Plugs, electronic devices and trains

Status
Not open for further replies.

physics34

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2013
Messages
3,202
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
9,525
Location
St Albans
But the weight issue doesn't make sense especially as they want to cram as many people on these units as possible. I'm sure a few humans weighs more than a few plug sockets and wiring per carriage.

So you suggest that they fill the interiror with lightweight paraphealia and not bother about carrying many passengers?
What a bizarre argument, - lightweight passenger trains with lower track access charges and enhanced reliability that aren't much use for carrying the very large numbers of passengers.
Mmmm, I think that would be missing the point of running any trains at all!
 

physics34

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2013
Messages
3,202
So you suggest that they fill the interiror with lightweight paraphealia and not bother about carrying many passengers?
What a bizarre argument, - lightweight passenger trains with lower track access charges and enhanced reliability that aren't much use for carrying the very large numbers of passengers.
Mmmm, I think that would be missing the point of running any trains at all!

think you are mis-quoting me. class 377/5 reckons that the lack of plug sockets is so the units weigh as little as possible, but im saying the aim of these units is to carry as many passengers as possible, why would the weight of a few plug sockets be an issue?
 

D365

Established Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
8,302
Don't forget the mass of the additional wiring and rectifier equipment required to provide a safe 'household voltage' feed. Not insubstantial.
 

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
9,525
Location
St Albans
Still not sure it would make a huge difference

But it is very much a minor gain for the TOC and does absolutely nothing positive for the stock's passenger capacity. Bear in mind that if it doesn't already do so, the demand will soon exceed the capacity so why add unnecessary weight?
 

physics34

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2013
Messages
3,202
But it is very much a minor gain for the TOC and does absolutely nothing positive for the stock's passenger capacity. Bear in mind that if it doesn't already do so, the demand will soon exceed the capacity so why add unnecessary weight?

because we want facilities on trains that make a journey comfortable/enjoyable......... otherwise lets all travel in a box with no seats, no air con etc.

Plug sockets are a useful addition to train travel....IMO not required.... but still useful, and the extra weight is not enough to be an issue...... otherwise we should then start vetting all passengers just to make sure the total occupancy is below a certain set weight.

We need to create a railway that has enough capacity so everyone can travel comfortably....albeit its impossible to provide everyone with a seat in the peak...unless we just want a railway that has trains that are nothing more than sardine tins on wheels.

Maybe this is just another part of the argument about the trains suitabilty based on distance travelled. Plug sockets are not needed for short commuter journeys but are a nice inclusion for journeys of a certain distance or over. Do we know what services the 707s are going to be running?
 
Last edited:

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
But the weight issue doesn't make sense especially as they want to cram as many people on these units as possible. I'm sure a few humans weighs more than a few plug sockets and wiring per carriage.

Actually it does. The Desiro City is a wireless train and not filled with wires like current stock. This means there is a significant weight saving. The figures for the 2018 timetable weights in the Core are huge. Extra weight was decided by the DfT to be a bad thing as the Core would have to close more regularly for track repairs. Something the DfT and NR are keen to avoid.

I don't think you realise you can just add wires as there is nothing there. You need to step down the voltage wire up every coach separately making the weight gain an significant one.

Lets make one point clear, when the TRSP was tendered the DfT had strict weight limits. The chances were any bidder who offered plugs would have failed to meet the criteria and would have lost any chance to win the bid. As the Desiro City is an adaptable design, we now have the 701 & 707 offering plugs as they we not subject to the weight criteria.
 
Last edited:

Philip Phlopp

Established Member
Joined
31 May 2015
Messages
3,004
The 12 car Class 700 ThamesLink sets are 410 tonnes, making the trains 430 tonnes won't let you carry more passengers, but it will increase track wear (previously discussed) and it will consume more electric accelerating that extra weight around all day, every day, for however long the wiring and equipment is installed.

I'd also mention, my latest smartphone manages anything from a day to three days on a single charge (depending how popular I am on the day) and quick charges from 0-50% in 30 minutes. I can either have it fully charged when leaving home in the morning, or charge it very quickly before leaving work, likewise with my trusty laptop. I don't think I'm unusual in that respect.

Power sockets on commuter stock are going to look terribly outdated in a couple of years, Wi-Fi could equally look gimmicky in a couple of years too, when 5G rollout happens.
 

physics34

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2013
Messages
3,202
The 12 car Class 700 ThamesLink sets are 410 tonnes, making the trains 430 tonnes won't let you carry more passengers, but it will increase track wear (previously discussed) and it will consume more electric accelerating that extra weight around all day, every day, for however long the wiring and equipment is installed.

I'd also mention, my latest smartphone manages anything from a day to three days on a single charge (depending how popular I am on the day) and quick charges from 0-50% in 30 minutes. I can either have it fully charged when leaving home in the morning, or charge it very quickly before leaving work, likewise with my trusty laptop. I don't think I'm unusual in that respect.

Power sockets on commuter stock are going to look terribly outdated in a couple of years, Wi-Fi could equally look gimmicky in a couple of years too, when 5G rollout happens.

As i previously i dont think it necessary at all for short journeys but the longer journeys it would be useful. I dont think if the extra weight was that much and they caused such increased track wear that they wouldve been installed in 377/6s, 377/7s and 387s do you? (unless the thameslink route specifically requires lighter stock......)..then why are 387s running?!. 35-40 plug sockets...... 50 metres of wiring, and a connection to the coverter would not weight more than 2 human beings per carriage. 24 people do not equal 20 tonnes!!! ;)

Also, when these units are not crowded especially off peak why would the weight be an issue.......you could then say we dont want more people on the trains because they would increased trackwear.!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Actually it does. The Desiro City is a wireless train and not filled with wires like current stock. This means there is a significant weight saving. The figures for the 2018 timetable weights in the Core are huge. Extra weight was decided by the DfT to be a bad thing as the Core would have to close more regularly for track repairs. Something the DfT and NR are keen to avoid.

I don't think you realise you can just add wires as there is nothing there. You need to step down the voltage wire up every coach separately making the weight gain an significant one.

lighting, PIS equipment, door buttons, door mechanism, air con and heating? Or is it all modules connected together etc etc
 
Last edited:

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
9,525
Location
St Albans
As i previously i dont think it necessary at all for short journeys but the longer journeys it would be useful. I dont think if the extra weight was that much and they caused such increased track wear that they wouldve been installed in 377/6s, 377/7s and 387s do you? (unless the thameslink route specifically requires lighter stock......)..then why are 387s running?!. 35-40 plug sockets...... 50 metres of wiring, and a connection to the coverter would not weight more than 2 human beings per carriage. 24 people do not equal 20 tonnes!!! ;)

The 387s were not ordered for permanent use on Thameslink, they were a stop-gap measure to overcome the delays in the class 700 procurement which are specified for Thameslink operation. The 387s can while away their service years on the GWML on longer journeys sharing tracks with heavy class 800 and 801s and even heavier freight trains. Presumably GWR thinks that their commuter passengers need to be bribed with frippery like power outlets to get them off the inter-city services.
The weight of 35-40 outlets, their wiring and the distribution equipment on each coach (Transformers/converters) not only is a deadweight whether the train is full or empty, but also the equipment will be drawing a standing current from the hotel supplies even when nothing is plugged in and the train is waiting for passengers to board.

Also, when these units are not crowded especially off peak why would the weight be an issue.......you could then say we dont want more people on the trains because they would increased trackwear.!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The off-peak/empty deadweight issue is answered above. I assume that your facetious comment about "we" (as in 'you') don't want more people on the trains etc.is either just missing an emoticon to signify a point of humour, or you are genuinely missing the point that metro/suburban trains are provided to transport however many passengers need to travel in the peak. Track wear is a fact of life, but to deliberately increase the incidence of maintenance action by adding permanent weight with non-essential equipment is hardly acting in the interests of the public purse of even the farepaying passengers themselves.

lighting, PIS equipment, door buttons, door mechanism, air con and heating? Or is it all modules connected together etc etc

Those systems are regarded as part of the trains' essential/normal services and are not required to be suitable for direct electrical access by passengers. Therefore they are integrated into the vehicles' elecrical infrastructure in the most power and weight-efficient way.
 
Last edited:

coppercapped

Established Member
Joined
13 Sep 2015
Messages
2,590
Location
Reading
This discussion is the equivalent to the medieval 'how many angels can dance on the head of a pin' debate.

A switched twin 13A outlet including two USB connectors weighs 0.3kg and can be bought from Screwfix <http://www.screwfix.com/p/lap-13a-sp-2-gang-switched-socket-usb-charger-port-white/1204f>.

It costs £9.99 retail in units of one.

If there were a dozen on each side of each coach that adds about 3.6kg to the coach mass. Add 5kg for the inverters to give 250v ac and wiring and each coach would weigh less than 10kg more. As each coach on average weighs just under 35 tonnes the increase in weight would be about 0.03%.

If the transformers and wiring weigh 10kg, for a total of 15kg, then the increase in mass per coach is still only 0.04%. WiFi transmitters can be had for a few kilogrammes, including brackets and such. Say 0.05% increase.

All this will obviously make such a huge difference to the track access charges and to the train's power consumption I can well understand why these things have not been fitted.

The real reason that WiFi and power sockets are not on the train is that the DfT simply didn't put the requirement into the train specification and now people are trying hard to find reasons why it wasn't added. And the reason it wasn't added is that the first publicly available spec for the Thameslink trains is dated April 2008, which means it was written in 2007 and drafts were certainly written earlier.

Apple introduced the iPhone in January 2007, the world's first successful smartphone - until then mobile WiFi wasn't on the radar and mobile phones operated for a week on one battery charge.

It is therefore not surprising the DfT did not put the power/WiFi requirement into the train spec. But don't try to find spurious reasons for its omission.
 

cjmillsnun

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2011
Messages
3,050
This discussion is the equivalent to the medieval 'how many angels can dance on the head of a pin' debate.

A switched twin 13A outlet including two USB connectors weighs 0.3kg and can be bought from Screwfix <http://www.screwfix.com/p/lap-13a-sp-2-gang-switched-socket-usb-charger-port-white/1204f>.

It costs £9.99 retail in units of one.

If there were a dozen on each side of each coach that adds about 3.6kg to the coach mass. Add 5kg for the inverters to give 250v ac and wiring and each coach would weigh less than 10kg more. As each coach on average weighs just under 35 tonnes the increase in weight would be about 0.03%.

If the transformers and wiring weigh 10kg, for a total of 15kg, then the increase in mass per coach is still only 0.04%. WiFi transmitters can be had for a few kilogrammes, including brackets and such. Say 0.05% increase.

All this will obviously make such a huge difference to the track access charges and to the train's power consumption I can well understand why these things have not been fitted.

The real reason that WiFi and power sockets are not on the train is that the DfT simply didn't put the requirement into the train specification and now people are trying hard to find reasons why it wasn't added. And the reason it wasn't added is that the first publicly available spec for the Thameslink trains is dated April 2008, which means it was written in 2007 and drafts were certainly written earlier.

Apple introduced the iPhone in January 2007, the world's first successful smartphone - until then mobile WiFi wasn't on the radar and mobile phones operated for a week on one battery charge.

It is therefore not surprising the DfT did not put the power/WiFi requirement into the train spec. But don't try to find spurious reasons for its omission.

Is it just a question of adding a few inverters, a few cables and the sockets themselves? What supply is on the train? is it more a case of a step down transformer (which is heavier) and something to smooth out the power (there are bound to be power spikes and dips from the trains own systems) what is the current draw expected to be? Phones take two thirds of didly squat, but laptops can have a much more significant draw. The minimum BS1362 (plug) fuse is 3A So probably more than one ring required per coach as there will likely be most of the sockets in use at the same time in the peak (something you don't get on a domestic supply). A ring is 32A, so 2 are 64A so that's 256A per 4 cars (guess what. That electricity has to be paid for!). Are you going to need bigger 25kV transformers? What about the load on DC? How about changeovers? There is likely to be a power spike.

It could also be that the 700s are right on the limit for the access charge they have. What is the next step up?

What about interactions with the signalling, other train systems, etc.

All have to be considered. It's really not as simple as you think.
 
Last edited:

coppercapped

Established Member
Joined
13 Sep 2015
Messages
2,590
Location
Reading
Is it just a question of adding a few inverters, a few cables and the sockets themselves? What supply is on the train? is it more a case of a step down transformer (which is heavier) and something to smooth out the power (there are bound to be power spikes and dips from the trains own systems) what is the current draw expected to be? Phones take two thirds of didly squat, but laptops can have a much more significant draw. The minimum BS1362 (plug) fuse is 3A So probably more than one ring required per coach as there will likely be most of the sockets in use at the same time in the peak (something you don't get on a domestic supply). A ring is 32A, so 2 are 64A so that's 256A per 4 cars. Are you going to need bigger 25kV transformers? They do get heavy!

It could also be that the 700s are right on the limit for the access charge they have. What is the next step up?

We are not trying to run toasters or microwave ovens from these sockets. :(

My 15" MacBook Pro has an 85 watt power supply - at 230v that's about 0.37A. Assuming a couple of dozen sockets in each coach, and that all are in use, that's a total draw of less than 9A.

For a smooth input for the inverter connect it to a battery output circuit.

Put a notice on each outlet that says 'Maximum load 100W'.

Don't make it complicated.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
25,127
Despite wifi being new at the time, the 2008 DfT high level spec DOES include "wi-fi" and at seat power sockets. I think it would be misleading to use the newness of wifi as the main reason it didn't end up in the actual ITT published later that same year.

A bit like the seat back tables, they also appeared in the same paragraph of the original high level spec.
 
Last edited:

Bishopstone

Established Member
Joined
24 Jun 2010
Messages
1,156
Location
Seaford
So probably more than one ring required per coach as there will likely be most of the sockets in use at the same time in the peak (something you don't get on a domestic supply).

Really? I've done a few years commuting on 377/4s, which have sockets in first class, and I would say the most common situation was to find none of them in use. I don't recall a single occasion on which all of the sockets were being used simultaneously.

Do many commuters carry plugs/adapters around? I never did, unless I was going through London and out the other side on a long day trip. Otherwise a charge overnight at home, and a top-up in the office late afternoon was perfectly sufficient.

I assume the WiFi, where enabled, will prohibit streaming which eliminates the most significant source of battery drain.

I realise you have to cater for a situation beyond average utilisation, as per domestic circuits, but I suggest it will be a very rare event to see more than 50% of sockets in use.

I suppose, where on-train sockets in Standard Class becomes the norm, behaviour might change and the commuting masses might all put three pin plugs in their day bags, but I doubt it.
 

physics34

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2013
Messages
3,202
Is it just a question of adding a few inverters, a few cables and the sockets themselves? What supply is on the train? is it more a case of a step down transformer (which is heavier) and something to smooth out the power (there are bound to be power spikes and dips from the trains own systems) what is the current draw expected to be? Phones take two thirds of didly squat, but laptops can have a much more significant draw. The minimum BS1362 (plug) fuse is 3A So probably more than one ring required per coach as there will likely be most of the sockets in use at the same time in the peak (something you don't get on a domestic supply). A ring is 32A, so 2 are 64A so that's 256A per 4 cars (guess what. That electricity has to be paid for!). Are you going to need bigger 25kV transformers? What about the load on DC? How about changeovers? There is likely to be a power spike.

It could also be that the 700s are right on the limit for the access charge they have. What is the next step up?

What about interactions with the signalling, other train systems, etc.

All have to be considered. It's really not as simple as you think.

I would assume there is a 110v-240v feed available already otherwise what would the lighting and other systems come off.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The 387s were not ordered for permanent use on Thameslink, they were a stop-gap measure to overcome the delays in the class 700 procurement which are specified for Thameslink operation. The 387s can while away their service years on the GWML on longer journeys sharing tracks with heavy class 800 and 801s and even heavier freight trains. Presumably GWR thinks that their commuter passengers need to be bribed with frippery like power outlets to get them off the inter-city services.
The weight of 35-40 outlets, their wiring and the distribution equipment on each coach (Transformers/converters) not only is a deadweight whether the train is full or empty, but also the equipment will be drawing a standing current from the hotel supplies even when nothing is plugged in and the train is waiting for passengers to board.


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The off-peak/empty deadweight issue is answered above. I assume that your facetious comment about "we" (as in 'you') don't want more people on the trains etc.is either just missing an emoticon to signify a point of humour, or you are genuinely missing the point that metro/suburban trains are provided to transport however many passengers need to travel in the peak. Track wear is a fact of life, but to deliberately increase the incidence of maintenance action by adding permanent weight with non-essential equipment is hardly acting in the interests of the public purse of even the farepaying passengers themselves.



Those systems are regarded as part of the trains' essential/normal services and are not required to be suitable for direct electrical access by passengers. Therefore they are integrated into the vehicles' elecrical infrastructure in the most power and weight-efficient way.

Without know the exactly facts I would still hasten to point out that in my opinion any track wear as a result of a few plug sockets would be very minimal and would not cause an issue to the public purse especially as the weight differential with and without plug sockets in the grand scheme of things when a 12 car is fully laden with passengers will be very small.
 
Last edited:

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
7,688
Location
nowhere
Without know the exactly facts I would still hasten to point out that in my opinion any track wear as a result of a few plug sockets would be very minimal and would not cause an issue to the public purse especially as the weight differential with and without plug sockets in the grand scheme of things when a 12 car is fully laden with passengers will be very small.

Let's take coppercapped's estimate of 10kg per carriage, so an extra 120kg per 12 car train and an extra 8kg per 8 car train. The fleet average then works out at 99kg per train (55x12 cars and 60x8 cars). Doing some rough and ready calculations, there will be 144 trains across the peaks (24x2x3) and then some 500 odd trains during the off peak (14x2x18) for a grand total of somewhere in the region of 650 trains across the day (although if someone more knowledgeable than I can give actual figures, I couldn't find anything that accurate hence the approximations). Thus in that extra day, there would be about an extra 65 tons of weight passing through the core (about 2 extra class 700 cars). Whilst inconsequential, it does add up in the long term track maintenance cycle.

Whilst the quantity of passengers that you carry is something that can't really be controlled, the weight of things like plug sockets, seatback tables, and other amenities are things that you can control, so they are what you minimise.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
24,747
Location
UK
Apple introduced the iPhone in January 2007, the world's first successful smartphone - until then mobile WiFi wasn't on the radar and mobile phones operated for a week on one battery charge.

Erm, I think you'll find that Symbian, Palm, Windows Mobile devices and many more existed LONG before Apple came in - and these devices had pretty awful battery life.

Three launched in 2003 and 3G phones early on needed charging daily, even the non-smart ones. It's amazing that Apple didn't even launch with a 3G phone, given 3G had launched FOUR years previous (even earlier in some markets, like Scandinavia).

The thing is, I don't think most people want to carry a mains adapter with them. Far easier to just carry a USB lead and look for a USB port (many places now have these, as they're far smaller) or carry their own battery pack - which is my personal choice as it means no tangled wires under seats or when someone wants to get off next to me etc.

For suburban trains, even those going long distances (but generally making multiple, usually very short, stops) I don't see the need for power sockets except perhaps in first class to justify the higher price for not a lot else.

On Intercity trains - sure.
 
Last edited:

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
9,525
Location
St Albans
I would assume there is a 110v-240v feed available already otherwise what would the lighting and other systems come off.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Low voltage supplies for public use are a totally different proposition to those powering essential on-board services. All items of equipment that form part of a train's electrical systems are:
a) of known electrical load range,
b) power factor,
c) surge immunity,
d) maintenance status
e) and reliability​

Accordingly, supplies are provisioned on that basis. That was the issue (mainly affecting safety) regarding the 'Not for Public Use' three-pin outlets that the arrogant twit on the LO train was cautioned for unauthorised use last year. Lighting, door controls, heating and AC may be used by the public, but they have no means of connecting directly to their power supplies.

Without know the exactly facts I would still hasten to point out that in my opinion any track wear as a result of a few plug sockets would be very minimal and would not cause an issue to the public purse especially as the weight differential with and without plug sockets in the grand scheme of things when a 12 car is fully laden with passengers will be very small.

You may be right over the effect of additional track wear, however the convoluted methods whereby the pseudo-privatisation's costs are allocated and priced may mean that it has a disproportional effect on the TOC, the infrastructure maintainer or the DfT's budgets.
The potential costs of providing at-seat power for passengers goes way beyond overall train weights though. Providing some power to many locations without any real control over what loads are connected has many complications:
1) every outlet must fully conform to electrical standards for domestic supplies which may not be the case for all low voltage services on a train. This dictates the use of dedicated inverters connected to non safety-critical or operationally important busbars
2) every outlet must fully conform to mandated EMC standards both in immunity and emissions to protect both passenger's connected devices and on-board systems
3) a diversity must be applied to all possible loads on every outlet, as the operator has no control over what will be connected to them. This is the most difficult aspect to reconcile as for example, the maximum reasonable load would be a notebook pc. Now although laptops typically use between 60W and 100W DC from their ac power packs, those power packs have a corresponding ac current draw between 1.2A and 1.6A at switch-on.
So if the current is set to a nominal 2A per outlet, each circuit, (radial or ring) would be limited to no more than 15 outlets so each coach would require three or four separate circuits.​
Now rail passengers are not known for their compliance with rules, and of them, some commuters are not known for their consideration of others (particularly when they think that their actions are anonymous), so each outlet would need some form of current trip to prevent a greater load being placed on some outlets. Therfore each outlet socket couldn't be a £10 standard item from Screwfix or any other domestic device supplier. They would require an auto resetting current trip on each, (preferably with a bleeper to let all the other passengers know what the selfish twit had tried to do! :) ).
All of this kit would require both electrical and mechanical qualification (type approval), and individual testing of each unit before delivery, as well as being integrated into the regular maintenance regime.

In summary, it won't be a case of a few cheap bits from Screwfix and a bit of wire connected up to the train's normal default voltage supplies because it 'will only be providing bug-power to a few mobile phones'. It would be cheaper for the TOCs to issue free portable charger/batteries to every season ticket holder, leaving them with the simple task of remembering to charge them at the office or at home.
 

coppercapped

Established Member
Joined
13 Sep 2015
Messages
2,590
Location
Reading
Erm, I think you'll find that Symbian, Palm, Windows Mobile devices and many more existed LONG before Apple came in - and these devices had pretty awful battery life.

Three launched in 2003 and 3G phones early on needed charging daily, even the non-smart ones. It's amazing that Apple didn't even launch with a 3G phone, given 3G had launched FOUR years previous (even earlier in some markets, like Scandinavia).

The thing is, I don't think most people want to carry a mains adapter with them. Far easier to just carry a USB lead and look for a USB port (many places now have these, as they're far smaller) or carry their own battery pack - which is my personal choice as it means no tangled wires under seats or when someone wants to get off next to me etc.

For suburban trains, even those going long distances (but generally making multiple, usually very short, stops) I don't see the need for power sockets except perhaps in first class to justify the higher price for not a lot else.

On Intercity trains - sure.

I did say, 'successful smartphone'. The market penetration of the iPhone within a couple of years far exceeded that achieved by any of the other products all of which remained niche[1]. See http://www.statista.com/statistics/263401/global-apple-iphone-sales-since-3rd-quarter-2007/ for Apple's sales. Millions of devices rather than hundreds of thousands.

I take your point about the early 3G devices - but the initial market penetration was not large - the bulk of customers in the UK stayed with the 2G (900MHz and 1800MHz) services with the big 4 network operators.

Apple was, and is not, in the mobile phone business. It sells computers - and the iPhone is simply a hand-held computer that, oh by the way, also makes phone calls. Apple would never have made a simple mobile phone - it would not have been able to make one that was sufficiently different for it to an identifiable Apple type of product.

I certainly agree with you about carting mains adaptors around. USB charging is OK for phones and the like, but laptops of all sizes do need more power. The question is whether, given the traffic patterns expected for Thameslink, the number of passengers needing laptop charging facilities makes it worthwhile catering for them. The argument would be about initial and maintenance costs - the weight issue is a nonsense. I would think that adding USB points is a no-brainer - especially if, in future, your ticket is on your smartphone and you lose the ability to show it if the battery is flat.

On the other hand these trains are going to make quite long journeys and laptop users might start feeling like second-class citizens...

[1] I spent some years specifying and testing SIMs in a range of devices for O2 in Germany and I know that, for example, the numbers of Windows Mobile devices registered on the network was tiny (1% or 2%) compared to all the Nokias. And it was a remarkably difficult thing to set up and use for no great advantage. Now - practically all phones are smartphones and most of these are either Android or iOS.
 
Last edited:

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
9,525
Location
St Albans
... Apple was, and is not, in the mobile phone business. ...

That was clearly demonstrated by their blaze of publicity releasing a phone with an aerial that didn't work (iphone 4).

I certainly agree with you about carting mains adaptors around. USB charging is OK for phones and the like, but laptops of all sizes do need more power. The question is whether, given the traffic patterns expected for Thameslink, the number of passengers needing laptop charging facilities makes it worthwhile catering for them.

It isn't worth catering for them as far as the TOC and DfT are concerned as they will still travel in the same numbers. All it does is put the prices up for everybody else.

... - especially if, in future, your ticket is on your smartphone and you lose the ability to show it if the battery is flat.

That's a ridiulous argument. It's the responsibility of the passenger to look after their ticket. If you lose/forget a paper/plastic ticket, you put that down to incompetance. It's the same as forgetting to charge a phone.

On the other hand these trains are going to make quite long journeys and laptop users might start feeling like second-class citizens...

The average class 700 journey time is well under the battery charge life expectancy of even the most voracious laptop/notebook. Those whose genuine need is greater will need to make their own provision to use the train as their office.
It's even less for the 707s about which this thread is concerned.
 

coppercapped

Established Member
Joined
13 Sep 2015
Messages
2,590
Location
Reading
That was clearly demonstrated by their blaze of publicity releasing a phone with an aerial that didn't work (iphone 4).

Your point being? It's not as if no other company has never made something that's a bit below par. Anyway, this was storm in teacup - it was an issue which seemed to affect some users in the way they held the device in areas with low signal strength. It was fixed in the next iteration but in any case this 'non-working' aerial 'problem' made no difference to sales as can be seen from this list. Sales per Fiscal Year (Oct to Sept), figures rounded:

2007: 1.3 million
2008: 12 million
2009: 20 million
2010: 40 million
2011: 72 million
2012: 125 million
2013: 150 million
2014: 170 million

The 'aerial that didn't work' didn't seem to have been much of an issue for the users.

It isn't worth catering for them as far as the TOC and DfT are concerned as they will still travel in the same numbers. All it does is put the prices up for everybody else.

I note only that this is an attitude that treats passengers with contempt. You can make the same argument about air conditioning - the passengers will travel in the same numbers over these short distances if the trains don't have it but we've saved mass, cost and energy. (But the fares won't be reduced for the absence of these things).

Don't be surprised if 'the railway' gets a bad press - it only has itself to blame.


That's a ridiulous argument. It's the responsibility of the passenger to look after their ticket. If you lose/forget a paper/plastic ticket, you put that down to incompetance. It's the same as forgetting to charge a phone.

Again - an arrogant approach. If 'the railway' wants people to use their smartphones as tickets then it has to help them keep the things working as 'the railway' is - presumably - also bright enough to realise there are issues with battery life.

There could be a thousand and one reasons why the phone is not fully charged at the start of a journey - what if the journey is being made at the end of the day and the passenger has not had a chance to re-charge the device since the night before? Or, because of high data use the battery runs down during the journey. Not all of these are due to incompetence - and why is the railway trying to demonstrate to its customers that they, the customers, are incompetent? If one insults the customer then one should not be surprised if they bad-mouth the railway or avoid it if possible.

Just once - be helpful.

The average class 700 journey time is well under the battery charge life expectancy of even the most voracious laptop/notebook. Those whose genuine need is greater will need to make their own provision to use the train as their office.
It's even less for the 707s about which this thread is concerned.

I agree with you about the short journeys expected with the Class 707s. But the passenger could have spent a day 'on the road' and the battery could be about to expire.

Portable electronic devices are here to stay - and people will want to use them. Throwing one's hands up in the air and proclaiming its all too difficult and the passengers' wants and desires are unreasonable is no longer an acceptable attitude.
 
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
387
I agree with someone above that said you rarely find the plugs in use anyway, of more concern is the lack of seat back tables. These are quite often in use and I really miss them when I have to use a 455 rather than a 450 or 458.

Many people have drinks in the morning, or have a tablet, or even need somewhere to put the make-up bag.
 

TheKnightWho

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2012
Messages
3,185
Location
Oxford
That's a ridiulous argument. It's the responsibility of the passenger to look after their ticket. If you lose/forget a paper/plastic ticket, you put that down to incompetance. It's the same as forgetting to charge a phone.

Considering there is a known iPhone bug that causes them to claim to have no battery at random points below 50%, it's not always possible to know when your phone is going to run out.

And yes, you can blame that on Apple incompetence (or whatever) all you like, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a problem. I really don't understand your vehement objection when it is a pretty trivial thing to include weight-wise, power-wise and space-wise in the grand scheme of things.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
You think anyone would take any notice of these?

They have them on trains in China, and seem to do the job well. I believe the limit there is 150W.
 
Last edited:

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
24,747
Location
UK
What about the 345s? Will they have power sockets? Despite being more like a tube line, there will be many people who are going from the city to Heathrow, and in the morning commuters will come in from either side right into the centre/city.

As such, surely there's an argument for these to have power sockets too?

In fact, why not the S Stock - at least on the Met line services - too?

My latest purchase is a 20000mAh battery with Quick Charge 3 and 3A outputs, which can charge my Nexus 6P from 0-100% in 90 minutes or charge a MacBook. In fact, it can charge three devices simultaneously. It was £35 delivered same day from Amazon.

It's big, but not particularly heavy, and easy to carry in a bag. I really don't see why I'd want to hunt down a power socket to plug in a power adapter I've got to carry, which most likely only has one USB output.

Instead I've got my own battery pack. I know it's going to work too, rather than sitting down in a carriage and realising the sockets are off... and to move now would likely mean not finding another seat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top