Class 700s - was it necessary for them to be so uncomfortable? How could they be done better, perhaps at refurb?

[Bletchleyite]

Leading on from a conversation on the seating thread.

It occurred to me when I recently (by "recently" I mean pre-COVID) used a 2-car 195 which had a crush-load. It seemed to me that despite the seating layout being more comfortable than the Class 700 - more legroom, wider with armrests - that the 195 actually coped with the large load and loading/unloading very well indeed. It seemed that it was the standbacks and wide doors that actually made a difference, rather than the aisle being about 20cm (8") wider on the 700 (4 armrests and a bit of extra body width, as the seats are basically the same other than colour and base cushion shape).

Therefore, was the 700 layout perhaps a mistake?

I wonder if a layout more like the 195 or indeed like the S-stock/345s would have been preferable, therefore? Both are more comfortable, though different.

Any thoughts?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Personally I am more than happy with the layout of the seating in the 700s; the only thing I would change would be to have softer seats - but in the same arrangement.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Personally I am more than happy with the layout of the seating in the 700s; the only thing I would change would be to have softer seats - but in the same arrangement.

Too narrow and insufficient legroom for me. I can't sit in an airline row at all, while in a facing bay it's only comfortable if nobody is opposite, and I will take up one and a bit seats width wise.

The S-stock/345 layout has neither of these problems despite being a "standee" design.

 

[MatthewRead]

Softer cleaner seats should most certainly be added.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Softer cleaner seats should most certainly be added.

Cleanliness isn't really an issue with the train. I'd certainly support replacing the seat bases with the contoured version used on Northern and ScotRail as they make the ironing board a completely different seat - most people who think all ironing boards are bad haven't tried the modified base cushion.

 

[DB]

Not been on them, but from pictures it seems like the issue is the same as with many modern trains - seats with not enough padding, and/or not laid out well.

Which should be easy enough to sort, but will they? Just look a the 80x trains - biggest problem is the rock-hard seats, but they still churn all fleets (so far) out the same because none of the operators wants to pay for a design variation.

 

[bramling]

Leading on from a conversation on the seating thread.

It occurred to me when I recently (by "recently" I mean pre-COVID) used a 2-car 195 which had a crush-load. It seemed to me that despite the seating layout being more comfortable than the Class 700 - more legroom, wider with armrests - that the 195 actually coped with the large load and loading/unloading very well indeed. It seemed that it was the standbacks and wide doors that actually made a difference, rather than the aisle being about 20cm (8") wider on the 700 (4 armrests and a bit of extra body width, as the seats are basically the same other than colour and base cushion shape).

Therefore, was the 700 layout perhaps a mistake?

I wonder if a layout more like the 195 or indeed like the S-stock/345s would have been preferable, therefore? Both are more comfortable, though different.

Any thoughts?

Aside from the lack of comfort, the other issue with the 700s is they lack wi-fi and sockets, which now seem to be “must have” items.

Reseating the 700s to the spec found in first, perhaps with half tables and no armrests, wouldn’t go amiss. The industry may have to get used to having to compete on quality again, which is partly what got it the increase in ridership from the late 90s onwards. I’m not sure bargain basement interiors are going to cut it if we continue to see a situation where people don’t *have to* travel by trains, or in some cases at all.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not been on them, but from pictures it seems like the issue is the same as with many modern trains - seats with not enough padding, and/or not laid out well.

Which should be easy enough to sort, but will they? Just look a the 80x trains - biggest problem is the rock-hard seats, but they still churn all fleets (so far) out the same because none of the operators wants to pay for a design variation.

Interestingly two TOCs now have - EMR and Avanti - which will rather shame the others!

 

[Ianno87]

Aside from the lack of comfort, the other issue with the 700s is they lack wi-fi and sockets, which now seem to be “must have” items.

*Some* have retrofitted wi-fi of course - but pot luck what turns up! As for plug sockets, I'm thankful for declassified first! There was a plan to retrofit plug sockets in standard, which seems to have gone quiet.

 

[py_megapixel]

Northern and CrossCountry are the UK railways' masters of costcutting - and even they both manage to have at-seat power and free wifi throughout the whole train on their most modern units. And in the case of Northern, there is an ongoing program to fit them to the rest of the fleet.

In the 21st century, they are basic features, and there is no excuse for GTR/DfT not to have included them.

 

[DB]

Interestingly two TOCs now have - EMR and Avanti - which will rather shame the others!

Well, reportedly - but those are yet to appear so I'll believe it when I see it. It was also reported in the railway press that Hull trains and TPE would have different seats, but when they appeared it was more of the same.

 

[Mikey C]

Don't the 12 car 700s have Wifi? The 8 cars don't which leads to the daft situation of 25 year old Southeastern Networkers on the same route having Wifi, but not the 700s

While the 700s seats aren't very comfortable, the biggest failing is that they're too close to the wall and to each other. If they were more like the 387 seats, with the small armrests separating the seats from each other and the wall, they'd be more acceptable, even without tables

 

[Ianno87]

Don't the 12 car 700s have Wifi?

Some do, some don't. I think it's the later-built ones do, after DfT woke up to the need.

 

[Energy]

and there is no excuse for GTR/DfT not to have included them.

GTR didn't have a hand in specifying the 700s.

 

[43096]

Some do, some don't. I think it's the later-built ones do, after DfT woke up to the need.

It was the usual DfT ineptitude. During construction, Siemens repeatedly asked DfT is they'd like WiFi fitting during build - or even have them pre-wired for it - as it would be a lot cheaper than doing it as a retro-fit. You can guess the rest - DfT said no.

 

[Energy]

The 700s are fine but needs a better cushion, how thick are the back of the Sophias in first? FISA Leans would be nice but have a thick back.

 

[swt_passenger]

GTR didn't have a hand in specifying the 700s.

FCC made all the interior layout recommendations, and also the recommendation to bin the standard class only variants. I think there was an FOI about it all, some years ago, which also attempted to get DfT‘s answer about the WiFi, but from memory I don’t think it was successful about WiFi...

 

[Hadders]

We can blame the DfT for the poor internal layout of the 700s. They didn't even have seat back tables, and eventually agreed to retrofit them (some still haven't been done).

The 700s are good 'people eaters' so there is definitely merit in the overall design of large stand back areas nearut none have the doors and wide aisles. My view is that the 365s give the best compromise seating style and had the 700s have had a similar spec to the 365s then there wouldn't be the number of complaints about them.

Plug sockets and wifi should also be added. Most of the 700s have wifi but none have plug sockets in standard, and as far as I know there are no plans to fit them either.

 

[westcoaster]

I thought the seat issue was due to fire regulations, due to no interconnecting doors to stop the spread of a fire.

 

[Hadders]

I thought the seat issue was due to fire regulations, due to no interconnecting doors to stop the spread of a fire.

An urban myth. Fire regulations due not mandate narrow ironing board seats with insufficient leg room. S stock seats meet the fire regulations with far more padding.

 

[Mikey C]

The transverse seats on the 345s are quite comfortable also

 

[charley_17/7]

Pre-COVID I was actually happier to spend an extra £2k on the Gold Card season to not have to sit 10 hours a week on a Class 700, and use the GatEx/Tube, even though my destination was Blackfriars. The seats are diabolical, even in First Class.

Now no matter how cheap a Super Off-Peak is at the weekends, if/when things do open up again, it will take me a lot to be tempted to travel anywhere, only as a distress purpose, taking a cushion for my derrière.

 

[JonathanH]

Now no matter how cheap a Super Off-Peak is at the weekends, if/when things do open up again, it will take me a lot to be tempted to travel anywhere, only as a distress purpose, taking a cushion for my derrière.

How many people do you see actually taking cushions on 700s (or indeed any other units)? I don't recall seeing anyone doing this.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How many people do you see actually taking cushions on 700s (or indeed any other units)? I don't recall seeing anyone doing this.

Personally I think the Standard seats are more comfortable (provided I have a bay with no more than me plus one other in it) than the Sophias in 1st, even given that the Thameslink variety have a thicker base cushion and so don't suffer the "metal bar" problem.

However, they're narrow without armrests and the pitch is awful. The 195/331 seems to fix all of those issues while not actually affecting the ability to handle a crush load. And even with armrests, a 700 would be about 8cm wider anyway as it's a 20m x 2.80m vehicle rather than 24m x 2.7something.

 

[Aictos]

In my view, the only 3 items that should be considered at a refurbishment stage and really should have been either prewired or installed from new is power sockets to all seats like the the Class 717s, folding tables for airline seats so you've got a place to put your coffee and WiFi.

There is no need to do anything about the seats as they've comfy enough and I say that as a daily user of them of journeys over a hour long.

 

[Ianno87]

How many people do you see actually taking cushions on 700s (or indeed any other units)? I don't recall seeing anyone doing this.

And how many people actually choose not to travel at all, purely because of the seats.....? The vast majority of people really aren't that sensitive about it, and just prefer a train they can get on and sit down on.

 

[MatthewRead]

Cleanliness isn't really an issue with the train. I'd certainly support replacing the seat bases with the contoured version used on Northern and ScotRail as they make the ironing board a completely different seat - most people who think all ironing boards are bad haven't tried the modified base cushion.

Then see these videos which proves my point

 

[whoosh]

They don't have armrests as they had a target time of a core station dwell to unload a full train and load a full train of people, which armrests would've hindered.

Fire regulations being a reason for seats being uncomfortable and having hardly any padding is nonsense. I'm sure airliners have more stringent fire regulations than trains, and they have comfortable business and first class seats - and even economy sometimes!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Then see these videos which proves my point

I'm not saying you're wrong, but it's an issue with inadequate cleaning, not an issue with the train. The only way to "design it out" is to have hard (i.e. no foam at all) seats, and I doubt anyone wants that!

 

[bramling]

And how many people actually choose not to travel at all, purely because of the seats.....? The vast majority of people really aren't that sensitive about it, and just prefer a train they can get on and sit down on.

No one really knows the answer to that one, as we don’t know who doesn’t travel.

However, anecdotally I know people who dislike rail travel on the basis that it’s uncomfortable and unpleasant. The 700s are unlikely to help change views in that regard. First to be fair isn’t bad on them at all, however there’s only a finite supply of it.

There’s certainly two in this household who drive a lot more since 2018, though I’m fortunate that I can to a large extent time journeys around the 365s (though not during the current COVID timetable).

An interior akin to what’s found in first would have been pretty satisfactory, though a bit of sound segregation wouldn’t go amiss - irritating noises made by other passengers seem to carry far on these trains.