off. Measures such as these with the 345s will still allow them to do that but they will forfeit the generally preferred seats and effectively be choosing to travel in virtually standing-only vehicles.

 

[samuelmorris]

Given that, at least while the two sides are still separate, the bulk of the capacity problem don't travel much further than Stratford to Ilford or Goodmayes, that seems like a reasonable solution.

 

[Goldfish62]

Personally I think the all-longitudinal seating at the front and rear coaches is a very intelligent move - those vehicles are always the ones that fill with people rushing to make the train in time, so it makes sense for them to have capacity prioritised - it's not like if there is space that you can't walk further down the train to the transverse seats. Of course as much longitudinal seating as the units have will be a downgrade from 315s, especially in the 7-car guise, but anyone who's used a 315 at Stratford in the peak knows that what is needed right now is more capacity, not more seats. The route has become one where letting full trains pass due to not standing in the optimal place to get ahead of the queue is commonplace. It couldn't be any other way really.

I agree. You can see it to a more limited extent on SWT's Class 455s. There is a section of longitudinal seating in each driving trailer precisely because passengers tend to pack themselves on at the door adjacent to this section when boarding at Waterloo.

 

[SF-02]

Same with 376s

 

[Fincra5]

I think the Longitudinal seating the the DMS's are a good move but there should be more 2+2 in the centre carriages for those who actually commute outside central london.

 

[samuelmorris]

From my count I see:

Longitudinal fixed: 316 (46-30-30-33-38-33-30-30-46)
Longitudinal tipup: 42 (0-6-6-3-12-3-6-6-0)
Transverse: 96 (0-16-16-16-0-16-16-16-0)

compared with 636 transverse seats on a pair of 315s, but of course 3+2, not highback and no armrests. In my opinion, being in a longitudinal seat with an armrest is probably equivalent or better comfort than sitting in the 3-abreast area on a 315. It's a question of how many people are expected to use the services from beyond zone 6.

 

[Trailfinder]

What is going to happen to all the standing passengers if there is a full emergency brake application at 90mph, there is nothing to restrict the movement?

Perhaps TFL/Bombardier should carry out a test run - any volunteers? To be on the safe side, better not.

 

[tsr]

A couple here:
Cab view 1
Cab view 2

Does it come with a complementary bloke in an orange vest to fix broken buttons?

 

[N228PF]

From my count I see:

Longitudinal fixed: 316 (46-30-30-33-38-33-30-30-46)
Longitudinal tipup: 42 (0-6-6-3-12-3-6-6-0)
Transverse: 96 (0-16-16-16-0-16-16-16-0)

compared with 636 transverse seats on a pair of 315s, but of course 3+2, not highback and no armrests. In my opinion, being in a longitudinal seat with an armrest is probably equivalent or better comfort than sitting in the 3-abreast area on a 315. It's a question of how many people are expected to use the services from beyond zone 6.

If in sections between doors in a car that have the transverse seating, changing the four longitudinal each side of the transverse to just transverse only adds 48 seats by my count, whereby hugely decreasing the standing room by the doors in the central cars.

As has been stated, an S Stock solution might have been more aesthetically pleasing.

 

[Chris125]

What is going to happen to all the standing passengers if there is a full emergency brake application at 90mph, there is nothing to restrict the movement?

I can't see why the top speed would make much difference, or why standing passengers on these are any different to those on 110mph LM services for example.

 

[AM9]

What is going to happen to all the standing passengers if there is a full emergency brake application at 90mph, there is nothing to restrict the movement?

So if the open gangways are seen as a problem, that means that a conventional train with standing passengers stopping on an emergency brake would result in a pile of passengers at the bulkhead of each coach gangway!

 

[The Growl]

Sorry to veer off, but has anyone commented on that disgusting design and livery? Yeeuch! In comparison with the concept it's horrid.

 

[phoenixcronin]

Sorry to veer off, but has anyone commented on that disgusting design and livery? Yeeuch! In comparison with the concept it's horrid.

Yes, its utterly horrific. The livery doesn't look like anything TFL, and isn't consistent with Underground/Overground/Tramlink etc liveries. Also, the front design is soooo ugly compared to the concept. It looks like a squashed fish. I can't believe they paid someone to take that very nice concept and manage to **** it up in every possible way. Terrible!

 

[D365]

Is it bad then, that I think it looks fantastic?