On Jul 12, 11:28*pm, Andy wrote:

On Jul 12, 11:11*pm, Mizter T wrote:

On Jul 12, 8:32*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

"Paul Corfield" wrote:

Ah the trenchant Mr T Dunning. *Yes his posts can be a bit to the point
can't they? * I'm amazed he hasn't had someone give him a word in his
"shell like" about what he posts.

Must be a very important chap, I gather he put Boris right when he went 'off
message' about Class 378 seating...

Yeah, I saw that too, and also thought much the same thoughts...!

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!

On Jul 12, 11:54*pm, Mizter T wrote:
On Jul 12, 11:28*pm, Andy wrote:





On Jul 12, 11:11*pm, Mizter T wrote:

On Jul 12, 8:32*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

"Paul Corfield" wrote:

Ah the trenchant Mr T Dunning. *Yes his posts can be a bit to the point
can't they? * I'm amazed he hasn't had someone give him a word in his
"shell like" about what he posts.

Must be a very important chap, I gather he put Boris right when he went 'off
message' about Class 378 seating...

Yeah, I saw that too, and also thought much the same thoughts...!

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!

I'm not talking about the current situation, I was talking about
potential plans for fitting some extra seats to what will be at least
four car trains, after the Olympics. Is it really alright for the 4
car class 378s to actually have less seating than the 3 car class 313s
that they have replaced (and which have, correctly in my opinion,
already had some seats removed) ?

And I do use the WLL (and occasionally the NLL) during the peaks, so I
know what a difference the 378s have made. However I can also foresee
a time, when the frequencies finally increase (along with the extra
car) that all that standing space won't be needed. Is it really OK not
to at least consult passengers about this?

In article
,
(Andy) wrote:

I'm not talking about the current situation, I was talking about
potential plans for fitting some extra seats to what will be at least
four car trains, after the Olympics. Is it really alright for the 4
car class 378s to actually have less seating than the 3 car class 313s
that they have replaced (and which have, correctly in my opinion,
already had some seats removed) ?

And I do use the WLL (and occasionally the NLL) during the peaks, so I
know what a difference the 378s have made. However I can also foresee
a time, when the frequencies finally increase (along with the extra
car) that all that standing space won't be needed. Is it really OK not
to at least consult passengers about this?

If the seats are only along the carriage side walls it is not clear how
you can add seats. The 313s lost seats by a few 2+3 rows becoming 2+2.
Easy to do.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote in message
...
In article

If the seats are only along the carriage side walls it is not clear how
you can add seats. The 313s lost seats by a few 2+3 rows becoming 2+2.
Easy to do.

Agreed. I'd be assuming the proposed change is basically impossible,
because so much of the equipment they normally fit in the corners of the
carriages (like in 377s etc) must have been moved to new positions to make
room for the gangways, and the only obvious other place is along the sides
under the seats...

Paul S

"Andy" wrote in message
...

And I do use the WLL (and occasionally the NLL) during the peaks, so I
know what a difference the 378s have made. However I can also foresee
a time, when the frequencies finally increase (along with the extra
car) that all that standing space won't be needed. Is it really OK not
to at least consult passengers about this?

When was the last major public consultation about either mainline or LU
rolling stock seating layout? I don't recall such a consultation prior to
various tube stocks losing transverse seating yet it's now the norm.

IIRC the S stock 'consultation' was basically a take it or leave it
exhibition, except for some tiny details...

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.

Paul S

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

"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

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

"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