Class 700

[The Stationmaster]

To a point. They're the right answer for journeys between Croydon and St Albans, but they're also going to take people from Haywards Heath to Luton airport, for which they are clearly unsuitable. It's an inner suburban train, but it's being bought to run outer suburban and inter city services.

 

That is a problem emerging with all the new 'cross London rolling stock with just the same (if not worse) happening with Crossrail where the choice between Reading and London will change from Class165/6 vs HST into Class 387 vs Class 800 vs Crossrail 'tube' trains - and all at the same fare.

 

But having said that I'm not entirely sure what the answer might be.  The relatively long units being used could possibly make provisions for both markets by having different layouts in some vehicles (although door spacing will have to match of course) but the likely consequence of that is that those who get on first will head for what they perceive as the 'most comfortable' vehicles and those joining at Haywards Heath will be left with the cramming space in which to try and stow themselves and their suitcases.  Regrettably, as with many other aspects of the railway, DafT seem to have little idea of what people actually want to use it for and like TFL have become fixated with commuting into and travel within the inner suburban and central areas.  

 

It almost suggests that two different types of train are needed on these routes (horror of horrors).

[Claude_Dreyfus]

To a point. They're the right answer for journeys between Croydon and St Albans, but they're also going to take people from Haywards Heath to Luton airport, for which they are clearly unsuitable. It's an inner suburban train, but it's being bought to run outer suburban and inter city services.

 

I don't think they are clearly unsuitable for that type of journey. Whilst they have not been designed for airport runs, they have wide doors, wide gangways, good visual information boards and far better luggage space than the 377. The seats may not be the most comfortable (I cannot comment on that as I didn't get to sit down on my journey), but look to be very similar to those on the 377.

 

As has been said, the Bedford - Brighton covers a multitude of sins; airport, London commuter (both north and south), Cross London connections, Brighton services. Can you get one train to cater for all of these duties? Probably not, so an eye will always be on its primary purpose.

[D854_Tiger]

Compared to some of the abominations BR were turning out in the 1980s they look pretty good to me.

 

Windows where not one single 3+2 seat lined up were the norm, horrible slab fronts and more often than not used on wholly inappropriate journeys. 

 

Who will forget North Wales in a class 150, indeed they still turn up, or a class 156 all the way from Birmingham to Norwich.

 

Give me a Desiro derivative over a PEP derivative (class 317, 319, 321 etc etc) any day.

 

Those BR designs may have been superbly engineered but they sure knew how to spoil the ship when it came to the passenger experience.

[jonathan452]

Cattle-class: are Thameslink's new 'tube-style' trains the future of commuting?
the guardian

 

As the UK south-east’s rail nightmare continues, a new class of commuter trains has been quietly revealed – long, metro-style carriages without tables, built to accommodate as many standing passengers as possible. Is this the new normal? Read the full story

[Joseph_Pestell]

That is a problem emerging with all the new 'cross London rolling stock with just the same (if not worse) happening with Crossrail where the choice between Reading and London will change from Class165/6 vs HST into Class 387 vs Class 800 vs Crossrail 'tube' trains - and all at the same fare.

 

But having said that I'm not entirely sure what the answer might be.  The relatively long units being used could possibly make provisions for both markets by having different layouts in some vehicles (although door spacing will have to match of course) but the likely consequence of that is that those who get on first will head for what they perceive as the 'most comfortable' vehicles and those joining at Haywards Heath will be left with the cramming space in which to try and stow themselves and their suitcases.  Regrettably, as with many other aspects of the railway, DafT seem to have little idea of what people actually want to use it for and like TFL have become fixated with commuting into and travel within the inner suburban and central areas.  

 

It almost suggests that two different types of train are needed on these routes (horror of horrors).

 

I think that we will see a time, probably quite soon, when some eastbound Class 800 trains will stop to "set down only" at Reading.

[pete_mcfarlane]

Cattle-class: are Thameslink's new 'tube-style' trains the future of commuting?

the guardian

 

As the UK south-east’s rail nightmare continues, a new class of commuter trains has been quietly revealed – long, metro-style carriages without tables, built to accommodate as many standing passengers as possible. Is this the new normal? Read the full story

 

That's a slightly confused article - it talks about commuter trains being used for longer distance journeys, and then jumps to talking about the all reserved seating policy on Continental express trains implying that it also applies to their longer distance commuter services. But at least it accepts that this isn't something unique to the UK. 

[Glorious NSE]

I think that we will see a time, probably quite soon, when some eastbound Class 800 trains will stop to "set down only" at Reading.

 

I think some already do, but from experience there is little stopping the seasoned commuter getting on it anyway.

[The Stationmaster]

I think that we will see a time, probably quite soon, when some eastbound Class 800 trains will stop to "set down only" at Reading.

 

If/when Crossrail reaches Reading that might be a possibility (as I still can't see quite how 'someone' would prevent Oystercard use on GWR trains) but the difficulty would be enforcing it on what amount to completely open platforms.  In the early privytisation years there were quite a number of GWML services which were U (pick-up) stop only at Reading which was done partly for practical reasons but also for other reasons (connected with revenue sharing arrangements - in order to stop Thames trains getting a cut).  

 

But the situation has always been with what amount to (even more so now) open platforms at both Reading and Paddington ('open' because the barriers are remote from the platform entrances) it is near impossible to make such a restriction work - other than by occasionally actually missing out the Reading stop (absolutely hilarious when that has happened).  More likely in future perhaps is that certain Up morning trains from further west might not stop at Reading and that would be quite feasible with the talked about increased frequencies for the Bristol and South Wales routes.  equally I suppose some Down evening peak trains could also omit a Reading stop.  

 

However one factor is that Reading is in itself an important commuter/leisure (honest) destination and although some way behind Paddington it is the second busiest station on the GWML in terms of passenger numbers - which in turn suggests it needs a comprehensive train service.

[Richard E]

Looking at those pictures why do I get the feeling that I've strayed onto an underground set, and an unwelcoming one at that. At least the tube trains have a bit of character, these are soulless.

[Joseph_Pestell]

I think some already do, but from experience there is little stopping the seasoned commuter getting on it anyway.

Usual technique is to charge them a Penalty Fare from the last station at which the train stopped to pick up.

[Glorious NSE]

Usual technique is to charge them a Penalty Fare from the last station at which the train stopped to pick up.

Sure - though my experience is the guard doesn't walk the train until after Reading (or later) as everyone who got on at Padd has been through a gateline...

[Joseph_Pestell]

Sure - though my experience is the guard doesn't walk the train until after Reading (or later) as everyone who got on at Padd has been through a gateline...

Yes, but we are talking eastbound here. So a team of revenue inspectors has about 30 mins to get through the train between Reading and arrival at Paddington.

 

Westbound, if the gates are at the platforms, it should be possible to program them not to take Reading tickets on trains that only pick up there. But ISTR the gates are further onto the concourse at Paddington.

[The Stationmaster]

Yes, but we are talking eastbound here. So a team of revenue inspectors has about 30 mins to get through the train between Reading and arrival at Paddington.

 

Westbound, if the gates are at the platforms, it should be possible to program them not to take Reading tickets on trains that only pick up there. But ISTR the gates are further onto the concourse at Paddington.

 

See my post above - apart from the total open platforms most of the others at Paddington are effectively open due to the common barrier lines.

[Siberian Snooper]

See my post above - apart from the total open platforms most of the others at Paddington are effectively open due to the common barrier lines.

What is the access like off the foot bridge at the other end? Does each platform apart from 1 and those on the old taxi way have barriers or is it completely open down there, it's been a while since I accessed the H & C line.

[The Stationmaster]

What is the access like off the foot bridge at the other end? Does each platform apart from 1 and those on the old taxi way have barriers or is it completely open down there, it's been a while since I accessed the H & C line.

 

The open platforms (Nos1, 8 & 9) are still completely open. No 10 & 11  have a common barrier line near the Bakerloo line subway and there is another barrier line which gives access to No.12 and via No.12 to No.s 13 &14  although the access to 13 & 14 might have changed a bit because of the platform lengthening.  There is a single entrance on the footbridge which gives access to No.s 2 to 5  plus separate stairs to No1, 6 & 7, and to No.s 8 & 9 while there is also a barrier line off the far end of the footbridge which gives access to   10 & 11 and 13 & 14 (and presumably still to No12 via 13 or 14 but again I'm not sure about the alterations.

 

But as you can see due to the common barrier lines to various groups of platforms it is impossible to control access to any single platform without a lot of extra temporary barriers of some sort.  And of course despite all these various barrier lines and open platforms it is now a major route march to access the H& C platforms from any other platform, including from 13 & 14.

[roundhouse]

These cross London services should be an inner suburban system not a medium to long distance one.

Just look at the delays between a Brighton and Bedford when a train breaks down at Blackfirars as one did the other day, there were 50 minute delays till end of service. It messes up a chunk of the South East which is set to get a much bigger problem in two years time when many more services will be added. All this pain during the LBG rebuilding will linger on. I really hope that I am wrong though.

[phil-b259]

These cross London services should be an inner suburban system not a medium to long distance one.

Just look at the delays between a Brighton and Bedford when a train breaks down at Blackfirars as one did the other day, there were 50 minute delays till end of service. It messes up a chunk of the South East which is set to get a much bigger problem in two years time when many more services will be added. All this pain during the LBG rebuilding will linger on. I really hope that I am wrong though.

 

All very true - but the die was cast long ago and it is impossible to alter direction now.

 

First you have the massive reduction in MML platforms at St Pancras requiring as many services as possible to head down Thameslink

Secondly you have the rebuild of London Bridge and the Bermondsey flyover making Thameslink a continuation of the Fast lines from Croydon, rather than the slows.

Thirdly you have the Great Northern link - which given most suburban services on that route go to Moorgate* means Thameslink has to mostly link up with the outer suburban services.

 

And most importantly, several generations of commuters have grown up used to be able to get trains from rural Sussex / Bedfordshire right into the City. If Wimbledon loop commuters would not countenance their services terminating at Blackfriars (and thus not having direct services to City Thameslink literally only a couple of hundred yards away) why on earth would other commuters not kick up an even bigger fuss if they found themselves being kicked out at London Bridge or St Pancras.

 

Had NSE restricted Thameslink to the London suburban area, things might have been different - but as we know NSE actually saw Thameslink primarily as a way of saving / earning money (through better fleet utilisation, the sale of land formerly occupied by Holborn Viaduct and getting the Government to fund new rolling stock). The bonus of new Cross London journey opportunities was actually merely a nice side benefit rather than the primary driver for the scheme. It thus went for linking Bedford and Brighton - setting a president which no Government is going to break. Indeed while the actual post 2018 Thameslink service pattern is yet to be decided, The DfT have made it a requirement that the 2TPH Bedford to Brighton service stays and also that a 2TPH Gatwick Airport to the ECML must also be provided.

 

* Moorgate is an difficult to expand underground station (given it sits directly above the Northern Line station tunnels) with only 6 car length platforms and thus cannot handle outer suburban workings.

[caradoc]

The open platforms (Nos1, 8 & 9) are still completely open. No 10 & 11  have a common barrier line near the Bakerloo line subway and there is another barrier line which gives access to No.12 and via No.12 to No.s 13 &14  although the access to 13 & 14 might have changed a bit because of the platform lengthening.  There is a single entrance on the footbridge which gives access to No.s 2 to 5  plus separate stairs to No1, 6 & 7, and to No.s 8 & 9 while there is also a barrier line off the far end of the footbridge which gives access to   10 & 11 and 13 & 14 (and presumably still to No12 via 13 or 14 but again I'm not sure about the alterations.

 

But as you can see due to the common barrier lines to various groups of platforms it is impossible to control access to any single platform without a lot of extra temporary barriers of some sort.  And of course despite all these various barrier lines and open platforms it is now a major route march to access the H& C platforms from any other platform, including from 13 & 14.

 

Arriving at Paddington this morning, and being fed up with the mucking around changing at Edgware Road from a 'Circle' line train in order to get any further east, I decided to try the H&C. However I took a wrong turning and ended up on platforms 13/14 !. I had no idea there is a swanky new concourse for the H&C Platforms, although as Stationmaster says it is a long way from most of Paddington main line. It is also, still, inadequate; Having found my way to the right place, the number of passengers coming up both stairways off a westbound service completely blocked anyone trying to go down the stairs (and this was at 0945, not at the height of the rush hour).    

 

I have said before, and I maintain, that Paddington is abysmally served by the Underground. Crossrail should alleviate this to some degree, but where will passengers off main line services to Paddington be expected to change onto Crossrail ? Not at Reading, due to the journey time and comfort (ie lack of) factors, nor at Slough, for the same reasons, and the fact that most main line trains do not stop there; Not at the most logical place either, Ealing Broadway, as no main line trains stop there. So it will have to be Paddington, which will still involve a route march of some sort, and having to pass through two sets of ticket gates. If Bedford/Brighton services can operate via Thameslink, why not Oxford/Southend via Crossrail, for example (although most certainly not with Class 700 units!) ?

[The Stationmaster]

The problem with, say, Oxford - Southend as with Thameslink is that what started off as a good idea based on sound railway and commercial sense is now being turned into some sort of glorified (well almost) inner-urban network with trains which are really only suited to very short distance journeys instead of what they started out as - through trains linking two networks and serving central London enroute.

 

Paddington has, alas, always been poorly served by the UndergrounD in some respects the big failing being poor, unreliable,  and slow, access to the City although access to the West End isn't too bad.  Although oddly in the early days of the Metropolitan Railway paddington of course offered quite good through train access to the edge of the City.

 

I think Caradoc also hits on the Catch 22 of Crossrail - it's not really sure what it is.  It will offer some improved access from  Paddington and will partially relieve the Bakerloo Line and the Central Line but it won't do much else unless you change to a real UndergrounD line in the busy central area - no fun with luggage or older people or with small children.  Strange when you think bout but the new Crossrail trains and those appearing on Thameslink in a way very strangely ignore all the lessons we were taught not very many years ago about having a railway centred on peak periods and carrying unnecessary cost the rest of the time.

[Christopher125]

Crossrail should alleviate this to some degree, but where will passengers off main line services to Paddington be expected to change onto Crossrail ? Not at Reading, due to the journey time and comfort (ie lack of) factors, nor at Slough, for the same reasons, and the fact that most main line trains do not stop there; Not at the most logical place either, Ealing Broadway, as no main line trains stop there. So it will have to be Paddington, which will still involve a route march of some sort, and having to pass through two sets of ticket gates.

I can't see a problem here to be honest - the Crossrail platforms at Paddington will be under the old taxi rank, hardly far, and by the mid 2020s it's likely that Old Oak Common will also provide an interchange between mainline and Crossrail services.

[caradoc]

I can't see a problem here to be honest - the Crossrail platforms at Paddington will be under the old taxi rank, hardly far, and by the mid 2020s it's likely that Old Oak Common will also provide an interchange between mainline and Crossrail services.

 

Changing at Paddington may not be a problem if you are reasonably young, reasonably fit, know where you're going, have a ticket that operates both barriers, and don't have children, luggage or a bike with you. Otherwise....

 

As to Old Oak Common, how many main line trains will actually call there ? Plus, the mid 2020s is 10 years away and some of us may not be around by then !

[The Stationmaster]

Changing at Paddington may not be a problem if you are reasonably young, reasonably fit, know where you're going, have a ticket that operates both barriers, and don't have children, luggage or a bike with you. Otherwise....

 

As to Old Oak Common, how many main line trains will actually call there ? Plus, the mid 2020s is 10 years away and some of us may not be around by then !

 

I can't see much sense in mainline trains calling at Old Oak - transfer there to/from Crossrail won't be much easier than at Paddington; it will be irrelevant for passengers travelling to/from LHR; and really there won't necessarily be much advantage for many journeys in interchange with HS2. 

 

On the downside it will mean further deceleration between Reading and Paddington thus actually extending journey times rather than reducing them and potentially undermining a competitive advantage of rail; it will render superfluous some of the various proposed linespeed improvements already being progressed or proposed; and it will reduce line capacity at a time when various projections are talking about the need to increase the number of trains on the Main Lines.

 

I can incidentally see some sense in having trains on the Reliefs stopping there as we are talking about some very different travel patterns and on a commercial basis the negative effect of increased journey times might well be balanced by the potential of increased business arising from more travel opportunities.  I presume that somebody somewhere will be doing the sums on that.

[phil-b259]

I can't see much sense in mainline trains calling at Old Oak - transfer there to/from Crossrail won't be much easier than at Paddington; it will be irrelevant for passengers travelling to/from LHR; and really there won't necessarily be much advantage for many journeys in interchange with HS2.

 

On the downside it will mean further deceleration between Reading and Paddington thus actually extending journey times rather than reducing them and potentially undermining a competitive advantage of rail; it will render superfluous some of the various proposed linespeed improvements already being progressed or proposed; and it will reduce line capacity at a time when various projections are talking about the need to increase the number of trains on the Main Lines.

 

I can incidentally see some sense in having trains on the Reliefs stopping there as we are talking about some very different travel patterns and on a commercial basis the negative effect of increased journey times might well be balanced by the potential of increased business arising from more travel opportunities. I presume that somebody somewhere will be doing the sums on that.

I rather think your are missing a key point here. As several posters have noted Paddington has relatively bad connectivity - certainly getting there from any part of South London is a pretty tedious business. Yes Crossrail + Thameslink will improve matters but not everybody wishes to travel via central London - particularly encumbered by luggage for example.

 

One of the reasons Southern's service to Watford junction was so popular is the ability to avoid having to go via Victoria and Euston. While yes in the case of GWR services, some may have the option of North Downs services to interchange at Reading, that doesn't really help those living in London itself.

 

As such, while I agree transfer at Old Oak between mainline services from the South West / Bristol / South Wales and HS2 or Crossrail services to Heathrow will be minimal, I think there will still be substantial numbers of people accessing the Old Oak area via the NLL / WLL connectivity TfL are trying to secure (even with the less than optimal station sites selected) who do so precisely to avoid getting to Paddington.

 

Now that doesn't mean all mainline services need to stop - just as not every WCML service calls at Watford Junction.

 

Another factor that may come into play is overcrowding at Paddington Crossrail station. On the Victoria line, a substantial number of Sussex commuters chose to circulate via SWT and Vauxhalll from Clapham Junction to avoid the long delays at Victoria Underground station which regularly had to close due to overcrowding. Stopping some inbound trams at Old Oak could, along with giving NLL / WLL options, ease the pressure at Paddington.

 

Of course the problem with that is if not every train stops, line capacity is affected - which brings us back to potential users and be fit / disbenifit calculations.

 

Also with the GLAs desire to move he various train depots in the area and engage in comprehensive redevelopment of the area while it may not currently be worthwhile to stop mainline trains at Old Oak, it would be foolish not to provide for the possibility that may change in future.

 

Finally, while yes Old Oak may increase journey times, most parallel roads are also suffering from record numbers of users - witness the Governments recently announced plan to convert the entire M4 as far a junction 11 into a 'Smart Motorway' just as soon as they finish doing the same to the M3 as far as junction 4A. In such a climate are users really going to take umbridge at a few more minutes on their journey's into / out of London at peak times? (Out of peak hours I imagine there is some spare line capacity to be had which would make a mix of stopping and non stopping on the mains more achievable)

[Peter Kazmierczak]

If they convert part of the M4 to a "Smart Motorway", I hope they do it a darn sight quicker (and smarter) than it's taking them to do the M3. The roadworks (and 50mph contaflow) seems to have been going on for years.....

[royaloak]

I think some already do, but from experience there is little stopping the seasoned commuter getting on it anyway.

They do but only on a Friday, meaning it is pointless, either dont bother or make it pick up only every weekday at Reading so there is no confusion.

 

A couple of times the train has been RA Paddington to Swindon and the poor hard done by Commuters who wanted to get off at Reading were moaning like mad on Twitter etc, the fact they shouldnt have been on the train in the first place seemed to pass them by.