In article ,
(1577+2260) wrote:

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:46:15 +0000, Mrs Redboots
wrote:

Yeah, that bit I knew - I've been on the 319s of Thameslink often
enough, and on Eurostar, too. But I hadn't realised the trains that I
occasionally catch between West Brompton & Clapham Junctions weren't
the usual Southern ones - and the Silverlink ones are so similar that I
never noticed *that*, either!

If you only catch them between West Brompton and CLapham Junction you
won't have noticed the power change - it's further north. The
Silverlink trains on that route are 313s; Southern used to use 319s
(like Thameslink) that way as they can use both power supplies, but I
believe they use Electrostars now.

All are dual voltage but the very different Silverlink livery should give
it away, surely?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
(S R) wrote:

I was amused to read, at CJ, that Southern are bringing in a new fleet
of suburban trains, since I was on one that was older than any.....
and my mother, who was with me, commented on how much more comfortable
the CEP was than the new train which had brought her up from Arundel
earlier in the day! How true....

I think this has been commented on befo as cars become ever queiter
and more comfortable, trains are, in a manner of speaking, travelling in
exactly the opposite direction.

While I too prefer Mark I seats on the CEP/CIGs the new trains are
quieter.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote to uk.transport.london on Sat, 18 Dec 2004:


All are dual voltage but the very different Silverlink livery should give
it away, surely?

Well, obviously - but to some of us a 3x2 train with uncomfortable
back-rests is a 3x2 train with uncomfortable back-rests no matter what
sort of livery it is wearing! Nor, indeed, who is responsible for
running it!
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 18 December 2004

In article ,
] (Arthur Figgis) wrote:

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 23:20:09 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On 16 Dec 2004, James wrote:

Yes, Southern has started refurbing the 455s. I was on one the other
day from Mitcham Jct to Ewell E. Very nice job. High-backed seats,
but sadly still 3+2.

Are new trains 2+2, then? Surely 3+2 is the best arrangement for
trains on inner suburban services; they seat 25% more people than 2+2s.

The snag is, within the British loading gauge(s) in reality they
don't.

AIUI, in
2+2, the width gained from liquidating the fifth seat goes into making
the four survivors wider, not providing more room the aisle, so it's
not as if you get more standing passengers in return.

You'll have to excuse my ignorance - i live in tubeland, and before
that, Hackney, manor of the 315.

The refurbed SWT 455s are 2+2 with more standing space, the Southern
ones are still 3+2. The problem with 3+2 is that the middle seat only
provides theoretical extra seating capacity. Unless one happens to be
on a train full of children or under-fed midgets the middle seat is
all but unusable. Many people would rather have decent standing room
than cramped standing space and a view of half a seat just visible
between the two seated passengers!

When I've been on 455s or 317s at busy times most of the 3 seat benches
have been filled without problems.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

The refurbed SWT 455s are 2+2 with more standing space, the Southern
ones are still 3+2. The problem with 3+2 is that the middle seat only
provides theoretical extra seating capacity. Unless one happens to be
on a train full of children or under-fed midgets the middle seat is
all but unusable. Many people would rather have decent standing room
than cramped standing space and a view of half a seat just visible
between the two seated passengers!

I have heard a lot of people saying this, but in my Experience of
Silverlink (County), Chiltern Railways & c2c, I have never seen people
standing when there is a middle seat avaliable.
--
To reply direct, remove NOSPAM and replace with railwaysonline
For railway information, news and photos see http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk

Joe wrote:
The refurbed SWT 455s are 2+2 with more standing space, the Southern
ones are still 3+2. The problem with 3+2 is that the middle seat only
provides theoretical extra seating capacity. Unless one happens to be
on a train full of children or under-fed midgets the middle seat is
all but unusable. Many people would rather have decent standing room
than cramped standing space and a view of half a seat just visible
between the two seated passengers!


I have heard a lot of people saying this, but in my Experience of
Silverlink (County), Chiltern Railways & c2c, I have never seen people
standing when there is a middle seat avaliable.

I think commuters are much more willing to ask people to let them sit in
a middle seat than leisure passengers - so it varies depending on the
time of day. Either that, or a certain critical mass of passengers is
required before people resort to middle seats...

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:51:56 +0000, Joe
wrote:

The refurbed SWT 455s are 2+2 with more standing space, the Southern
ones are still 3+2. The problem with 3+2 is that the middle seat only
provides theoretical extra seating capacity. Unless one happens to be
on a train full of children or under-fed midgets the middle seat is
all but unusable. Many people would rather have decent standing room
than cramped standing space and a view of half a seat just visible
between the two seated passengers!

I have heard a lot of people saying this, but in my Experience of
Silverlink (County), Chiltern Railways & c2c, I have never seen people
standing when there is a middle seat avaliable.


Journeys on these TOCs tend to be somewhat longer than journeys with
say Southern or SilverlinkMetro. People are less likely to stand for
15-20 minutes where there are seats available. However on Metro
services the reverse psychology applies, people are less likely to
squeeze in between two strangers for a journey of only 5-10 minutes.

PRAR
--
http://www.i.am/prar/
As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. Dick Cavett
Please reply to the newsgroup. That is why it exists.
NB Anti-spam measures in force
- If you must email me use the Reply to address and not

Joe wrote to uk.transport.london on Sat, 18 Dec 2004:

The refurbed SWT 455s are 2+2 with more standing space, the Southern
ones are still 3+2. The problem with 3+2 is that the middle seat only
provides theoretical extra seating capacity. Unless one happens to be
on a train full of children or under-fed midgets the middle seat is
all but unusable. Many people would rather have decent standing room
than cramped standing space and a view of half a seat just visible
between the two seated passengers!

I have heard a lot of people saying this, but in my Experience of
Silverlink (County), Chiltern Railways & c2c, I have never seen people
standing when there is a middle seat avaliable.

Perhaps Southern commuters are fatter, since I've often seen this!
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 18 December 2004

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Charles Ellson wrote:

In article
"Tom Anderson" writes:

On 16 Dec 2004, James wrote:

Yes, Southern has started refurbing the 455s. I was on one the other day
from Mitcham Jct to Ewell E. Very nice job. High-backed seats, but sadly
still 3+2.

Are new trains 2+2, then? Surely 3+2 is the best arrangement for trains on
inner suburban services; they seat 25% more people than 2+2s. AIUI, in
2+2, the width gained from liquidating the fifth seat goes into making the
four survivors wider, not providing more room the aisle, so it's not as if
you get more standing passengers in return.

You'll have to excuse my ignorance - i live in tubeland, and before that,
Hackney, manor of the 315.

Unless the 315 has a different seating layout from a 313 you should have
noticed what is wrong with 3+2 seating on inner-suburban services when
more than a few people are standing.

Not really - AFAICR, people sat on all the seats. Perhaps Hackneyites and
Waltham Foresters aren't as precious about their personal space as
SWTLanders . Or perhaps it's just that the trains were so crowded, there
wasn't any more room to stand in, so people sat down!

I take the point, though - in this case, going from 2+3 to 2+2 means
getting a wider + (if you see what i mean!), so although you've got 20%
less seating (nominally - the loss in real terms is smaller if the
utilisation of the third seats is low), you get more standing space to
make up for it. Seems eminently sensible. The longitudinally-seated
vestibules are a good idea, too.

tom

--
3.141592666666 and then it's just all sixes for the other 298 digits. Then
after that there's just hieroglyphs of scary eyes.

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:51:56 +0000, Joe
wrote:

The refurbed SWT 455s are 2+2 with more standing space, the Southern
ones are still 3+2. The problem with 3+2 is that the middle seat only
provides theoretical extra seating capacity. Unless one happens to be
on a train full of children or under-fed midgets the middle seat is
all but unusable. Many people would rather have decent standing room
than cramped standing space and a view of half a seat just visible
between the two seated passengers!

I have heard a lot of people saying this, but in my Experience of
Silverlink (County), Chiltern Railways & c2c, I have never seen people
standing when there is a middle seat avaliable.

OTOH, it is common on the Southern (and sometimes SWT) trains I use.
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK