New Thameslinky Trains - Tables ?

[Bishopstone]

The other key omission on the 700s - which I agree are fundamentally decent units - is sockets for charging devices.

However, we had this debate in 2015-16 and the industry view, as repeated in this forum, is that it would be more convenient for the operator if people bought their own portable charging packs and stopped being unreasonably demanding.

Five years on, lots of urban bus operators are fitting USB sockets, whilst all (I think?) new build and many refurbished trains include charging facilities. Even the new DLR units will have some USB sockets. Still, I’m sure the railway knew best.....

 

[CBlue]

Personally, I think the 700 is a pretty good train, especially when you consider the challenges that have gone into designing it. It's used for everything from effectively being another tube line through central London, to stopping inner suburban services, to long-distance semi-fast services. Designing something that works for all of those things is no easy task! Generally the seats aren't too bad, and provide a decent amount of space. There's good luggage space, a decent amount of standing room, good information systems and plenty of toilets. While it may not be perfect for everything, I don't think there's been any major cock-ups in the design. They're smooth and quiet too, and generally a lot nicer to travel in than 319s. At full speed with the windows open, those things didn't half make a racket.

I wasn't hugely impressed the first time I travelled on one compared to the 365s they replaced....but an enormous improvement over the manky and worn out 319s which somehow always seemed a fair bit worse than the 317s and 321s.

The other key omission on the 700s - which I agree are fundamentally decent units - is sockets for charging devices.

However, we had this debate in 2015-16 and the industry view, as repeated in this forum, is that it would be more convenient for the operator if people bought their own portable charging packs and stopped being unreasonably demanding.

Five years on, lots of urban bus operators are fitting USB sockets, whilst all (I think?) new build and many refurbished trains include charging facilities. Even the new DLR units will have some USB sockets. Still, I’m sure the railway knew best.....

Typing this on a 2020 era Samsung smartphone and it has battery life good enough to last all day with more or less constant use.

Can't say I've ever carried a battery pack or a usb cable with me when travelling by train!

 

[Journeyman]

I wasn't hugely impressed the first time I travelled on one compared to the 365s they replaced....but an enormous improvement over the manky and worn out 319s which somehow always seemed a fair bit worse than the 317s and 321s.

I think the 319s led harsh lives, and weren't well looked after. The whole point of Thameslink in its original form was to get maximum efficiency out of a small fleet of new trains, and the high mileage that resulted seem to knacker the 319s very quickly. The ones smartened up and reused by Northern look a lot better than they did in FCC days, when they just seemed to be falling to bits.

 

[bramling]

I think the 319s led harsh lives, and weren't well looked after. The whole point of Thameslink in its original form was to get maximum efficiency out of a small fleet of new trains, and the high mileage that resulted seem to knacker the 319s very quickly. The ones smartened up and reused by Northern look a lot better than they did in FCC days, when they just seemed to be falling to bits.

I think this is a good summary. It perhaps didn’t help that for many years there was no dedicated heavy maintenance depot on the Midland part, and even when Cauldwell finally appeared it was only small.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The 321 Wi-fi probably wouldn't work as if I remember correctly the early 700's don't have the wiring looms installed to connect a Wi-Fi or an aerial which is why they couldn't just plug them in.

Nor did 321s when they were built!

Anyhow as you say its a lack of will by DofT to do anything about it but when it was a TOC obligation it got done

 

[Journeyman]

I think this is a good summary. It perhaps didn’t help that for many years there was no dedicated heavy maintenance depot on the Midland part, and even when Cauldwell finally appeared it was only small.

Yeah - having to rely on Selhurst alone didn't seem to work very well.

 

[AM9]

Personally, I think the 700 is a pretty good train, especially when you consider the challenges that have gone into designing it. It's used for everything from effectively being another tube line through central London, to stopping inner suburban services, to long-distance semi-fast services. Designing something that works for all of those things is no easy task! Generally the seats aren't too bad, and provide a decent amount of space. There's good luggage space, a decent amount of standing room, good information systems and plenty of toilets. While it may not be perfect for everything, I don't think there's been any major cock-ups in the design. They're smooth and quiet too, and generally a lot nicer to travel in than 319s. At full speed with the windows open, those things didn't half make a racket.

The 700s were designed asmass people movers both over 'metro' routes and outer suburban services. The lines that they run on had all stations' extended to at least 160m and 240m for principal stops. The route through the core was streamlined and enhanced to maximise passenger capacity including measures to reduce dwell times to 45s. So as has been said before, they inevitably compromise in minor passenger comforts, but the most important comfort (and safety) quality is that they can effectively carry nearly 150 passenger per 20m car, on trins running on 2 1/2 minute headways.
I travelled on them for the first time in 7 months today, lightly loaded but ran to time. Both trains were of the later batch that had seat-back tables - I don't bother with wi-fi. The MP who badgered the DfT for the tables wanted that batch to be reserved for GN line services, but of course the trains are regarded as a common resource for all TL services, which presumably pleases the few who noticed their addition when they were diagrammed on the MML routes.

 

[SeanG]

Typing this on a 2020 era Samsung smartphone and it has battery life good enough to last all day with more or less constant use.

Can't say I've ever carried a battery pack or a usb cable with me when travelling by train!

^This

Modern phones can last from leaving the house until returning (and those using them in the day for work can surely charge them there).
Plus given most people have lots of data on contract, is there need for WiFi?

 

[py_megapixel]

Modern phones can last from leaving the house until returning (and those using them in the day for work can surely charge them there).
Plus given most people have lots of data on contract, is there need for WiFi?

Most people have legs and feet. Is there any need for seats?

 

[Failed Unit]

The 700s were designed asmass people movers both over 'metro' routes and outer suburban services. The lines that they run on had all stations' extended to at least 160m and 240m for principal stops. The route through the core was streamlined and enhanced to maximise passenger capacity including measures to reduce dwell times to 45s. So as has been said before, they inevitably compromise in minor passenger comforts, but the most important comfort (and safety) quality is that they can effectively carry nearly 150 passenger per 20m car, on trins running on 2 1/2 minute headways.
I travelled on them for the first time in 7 months today, lightly loaded but ran to time. Both trains were of the later batch that had seat-back tables - I don't bother with wi-fi. The MP who badgered the DfT for the tables wanted that batch to be reserved for GN line services, but of course the trains are regarded as a common resource for all TL services, which presumably pleases the few who noticed their addition when they were diagrammed on the MML routes.

I remember in the big debate out these trains you predicted that commuting traffic would decline rapidly and these trains would need their super high density. I know you didn’t have this in mind. Maybe the midlife refurbishment will give us more spare to reflect this. I personally don’t expect to stand for many years. (Disruption and special events aside)

 

[yorksrob]

I think the 319s led harsh lives, and weren't well looked after. The whole point of Thameslink in its original form was to get maximum efficiency out of a small fleet of new trains, and the high mileage that resulted seem to knacker the 319s very quickly. The ones smartened up and reused by Northern look a lot better than they did in FCC days, when they just seemed to be falling to bits.

Yes, it's cheering to think that a bit of a spruce up has helped to make the 319's such an improvement up here.

When one turns up somewhere like Manchester, I smile to myself to think how I used to avoid them.

The 700s were designed asmass people movers both over 'metro' routes and outer suburban services. The lines that they run on had all stations' extended to at least 160m and 240m for principal stops. The route through the core was streamlined and enhanced to maximise passenger capacity including measures to reduce dwell times to 45s. So as has been said before, they inevitably compromise in minor passenger comforts, but the most important comfort (and safety) quality is that they can effectively carry nearly 150 passenger per 20m car, on trins running on 2 1/2 minute headways.
I travelled on them for the first time in 7 months today, lightly loaded but ran to time. Both trains were of the later batch that had seat-back tables - I don't bother with wi-fi. The MP who badgered the DfT for the tables wanted that batch to be reserved for GN line services, but of course the trains are regarded as a common resource for all TL services, which presumably pleases the few who noticed their addition when they were diagrammed on the MML routes.

I suppose the Brighton line is one where a mass people moover will probably come in handy for leisure travel anyway.

It doesn't bode well that the DfT can't even approve a comparatively minor, quick win retrofit such as seatback tables. It's obvious that Thameslink units won't be kept on dedicated routes.

 

[AM9]

... I suppose the Brighton line is one where a mass people moover will probably come in handy for leisure travel anyway.

Both the Brighton line and the MML services do need considerable capacity at times outside the conventional M-F peak hour times.

It doesn't bode well that the DfT can't even approve a comparatively minor, quick win retrofit such as seatback tables. ...

I don't think that is the issue. The late batch fit quietened the complaints from the GN side. Once the trains were in full service there were inadequate spare units to take them out for such a non-essential modification. There were far more important things to do. The GN group did get what they wanted on the 717s in the end including power sockets for their hair straighteners.

... It's obvious that Thameslink units won't be kept on dedicated routes. ...

Well they are dedicated to all the Thameslink services that run through the core, particularly as they are the only trains cleared for the core now. Given that they are maintained at Hornsey and Three Bridges, then there is no sensible way of separating those in the later batch from the earlier ones, and serviceable stock will be sent out on as required where all diagrams can use all trains (excepting the need for 8/12 car sets on particular routes).

 

[cactustwirly]

Personally, I think the 700 is a pretty good train, especially when you consider the challenges that have gone into designing it. It's used for everything from effectively being another tube line through central London, to stopping inner suburban services, to long-distance semi-fast services. Designing something that works for all of those things is no easy task! Generally the seats aren't too bad, and provide a decent amount of space. There's good luggage space, a decent amount of standing room, good information systems and plenty of toilets. While it may not be perfect for everything, I don't think there's been any major cock-ups in the design. They're smooth and quiet too, and generally a lot nicer to travel in than 319s. At full speed with the windows open, those things didn't half make a racket.

Agreed! There's a night and day difference between the 700s and TfL Rail 345s

 

[Journeyman]

Most people have legs and feet. Is there any need for seats?

WiFi on the railway is highly likely to disappear soon. It's no longer worth the expense and hassle of providing it.

 

[yorksrob]

Both the Brighton line and the MML services do need considerable capacity at times outside the conventional M-F peak hour times.


I don't think that is the issue. The late batch fit quietened the complaints from the GN side. Once the trains were in full service there were inadequate spare units to take them out for such a non-essential modification. There were far more important things to do. The GN group did get what they wanted on the 717s in the end including power sockets for their hair straighteners.


Well they are dedicated to all the Thameslink services that run through the core, particularly as they are the only trains cleared for the core now. Given that they are maintained at Hornsey and Three Bridges, then there is no sensible way of separating those in the later batch from the earlier ones, and serviceable stock will be sent out on as required where all diagrams can use all trains (excepting the need for 8/12 car sets on particular routes).

Personally I would say that everything going towards Brighton needs those modifications.

Out of interest, I thought the plan was now to run fewer Thameslink services through the core than originally planned, so shouldn't it be possible to take at least one unit at a time to be retrofitted ?

 

[Ianno87]

Personally I would say that everything going towards Brighton needs those modifications.

Out of interest, I thought the plan was now to run fewer Thameslink services through the core than originally planned, so shouldn't it be possible to take at least one unit at a time to be retrofitted ?

The "missing" services are all 8-car service groups. The 12-car fleet is fully spoken for.

 

[Bald Rick]

It doesn't bode well that the DfT can't even approve a comparatively minor, quick win retrofit such as seatback tables.

If you saw the price from Siemens for the retrofit, you wouldn’t approve it either.

Whilst I understand why some people might want a seatback table (personally I don’t, but I know others find them useful), I genuinely don’t understand the need for WiFi and charging points on these trains. It would be interesting to see how many people do hook up to WiFi on the 700s that have it.

The 12-car fleet is fully spoken for.

More than spoken for, hence some 8 cars turning up on 12 car routes.

 

[yorksrob]

If you saw the price from Siemens for the retrofit, you wouldn’t approve it either.

Whilst I understand why some people might want a seatback table (personally I don’t, but I know others find them useful), I genuinely don’t understand the need for WiFi and charging points on these trains. It would be interesting to see how many people do hook up to WiFi on the 700s that have it.

As others have mentioned, wifi is being superceded by better networks anyway, but charging points are still useful. The train might be the only place you've been in, indoors all day.

The reality is, these trains were always going to end up on the mainline to Brighton. I'm sorry that Siemens are price gouging the alterations, but the DfT should have specified them for their routes in the first place, so they should suck it up and learn from the experience to do it properly.

 

[Bald Rick]

The reality is, these trains were always going to end up on the mainline to Brighton.

That is what they were designed for, ie TL services to Brighton (amongst other destinations).

 

[AM9]

As others have mentioned, wifi is being superceded by better networks anyway, but charging points are still useful. The train might be the only place you've been in, indoors all day.

The reality is, these trains were always going to end up on the mainline to Brighton. I'm sorry that Siemens are price gouging the alterations, but the DfT should have specified them for their routes in the first place, so they should suck it up and learn from the experience to do it properly.

It's not as if they are paying for their 'mistakes', - public funds are.

 

[bramling]

It's not as if they are paying for their 'mistakes', - public funds are.

It is someone’s mess-up though, and one would expect to see an element of accountability for it.

To be fair, I’d tend to agree that wi-fi is increasingly superfluous. I’m less sure about charging points though, these are one area where a new train should be expected to have an edge on something from the 1990s.

Presumably something attracts people to declassified first on a 700. Assuming it’s not an attraction to antimacassars, it can only be either the presence of tables or the plug sockets.

 

[Ianno87]

It is someone’s mess-up though, and one would expect to see an element of accountability for it.

Depends whether wi-if and plug sockets are integral to the operation of the service, or merely nice-to-haves. I certainly don‘t think retrofitting them at disproportionate cost is really justifiable to correct non-inclusion first time around.

Presumably something attracts people to declassified first on a 700. Assuming it’s not an attraction to antimacasars, it can only be either the presence of tables or the plug sockets.

For me, a combinaction of the better seat (as I tend to do longer journeys on them) plus the plug socket.

 

[yorksrob]

That is what they were designed for, ie TL services to Brighton (amongst other destinations).

In that case, why did it take an MP intervention to get seat tables added.

It's not as if they are paying for their 'mistakes', - public funds are.

And the public use the trains.

 

[Bald Rick]

Assuming it’s not an attraction to antimacassars, it can only be either the presence of tables or the plug sockets.

Table and bigger seat in my experience. Very rare to see the plug sockets in use, indeed I don’t even know where they are!

 

[bramling]

If you saw the price from Siemens for the retrofit, you wouldn’t approve it either.

Whilst I understand why some people might want a seatback table (personally I don’t, but I know others find them useful), I genuinely don’t understand the need for WiFi and charging points on these trains. It would be interesting to see how many people do hook up to WiFi on the 700s that have it.



More than spoken for, hence some 8 cars turning up on 12 car routes.

Was it always the plan that the 12-car routes were going to see a small number of 8-car services / diagrams?

It’s notable that on the GN side the daily 700/0 diagram on the Cambridge-Brighton service changed to 700/1 as part of the erstwhile May 2020 timetable, which as it happened got overtaken by Covid. It’s still fairly common to see 700/0s on such services though.

The 700/0 fleet is rather under-utilised at this moment, especially with the KX works. From memory it was something like just 4 GN-side diagrams, pre-Covid again from memory it was something like 10 or 11.

 

[Bald Rick]

In that case, why did it take an MP intervention to get seat tables added.

It didn’t. It was wider feedback.

 

[Ianno87]

And the public use the trains.

Though personally, if it‘s a choice between the cost of retrofitting tables, and something other somewhere else - I’d probably pick the something else.

 

[Bald Rick]

Was it always the plan that the 12-car routes were going to see a small number of 8-car services / diagrams?

Well that depends on what plan you mean. When they were ordered, the 12 car routes were to be fully 12 car, except for a couple of 8s to swap units through the depots. But then the 12 car routes (and stopping patterns) changed.

 

[Ianno87]

Was it always the plan that the 12-car routes were going to see a small number of 8-car services / diagrams?

It’s notable that on the GN side the daily 700/0 diagram on the Cambridge-Brighton service changed to 700/1 as part of the erstwhile May 2020 timetable, which as it happened got overtaken by Covid. It’s still fairly common to see 700/0s on such services though.

The 700/0 fleet is rather under-utilised at this moment, especially with the KX works. From memory it was something like just 4 GN-side diagrams, pre-Covid again from memory it was something like 10 or 11.

One of the issues was ordering the fleet before the final service pattern was settled - the interloper of the Rainham service only came late in the day (for example).

 

[bramling]

Table and bigger seat in my experience. Very rare to see the plug sockets in use, indeed I don’t even know where they are!

I seem to remember they’re under the seats. Not particularly obvious, but people seem to find them.

The 700s wouldn’t be nearly so objectionable if the whole train had been done out like in first, though I still find the decor exceptionally spartan.

Having said that, when on standby lighting (which a handful of drivers seem to take it on their own initiative to select) the ambience does change for the better a bit IMO.

Well that depends on what plan you mean. When they were ordered, the 12 car routes were to be fully 12 car, except for a couple of 8s to swap units through the depots. But then the 12 car routes (and stopping patterns) changed.

You’ll have to remind me exactly what changed?...