Class 195 - Too Many Table Seats?

[Discuss223]

I often travel from Nottingham to Leeds on Northern's new Class 195 trains and notice regular over-crowding and have had to stand on many occasions. I do think that these ought to be 3 coach sets but I am told that because of the length of Platform 17 at Leeds, this isn't possible but sitting on one right now, I can count 6 table seats in the middle portion of the carriage and several more table bays at the ends of the coach. This does seem like a ratio that's too high, considering other operators' sem-long distance services tend to have 2-3 table bays per coach - for example EMR 158s. As you can imagine, it's awkward sharing a table with a stranger and tables mean less seats so on a busy route, the likelihood is that some customers will have to stand - not ideal for a journey of nearly 2 hours. Something like the High Density HST layout that First Great Western had would be better for ensuring everyone can be seated. I can't believe Northern & DfT specified so many tables on a busy route that can't have additional coaches used even if they had the carriages available. What do you think, have you noticed lack of seat availability on the new Northern Connect services?

 

[greyman42]

As you can imagine, it's awkward sharing a table with a stranger

I don't find it awkward at all and what do you expect on public transport. You may well have to share with a stranger regardless of how many tables there are.

 

[Discuss223]

I don't find it awkward at all and what do you expect on public transport. You may well have to share with a stranger regardless of how many tables there are.

Yes, but not sat directly opposite them and playing footsie every time my legs move in the slightest way.

 

[YorksLad12]

Compared to what they replaced they do have more tables. When I used to catch the 0738 from Leeds the airline seats always filled first, the tables only reluctantly. The 195s are better for group leisure travel, less so for commuters. But then the tables don’t line up with the windows, so they’re not much good for that either.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I wasn't aware of any formal designation of 'Northern Connect' services, operated by Class 195 (or similar Class 331s). They seem to operate quite a few longer distance journeys such as Blackpool-Manchester (Cl331) or Leeds-Nottingham. I am of average height, frequently sit at a table as a solo traveller, often with 'strangers' opposite and have not noticed an undue 'footsie' problem. Some types of stock, such at Class 156 or the old Class 153s seemed much 'tighter'.

I like the modern CAF units. And I frequently enjoy chatting with other passengers.

 

[Discuss223]

I wasn't aware of any formal designation of 'Northern Connect' services, operated by Class 195 (or similar Class 331s). They seem to operate quite a few longer distance journeys such as Blackpool-Manchester (Cl331) or Leeds-Nottingham. I am of average height, frequently sit at a table as a solo traveller, often with 'strangers' opposite and have not noticed an undue 'footsie' problem. Some types of stock, such at Class 156 or the old Class 153s seemed much 'tighter'.

More tables mean less overall seats. Less seats mean more customers having to stand. Lincoln/Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds is a busy route, certainly at the Leeds end.

 

[childwallblues]

The 2 car variant of the 195 operates on many routes including Lincoln-Sheffield-Leeds and mainly replaced Class 156/158 on longer distance routes as fourcar trains. I don't think that any other platform without having to go across P15/16 which are used by the intensive TPE services.

 

[FOH]

When I used to catch the 0738 from Leeds the airline seats always filled first, the tables only reluctantly.

Down South it's the other way around weirdly. Always the facing groups go first

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The Northern 195/331 order is a bit of a case of trying to cover too many use-cases with a single layout, and ending up with something not perfectly suited to any.
The old "Northern Connect" plan led to a low-density layout being chosen, though it was always the plan that not all new units would work Connect services and not all Connect services would use new units. With hindsight two different interiors should have been provided- the present one for services such as Barrow, Windermere and Leeds to Nottingham (which admittedly wouldn't solve the issue in the OP, as that needs platform 17 sorting); and a more high-density layout with fewer table bays for routes like Airedale and Wharfdale.

 

[Trainman40083]

The issue with platform 17 at Leeds is, the Nottingham train often shares the platform with another service (Knottingley?) . Personally, I have no issue with sharing a table with anyone. In fact , met some lovely people there, and the conversation flowed , making the journey seem shorter..

 

[Kite159]

I would agree, the 195s & 331s have quite a low density interior compared to other trains.

Doesn't help that a 2 coach 195 has a lot less seats than a 2 coach 158 they replaced on the Leeds - Sheffield 'fast' services, and those 158s were already busy.

 

[duffield]

I'd say the table seats effectively reduce capacity even more than their already less efficient use of space suggests. Due to the foot conflict issue they tend to fill up as follows: one Window seat, one aisle seat diagonally opposite, then the other aisle seat, leaving one window seat (typically with a bag on it) blocked in with three people surrounding it.
People are very reluctant to try to claim that seat, whereas with an airline seat people are more likely to ask a single occupant to move over or move their bag as appropriate. This means that typically the table seats even on a very crowded service often end up only 75% occupied, when the airline seats are nearly fully occupied.

Of course I'm ignoring things like couples or groups travelling together, for simplicity, but I think at the most crowded times there are more single travellers anyhow, and this does pretty much hold true.

 

[simonmpoulton]

I'm presuming that 195104 is still out of service being repaired? Assuming that's the case that's one three car unit unavailable for service which may be why you've got just 2 cars on this service.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I wasn't aware of any formal designation of 'Northern Connect' services, operated by Class 195 (or similar Class 331s). They seem to operate quite a few longer distance journeys such as Blackpool-Manchester (Cl331) or Leeds-Nottingham. I am of average height, frequently sit at a table as a solo traveller, often with 'strangers' opposite and have not noticed an undue 'footsie' problem. Some types of stock, such at Class 156 or the old Class 153s seemed much 'tighter'.

I like the modern CAF units. And I frequently enjoy chatting with other passengers.

From what I recall of the abandoned "Northern Connect" plan, services were to be operated predominantly with the new CAF units. The exception being those in the North East and some diagrams operated from Neville Hill, which would have 158s.

 

[Peter0124]

Yes, but not sat directly opposite them and playing footsie every time my legs move in the slightest way.

I think Id rather share a table than have someone next to me in a claustrophobic airline seat

 

[skyhigh]

I'm presuming that 195104 is still out of service being repaired? Assuming that's the case that's one three car unit unavailable for service which may be why you've got just 2 cars on this service.

No, as the OP and others have said it's because of platform capacity issues at Leeds.

 

[dk1]

I think Id rather share a table than have someone next to me in a claustrophobic airline seat

See i have always been the complete opposite. Much prefer that to facing someone. Especially if they are the type to want to start an inane conversation once they make eye contact.

 

[47434]

No, as the OP and others have said it's because of platform capacity issues at Leeds.

Indeed, although I understand there are plans to extend 17 - goodness knows how though! I did wonder whether it would be feasible to do a detach on these services at Sheffield and send the remaining 2 somewhere else - but that just puts more pressure on an already challenging timetable.

At least Sundays are now 2 x 2 car sets.

 

[robert thomas]

I think Id rather share a table than have someone next to me in a claustrophobic airline seat

Agreed. On IETs in South Wales the tables always seem to fill up before the airline seats which are claustrophobic.

 

[Grumpy Git]

I don't find it awkward at all and what do you expect on public transport. You may well have to share with a stranger regardless of how many tables there are.

Ditto. I travel alone 95% of the time and always prefer a table (window seat facing forwards if possible ). The only downside can be someone sitting opposite who assumes it's OK for their laptop to take-up the full table width!

 

[JD2168]

I do feel on Northern Class 195 that there are too many table seats with the use of the trains on the busy Nottingham/Lincoln to Leeds via Sheffield service. Obviously the problem would be instantly solved with a third carriage but then you have the short Platform 17 at Leeds causing the issue.

To me a few more airline seats would have been better & would have possibly enabled the table seats to be better aligned with the windows than at present.

 

[xotGD]

Plenty of people prefer the table seats. Especially those who want to use their laptop. Like me.

 

[YorksLad12]

Plenty of people prefer the table seats. Especially those who want to use their laptop. Like me.

How easy is it to use your laptop when someone sits opposite you? I'd rather have fewer, deeper tables and more airlines for this reason; you can't have four people using laptops at the same time, especially when they have bags to stow. I've seen people take up the whole of the three-seat tables at the carriage ends; one laptop, one bag, one coat. That's people for you!

 

[Peter0124]

How easy is it to use your laptop when someone sits opposite you? I'd rather have fewer, deeper tables and more airlines for this reason; you can't have four people using laptops at the same time, especially when they have bags to stow. I've seen people take up the whole of the three-seat tables at the carriage ends; one laptop, one bag, one coat. That's people for you!

That would depend on the size of table. Pretty easy on IC services.

 

[Halish Railway]

Is there any evidence that having a greater ratio of airline-style seats would increase density? Remember that a fixed table is just occupying the space used primarily for legroom.

Looking at the area over the bogies shows that two rows of airline-style seats takes up exactly the same amount of space as two rows arranged around a table, so the only way to increase density within the confines of the two sets of doors would be significantly decrease legroom to an almost unusable extent.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is there any evidence that having a greater ratio of airline-style seats would increase density?

Yes. The space between the seat backs of adjacent sets of facing seats is wasted (or luggage space if you prefer - though it's not particularly useful luggage space because of its shape) - that space added up along a whole vehicle can give you a couple of extra rows.

Even if you go for the efficient layout the Class 158 has (alternating two airline rows with a bay) you have some back-to-back seats.

 

[xotGD]

How easy is it to use your laptop when someone sits opposite you?

No problem at all when neither laptop user is being silly and trying to claim more than half the width of the table.

Using a laptop on a 333 is much more of a challenge.

 

[35B]

How easy is it to use your laptop when someone sits opposite you? I'd rather have fewer, deeper tables and more airlines for this reason; you can't have four people using laptops at the same time, especially when they have bags to stow. I've seen people take up the whole of the three-seat tables at the carriage ends; one laptop, one bag, one coat. That's people for you!

I'm 6'6" and I simply cannot use a laptop in an airline seat because I cannot get a clear angle on the screen and type. I've not used the 195s but my experience is that if I'm facing someone else with a laptop, we all make shift with the available space.

 

[Allwinter_Kit]

I'm definitely on team table seat. The airline seats are cramped and claustrophobic when you're over 6'0, and utterly useless if you want to use a laptop. The table seats are instead quite roomy and I've never experienced any real problem with people sharing them. I find that when the train gets busy it's the table seats that fill up first, and then the airline ones that follow - but all anecdata of course.

I think it is one of those things where preferences do seem to split roughly down the middle, but I find that the 195s have enough of each type for most people to be content. And if they don't - then they need another carriage anyway.

 

[norbitonflyer]

I'm on team table. Even though I'm only 5'9 I find knee room in airline seats cramped, the seatback in front of me too close, and inadequate view outside if I'm on the gangway (as I have to be if I want somewhere to put my legs).

Yes, with a table seat you have to share legroom with the person opposite, but that's not difficult even with my size 10 feet.