SET 376 - A big disappointment
 

Jack Taylor wrote:
IIRC, after the last time, Bombardier purchased the former Chapman company
outright.

That's right: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/d...re/3330089.stm

[ The company said its seat supplier went into administration, causing
delays.

Bombardier has since bought out the troubled supplier ]

--
Darren

Sudbury Branch Line website: http://www.sudbury-branchline.co.uk
http://photos.darrenjohnson.co.uk

SET 376 - A big disappointment
 

Rich Mallard wrote:
I'm not so sure about that though - I use Bexley station on the
Dartford
line via Sidcup and very much prefer a 375/9 over a 376. I think the
376
would probably be preferred by users of Hither Green, Lewisham,
Blackheath,
Deptford, Greenwich etc, but I reckon when you get out to places such
as
Abbey Wood, Welling, Sidcup and beyond, people don't want to slum it
in
uncomfortable urban stock, particularly off-peak.


However, an operator of the trains is not simply going to terminate a
Class 376 at those locations for the sake of changing the type of unit.

Of course, there is the alternative of embarking on a train at either
Farningham Road or Swanley, where you will be able to use Class 375s
and the occasional 4 Vep. The line speed is much greater, with fewer
stops, but from my experience, it is just as crowded during the peak as
the North Kent Lines are. That is not to say that Class 375s do not
traverse our native North Kent routes: it was only yesterday that I saw
one speed through Swanscombe. However, such movements are empty stock
to Slade Green Depot.

Having said all that, there's still no excuse for making the 376
seats so
damn uncomfortable, that's just plain inexcusable. If there's gonna
be less
seating, at least make it comfortable!


I am not fond of the lack of comfortable seating either, but our lines
have far more scheduled stops than the route to Sevenoaks (Tubs Hill)
and that via Swanley. It would seem uneconomical to be using what is
general acknowledged as 'main line' stock on our lines. If I am correct
in what I remember, then the Class 375/9 is an 'outer suburban' breed,
whereas the Class 376 is 'inner suburban'. The latter describes the
North Kent network up to at least Dartford. Plus, the Class 465/466
units still constitute the bulk of the off-peak diagrams, thus at least
we still have a comparatively more comfortable alternative. A few
Doncaster-refurbished Class 465s may even creep onto our lines as a
temporary measure, thus we have some hope.

We seem to have two unfortunate extremes - the 376 designed for
ultra-peak
wedged workings, and the 2x2 375 which seems to be designed for
fairly long
distance off-peak journeys. So perhaps the 375/9 is the happy medium
after
all :-)


London to Dartford = Inner suburban. Thus, that equals Class 376.
London to Sevenoaks & Tonbridge = Outer suburban. This equates to the
modest Class 375/9.
London to Dover = Long distance. Therefore, a Class 375, not including
the 375/9 derivative.

If Crossrail finally takes off, you will have the option of traversing
the Dartford Loop (using the existing Sidcup service via Slade Green
and Erith), and embarking on Crossrail stock at Abbey Wood. You will
have to hope these trains are more comfortable!

Just to add, it is good to see Bexley station upholding the Network
SouthEast tradition of red lamp posts!

SET 376 - A big disappointment
 

"Rich Mallard" wrote in message
...
Having had several journeys to and from work on these, I wonder if anyone
else agrees with my observations:



- Despite having hardly any seating, the atmosphere is quite
claustrophobic because of the overly-high seat backs that obscure views of
the rest of the carriage when seated.


I agree these trains are pretty bad. To be honest I thought the high,
claustrophobic backed seats was a new safety thing. They seem to be
appearing on all new/refurbished trains (although not necessarily as bad as
on the 376). I quite like the two by two seating though.

Funnily enough I saw the same "high capacity" seating on a three by two 375
the other day (even in 1st) - although I think they're replacing them
eventually.

SET 376 - A big disappointment
 

The InterCity wrote:

I can understand your point concerning a claustrophobic atmosphere when
being seated: the seat backs are indeed high. However, when standing in
the vestibule area and walking down the carriages, there appeared to be
a wealth of space around me, somewhat more pleasant than the
Networkers.

High seat backs are part of the ATOC requirements for
crashworthiness

http://217.33.37.196/docushare/dsweb...4/Avst9001.pdf

6.2 Transverse seats
Transverse seats shall be high backed. The top of the seat shall
be at least 25 mm above the level of the centre of gravity of the
head of a 95th percentile male when seated on a compressed seat
cushion. The seat back shall be continuous to provide support for
the heads of a 5th percentile female to 95th percentile male. The
support shall be sufficiently close to the head of a normally
seated person to prevent unacceptable rotation of the head.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Have dancing shoes, will ceilidh.

SET 376 - A big disappointment
 

"Rich Mallard" wrote in
:

"Rich Mallard" wrote in message
...
snip my own comments

Following up on that somewhat negative post, instead of building a new
class of train, I think with hindsight it would have been better to
have:

- Completed the 12-car Networker project in the Kent Link area

- Lengthened all Charing Cross/Cannon St Kent Link peak trains by two
carriages or more, giving 10 or 12 car formations on virtually all
services.

- Refurbished and modified the Networkers to allow for more room for
standing by doorways

- Placed a follow-on order for more 375/9 units to be used on Networker
routes, keeping them targeted at Gillingham/Gravesend/Sevenoaks trains
when possible.

OK, so that's not going to happen now, so to resolve the current
situation I suggest:

- Removal of the tip-up seats and proper seating installed

- An urgent rethink on the seating with new deeper upholstery supplied
(and not in a dreary grey fabric)

Rich



Sounds sensible to me. But, if new trains had to be built, why on earth
build them with only 2 sets of doors per side ?! (The old standard DB S
Bahn EMU - class 420 - has 4 sets on each side of a 20.8m vehicle, its
replacement, the articulated class 423, 3 sets on a 15.5m vehicle)

David

SET 376 - A big disappointment
 

I certainly agree about the seats: they are truly shocking! They're
only vaguely bearable if you sit bolt upright, and reading a book or
whatever seems to put a strain on your neck.

The brakes would appear to require some getting used to as well, with
some lurching stops on my daily trip home on the Barnehurst line...

SET 376 - A big disappointment
 

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:40:39 GMT, Chris J Dixon wrote:

The support shall ... prevent unacceptable rotation of the head.

So much for having a conversation with the person sitting next to you...

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p11857664.html
(M50079 gleaming white in its refurbished livery: Kings Norton, 1978)

SET 376 - A big disappointment
 

"Roy Stilling" wrote in message
...
"Rich Mallard" wrote:

They already had a half-decent slimline seat design that's used in
the 375/9, but oh no, let's design something else even less comfortable.

*Worse* than the 375/9 seats? Do they have spikes on them???

If they were foam spikes, they'd be more comfortable, believe me.

I wondered if it was some kind of anti-vandal measure? Make the seats so
uncomfortable, no-one will want to travel on them at all unless they have to
(ie commuters).

How have we reached such a crazy situation? Doesn't anyone important in SET
have to travel on these things regularly? Obviously not!

Nick

SET 376 - A big disappointment
 

"Chris Tolley" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:40:39 GMT, Chris J Dixon wrote:

The support shall ... prevent unacceptable rotation of the head.

So much for having a conversation with the person sitting next to you...

Or looking out of the window...

Roger

SET 376 - A big disappointment
 

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:25:06 -0000, JB wrote:



I agree these trains are pretty bad. To be honest I thought the high,
claustrophobic backed seats was a new safety thing. They seem to be
appearing on all new/refurbished trains (although not necessarily as bad
as on the 376). I quite like the two by two seating though.

I love the high-backed seats on the new Southern trains. (Sorry, not
enough of an enthusiast to know the class number!) In fact, my train home
from work is often a two-car old unit at the front and a four-car new unit
at the rear, and I'll sit in the new bit by choice even though I
inevitably have a longer walk at my destination station.