On Tue, 13 Jul 2010, Paul Scott wrote:

I think now that LO have 'broken the mould', there'll be more on
mainline TOCs. The Greater Anglia RUS already suggests that new stock
for some of their next inner suburban trains (eg Chingfords) will have
the same layout as 378s.

You mean longitudinal seating? Seriously? I boggle.

Not that i'm complaining. It's just something i never thought i'd see.

tom

--
The players listen very carefully and respectfully to all that the clever
men have to say about what is to happen in the next generation. They
players then wait until all the clever men are dead, and bury them
nicely. Then they go and do something else. -- The Napoleon of Notting
Hill, G. K. Chesterton

On Jul 13, 10:49*am, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

[seating consultations]

I think now that LO have 'broken the mould', there'll be more on mainline
TOCs. The Greater Anglia RUS already suggests that new stock for some of
their next inner suburban trains (eg Chingfords) will have the same layout
as 378s.

That's the first time I've heard of that. The franchise docs for
Greater Anglia didn't have any suggestion of new stock being
considered for the inner suburban lines which strikes me as a bit odd
given their age. I appreciate the RUS is a different document with a
different purpose but I thought the aspiration was for longer trains
on the inner suburban lines given there's little scope for higher
frequencies given the ambitions for more services via Harlow /
Cambridge. I can imagine that if NXEA got a 378 style layout they'd
never run a 8 car train on the Chingford line again. It would be cram
them in Japanese style on the Chingford line (as they do today when
they "forget" to stick the extra 4 carriages on for the peak) but on a
permanent basis.

--
Paul C
via Google

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
th.li...
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010, Paul Scott wrote:

I think now that LO have 'broken the mould', there'll be more on mainline
TOCs. The Greater Anglia RUS already suggests that new stock for some of
their next inner suburban trains (eg Chingfords) will have the same
layout as 378s.

You mean longitudinal seating? Seriously? I boggle.

Not that i'm complaining. It's just something i never thought i'd see.

I looked it up again, to get the full context:

"It is recommended that this [9 car trains] should be implemented along with
a scheme for replacement of the Class 315 rolling stock on the route.
Consideration should be given to providing Class 378 or similar rolling
stock with high passenger capacity layout, which it is expected will be
necessary to accommodate long term increases in passenger
demand on West Anglia Inner-suburban services and improve performance by
reducing station dwell times
in the peak."

Paul S

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...

I can imagine that if NXEA got a 378 style layout they'd
never run a 8 car train on the Chingford line again. It would be cram
them in Japanese style on the Chingford line (as they do today when
they "forget" to stick the extra 4 carriages on for the peak) but on a
permanent basis.


My reply to Tom crossed unfortunately, but the mention of a '378 layout' is
associated with 9 car trains as well...

Paul S

"Paul Scott" wrote in message
...


"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...

I can imagine that if NXEA got a 378 style layout they'd
never run a 8 car train on the Chingford line again. It would be cram
them in Japanese style on the Chingford line (as they do today when
they "forget" to stick the extra 4 carriages on for the peak) but on a
permanent basis.


My reply to Tom crossed unfortunately, but the mention of a '378 layout'
is associated with 9 car trains as well...

IIRC before the 315s came along Chingford (and Enfield Town) did have 9
coach trains. And before the Victoria Line came to relieve the load,
Chingford's peak service was 9 tph.

Peter

On 13/07/2010 12:57, Peter Masson wrote:


"Paul Scott" wrote in message
...


"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...

I can imagine that if NXEA got a 378 style layout they'd
never run a 8 car train on the Chingford line again. It would be cram
them in Japanese style on the Chingford line (as they do today when
they "forget" to stick the extra 4 carriages on for the peak) but on a
permanent basis.


My reply to Tom crossed unfortunately, but the mention of a '378
layout' is associated with 9 car trains as well...

IIRC before the 315s came along Chingford (and Enfield Town) did have 9
coach trains. And before the Victoria Line came to relieve the load,
Chingford's peak service was 9 tph.

Peter

Indeed - I commuted to school from Chingford to Liv St. for 7 years in
the late 60s / early 70s, and I remember the 9 trains per hour. They
were in three groups of 3, one group every 20 minutes. The first two of
the group were fast between St. James' St and Liv St. (missing Clapton,
Hackney Downs and Bethnal Green), while the third was the stopper. And
in the rush hours they were all 9 car (3x3) trains.

Just a quick reminisce!

Kevin

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 03:54:46PM -0700, Mizter T wrote:

Says the man who seemingly has absolutely no idea how much most NLL
and WLL users prefer the new trains because they can actually get on
them without feeling like they're jammed in like cattle. No Andy,
you're not going to succeed in attaching that misguided snipe on to my
comments at all!

That's funny, I thought I *was* jammed in like cattle every evening on
the way home from work. And people get left behind at Olympia and West
Brompton southbound most days cos they can't get on the trains. The
solution to overcrowding isn't to just faff about with the seating
layout, but to run more trains (one every twenty minutes just isn't
good enough) and longer trains.

--
David Cantrell | Godless Liberal Elitist

Languages for which ISO-Latin-$n is not necessary, #1 in a series:

Latin

On 13 July, 13:28, Kevin Ayton wrote:
On 13/07/2010 12:57, Peter Masson wrote:







"Paul Scott" wrote in message
...

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...

I can imagine that if NXEA got a 378 style layout they'd
never run a 8 car train on the Chingford line again. It would be cram
them in Japanese style on the Chingford line (as they do today when
they "forget" to stick the extra 4 carriages on for the peak) but on a
permanent basis.

My reply to Tom crossed unfortunately, but the mention of a '378
layout' is associated with 9 car trains as well...

IIRC before the 315s came along Chingford (and Enfield Town) did have 9
coach trains. And before the Victoria Line came to relieve the load,
Chingford's peak service was 9 tph.

Peter

Indeed - I commuted to school from Chingford to Liv St. for 7 years in
the late 60s / early 70s, and I remember the 9 trains per hour. They
were in three groups of 3, one group every 20 minutes. The first two of
the group were fast between St. James' St and Liv St. (missing Clapton,
Hackney Downs and Bethnal Green), while the third was the stopper. And
in the rush hours they were all 9 car (3x3) trains.

Just a quick reminisce!


They continued after the 315s were introduced as well, certainly
through to the late 1980s and probably till the 321s were introduced
to displace more 315s. 315s covered the off-peak, but the 9 x 305s
appeared in the peaks.

Mizter T wrote:

Especially as consultation is apparently OK for important things like
naming lines, but not for the silly things like passengers having the
chance of a seat.

Says the man who seemingly has absolutely no idea how much most NLL
and WLL users prefer the new trains because they can actually get on
them without feeling like they're jammed in like cattle. No Andy,
you're not going to succeed in attaching that misguided snipe on to my
comments at all!

Having experienced a wedged Richmond-bound 378 arriving at Willesden
Junction 20 minutes down on Saturday evening and emptying/reloading in
the blink of an eye, the trains are extremely well suited to the route.
In fact, I was using them instead of the Tube to get to/from
Marylebone to take advantage of the aircon, which beats a seat any day*.

There were three 172s parked up at the depot, too, DMU fans.

Tom

* Particularly days like last week's heatwave