Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress

[jon0844]

Or in my case, connections (often having one device for every network - or at the very least two)!!

 

[Nic Robinson]

Summing up: seems the trains are brilliant technically but are let down by the seating. I admit to being most disappointed by the lack of legroom in airline seats...reminded me of the original Mk 4 legroom which was a disgrace given the distances.

Looking forward to lots more runs in coming weeks.

 

[The Box Photter]

I notice that this morning's 0734 Bedford to Brighton was cancelled again. In addition tonight's 1635 Brighton to Bedford "...is being delayed from Brighton due to a fault on this train". Both services are supposed to be class 700s.

 

[whoosh]

Has anyone authorised the funding of adding the 'aforementioned things'?

Yes, DfT windfall from selling 4G frequencies I believe.

 

[The Box Photter]

Update- 1635 Brighton to Bedford has now been cancelled due to a brake problem. That's two nights in a row that a class 700 has fallen down on that train.

Class 700 clearly not brilliant technologically or for passenger comfort.

 

[Bungle965]

Update- 1635 Brighton to Bedford has now been cancelled due to a brake problem. That's two nights in a row that a class 700 has fallen down on that train.

Class 700 clearly not brilliant technologically or for passenger comfort.

:roll:
What do you not understand about the fact that these are new trains, and the vast majority of new trains cannot just spring out of their boxes brand new and `just work`, I am sure that we all wish thay they could. They are bound to have teething troubles some trains have them more than others!
Sam

 

[100andthirty]

Often the "out of the box" problems are "finger trouble".

 

[carriageline]

Plus, the reason behind a delay code can be a bit misleading.

For example, driver has an issue with releasing the brakes. Cos the units are new, driver unfamiliarity, whatever.

Driver rings up fleet to help with the issue.

Say 5-15 minutes later the problem Is sorted. But now the train is late, and it's not always worth running it, so that service gets cancelled so the stock can travel ECS to form it's return working right time.

All I'm saying is it doesn't necessarily mean the stock is sat there with the brakes hard on!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dgl]

Just remember, these few teething troubles are nothing when compared to late 90's/early 2000 Alstom UK built trains

Sent from my Lumia 625 using Tapatalk

 

[neilm]

Just remember, these few teething troubles are nothing when compared to late 90's/early 2000 Alstom UK built trains

Sent from my Lumia 625 using Tapatalk

Or Class 375/377 which could not be coupled together, I remember the sheets in the window saying what software was installed.

 

[Class377/5]

:roll:
What do you not understand about the fact that these are new trains, and the vast majority of new trains cannot just spring out of their boxes brand new and `just work`, I am sure that we all wish thay they could. They are bound to have teething troubles some trains have them more than others!
Sam

It's also misleading and false comments by him. Yesterday I believe was not a unit failure. However he is making many assumptions based on little information.

I was always taugh that assume means ass (out of) u (and) me. Seem some could do with taking that thought in.

Right now the 700 failure rate is below the 377 and 387 introduction on Thameslink. Just remember right now we have a very large magnifying glass over ever 700 run so any issue is being made out to be bigger than it is while we also ignore the other various failures on the line. I notice no comments about the 387 taken out of service in peak yesterday with a defect mentioned anywhere.

We need to keep perspective especially as the life time 'failures' rate of rolling stock isn't called a bath tub curve for nothing folks.

 

[ComUtoR]

What do you not understand about the fact that these are new trains, and the vast majority of new trains cannot just spring out of their boxes brand new and `just work`, I am sure that we all wish thay they could. They are bound to have teething troubles some trains have them more than others!

Why ?

Trains have been built for years now and many of the systems are pretty standard. They go through a huge design and build process and do have a testing program. They cost millions to build and procure etc so why do they get to the passenger in such a poor state ?

I must admit, I do believe it shouldn't happen. When I buy a product I expect it to work. Why is there an acceptance for non working equipment and "teething problems" ?

If the doors don't work then why ? Is it incompetence, departments not working together, poor craftsmanship ? Poor design ? totally new tech ?

I'm not on any kind of downer, just curious as to why this is both expected and accepted.

Cheers in advance.

 

[The Box Photter]

It's also misleading and false comments by him. Yesterday I believe was not a unit failure. However he is making many assumptions based on little information.

I was always taugh that assume means ass (out of) u (and) me. Seem some could do with taking that thought in.

Right now the 700 failure rate is below the 377 and 387 introduction on Thameslink. Just remember right now we have a very large magnifying glass over ever 700 run so any issue is being made out to be bigger than it is while we also ignore the other various failures on the line. I notice no comments about the 387 taken out of service in peak yesterday with a defect mentioned anywhere.

We need to keep perspective especially as the life time 'failures' rate of rolling stock isn't called a bath tub curve for nothing folks.

So how come two days in a row one of the busiest peak trains from London to Bedford has been cancelled? On both days the reason given by Thameslink was "unit failure ". That train is supposed to be covered by a class 700. This morning the failed unit was a class 700. Check the records.

The units aren't reliable enough to run key peak hours trains yet.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's also misleading and false comments by him. Yesterday I believe was not a unit failure. However he is making many assumptions based on little information.

I was always taugh that assume means ass (out of) u (and) me. Seem some could do with taking that thought in.

Right now the 700 failure rate is below the 377 and 387 introduction on Thameslink. Just remember right now we have a very large magnifying glass over ever 700 run so any issue is being made out to be bigger than it is while we also ignore the other various failures on the line. I notice no comments about the 387 taken out of service in peak yesterday with a defect mentioned anywhere.

We need to keep perspective especially as the life time 'failures' rate of rolling stock isn't called a bath tub curve for nothing folks.

So how come two days in a row one of the busiest peak trains from London to Bedford has been cancelled? On both days the reason given by Thameslink was "unit failure ". That train is supposed to be covered by a class 700. This morning the failed unit was a class 700. Check the records.

The units aren't reliable enough to run key peak hours trains yet.

 

[Class377/5]

Why ?

Trains have been built for years now and many of the systems are pretty standard. They go through a huge design and build process and do have a testing program. They cost millions to build and procure etc so why do they get to the passenger in such a poor state ?

I must admit, I do believe it shouldn't happen. When I buy a product I expect it to work. Why is there an acceptance for non working equipment and "teething problems" ?

If the doors don't work then why ? Is it incompetence, departments not working together, poor craftsmanship ? Poor design ? totally new tech ?

I'm not on any kind of downer, just curious as to why this is both expected and accepted.

Cheers in advance.

Train systems are not all the same. As with the Aventra, the Desiro City are brand new platforms and under the hood state of the art.

If this sounds like just upgrading because you can it's worth noting the 377 software runs on a very old windows (remember the Base design is 1997 and hasn't been changed since IIRC).

The railway requires a higher level of testing and proof compared to other industries like your car for example.

It worth pointing out that there have been many recalls of cars recently from issues with them and the railway is no different.

The issue is not new either as the 313s suffered major issues themselves while being introduced that makes every 700 'reported' failure look like nothings happened!

As for the example of doors not working, well so far it's pretty much units operating as they are planned too. It's just they work different to the Electrostar models so there issues there. It's part of the learning process where a driver has had five years of experience with a 377 is likely to feel confident in what he has to do. The 700s have only been around a few weeks so there just isn't the level of confidence in them YET. The same was true when TL rolled out 377s.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So how come two days in a row one of the busiest peak trains from London to Bedford has been cancelled? On both days the reason given by Thameslink was "unit failure ". That train is supposed to be covered by a class 700. This morning the failed unit was a class 700. Check the records.

The units aren't reliable enough to run key peak hours trains yet.

So how come two days in a row one of the busiest peak trains from London to Bedford has been cancelled? On both days the reason given by Thameslink was "unit failure ". That train is supposed to be covered by a class 700. This morning the failed unit was a class 700. Check the records.

The units aren't reliable enough to run key peak hours trains yet.

I have checked the records. Hence why I said I'm not going off tweets that come from people that (to be fair should't know) the real details behind an incident.

Your also assuming that unit failure is not only for that train. If a train fails eariler on and a driver then cannot make another train that is cancelled due to a train failure which is the cause of a second train even tho it may have been a 319 failure and driver is doing a different class. This is where your views are falling down as you keep making assumptions which I know some of the time to be completely untrue.

 

[The Box Photter]

Sorry about the double post. Being thrown around on a 377 at the moment.

How long have these class 700s been on test? FFS Siemens should have spent less money on putting one in a freezer and instead given one to a militant ham-fisted driver and 500 out of work chavs then told the driver to run round & round the test track opening & closing the doors every now and then whilst the passengers tried to break the doors.

 

[Bungle965]

Why ?

Trains have been built for years now and many of the systems are pretty standard. They go through a huge design and build process and do have a testing program. They cost millions to build and procure etc so why do they get to the passenger in such a poor state ?

I must admit, I do believe it shouldn't happen. When I buy a product I expect it to work. Why is there an acceptance for non working equipment and "teething problems" ?

If the doors don't work then why ? Is it incompetence, departments not working together, poor craftsmanship ? Poor design ? totally new tech ?

I'm not on any kind of downer, just curious as to why this is both expected and accepted.

Cheers in advance.

I don't think there's any problems that you can't foresee with that kind of rigorous testing
I think the problems are human error, which is almost unavoidable.
And manufacturing defects, which should be unacceptable and you correct that they should not happen.
Sam

 

[The Box Photter]

Train systems are not all the same. As with the Aventra, the Desiro City are brand new platforms and under the hood state of the art.

If this sounds like just upgrading because you can it's worth noting the 377 software runs on a very old windows (remember the Base design is 1997 and hasn't been changed since IIRC).

The railway requires a higher level of testing and proof compared to other industries like your car for example.

It worth pointing out that there have been many recalls of cars recently from issues with them and the railway is no different.

The issue is not new either as the 313s suffered major issues themselves while being introduced that makes every 700 'reported' failure look like nothings happened!

As for the example of doors not working, well so far it's pretty much units operating as they are planned too. It's just they work different to the Electrostar models so there issues there. It's part of the learning process where a driver has had five years of experience with a 377 is likely to feel confident in what he has to do. The 700s have only been around a few weeks so there just isn't the level of confidence in them YET. The same was true when TL rolled out 377s.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I have checked the records. Hence why I said I'm not going off tweets that come from people that (to be fair should't know) the real details behind an incident.

Your also assuming that unit failure is not only for that train. If a train fails eariler on and a driver then cannot make another train that is cancelled due to a train failure which is the cause of a second train even tho it may have been a 319 failure and driver is doing a different class. This is where your views are falling down as you keep making assumptions which I know some of the time to be completely untrue.

Why were the trains cancelled? Your attitude stinks. Are you a Siemens shareholder?

I'm not prepared to accept the way you answer questions by casting doubt on the validity of the question or the intellect of the questioner.

How many class 700s successfully completed their alloted diagrams yesterday and how many are currently carrying fare paying passengers.?

 

[Class377/5]

Sorry about the double post. Being thrown around on a 377 at the moment.

How long have these class 700s been on test? FFS Siemens should have spent less money on putting one in a freezer and instead given one to a militant ham-fisted driver and 500 out of work chavs then told the driver to run round & round the test track opening & closing the doors every now and then whilst the passengers tried to break the doors.

No worries.

The 700s have been on test doing various bits over a few years. Actually stopping and starting, opening doors, less than a year.

I will point out the 700s have been testing far more than the 387s have been and it shows in the lower failure rate.

This extended testing process is seen as more important with Bombardier now built a testing facility at Derby.

I will point out the doors haven't broken. It's the safety system working correctly. Testing these with people would have made no difference with these incidents.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why were the trains cancelled? Your attitude stinks. Are you a Siemens shareholder?

I'm not prepared to accept the way you answer questions by casting doubt on the validity of the question or the intellect of the questioner.

How many class 700s successfully completed their alloted diagrams yesterday and how many are currently carrying fare paying passengers.?

Wow, you really haven't listened have you?

I'm questioning the validity of your evidence which quite frankly is zero creditability as it's gossip and nothing else. I'm trying to give you insight but if you cannot see that I do not see what the point of confining this discussion is as your not really discussing here.

I'm bored of bashing my head against a brick wall. I won't reply to you again unless you have a sensible point especially as this thread isn't just about you.

And for the record I have nothing to do with Siemens nor do I financially benefit from the 700s.

Have a safe jounery home.

 

[JonathanH]

How many class 700s successfully completed their alloted diagrams yesterday and how many are currently carrying fare paying passengers.?

If Realtimetrains and other sources are to be believed, all a bit unfortunate today with the identified services. It is highly likely that the issues are not all related to the traction as there was a bit of other late running / train crew issues.

TB501 - 2W91 cancelled, 1B00 started Haywards Heath with four coach train empty from Lovers Walk, 1B10 cancelled but 5B10 ran from Three Bridges to London Bridge, presumably with 700, 1B15 return ran to Brighton but picked up delay due to other trains, 1B22 / 1B25 cancelled, 1B38 / 1B41 / 1B48 / 1B51 ran.

TB502 - Cancelled throughout

TB503 - 1W11 ran, train used for TB501 from 5B10, 2W22 cancelled, 1W29 ran as did remainder of diagram - interested to know if 700 used for restart from 1W29

TB504 - Ran throughout to 1W37. 1W96 cancelled. 5W96 to Three Bridges depot left Brighton 69 minutes after 1W96 was scheduled to leave.

TB505 - Cancelled throughout

PS - no axe to grind here other than it is unfortunate that my sister's commute to London is on TB505 in both directions.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Siemens should have spent less money on putting one in a freezer and instead given one to a militant ham-fisted driver and 500 out of work chavs then told the driver to run round & round the test track opening & closing the doors every now and then whilst the passengers tried to break the doors.

I suspect, given your anger at everything to do with these trains, you would be somewhere near the front of the queue complaining if the doors froze and there was no cold weather testing, but whatever.

Trade shows are the most incredible fun way of finding out things too - you should really try it. You might learn just how much twaddle you're talking right now.

The door manufacturers (I think it's iFE in this case) have the most incredible testing rigs, for accelerated testing. They can do testing over a month which replicates a decade's worth of use, with temperature variations, with water, dirt, grit and salt sprayed on them, with lubrication removed and all sorts of combinations thereof.

They and Siemens have also had engineers on depot watching how maintenance of the existing doors is performed, what sort of access is available, where does debris get lodged and so on, the way the doors are integrated into the design is purely about reliability and maintainability now.

 

[The Box Photter]

If Realtimetrains and other sources are to be believed, all a bit unfortunate today with the identified services. It is highly likely that the issues are not all related to the traction as there was a bit of other late running / train crew issues.

TB501 - 2W91 cancelled, 1B00 started Haywards Heath with four coach train empty from Lovers Walk, 1B10 cancelled but 5B10 ran from Three Bridges to London Bridge, presumably with 700, 1B15 return ran to Brighton but picked up delay due to other trains, 1B22 / 1B25 cancelled, 1B38 / 1B41 / 1B48 / 1B51 ran.

TB502 - Cancelled throughout

TB503 - 1W11 ran, train used for TB501 from 5B10, 2W22 cancelled, 1W29 ran as did remainder of diagram - interested to know if 700 used for restart from 1W29

TB504 - Ran throughout to 1W37. 1W96 cancelled. 5W96 to Three Bridges depot left Brighton 69 minutes after 1W96 was scheduled to leave.

TB505 - Cancelled throughout

PS - no axe to grind here other than it is unfortunate that my sister's commute to London is on TB505 in both directions.

That's not very good is it, considering the impact on passengers relying on these trains to get them to work and home again. 1B00 couldn't have been a 700 if it was four coaches only. 1W96 is the 1752 Blackfriars to Bedford, one of the heaviest-loaded evening northbound services, usually full & standing to Luton. It's just too risky to diagram this service as a class 700 at present because it leaves a big hole in the service if cancelled.

Its all very well saying that these are teething troubles, but from a passenger's point of view (including mine) a cancelled train is a cancelled train. It means they can't rely on turning up at the station in the morning to catch their regular service, or home again in the evening.

Chuck the class 700 fragility into the mix with driver shortages, infrastructure weakness and the odd trespasser/fatality and its an added risk that the passengers shouldn't have to face.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I suspect, given your anger at everything to do with these trains, you would be somewhere near the front of the queue complaining if the doors froze and there was no cold weather testing, but whatever.

Trade shows are the most incredible fun way of finding out things too - you should really try it. You might learn just how much twaddle you're talking right now.

The door manufacturers (I think it's iFE in this case) have the most incredible testing rigs, for accelerated testing. They can do testing over a month which replicates a decade's worth of use, with temperature variations, with water, dirt, grit and salt sprayed on them, with lubrication removed and all sorts of combinations thereof.

They and Siemens have also had engineers on depot watching how maintenance of the existing doors is performed, what sort of access is available, where does debris get lodged and so on, the way the doors are integrated into the design is purely about reliability and maintainability now.

I don't like the trains. There, I've said it. The ones I've managed to ride on (failures permitting) have given me an aching back and pins & needles in my lower legs.

I admit it isn't an empirical study, but amongst my fellow passengers, who, contrary to popular belief do speak to each other, the consensus is that the seats are too hard and too close together and there are no tables or armrests. The lack of tables is a particular bugbear if normally you spend the hour-long commute into London each day working on your laptop. The seat pitch on the 700 airline seats doesn't give enough room to comfortably use a laptop.

Perhaps if you looked at the trains from the point of view of a passenger who'll be spending on average 480 hours per year (that's 20 days) on a class 700 for the next 10 years, rather than from the point of "look, new, shiny, must be better" you might have an idea of where I'm coming from.

If the doors and all the other systems have been tested to death, then either the testing isn't rigorous enough or its user failure.

It seems to me that the more technologically complex trains become, the more likely they are to fail because of a problem the driver can't rectify en-route. Surely questions need to be asked as to whether all the technology is really necessary, if it comes with the attendant fragility to which the class 700 is currently prone.

 

[43074]

I tried my first 700s today, on the 13:40 from Bedford to Luton (700112) and later the 16:53 from Flitwick to Bedford (700114). For positives - they look very good externally, almost striking as they arrive at a station, and on boarding the experience is pleasant - I was impressed by the light and spacious feel of the trains. The acceleration is very impressive, the PIS was very good (when it works, which it didn't on 700112) and they seem very solidly built - there were no rattles or vibrations, they ride well and are very quiet (although noise carries a long way).

The biggest issue for me was the seating, in terms of the airline seating I thought it wasn't so much the firmness of the seat which made it uncomfortable, rather the ridiculous upright posture they force you into. If they were slightly more reclined they might be more comfortable. The window seat of a pair is one to avoid completely - the lack of armrests mean there is no real divide between the two seats so one can imagine being wedged between a more portly passenger and the window all too easily. I also found myself playing footsie with the cantilever supporting the seat in front - nice idea, but it encroaches on the already limited footspace. On a train where the seat pitch is more reasonable, they could work.

So overall, I'd sum them up as ''meh''. When the niggles have been ironed out, we will be able to judge their reliability etc, but it isn't good at the moment. The biggest problem for me was the seating - fewer seats per train but more room at each seat would make them vastly better. No flip down tables/wifi I could cope with, neither are available on a 319. I'd say they are fine metro trains and will be well suited to MML stopping services, the Core and the Wimbledon Loop - they will make a great replacement for the 319s and I look forward to seeing the 707s and new GN units, but they should not be replacing 365s, 377s and 387s on outer suburban express workings, no way.

 

[Bishopstone]

By chance I was in Brighton, ready to go home, when I saw the 16.35 was due to be 700 formed and sensed an opportunity for a first ride. I bought a return to Haywards Heath.

Had a walk through, got seated in coach two and waited whilst the train was put through several re-boots, judging by the noises it was making. Told at about 16.50 that the technical fault was beyond immediate repair, and all passengers should disembark. As others have noted, the next Thameslink departure - the 17.01 - was also cancelled due to a train fault, leading to a loss of 24 coaches through the core during the PM peak.

Went back to the booking office and got a refund on my ticket!

I'm quite sanguine about the teething troubles as it's very early days, and the Electrostar and Juniper (etc) introductions were also problematic initially. That said, with the Southern/GatEx timetable thinned by crew shortages - including the loss of some Brighton - Victoria expresses - this is a poor time for rolling stock flakiness to be thrown into the mix on the Brighton mainline.

The off-peak Brighton-London Bridge Thameslink services are particularly unreliable, being canned at the first sign of train failure, staff shortage or infrastructure issues. When the core is fully operational and these workings extend onto GN/MML metals, presumably more people will notice, and comment, when several round trips are binned.

Though I didn't get to ride a 700, I sat for a while, and despite being well north of six feet in height, the legroom was better than I had been led to believe through the commentary here. I would certainly choose an aisle seat, as the intrusion of the floor-level conduits in the window seats forces you to sit with a slight twist in the hips, like a right hand drive Audi with a manual gearbox.

 

[jon0844]

I don't like the trains. There, I've said it.

Well I never. Thanks for clarifying as I am sure nobody was sure until then!

 

[ComUtoR]

Train systems are not all the same. As with the Aventra, the Desiro City are brand new platforms and under the hood state of the art.

I get that but it still beggars belief that systems can fail after they have already been through rigorous testing. By the time it hits service those kinks should be ironed out. I do understand unknowns but doors failing to open seems like a basic oversight.

If this sounds like just upgrading because you can it's worth noting the 377 software runs on a very old windows (remember the Base design is 1997 and hasn't been changed since IIRC).

I understand and I do watch the Mitrac boot on my units. One of the reasons why old software is used is because it brings reliability. I assume (yes deliberate use of the word ) that 700's and other new units still use systems that are "old faithfulls'"

The railway requires a higher level of testing and proof compared to other industries like your car for example.

Which is why I don't get why unit failures happen and why its expected. As a for example, our PIS was broken at install and is still broken. If the testing regime is so rigorous then why do they fail so frequently ? I have a new car and it hasn't failed yet so why does a new train, subject to higher testing still fail on basic systems like doors ?

It worth pointing out that there have been many recalls of cars recently from issues with them and the railway is no different.

Very true and they are mostly down to human error and things slipping through the gaps. I understand that but I don't accept it should happen. Those should be dealt with before delivery to the passenger.

The issue is not new either as the 313s suffered major issues themselves while being introduced that makes every 700 'reported' failure look like nothings happened!

Yes, its been happening for years, why do we accept it so readily ? Is it because the supplier swallows the costs ? Political pressure ? Operatonal demands ?

As for the example of doors not working, well so far it's pretty much units operating as they are planned too. It's just they work different to the Electrostar models so there issues there. It's part of the learning process where a driver has had five years of experience with a 377 is likely to feel confident in what he has to do.

So its Driver error that doors don't open ? I don't understand where you say they are working as planned but passenger and Driver reports say that doors are not opening correctly. Are you saying that they are not designed to open all 12 on a 12 car mark ? A little clarity would be appreciated.

The 700s have only been around a few weeks so there just isn't the level of confidence in them YET. The same was true when TL rolled out 377s.

Totally understand that point and I've always been a little tentative in a new unit but I do expect onboard systems to work as intended. From my perspective if I press doors open then I expect them to open. When I hit the AWS button I expect it to cancel. I really do understand differences in traction and new bells and whistles, I've been driving long enough. My course is looming and tbh I am a little apprehensive. I shouldn't expect failure to happen.

I have checked the records. Hence why I said I'm not going off tweets that come from people that (to be fair should't know) the real details behind an incident.

I'm on your side with that one. This forum is a shining example of the wrong end of the stick and jumping to conclusions.

**ninja edit**

 

[Domh245]

I don't like the trains. There, I've said it. The ones I've managed to ride on (failures permitting) have given me an aching back and pins & needles in my lower legs.

We never could have guessed!

I admit it isn't an empirical study, but amongst my fellow passengers, who, contrary to popular belief do speak to each other, the consensus is that the seats are too hard and too close together and there are no tables or armrests. The lack of tables is a particular bugbear if normally you spend the hour-long commute into London each day working on your laptop. The seat pitch on the 700 airline seats doesn't give enough room to comfortably use a laptop.

I think I mentioned it in another (now deleted) post, but the people who will talk are the people who feel strongly about it. A lot of passengers simply couldn't care either way and so don't talk about it (or are just living up to a Londoner's stereotype of absolute silence on public transport). The vast majority of restaurant customers come, have their food, leave, and that's the end of it. Those who have a horrible experience are the ones likely to then go on and write a bad review.

Perhaps if you looked at the trains from the point of view of a passenger who'll be spending on average 480 hours per year (that's 20 days) on a class 700 for the next 10 years, rather than from the point of "look, new, shiny, must be better" you might have an idea of where I'm coming from.

But which passenger's perspective do you look at it from? The Bedford commuter, or the passenger who can now board the train near the core in the peak? Also, do you look at it now, or in 15 years time when the network is even busier?

If the doors and all the other systems have been tested to death, then either the testing isn't rigorous enough or its user failure.

As mentioned, the doors have been tested to meet the specification. The doors themselves are fine, it is the systems surrounding them that seem to be the weak link.

It seems to me that the more technologically complex trains become, the more likely they are to fail because of a problem the driver can't rectify en-route. Surely questions need to be asked as to whether all the technology is really necessary, if it comes with the attendant fragility to which the class 700 is currently prone.

So, you don't want onboard WiFi then!?

That's quite obvious really. A train with a body, bogies, a motor, and no doors is obviously going to be a damn sight easier to get working that an all singing, all dancing machine. However, the all singing, all dancing train will then easily surpass the other one once everyone is trained on it, and will provide a far greater environment for staff and passengers. The problems aren't entirely with the train - some 'blame' must be apportioned to staff unfamiliarity.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What were the original Desiros like when the very first entered service (I'd assume that the SWTs 450s or the 444s were the first examples of Desiros to enter service)?

 

[Kite159]

What were the original Desiros like when the very first entered service (I'd assume that the SWTs 450s or the 444s were the first examples of Desiros to enter service)?

Didn't the 360s enter service before the 450s?

-----

Compared to the 387s, the 700s are a step backwards for passenger comfort for those passengers making longer trips (i.e. no tables/armrests/seat back tables). Probably something similar to expecting to get a 168 on a Chiltern service to Birmingham Moor Street and a pair of 172s turn up instead

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Perhaps if you looked at the trains from the point of view of a passenger who'll be spending on average 480 hours per year (that's 20 days) on a class 700 for the next 10 years, rather than from the point of "look, new, shiny, must be better" you might have an idea of where I'm coming from.

The industry is looking at the trains as a solution to passengers being left behind on platforms due to insufficient capacity on existing stock, and insufficient capacity through the core to provide additional paths and additional services as a result.

 

[gazthomas]

I've been on my first 700's. I think they're great trains, yes taking out seats is a quick fix for peak time issues, but I do find the lack of Wifi and the dubious loading detectors (I have been in a rammed carriage showing "half full" for example) a little disappointing. I do wonder in the peak that commuters with season tickets are paying too little for their tickets if the train is full to sardine-standing at 7am