ukclique > railway

gmortimer20031 (02.04.2017, 13:35)
This would appear to be quite newsworthy, am I missing a thread somewhere?



best regards
Geoff
Anna Noyd-Dryver (02.04.2017, 14:18)
gmortimer20031 <gmortimer2003> wrote:
> This would appear to be quite newsworthy, am I missing a thread somewhere?
>
> best regards
> Geoff


Hidden within the current SWT thread.

Anna Noyd-Dryver
Roland Perry (02.04.2017, 14:35)
In message <c405cd71-a137-4eab-ba47-493fa764f4d8>, at
03:35:50 on Sun, 2 Apr 2017, gmortimer20031 <gmortimer2003>
remarked:
>This would appear to be quite newsworthy, am I missing a thread somewhere?
>


"It's a bit like walking into a car showroom, and being offered
a brand new car from the factory for less money than the
identical demonstrator that is already sitting in front of you
ready to go."

If they don't mark them down (typically by 50%) to shift them, the demo
laptops in a shop are a bit like that after 6-9 months.
Clive Page (02.04.2017, 23:46)
On 02/04/2017 11:35, gmortimer20031 wrote:
> This would appear to be quite newsworthy, am I missing a thread somewhere?
>


Well if these Siemens units are anything like the class 700s being
introduced to the various Thameslink routes, I'm not surprised. They
have a very basic interior, no wifi, no tables not even tiny ones
(except in 1st class), very poor ride, information screens that are
often faulty, exceptionally uncomfortable seats.

Maybe GTR will buy up a few of them cheaply as spares to replace the
current units that break down in service.
Neil Williams (03.04.2017, 00:01)
On 2017-04-02 20:46:40 +0000, Clive Page said:

> Well if these Siemens units are anything like the class 700s being
> introduced to the various Thameslink routes, I'm not surprised. They
> have a very basic interior, no wifi, no tables not even tiny ones
> (except in 1st class), very poor ride, information screens that are
> often faulty, exceptionally uncomfortable seats.


Well, I've been on a Class 700 a few times and they seem decent enough.
Nicer, certainly, than Class 319s, and some good modern features like
the PIS.

Neil
Recliner (03.04.2017, 00:05)
Clive Page <usenet> wrote:
> On 02/04/2017 11:35, gmortimer20031 wrote:
> Well if these Siemens units are anything like the class 700s being
> introduced to the various Thameslink routes, I'm not surprised. They
> have a very basic interior, no wifi, no tables not even tiny ones
> (except in 1st class), very poor ride, information screens that are
> often faulty, exceptionally uncomfortable seats.


Apparently SWT specified a better interior for its trains than the DfT's
civil servants did for Thameslink.

> Maybe GTR will buy up a few of them cheaply as spares to replace the
> current units that break down in service.


GTR doesn't own or buy any trains. Its class 700 trains are owned by Cross
London Trains and maintained by Siemens:
<http://www.3i.com/our-business/infrastructure/core-infrastructure/portfolio/cross-london-trains>

The Class 707 trains are being acquired by Angel, which will presumably
have to either convert them to AC operation for greater flexibility, or to
negotiate a lower lease from First MTR.
Clive Page (03.04.2017, 13:02)
On 02/04/2017 22:01, Neil Williams wrote:
> Well, I've been on a Class 700 a few times and they seem decent enough.
> Nicer, certainly, than Class 319s, and some good modern features like
> the PIS.


Sorry I disagree. Yes PIS useful when it works (the last two I
encountered said "the next station is Burgess Hill" when going north
from Farringdon, and "This train terminates here" - throughout the journey).

The seats are much less comfortable, and I found the ride worse.
Neil Williams (03.04.2017, 15:44)
On 2017-04-03 10:02:48 +0000, Clive Page said:

> The seats are much less comfortable


Any 2+2 is better than any 3+2 by definition (unless you can be sure of
the 2 side).

Neil
David Walters (03.04.2017, 17:02)
On Mon, 3 Apr 2017 13:44:14 +0100, Neil Williams <wensleydale> wrote:
> On 2017-04-03 10:02:48 +0000, Clive Page said:
>> The seats are much less comfortable

> Any 2+2 is better than any 3+2 by definition (unless you can be sure of
> the 2 side).


I disagree, I'd rather sit in one of the 3 side 3+2 seats than stand.
Neil Williams (03.04.2017, 17:52)
On 2017-04-03 14:02:43 +0000, David Walters said:

> I disagree, I'd rather sit in one of the 3 side 3+2 seats than stand.


Are you, I guess, fairly slim and narrow-shouldered?

Neil
David Walters (03.04.2017, 18:30)
On Mon, 3 Apr 2017 15:52:20 +0100, Neil Williams <wensleydale> wrote:
> On 2017-04-03 14:02:43 +0000, David Walters said:
>> I disagree, I'd rather sit in one of the 3 side 3+2 seats than stand.

> Are you, I guess, fairly slim and narrow-shouldered?


Not especially. I'm a 6ft tall, 13st male. Given a choice of middle
3 seats then I'll pick the one next to the slim and narrow-souldered
people though.
Neil Williams (03.04.2017, 18:51)
On 2017-04-03 15:30:08 +0000, David Walters said:

> Not especially. I'm a 6ft tall, 13st male.


13st at 6' is *fairly* slim.

Neil
Martin Coffee (03.04.2017, 19:22)
On 03/04/17 16:51, Neil Williams wrote:
> On 2017-04-03 15:30:08 +0000, David Walters said:
>> Not especially. I'm a 6ft tall, 13st male.

> 13st at 6' is *fairly* slim.

On the contrary that is towards the top end of a healthy weight for the
height.
Neil Williams (03.04.2017, 20:09)
On 2017-04-03 16:22:08 +0000, Martin Coffee said:

> On 03/04/17 16:51, Neil Williams wrote:
>> On 2017-04-03 15:30:08 +0000, David Walters said:
>>> Not especially. I'm a 6ft tall, 13st male.

>> 13st at 6' is *fairly* slim.

> On the contrary that is towards the top end of a healthy weight for the height.


Met any rugby players lately? (BMI is a load of garbage - it doesn't
take muscular build into account properly)

Do your shoulders fully fit within the confines of a 3+2 seat? The
vast majority of adult males do not. A seat width that does not fit an
average adult male fully within its confines is not a sensible seat
width.

Neil
Arthur Figgis (03.04.2017, 20:26)
On 03/04/2017 15:52, Neil Williams wrote:
> On 2017-04-03 14:02:43 +0000, David Walters said:
>> I disagree, I'd rather sit in one of the 3 side 3+2 seats than stand.

> Are you, I guess, fairly slim and narrow-shouldered?


Or the kind of person who would scare anyone from sitting near them :)

Similar Threads