London Northwestern Class 730s

Discussion in 'Traction & Rolling Stock' started by KX03HZY, 14 Oct 2018.

  1. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    34,703
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    FWIW, the CAF layout shown is really lazy. So you've got two windows, a large one and a small one. Do you...

    1. Align the bay with the large window and put the airline seat pair next to the small window?
    Or
    2. Mess up the alignment by doing the opposite, then show off about it on your presentation?

    I give up.
     
  2. TheDavibob

    TheDavibob Member

    Messages:
    317
    Joined:
    10 Oct 2016
    I know it's technically outside the scope of this thread, but do we have any info on the WMR 730/0 interior layout?

    I assume 3+2 is off the cards as maximising maximising passenger room is a requirement, but do we know yet about longitudinal seating, etc?

    (And don't get me started on class numbering. These units have far less in common with the LNR units than for example the SWT ones)
     
  3. Wolfie

    Wolfie Established Member

    Messages:
    2,005
    Joined:
    17 Aug 2010
    Perhaps not given that the franchise is supposed to split..
     
  4. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    34,703
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    We're talking about the two LNR types rather than the 3-car WMR ones.
     
  5. driver_m

    driver_m Established Member

    Messages:
    1,819
    Joined:
    8 Nov 2011
    No one likes them up here either. We get commuter trains up here too believe it or not, and they're just as disliked here. I travel on them enough and rarely see 3 sat together, even with kids.
     
  6. Photohunter71

    Photohunter71 Member

    Messages:
    437
    Joined:
    17 Jan 2012
    They look like 380's, so why the 730 tops number? Does it run on third rail as well as overhead lines?
     
  7. sprinterguy

    sprinterguy Established Member

    Messages:
    9,778
    Joined:
    4 Mar 2010
    Location:
    Macclesfield
    They're Bombardier Aventras though, a completely different product from a different manufacturer to the Siemens Desiros of which the class 380s are a variant.

    The number series 700 - 799 is the new range introduced in 2011 for both ac and dc electric multiple units, due to the 300 - 399 range approaching full utilisation.
     
  8. Photohunter71

    Photohunter71 Member

    Messages:
    437
    Joined:
    17 Jan 2012
    Thanks!
     
  9. TRAX

    TRAX Member

    Messages:
    636
    Joined:
    2 Dec 2015
    Location:
    Oceania
    I like how Aventras have a different face for each order.
     
  10. Alfie1014

    Alfie1014 Member

    Messages:
    530
    Joined:
    27 Jun 2012
    Location:
    Essex
    The current issue of Modern Railways has an article on the 730s they state that 29 will be 2+3 seated for London commuter services and only the remaining 16 with 2+2 for longer distance services.
     
  11. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    34,703
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Yes, I saw this with quite some annoyance. LM were once quoted as saying they regretted ordering 3+2 units, and now LNR have gone back on it.

    And you know where they'll end up. At least unlike a 350/2 on a Crewe service they won't be guaranteed to run late, as all are 110mph.
     
  12. samuelmorris

    samuelmorris Established Member

    Messages:
    2,962
    Joined:
    18 Jul 2013
    Location:
    Brentwood, Essex
    Presumably a TOC policy, Govia were keener on 2+2, Abellio prefer 3+2.
     
  13. swt_passenger

    swt_passenger Veteran Member

    Messages:
    18,887
    Joined:
    7 Apr 2010
    You yourself posted a few times that no more 2+3 trains would ever be ordered, didn't you?
     
  14. tbtc

    tbtc Veteran Member

    Messages:
    15,053
    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Location:
    Sheffield
    ...and the 700-799 range will be approaching full utilisation in the next five/ten years, if we only use numbers that end in zero/five/seven. In the space of just a few years we'll go from having nothing to having...

    • 700
    • 701
    • 707
    • 710
    • 717
    • 720
    • 730
    • 745
    • 755
    • 769 (albeit a repackaged 319, given a new number...)
    • 777
    ...i.e. ten new classes of EMU (plus the 769s), and we've left some massive gaps - presumably numbers ending in zero/ five/ seven are seen as desirable, so we make huge skips in the numbering system.

    (sorry, going off-topic, I guess...)
     
  15. Class 170101

    Class 170101 Established Member

    Messages:
    4,629
    Joined:
    1 Mar 2014
    But thats only because they don't use sub classes.

    Classes 710, 720 and 730 could have all been one class, sub divided in the way Class 170s are.
     
  16. samuelmorris

    samuelmorris Established Member

    Messages:
    2,962
    Joined:
    18 Jul 2013
    Location:
    Brentwood, Essex
    Effectively yes but that's no issue, really they could have used 700/701/702 for 700/717/707 and 710/711/712/713/714 for 710/720/701/730/711 if they wanted. That there's no enforcement of order in the TOPS system makes it rather laughable to be honest. If it were done properly, 720s and 711s would be different subclasses of the same class.
     
  17. trash80

    trash80 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,204
    Joined:
    18 Aug 2015
    Location:
    Birches Green
    It does seem rather haywire whereas the new 8xx sequence is proceeding in linear fashion. But then again its TOPS, its supposed to be crazy.
     
  18. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    34,703
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    I didn't think they would.
     
  19. superalbs

    superalbs Established Member

    Messages:
    1,414
    Joined:
    3 Jul 2014
    Location:
    Exeter
    Sadly that 196 interior looks awful. It'll be a 700 style seating layout except with engines and rattles. Not a good idea at all.
     
  20. BucksBones

    BucksBones Member

    Messages:
    141
    Joined:
    18 Jul 2017
    I think 3+2 is fine in principle but it doesn’t work in this country because of the loading gauge. I wouldn’t mind sitting in the middle of a 3 if it were not for the fact that the seats are so narrow that absolutely nobody can fit in them, so you always end up having a sort of shoulder fight with your neighbours (the ideal position being shoulders back; if you lose you end up in the most contorted shoulders-forward position and suffer from backache for the rest of the day. At least I do). Like Bletchleyite, I thought we were done with it. Oh well....

    On a positive note it does appear from the last few new train designs I’ve seen that the phase of ridiculously tiny overhead luggage racks is now consigned to history.
     
  21. pt_mad

    pt_mad Established Member

    Messages:
    2,180
    Joined:
    26 Sep 2011
    It may come down to, would passengers rather have a seat be it a small, possibly tight one with someone on either side? Or would you like they rather stand? 4 out of five passengers (roughly) will still only have one person sitting directly next to them even if all seats were taken on 3+2.

    Or, would passengers prefer less seats, wider aisles, and grab rails? There may, especially on longer distance routes, be a reluctance to willingly stand in the aisle ways. Some passengers still appear to think that standing is only safe in vestibule and door areas.
    For (less seats bigger aisles) layouts to be a success, then passengers really have to be half expecting and willing to easily accept standing within the aisleways near to other seated passengers. If those passengers would rather have a bigger chance of a seat, be it possibly a cramped one then 3+2 is perhaps a better choice.
     
  22. swt_passenger

    swt_passenger Veteran Member

    Messages:
    18,887
    Joined:
    7 Apr 2010
    The problem is the DfTs rules about capacity measurement only allows standing to be included in the overall numbers on routes where there are stops less than 20 mins apart. So for any longer distance service that doesn’t stop often enough, 2+3 is needed to meet the capacity numbers required in the typical ITT.
     
  23. pt_mad

    pt_mad Established Member

    Messages:
    2,180
    Joined:
    26 Sep 2011
    But does that mean there can't be a period of over 20 minutes anywhere on the route where the train doesn't make a stop for standing to be counted? Or does it mean, if there are at least two station stops within 20 minutes of each other then standing room is permitted?
     
  24. swt_passenger

    swt_passenger Veteran Member

    Messages:
    18,887
    Joined:
    7 Apr 2010
    Their published definition is:
    The busiest point is usually the main terminus.
     
  25. pt_mad

    pt_mad Established Member

    Messages:
    2,180
    Joined:
    26 Sep 2011
    So on Birmingham to Liverpool services, this would passed out of Birmingham, so standing can be included in the train's capacity?

    And in Northampton and Birmingham services there are stops at both ends within 20 mins, i.e. Watford or Marston Green at the other end?

    So it's essentially only Crewe service which can't include standing room as capacity, as it's more than 20 minutes between Milton Keynes and Euston?
     
  26. swt_passenger

    swt_passenger Veteran Member

    Messages:
    18,887
    Joined:
    7 Apr 2010
    Their published top tens always state exactly which station call is being considered as the busiest point. If it isn’t a service in the list your guess is likely to be as good as anyone’s.
     
  27. zn1

    zn1 Member

    Messages:
    385
    Joined:
    3 Sep 2011
    the system probably allocates units (i have no idea how it works) to allow exams to be balanced - assuming these are mileage based using gemini,
     
  28. sd0733

    sd0733 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,173
    Joined:
    7 Nov 2012
    Some of the problem with diagramming of the 350s comes down to where they stable at night. A fair few stable in the River sidings next to Northampton and in the bays at Northampton. Whatever order they arrive in in an evening onto those locations is how they leave in the morning (last in 1st out) so any set changes can last several days. But there are far too many mismatched diagrams coming out of Crewe, Kings Heath, Bletchley at the moment to just be down to that.
    At the moment operationally there is a financial cost (/2s on expensive mileage based lease others arent) and a speed decrease (100v110) and units still aren't really properly separated so the idea of the 730s being in two subfleets woth the only difference being passenger facilities seems a little optimistic to suddenly keep two seperate subfleets especially with one being so small at just 16 units. It seems a very odd decision when all other TOCs are standardizing.
     
  29. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    34,703
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    There is one other benefit of 3+2, which is that if you take it to be the case that a train feels crowded as soon as someone has to sit directly next to someone they are not travelling with, you can get 3 passengers per row rather than 2, as the middle seat acts as a very effective divider.

    I have proposed before that it would be good to see 3+1 trialled in some parts of Standard, because that also has the same effect while retaining wide seats - groups of 6 are, off-peak, quite popular on LNR with families and small groups travelling together. Though being able to have a single seat in Standard may reduce the call for First Class.

    Talking of which, I wonder what 1st layout is proposed for these units? Decent 2+1 and I'll happily cough up the LNR-Only 1st walk-up fares at their current rates (2+2 "First Class" with less comfortable seats and less legroom than Standard is a total sham and should not be allowed; if I had a 1st ticket on LNR at present on anything other than a 350/2 I would sit in Standard). Sadly, the only First Class worth paying for on LNR at the moment is the Class 319s, which have the best 1st in the fleet but don't operate on journeys where it's really worth bothering. Hopefully they will do what they should, which is one fewer seat across the width of the train than Standard.

    Talking of 3+2, though, I think the East Anglia units look "least worst" in this regard - decent seats and seat back tables. So if they're the same as those they will be a step up from the /2s.
     
  30. E6007

    E6007 Member

    Messages:
    41
    Joined:
    3 Jan 2018
    Location:
    WCML South
    As well as the Crewe's, there are some Northampton / Birmingham services that are non stop Euston to Leighton Buzzard or Milton Keynes including the xx:13 all day bar evening peak when they are xx:16
     

Share This Page