• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

DJL

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2013
Messages
310
Heads up if you're planning on going to see the mock up at the ExCeL, there's planned strike action on the DLR on that day, 29th January.

Is that because all the DLR staff want to go and see the mockup?

(just in case you didn't guess - that was intended as a joke)
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
Poster up at King's Cross today saying which days you can visit the station for a preview. Didn't note dates though, but think it's one day in February and one in March.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,771
Be interested as to where they're going to put a life size two carriage model at Cambridge!
 

transmanche

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
6,018
Be interested as to where they're going to put a life size two carriage model at Cambridge!
They're not. See upthread: the full-size mock-up will be at the one-off exhibition at the ExCEL. The roadshow visiting various stations will probably just have the small model.
 

deltic08

On Moderation
Joined
26 Aug 2013
Messages
2,499
Location
Ripon
Can anybody please explain why 319s were built with emergency end doors for central section tunnels yet 700s do not have these?
 

DJL

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2013
Messages
310
As a general question on that point - what is the thinking behind not providing interconnecting doors?

Is there a substantial cost saving? Does it improve the driver's view?

I've just always thought it odd that even new trains are not always provided with these doors which have an obvious advantage to the passenger, and to guards/ticket inspectors too.
Not to mention the driver on a DOO service when the passenger alarm gets pulled. (I've seen the driver have to get out and walk along the trackbed to reset an alarm, Presumably this needs clearance from the signaller and obviously takes a lot longer than walking down inside the train (Assuming it isn't rammed))
 

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
700s are fixed formation trains of 8 and 12 cars in length, I don't think there is any plan to operate 16 or 24 length trains through Thameslink hence why they aren't really needed
 

DJL

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2013
Messages
310
700s are fixed formation trains of 8 and 12 cars in length, I don't think there is any plan to operate 16 or 24 length trains through Thameslink hence why they aren't really needed

Yes I thought that might be the case for the 700s, however my question was more of a general one.
 

TheGrew

Member
Joined
31 Jul 2012
Messages
334
Yes I thought that might be the case for the 700s, however my question was more of a general one.

I know some drivers aren't keen due to poor visibility. Other than that if the train is never planned to work in multiple then I guess it is one more complexity (and therefore extra cost?)
 

DJL

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2013
Messages
310
I know some drivers aren't keen due to poor visibility. Other than that if the train is never planned to work in multiple then I guess it is one more complexity (and therefore extra cost?)

376 work in multiple and have no connecting door
 

TheGrew

Member
Joined
31 Jul 2012
Messages
334
376 work in multiple and have no connecting door

Yes but where they planned to work in Multiple from the beginning? That is what I am getting at really. Otherwise I too am surprised they didn't go for a 375 or 377. Do the 376's run DOO as that is sometimes the other reason, some drivers demand better visibility for DOO operation for safety reasons.
 

starrymarkb

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
5,985
Location
Exeter
As a general question on that point - what is the thinking behind not providing interconnecting doors?

Is there a substantial cost saving? Does it improve the driver's view?

I've just always thought it odd that even new trains are not always provided with these doors which have an obvious advantage to the passenger, and to guards/ticket inspectors too.
Not to mention the driver on a DOO service when the passenger alarm gets pulled. (I've seen the driver have to get out and walk along the trackbed to reset an alarm, Presumably this needs clearance from the signaller and obviously takes a lot longer than walking down inside the train (Assuming it isn't rammed))

They won't be working in Multiple, the couplers at the outer ends are emergency use only.

Also the 319s required cab front doors for Emergency use in the tight single bores around Moorgate, now the branch is closed all tunnels are either double track or have evacuation walkways in the case of the new ECML connection
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Ends without gangways might be appropriate for trains that rarely work in multiple or for suburban-type journeys where staff don't need to pass through the train and there are no narrow tunnels requiring end door evacuation. Gangways do cost money, add weight and compromise the cab design.

When the 170s were built it was probably expected that demand would mostly require them to run singly, but these days they regularly double up on certain routes and perhaps with hindsight a gangway would have been approprate on some of the fleets, as provided later on the 172s.

Although end doors aren't needed any more on Thameslink, having through gangways within a set is very helpful for emergency evacuation because the driver can detrain all passengers through one door instead of having them exit further back where crew supervision isn't possible. Partly for this reason, the Crossrail stock (which will also multiple only in an emergency) will have wide gangways within the unit but no end gangways.
 
Last edited:

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,841
Yes but where they planned to work in Multiple from the beginning? That is what I am getting at really. Otherwise I too am surprised they didn't go for a 375 or 377. Do the 376's run DOO as that is sometimes the other reason, some drivers demand better visibility for DOO operation for safety reasons.

Yes, they were always intended for 10-car operations. 376s were basically designed as a cheap, suburban unit though. The cost of installing a gangway was probably felt unnecessary. They are exclusively operated as DOO trains too. Well, I'm not aware of any guard worked 376 services.
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
Look at that one guys, it might be interesting

Nice find. Translated...

The Thameslink line is a 225 km long distance in England, which leads through London from Bedford to Brighton. Currently, the Company period Capital Connect is responsible for the operation of equipped with two power systems route. In order to increase the fleet of vehicles on the one hand, or to refurbish as well, we chose Siemens to supply eight-and twelve-part sets in dual mode (25kV ~ / = 750V) version. This based on the Desiro platform and up to 160km / h fast vehicles are manufactured in the factory Krefeld and will begin commercial operation in 2016. After the production of the Erstexemplare has already begun, those are associated acceptance tests in full swing. This resulted in two members of a twelve-part railcar in the Vienna climatic wind tunnel of RailTec Arsenal. Ironically, did not reach the two DUTs your destination on the rail, but were delivered with the argument of a "cost savings" calculated by lorry. Our document images show the vehicles after exiting the unloading in the outdoor area of the RTA:
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,841
I think that looks really good, not at all ugly IMO, unlike what other people have said about them.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
Hmm. Not so sure about that. Still, I hate(d) the 380s too.

But a train is a train and it's the reliability and comfort inside that matters.
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
I think that looks really good, not at all ugly IMO, unlike what other people have said about them.

No they are looking very smart indeed. Think now we have a fully proper coach to look at a proper opinion can be formed.
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,841
Hmm. Not so sure about that. Still, I hate(d) the 380s too.

But a train is a train and it's the reliability and comfort inside that matters.

I agree the 380s are ugly. The 700 looks a lot better without that monstrosity of a gangway on the front though IMO.
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
Just noticed the DOO camera location. Looks like a better location for coverage of the doors than the Electrostar location.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,098
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Has anyone else noticed the significant change in bogie construction yet? Saves a significant amount of semi sprung weight and will do wonders for track wear...
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
I heard the train will be fully operational. It's lack of movement will simply be an accurate simulation of what it will be like running through the core once the link to the GN line is complete.

Sent from my D5503 using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top