GN Class 717

[Goldfish62]

Has anyone noticed that (same on 700s) when sitting in a window seat, because of the way the train curves in at the bottom, and the cabling (I assume) down the side of the train at foot level you can't sit with both feet flat on the floor. I know the trains are built now but seems like a bit of a design flaw, no lessons learnt from 700s. Makes you wonder if Siemens actually tested them with someone sitting in the seat before they built them.

It's the heating duct. Pretty much the same on older Desiros.

 

[hwl]

It's the heating duct. Pretty much the same on older Desiros.

And electrical too below the heating elements.

 

[hwl]

My observations are similar to many already posted, but one observation I had (and not so far mentioned) was that the front door stand back and the area between the longitudinal seat behind the cab was very lacking in useable grab poles. This area could really have done with something like S Stock like ceiling suspended poles and loops. Holding on here required leaning over the seated passengers, which felt uncomfortably like invading their personal space. As these trains will typically be left the same way round, perhaps a low cost modification could improve this. I saw one person lose their balance while searching around for something to hold.

(plus presumably a follow on train order).

Has anyone noticed that (same on 700s) when sitting in a window seat, because of the way the train curves in at the bottom, and the cabling (I assume) down the side of the train at foot level you can't sit with both feet flat on the floor. I know the trains are built now but seems like a bit of a design flaw, no lessons learnt from 700s. Makes you wonder if Siemens actually tested them with someone sitting in the seat before they built them.

Correct as regards the cable run, they then go up in the door pockets and across the vestibule ceilings. The vestibule ceiling electrical access panel also precludes lots of grab rails. The lesson has been learned but only way to change was a major redesign which wasn't going to happen. Govia who ordered the 717s weren't fuilly aware at the time of ordering.

DfT has learned though and the SWR ITT and SE ITT have effectively precluded Desiro City use with out a redesign / refit. e.g. they specified Grab rail and hand hold numbers and locations/distances/spacing to qualify for 4pax/m^2 standing desity in bidding. The desiro City designs only quailify for 3pax/m^2 now. Seats now have to include usable foot space underneath them so seats would have to be further from the window and /or redesigned duct.

The grab pole and duct issues have been extensively covered in the 700 thread (many many times over), I've known about the grab pole one for nearly 4 years... It keeps being forgotten about and rediscovered so good observation!

Follow on Order unlikely as the ordered enough for service improvements with ETCS which as it was originally planned to be installed already hence the SDO and camera gap issues as they were focused on ETCS operation in the tunnels

 

[notverydeep]

Has anyone noticed that (same on 700s) when sitting in a window seat, because of the way the train curves in at the bottom, and the cabling (I assume) down the side of the train at foot level you can't sit with both feet flat on the floor. I know the trains are built now but seems like a bit of a design flaw, no lessons learnt from 700s. Makes you wonder if Siemens actually tested them with someone sitting in the seat before they built them.

This is deliberate, the train is wider where it can be further up the body, and narrower lower down where the loading gauge is narrower. The benefit is that the aisle can be a fair bit wider and accommodate more standing passengers. One downside is your discomfort when seated, but another one is that some unwary passengers standing close to the door (which curves in sharply low down in the same manner as the body side), find their feet being pushed from underneath them by the closing doors in a manner that could be a Platform Train Interface risk...

The grab pole and duct issues have been extensively covered in the 700 thread (many many times over), I've known about the grab pole one for nearly 4 years... It keeps being forgotten about and rediscovered so good observation!

Indeed, however - the single longitudinal seat behind the cab of a 717 differs from the 700 (which would have a first class table with three seats at this specific location) and this makes the grab pole arrangement at this particular location even more problematic than others previously mentioned, given the 'true metro' nature of the services to be worked by 717s (apologies though if this specific issue has been mentioned in the context of 717s previously)...

 

[Railperf]

Here's a run illustrating the superior performance of the 717's compared to the 313's hitting 73mph where a 313 might only be doing 60mph going into the tunnels:

 

[OwenB]

The 5.41 FPK-MOG currently a no show..

 

[jon0844]

Yeah, it's cancelled.

 

[jamieP]

The 5.41 FPK-MOG currently a no show..

Unit was late of Hornsey so diverted to Kings Cross to start the 0607 Moorgate to Stevenage at Finsbury Park.

 

[OwenB]

Unit was late of Hornsey so diverted to Kings Cross to start the 0607 Moorgate to Stevenage at Finsbury Park.

More importantly, I got a cold bum waiting for the 5.55.

 

[SeaKing]

Anyone know what units are still at Dollands Moor.

 

[daniel1234321]

Anyone know what units are still at Dollands Moor.

017 and 001 (I think)

 

[daniel1234321]

There's 6 at Hornsey, 6 at Cricklewood, not sure about West Worthing (i think 2) and 3 at Ferme Park (by Hornsey)

 

[jon0844]

Deleted

 

[dcs34]

Had my first experience on these today MOG - PBR, sat sideways in the priority seat you really feel all the twists and undulations in the NCL tunnels!

Despite the fact it was announced as soon as we left "High-Berry and Islintonne" the number of people trying to get out at the rear carriage at Drayton Park was somewhat amusing, how long until people get used to that one.

Also at Drayton, my theory on the rear doors not opening is not so much a horizontal issue but a vertical one; the platform dips slightly towards the tunnels, so maybe they can't guarantee the rear door can stop within the maximum step height parameters from the train to the platform?

 

[387star]

Correct as regards the cable run, they then go up in the door pockets and across the vestibule ceilings. The vestibule ceiling electrical access panel also precludes lots of grab rails. The lesson has been learned but only way to change was a major redesign which wasn't going to happen. Govia who ordered the 717s weren't fuilly aware at the time of ordering.

DfT has learned though and the SWR ITT and SE ITT have effectively precluded Desiro City use with out a redesign / refit. e.g. they specified Grab rail and hand hold numbers and locations/distances/spacing to qualify for 4pax/m^2 standing desity in bidding. The desiro City designs only quailify for 3pax/m^2 now. Seats now have to include usable foot space underneath them so seats would have to be further from the window and /or redesigned duct.

The grab pole and duct issues have been extensively covered in the 700 thread (many many times over), I've known about the grab pole one for nearly 4 years... It keeps being forgotten about and rediscovered so good observation!

Follow on Order unlikely as the ordered enough for service improvements with ETCS which as it was originally planned to be installed already hence the SDO and camera gap issues as they were focused on ETCS operation in the tunnels

So the seat tightness against the ducting must be very unpopular for it to be banned

 

[physics34]

This is deliberate, the train is wider where it can be further up the body, and narrower lower down where the loading gauge is narrower. The benefit is that the aisle can be a fair bit wider and accommodate more standing passengers. One downside is your discomfort when seated, but another one is that some unwary passengers standing close to the door (which curves in sharply low down in the same manner as the body side), find their feet being pushed from underneath them by the closing doors in a manner that could be a Platform Train Interface risk...

ironically. because of that ducting and the legroom issues, you and the passenger next to you basically have to to swivel round a bit and sit nearly sideways with your legs intruding into this "extra wide gangway", making the whole "extra standing room" thing completely pointless. !! Incompetent idiots.

The seats should be an armrest (2-3 inches) away from the side wall.

 

[jon0844]

It isn't that bad. If anyone has their legs slightly out into the aisle, it hardly blocks the use of the aisle. If someone needs to get through, they can as people can move for the second or two needed with minimal effort or discomfort.

The extra space in the aisles is the best aspect of the 700s. It actually allows and encourages people to move up and down the train.

 

[choochoochoo]

It isn't that bad. If anyone has their legs slightly out into the aisle, it hardly blocks the use of the aisle. If someone needs to get through, they can as people can move for the second or two needed with minimal effort or discomfort.

The extra space in the aisles is the best aspect of the 700s. It actually allows and encourages people to move up and down the train.

I just rest my foot on the ducting. It's comfortable enough. Especially seeing as the argument for not having a toilet is you're not on it long enough to need one. I'd say the same argument applies in that you're not on it long enough to need an comfy armchair to relax in. It's just a seat to take the weight off your feet.

 

[physics34]

It isn't that bad. If anyone has their legs slightly out into the aisle, it hardly blocks the use of the aisle. If someone needs to get through, they can as people can move for the second or two needed with minimal effort or discomfort.

The extra space in the aisles is the best aspect of the 700s. It actually allows and encourages people to move up and down the train.

I had a photo i took on a 700 which proves my point. Every aisle seat sees the occupier having his/her leg hung out into the aisle on both sides. Poor design

 

[OwenB]

I find the legroom in front is more troublesome than the duct at the side. I do think these trains are a massive improvement on the 313s though, definitely more advantages than disadvantages.

 

[LK717]

Currently on my first 717 ride.
2100 from HFN, though slightly delayed due to incident at KGC/STP, but nothing to do with the train itself!
Much nicer than the 313s, seats will need a bit of getting used to...
But the announcements are quite useful to be honest, mainly as I don’t commute much and don’t know the stations off by heart!

Also bonus is that my Oyster card worked at Hertford!

 

[bramling]

It isn't that bad. If anyone has their legs slightly out into the aisle, it hardly blocks the use of the aisle. If someone needs to get through, they can as people can move for the second or two needed with minimal effort or discomfort.

The extra space in the aisles is the best aspect of the 700s. It actually allows and encourages people to move up and down the train.

People moving up and down the train, so for those seated the equivalent of sitting in a thoroughfare or corridor rather than a pleasant rail journey.

More of a problem is that it also encourages or facilitates people to make their way to the door nearest the exit at their destination, so extending dwell time by more people alighting through one or two doorways - often the same ones by the exit where more people will be attempting to board.

 

[jon0844]

More of a problem is that it also encourages or facilitates people to make their way to the door nearest the exit at their destination, so extending dwell time by more people alighting through one or two doorways - often the same ones by the exit where more people will be attempting to board.

That's a fair point. I certainly try and walk down to the front at King's Cross and can imagine it being a problem at other stations where the train is trying to go in 20 seconds.

I can see this slowing things down at stations like Old Street, where everyone wants to be at the front to get off in the morning.

However, I cannot see a way around this. The openness of the train will help in more situations than the bunching up is likely to be an issue.

I should add that in my experience of walking up the train to be nearest the gates at King's Cross, the majority of people on the train prefer to stay where they are - especially if seated.

 

[bramling]

That's a fair point. I certainly try and walk down to the front at King's Cross and can imagine it being a problem at other stations where the train is trying to go in 20 seconds.

I can see this slowing things down at stations like Old Street, where everyone wants to be at the front to get off in the morning.

However, I cannot see a way around this. The openness of the train will help in more situations than the bunching up is likely to be an issue.

I should add that in my experience of walking up the train to be nearest the gates at King's Cross, the majority of people on the train prefer to stay where they are - especially if seated.

I was surprised getting off at Letchworth around midday today, just how many were alighting through two doorways - I’d say at least 80% of the train. This caused quite a blockage at the bottom of the stairs, with a whole bunch of people getting off clashing with those getting on. This was middle of the day, so not even clued-up commuter types. Definitely didn’t help the dwell time.

I think walk-through trains is a fad which will come and go - especially if there’s a high-speed derailment and a load of passengers get tipped out the end of a vehicle to their deaths.

The usefulness of through gangways is kind of proved by the number of operators who have ceased using ones fitted on the unit ends - GN being one such with both 317s and 387s.

 

[simple simon]

Much nicer than the 313s, seats will need a bit of getting used to...

This comment might cause some consternation amongst railway people, but from the point of view of a passenger I would have been happier if these trains had used the seats in the 313's - yes if need be actually remove the seats from the old trains and place in the new trains. No-one can cite fire safety as a reason for not doing this, as if they did then it begs questions about why they were allowed on the 313's.

I suggest this because the older seats are far better liked - whilst the ironing boards are actively disliked.

What would I do with the displaced ironing boards? Since they are paid for I would insist upon the bods at Daft who chose them having them in their offices.

 

[Bald Rick]

This comment might cause some consternation amongst railway people, but from the point of view of a passenger I would have been happier if these trains had used the seats in the 313's - yes if need be actually remove the seats from the old trains and place in the new trains. No-one can cite fire safety as a reason for not doing this, as if they did then it begs questions about why they were allowed on the 313's.

I suggest this because the older seats are far better liked - whilst the ironing boards are actively disliked.

What would I do with the displaced ironing boards? Since they are paid for I would insist upon the bods at Daft who chose them having them in their offices.

It’s actually about crash worthiness. The standards have changed significantly since 1976.

 

[bramling]

It’s actually about crash worthiness. The standards have changed significantly since 1976.

Just a point of order, the seats on the GN 313s (apart from the three ex Silverlink units which retain their original seats) date from a refurbishment carried out by WAGN in the late 1990s.

Out of interest, are the seats fitted in the Southern 313s still compliant? These were fitted rather more recently, and don’t seem to attract too much criticism.

Personally, I’d rather have some of these older designs and take the risk on crashworthiness.

 

[Ethano92]

It’s actually about crash worthiness. The standards have changed significantly since 1976.

Not so much a problem on these metro units but perhaps an unpopular opinion: I'd rather travel comfortably the vast majority if not every journey in my life and not fair well the very, very slim chance there's a crash than have comfort being an afterthought for every journey of my life. If the regulations were so dire, all old trains should've been stripped of their seating and replaced with the 'crash worthy' seats if they make that big a difference because safety of passengers should be paramount.

The extra space in the aisles is the best aspect of the 700s. It actually allows and encourages people to move up and down the train.

Agreed, a wide aisle is truly helpful and although fit outs may not be great for off peak or long distance travellers it's truly something special to see the way these Desiro cities can swallow up crowds with minimal fuss.

I do however agree the seats should be a few inches from the wall. If they were, that lack of space in-between the seats wouldn't be so much of an issue as someone by the window seat would be able to occupy their seat fully rather than be overhanging because the few inches by the wall can't be used as their arm is there instead.

I think walk-through trains is a fad which will come and go - especially if there’s a high-speed derailment and a load of passengers get tipped out the end of a vehicle to their deaths.

Quite an interesting point of view which I agree with to some extent. I see modern walk through trains with wide aisles, poor legroom and slim seats (and few of them) as a gap fill measure. Until there's money to actually invest in the current infrastructure to a significant extent and make more of it. Perhaps even a drastic change in the way people work to relieve rush hour pressure will come first. Either way until those days come all we can do is put in less seats, cram in those extra people, shave off those few seconds at stations etc. Little things that add up to a significant amount, but those are the little things we're already doing and no more can really be done. What comes next when passenger demand on Thameslink outgrows the 700s running at 24tph? That's when infrastructure has been stretched and the only resolution is more of it. It's truly something for a 12 car train to be full. I understand ''gap fill" may not be the right term as the "gap" I describe is quite some time and money ever just becoming available to build another 3 lines is unrealistic but I hope I've somewhat gotten my point across.

I realise I've gone off topic now I apologise.

 

[LK717]

This comment might cause some consternation amongst railway people, but from the point of view of a passenger I would have been happier if these trains had used the seats in the 313's - yes if need be actually remove the seats from the old trains and place in the new trains. No-one can cite fire safety as a reason for not doing this, as if they did then it begs questions about why they were allowed on the 313's.

I suggest this because the older seats are far better liked - whilst the ironing boards are actively disliked.

What would I do with the displaced ironing boards? Since they are paid for I would insist upon the bods at Daft who chose them having them in their offices.

The 313 seats are certainly a lot more comfortable, especially if going right down to Moorgate, don’t think I’d be able to handle the non-cushioned seats for that long...

 

[hwl]

... No-one can cite fire safety as a reason for not doing this, as if they did then it begs questions about why they were allowed on the 313's...

Simplz - Grandfather rights...

Not just fire crash safety and personal safety too (e.g. anti pick pocketing and throttling from behind)