Class 387

[urpert]

That's not a 442 it's a Union Pacific Railroad steam engine

It's also much bigger than I was expecting, sorry.

 

[Deepgreen]

That's not a 442 it's a Union Pacific Railroad steam engine

Hardly UP - more CCCP!

 

[Class377/5]

So they are regulation?

How very lovely, now every single new train is going to have these, welcome to the UK's wonderful railway system everyone!

Of course they meet the new regulations, hence why they are used on newly introduced trains.

We're perfectly entiled to a) question the Standards and b) moan about seats that have been designed as cheaply as possible with little or no concession to comfort.

Right to an opinion doesn't make that opinion right. Each to his own.

 

[bb21]

201 and 203 in the same formation today. Next service 1W94 heading north with 387115, leaving Brighton at 1602.

 

[grid56126]

201 and 203 in the same formation today. Next service 1W94 heading north with 387115, leaving Brighton at 1602.

Confirmed

 

[Domh245]

Confirmed

Nice photo. Slightly OT, but I've often admired the front end of a Gangwayed -star, and wondered why they have as large a recess beneath the headlights as they do. Obviously some of it is taken up with the hinge (?) connected to the gangway, but what about the rest, is it so that maintenance staff can access the front of the train within a depot?

 

[southern442]

Of course they meet the new regulations, hence why they are used on newly introduced trains.

Why can't we have seats that meet the requirements, but actually have some thought put into them and aren't just cheap unpadded slabs of metal with a beach towel stuck onto the front?

Out of interest what are the new regulations? Just curious.

 

[jopsuk]

Nice photo. Slightly OT, but I've often admired the front end of a Gangwayed -star, and wondered why they have as large a recess beneath the headlights as they do. Obviously some of it is taken up with the hinge (?) connected to the gangway, but what about the rest, is it so that maintenance staff can access the front of the train within a depot?

All the *stars except Class 376 and 378 have the step- it's for exactly what you think it's for. It's a design feature inherited from the Networkers (on the turbos they're a more obvious plate with the lower front shroud being raked back, and the orginal batch of 168s it's full width!). The steps on the Southeastern Networkers have been covered over as there was a major problem with "train surfing" in south east London; this influenced the design of the 376 and thus 378.

You can tell it's a step as it has non-slip coating on it!

 

[AM9]

Why can't we have seats that meet the requirements, but actually have some thought put into them and aren't just cheap unpadded slabs of metal with a beach towel stuck onto the front?

Aren't we letting our personal opinion of the seats run away with that daft description of them?

 

[Class377/5]

Aren't we letting our personal opinion of the seats run away with that daft description of them?

Indeed. Seems to be theme for some.

 

[LBSCR Times]

Aren't we letting our personal opinion of the seats run away with that daft description of them?

Hardly, but travelling from St.Albans on them doesn't give you much experience of them on longer journies, even compared to a 377.

Mind you, 30 minutes on them see's me having to keep moving, as I don't have ample padding......

But then there are opinions and opinions, some think they are more right than others though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Indeed. Seems to be theme for some.

Some of us are of an age to know what comfortable seats were like.
And I've suffered more back pain with the 387's than any predecessor.

 

[southern442]

Aren't we letting our personal opinion of the seats run away with that daft description of them?

Is it not too much to ask for a seat with decent padding? Especially on longer journeys like the ones that the IEP's will be doing?

 

[AM9]

Hardly, but travelling from St.Albans on them doesn't give you much experience of them on longer journies, even compared to a 377.

Were that true then your point might be valid. However see post #2499 in this thread where I mention that I have sat comfortably over the maximum length journey that the 387/1s currently do. I've also done St Albans to Brighton a couple of times and St Albans to East Croydon a few times on them. Add to that a few assorted journeys on 377/6s and 377/7s, crawling around the pedestrian lines south of the river on those seats, then for a train that has been in service for just over 1 year, that's more than enough to pass judgement on how suitable the seats are.
Oh, and by the way, I am old enough to remember the class 309 Clacton EMUs being introduced and I have a spinal condition that makes me sensitive to seats with inadequate support so my opinion on these seats is as valid as anybody elses.

 

[asylumxl]

Hardly, but travelling from St.Albans on them doesn't give you much experience of them on longer journies, even compared to a 377.

Mind you, 30 minutes on them see's me having to keep moving, as I don't have ample padding......

But then there are opinions and opinions, some think they are more right than others though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Some of us are of an age to know what comfortable seats were like.
And I've suffered more back pain with the 387's than any predecessor.

Perhaps it'd be more comfortable to train surf using the step than sitting on these seats?

 

[Class377/5]

Perhaps it'd be more comfortable to train surf using the step than sitting on these seats?

Some of us are of an age to know what comfortable seats were like.
And I've suffered more back pain with the 387's than any predecessor.

I suffer back pain with the 442 seating so to each his own.

 

[LBSCR Times]

Is it not too much to ask for a seat with decent padding? Especially on longer journeys like the ones that the IEP's will be doing?

No, because the experts in seat design (and their supporters on here) say that hard seats are better.....

It comes to something when a 313 is more comfortable than a 387, having to endure both most days, unless I can get a 377 to and from work, which isn't that often unless I want to hang around specially!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I suffer back pain with the 442 seating so to each his own.

Some more than others....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I don't think we will ever agree on the ideal seat, it's just those of us that don't like modern seating design can win the argument.
We are just really going around in circles with this discussion...

 

[The Box Photter]

I suffer back pain with the 442 seating so to each his own.

Well, you won't have to worry about that much longer.

As for the rest of us, we've got to endure trains that aren't fit for purpose (and by that I mean a journey of more than 20 minutes) for the next 20 years or so.

I specifically pick out 20 minutes as the timescale because you and AM9 keep ramming down our throats that "the average journey time is only 20 minutes". Well let me tell you sunshine, (and you AM9) that I spend MUCH longer than 20 minutes on the train each morning and each evening.

Don't peddle your bull**** about "average pence per mile" either, when comparing the cost of my season ticket with one from St Albans or bloody Mill Hill. It still costs me ALL that £5172 UP FRONT out of my taxed income.

I don't think what I receive in return from GTR or Network Fail or the designers of the 387s and 700s represents fair value for what I pay.

The Thameslink service is pathetic, management is pathetic and the trains are pathetic. Even more pathetic is your attitude to paying customers who have to put up with the shoddy standards you feel are acceptable on today's railway. I'm just a passenger, I challenge 377/5 and AM9 to both let us all know exactly what involvement they have with the Thameslink project and the procurement, design and roll out of the Class 700s. I say this, because if you are involved in any aspects of their design, you've done a pretty poor job for most intending passengers.......unless you intend to use the train only between St Pancras and Blackfriars.

Rant over.

 

[jon0844]

I think the seats are okay. But the 20 minute average is a bit silly given there must be stacks of people who use the services just between St Pancras and Blackfriars (many just one or two stops within that area) so it does somewhat skew the figures.

 

[RobShipway]

I think that most commuter type trains are designed for passengers making short journeys, i.e. a journey of 10 - 30 minutes.

I have travelled on many trains within this country on various amount of journey times and have done so since the age of 4, I am currently 46.

I have experienced seats in the old class 116 that used to do the Cross City Route in Birmingham, I have experienced Pacer units, class 150's, class 165, class 166, 168, Class 172, 175, 180, 35X, 37x, 411, 442, 45x etc.... and can safely say that the worse seats that I have travelled seating on for more than an hour are the seats on pacers, but not far behind are the seats on class 319 and class 458/0's. I am hoping with the refurbishment to class 458/5's that the seats have improved.

Now I must confess that I have not been on any of the class 387's, but the seats on the class 377's I have always found to be comfortable as I do with the class 444/450's as well. If the class 387 seats are similar or the same as class 377 seats, no problem. If the class 387 seats though are like pacer seats, then I think the Railway company/Government should be paying back at least half the cost of the money people pay on the routes where these trains are used to those people that have season tickets. Unfortunately though I cannot see that happening as experts will say that they are good seats for your back etc..... I wonder if these are the same people that said that Saddam Hussain had nuclear weapons in Irag and was dangerous to the world prior to the Iraq war?

I am sure in time there will be proof one way another about the seats in the class 387 and class 700 trains, but I doubt that proof will appear for another 5 - 10 years.

 

[southern442]

No, because the experts in seat design (and their supporters on here) say that hard seats are better.....

It comes to something when a 313 is more comfortable than a 387, having to endure both most days, unless I can get a 377 to and from work, which isn't that often unless I want to hang around specially!

Plus the fact that they have become regulation means that in a few years or so the suburban units on the GWML will have more or less the same seating facilities as the intercity trains! :-x

 

[Bald Rick]

The seats are fine for me too, and I have regular back problems. Had 40 minutes on a brand new 387/2 tonight and an hour on a 387/1 this morning, no issues at all.

Comparing the 387/2 with the 387/1, I would say the newer train had harder seats, so suspect that the seats 'give' a little bit with age. Pretty much like every padded seat I've ever used anywhere.

 

[physics34]

I think the seats are okay. But the 20 minute average is a bit silly given there must be stacks of people who use the services just between St Pancras and Blackfriars (many just one or two stops within that area) so it does somewhat skew the figures.

exactly.

The design of the seat should be suitable for the LONGEST possible journey, not just the average.

Because if it was made fit for just the average that would mean half of the travellers would be sitting on seats not suitable for that longer journey.

 

[3270]

Talking only about Standard Class why can't we have a mixture of seat types on the same train? Some firm seats, some soft seats. They could use the same basic seat frame but fitted with hard or soft cushions. Different coloured seat covers could be used for easy identification. Passengers could then, err, vote with their bums.

 

[fowler9]

What we are seeing is people making longer and longer journies which they pretty much have no choice in making. The trains are being tailored to meet demand, much like the 185's aren't really what would have been considered for a service from Liverpool to Newcastle back in the day as being state of the art passenger provision. They are a commutor train trying to take people a long way, it just gets even worse in the London area.

 

[Class377/5]

Well, you won't have to worry about that much longer.

As for the rest of us, we've got to endure trains that aren't fit for purpose (and by that I mean a journey of more than 20 minutes) for the next 20 years or so.

I specifically pick out 20 minutes as the timescale because you and AM9 keep ramming down our throats that "the average journey time is only 20 minutes". Well let me tell you sunshine, (and you AM9) that I spend MUCH longer than 20 minutes on the train each morning and each evening.

Don't peddle your bull**** about "average pence per mile" either, when comparing the cost of my season ticket with one from St Albans or bloody Mill Hill. It still costs me ALL that £5172 UP FRONT out of my taxed income.

I don't think what I receive in return from GTR or Network Fail or the designers of the 387s and 700s represents fair value for what I pay.

The Thameslink service is pathetic, management is pathetic and the trains are pathetic. Even more pathetic is your attitude to paying customers who have to put up with the shoddy standards you feel are acceptable on today's railway. I'm just a passenger, I challenge 377/5 and AM9 to both let us all know exactly what involvement they have with the Thameslink project and the procurement, design and roll out of the Class 700s. I say this, because if you are involved in any aspects of their design, you've done a pretty poor job for most intending passengers.......unless you intend to use the train only between St Pancras and Blackfriars.

Rant over.

What ticket do you have out of curiosity?

And for the record I will be using the 700s for around 90% of my rail trips, the rest should be the 387/2 with the rare 377 after coming back from a gig (going is normally on a GatEx service).

 

[The Box Photter]

Its an annual season ticket plus Travelcard zones 1-6 because I have to get across London to Canary Wharf.

As far as I know, its the cheapest way to do the journey both ways five days a week.

As you can probably tell, I'm not a fan of GTR (or their predecessors) and fear more turmoil to come with the added complication of putting GN trains through the Core. My initial assessment (based on the Excel mock-up) has informed my opinion on the Class 700s as being a poor substitute for real trains designed with passenger comfort in mind.

I still think the 387/1 and 387/2 seats are too firm and not comfortable for the journeys I am forced to make.

I'm prepared to be converted, if the Class 700s perform as expected out of the box, but my experience with all things railway has taught me not to expect too much.

 

[Class377/5]

Its an annual season ticket plus Travelcard zones 1-6 because I have to get across London to Canary Wharf.

As far as I know, its the cheapest way to do the journey both ways five days a week.

As you can probably tell, I'm not a fan of GTR (or their predecessors) and fear more turmoil to come with the added complication of putting GN trains through the Core. My initial assessment (based on the Excel mock-up) has informed my opinion on the Class 700s as being a poor substitute for real trains designed with passenger comfort in mind.

I still think the 387/1 and 387/2 seats are too firm and not comfortable for the journeys I am forced to make.

I'm prepared to be converted, if the Class 700s perform as expected out of the box, but my experience with all things railway has taught me not to expect too much.

BTW I've never quoted average jounery times only referenced to them as I honest haven't seen a figure for them so please direct your ire on that to the correct posters.

Second thing is you don't actually pay all of that money to GTR (well technically you don't pay GTR anyway as it all goes to the DfT but that's a separate point). However your ticket is actually in part paying for something else so I don't really see how the full amount must all apply to the 700s but I suspect your going to ram this point over and over again despite it not actually being for what you've stated.

As for performance in real life, well that will be a big test but I will say this, the first year or so will not be a reliable due to crew and fitters getting used to the stock and the required bedding in time. Same applies for the 350/3, 387 etc fleets. That's why the question of where Siemens a better choice for Thameslink will be answered in January edition of MR in 2021.

As for the seats, well you've identified that the modern offering are all bad. So not sure the 700s are purely to blame but modern standards but don't let that fact interfer with your rant.

As for not a fan of FCC/GTR, funny your wraith is directed purely as them when under FCC something like 70% of issues were NR caused. Not quite sure what the figure is under GTR but it's not that different. But I seem to have missed your 70% anger directed as the real cause, NR.

 

[The Box Photter]

BTW I've never quoted average jounery times only referenced to them as I honest haven't seen a figure for them so please direct your ire on that to the correct posters.

Second thing is you don't actually pay all of that money to GTR (well technically you don't pay GTR anyway as it all goes to the DfT but that's a separate point). However your ticket is actually in part paying for something else so I don't really see how the full amount must all apply to the 700s but I suspect your going to ram this point over and over again despite it not actually being for what you've stated.

As for performance in real life, well that will be a big test but I will say this, the first year or so will not be a reliable due to crew and fitters getting used to the stock and the required bedding in time. Same applies for the 350/3, 387 etc fleets. That's why the question of where Siemens a better choice for Thameslink will be answered in January edition of MR in 2021.

As for the seats, well you've identified that the modern offering are all bad. So not sure the 700s are purely to blame but modern standards but don't let that fact interfer with your rant.

As for not a fan of FCC/GTR, funny your wraith is directed purely as them when under FCC something like 70% of issues were NR caused. Not quite sure what the figure is under GTR but it's not that different. But I seem to have missed your 70% anger directed as the real cause, NR.

I don't think I'd disagree wildly with anything you say here. I take your point that I'm also paying some of the season ticket to TfL.

I'll leave the topic of seats alone until I can sample them over a longer period and in the proximity of other patrons.

 

[physics34]

BTW I've never quoted average jounery times only referenced to them as I honest haven't seen a figure for them so please direct your ire on that to the correct posters.

Second thing is you don't actually pay all of that money to GTR (well technically you don't pay GTR anyway as it all goes to the DfT but that's a separate point). However your ticket is actually in part paying for something else so I don't really see how the full amount must all apply to the 700s but I suspect your going to ram this point over and over again despite it not actually being for what you've stated.

As for performance in real life, well that will be a big test but I will say this, the first year or so will not be a reliable due to crew and fitters getting used to the stock and the required bedding in time. Same applies for the 350/3, 387 etc fleets. That's why the question of where Siemens a better choice for Thameslink will be answered in January edition of MR in 2021.

As for the seats, well you've identified that the modern offering are all bad. So not sure the 700s are purely to blame but modern standards but don't let that fact interfer with your rant.

As for not a fan of FCC/GTR, funny your wraith is directed purely as them when under FCC something like 70% of issues were NR caused. Not quite sure what the figure is under GTR but it's not that different. But I seem to have missed your 70% anger directed as the real cause, NR.

Yeh I'm don't think the performance of the fleet is of biggest concern,the performance of network rail and it's infrastructure would worry me more. Just cannot see 24 tph working.

 

[Townsend Hook]

Yeh I'm don't think the performance of the fleet is of biggest concern,the performance of network rail and it's infrastructure would worry me more. Just cannot see 24 tph working.

TBF best thing to do on that front is wait and see what happens when they try. You never know, might be pleasantly surprised .