• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

LM Class 350 seats

Status
Not open for further replies.

Charlie2555

Member
Joined
12 Jun 2012
Messages
144
Location
Near Gillingham (Dorset)
Where did the blue seats and the grey carpet come from in the London Midland Class 350/1s? I noticed the 3+2 seats in the 350/2s are in a green LM colour scheme but the blue seating does not really fit in. Why do they not make them the same green as the 350/2s? Will they do this in the future?
Thanks
 

Attachments

  • SAM_9625.JPG
    SAM_9625.JPG
    221.3 KB · Views: 119
  • SAM_9505.JPG
    SAM_9505.JPG
    248.5 KB · Views: 100
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,857
350/1s date back from Central Trains before LM's tenure, and as such are in their colour scheme, however the /2s came in under London Midland. They won't be due an overhaul for a good while yet, and TBH I think it would just be change for change's sake!
 

Qwerty133

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2012
Messages
2,457
Location
Leicester/Sheffield
350/1s were delivered under silverlink and central /2s were delivered under LM in 2007 the /1s were yet ready for refurbishment so were not refurbed.
It is impossible to know at this stage if they are put into LM covering as this will proberly depend on them winning the next franchise which is up in 2015
 

AndyLandy

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2011
Messages
1,323
Location
Southampton, UK
The 350/1s are still upholstered in the "OEM" moquette, the trains were delivered in a plain livery since they arrived before (or possibly just as) London Midland took over the franchise. At the time, the trains looked rather more like this:

IMAGE_00129.jpg

Much better match for the blue interiors. :)
 

causton

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2010
Messages
5,504
Location
Somewhere between WY372 and MV7
It makes it easier to differentiate when a /1 works the Crewe and a /2 works the BHM portion of a service dividing at Northampton. For example, the guards announce "Blue seats for Crewe, green seats for Birmingham" :P
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
9,653
The blue seating is NOT down to the fact they were meant to be heading to SWT :lol:

It makes it easier to differentiate when a /1 works the Crewe and a /2 works the BHM portion of a service dividing at Northampton. For example, the guards announce "Blue seats for Crewe, green seats for Birmingham" :P

Yes I heard that announcement the other day
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,384
Location
Fenny Stratford
it is a quick and easy ay to see how pleasant a journey you will have if going a long way. Blue = good Green = bad :)

Crewe - Euston on a blue seat is much nicer than Crewe - Euston on a green seat
 

starrymarkb

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
5,985
Location
Exeter
The 350s were indeed originally for SWT as part of the 10 car suburban project. However the Government cancelled the funding for the infrastructure works needed as the trains were starting to enter build. As the cancellation was as a result of the DfT/SRA they were left to either pay Siemens the penalty charges or find new homes for the units. In the end it was agreed to build an AC batch of 350s for services on the southern WCML and they would be a common pool between Silverlink and Central trains. As they were common use they were delivered in the Silver and Blue neutral scheme pending a decision on the franchise restructuring that would eventually lead to LM
 

Lewisham2221

Established Member
Joined
23 Jun 2005
Messages
1,492
Location
Staffordshire
For all this talk about the 3+2 seated /2's being less comfortable than the 2+2 /1's, aren't the actual seats virtually the same though? I've done Stoke-Euston several times and travelled on both /1's and /2's without any noticeable difference in comfort. The legroom is the same so the only difference is having an extra seat next to you. And if there's still only 2 people sitting in an airline row, or 3/4 sat around a bay, I can't see how it makes the slightest bit of difference to being sat on a forward facing row or around a table on a /1 set.
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
Copied from twitter
@RailUKForums The Class 350/1s were destined for @SW_Trains hence the colour scheme. Surprised no-one seems to know this. Keep up!
Link : https://twitter.com/AlexHynes/status/266995925283643392

The 350s were indeed originally for SWT as part of the 10 car suburban project. However the Government cancelled the funding for the infrastructure works needed as the trains were starting to enter build. As the cancellation was as a result of the DfT/SRA they were left to either pay Siemens the penalty charges or find new homes for the units. In the end it was agreed to build an AC batch of 350s for services on the southern WCML and they would be a common pool between Silverlink and Central trains. As they were common use they were delivered in the Silver and Blue neutral scheme pending a decision on the franchise restructuring that would eventually lead to LM

The 350's were never or SWT. The 450/1's were. The change to the 350's numbering changed after deciding to sent them to WCML.

Idea was for 15 car 450/1 services and as Starrymarkb put it, went tits up when SRA found infrastructure costs were about £1bn!
 

Crossover

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Messages
9,259
Location
Yorkshire
It makes it easier to differentiate when a /1 works the Crewe and a /2 works the BHM portion of a service dividing at Northampton. For example, the guards announce "Blue seats for Crewe, green seats for Birmingham" :P

I've not personally heard that one, but people have told me of it - quite useful, I would think :D

For all this talk about the 3+2 seated /2's being less comfortable than the 2+2 /1's, aren't the actual seats virtually the same though? I've done Stoke-Euston several times and travelled on both /1's and /2's without any noticeable difference in comfort. The legroom is the same so the only difference is having an extra seat next to you. And if there's still only 2 people sitting in an airline row, or 3/4 sat around a bay, I can't see how it makes the slightest bit of difference to being sat on a forward facing row or around a table on a /1 set.

The difference is probably a lack of tables (a bit of a pain if you are on one that should be a /1 route and want to do some work) and they may be a bit narrower too, to fit in the 3+2 arrangement.
 

ATW Alex 101

Established Member
Joined
28 Dec 2010
Messages
2,083
Location
Ellesmere port
The Blue/grey seating is the original set. And the better of the two, especially on the all shacks from Crewe.

The first class isn't much better, the standard class seats with a cloth over the top
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
9,653
First class seats aren't the same type as standard ones. The first class seating can be found on 375s and 377s as standard (and first!) class seating, although they don't have the awful reclining mechanism
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,693
Location
Northwich
2-3 years before however couldnt be in livery due to jointly working for CT and silverlink

Indeed. Some units did change operator at Northampton on a through service. There were route maps for both CT and Silverlink on board the trains.

Although when the same thing happened with the 175s between FNW and W&B/ATW the 175s remained very much in First Group colours but with the First North Western name removed from the trains. However, in that instance the 175 routes were originally all FNW and it was only after franchise meddling to get an 'All Wales' franchise did they finish up being used by 2 different operators.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
For all this talk about the 3+2 seated /2's being less comfortable than the 2+2 /1's, aren't the actual seats virtually the same though?

This is also the case with the Northern 150s that FNW refurbished and the ex-Wessex 150s. Although the extra seats, lack of arm rests and less leg room on the Northern 150s makes them a lot more claustrophobic.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,543
Idea was for 15 car 450/1 services and as Starrymarkb put it, went tits up when SRA found infrastructure costs were about £1bn!

Back in 2001 the ill-fated SRA/SWT agreement for infrastructure changes in the suburban area was only planned to provide for 10 car suburban services by 2004.

There was also a longer term 'aspiration' for 16 car services on the mainlines. As the 32 x 5 car 450/1s (shown as 450/2s in most references) were to have been a standard class only unit as originally ordered, I doubt they could have been part of any plan for 16 car longer distance services. I kept a copy of the press announcement saved, but unfortunately cannot find it online, here are some relevant extracts:

Early Benefits (by 2004)

* Investment in 800 new vehicles to replace the ageing Mark 1 stock by 2004, to increase the fleet and to help relieve overcrowding

* Stagecoach will undertake a programme to lengthen platforms at Waterloo and throughout the suburban system to allow the use of 10-car trains in place of the current 8-car trains. This will increase the peak capacity on most suburban routes by 25% by the end of 2004

* A recast timetable on the Windsor and Reading lines to provide 14 extra trains in each peak and give 15 minute service frequency on the Suburban lines through Hounslow and Putney

* Doubling of the Portsmouth to Southampton service frequency and provide a new service between Southampton and a re-opened station at Chandlers Ford

Longer Term Benefits

* Improvements at Waterloo Station to provide for the safe and convenient circulation of a growing number of passengers

Also contained in the document are a set of aspirations. These are projects that will be brought forward subject to feasibility studies, and, where appropriate, passenger growth.

Aspirations

* Introduction of 16 car trains on long distance routes by extending platforms at Waterloo and other stations (2006)

* Extension of platforms 1-6 at Waterloo for 12 car suburban trains (2009)


I think you have confused two separate but related proposals.
 
Last edited:

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
Back in 2001 the ill-fated SRA/SWT agreement for infrastructure changes in the suburban area was only planned to provide for 10 car suburban services by 2004.

There was also a longer term 'aspiration' for 16 car services on the mainlines. As the 32 x 5 car 450/1s (shown as 450/2s in most references) were to have been a standard class only unit as originally ordered, I doubt they could have been part of any plan for 16 car longer distance services. I kept a copy of the press announcement saved, but unfortunately cannot find it online, here are some relevant extracts:

I think you have confused two separate but related proposals.

Not sure how 5 car units could be used in 16 car formations.......

I'm quoting what's in Modern Loco Illustrated Desiro special on here. Original SWT Desiro order was supposed to be

100x 450/0 four cars
32x 450/1 five cars
45x 444 five car units

And I quote "the five car Class 450s were ordered to allow operation of 15 car trains on the busiest routes".

After this the order was changed to increase the four car 450s by ten additional units and 30 350s to balance things out. Later on 17 additional units were ordered to bring it to a total of 127.

There is a comment on an image, "the West Coast Class 350/1 order took the vehicles originally ordered to the five car 450s. In fact when the build was underway, the identities in the factory showed the sets as Class 450/1 for many months".

EDIT: According to the Railway Center the order for the five car 450/2 were cancelled on 09/03.

The question is was the designation of 450/1 for the five cars a Siemens internal one?
 
Last edited:

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,543
... I quote "the five car Class 450s were ordered to allow operation of 15 car trains on the busiest routes".

Doesn't mean they're right. Probably wishful thinking.

If anyone's interested I've attached the whole of the SRA/SWT 'heads of terms' announcement below (just txt unfortunately - will need formatting).

Would have been expensive as a whole package, but I suggest the 10 car suburban services weren't actually the straw that broke the camel's back...
 

Attachments

  • SWT SRA Heads of terms 2001.txt
    10.2 KB · Views: 8

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
Doesn't mean they're right. Probably wishful thinking.

If anyone's interested I've attached the whole of the SRA/SWT 'heads of terms' announcement below (just txt unfortunately - will need formatting).

Would have been expensive as a whole package, but I suggest the 10 car suburban services weren't actually the straw that broke the camel's back...

Doesn't mean they are wrong neither. As far as we know they are correct but plan was changed (as it often is). However evidence of what the five car 450s were to be numbered will properly never be know for sure now.

Thought I'd include this as you missed the most curious inclusion of the aspirations.

Aspirations

* Introduction of 16 car trains on long distance routes by extending platforms at Waterloo and other stations (2006)
* Extension of platforms 1-6 at Waterloo for 12 car suburban trains (2009)
* Various infrastructure schemes to ease delays, including new platforms at Havant and Portsmouth and Southsea (End 2009)
* Introduction of double deck trains between Waterloo , Guildford, Basingstoke, Chessington, Hampton Court and Kingston

The whole thing is here...

Strategic Rail Authority 2 April 2001

Building A Better Railway

SRA and Stagecoach Sign Up To £1.7 Billion Investment
Package for South West Trains

The Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) has signed heads of terms with incumbent Stagecoach Holdings plc as the preferred counterparty for the new South West Trains replacement franchise. Under the new franchise agreement, a total of £ 1.7 billion will be committed over the first 15 years to implement much needed changes on this intensively used and overcrowded commuter network.
Currently, around 2.5 million passengers use the South West Trains network every week.

The focus of the investment proposal is to allow growth in passenger demand, increase reliability and punctuality, improve levels of customer satisfaction and reduce overcrowding. Highlights of the deal include more and longer trains, infrastructure improvements including platform extensions, more frequent services, and station upgrades to facilitate interchange with tube and bus.

The SRA has negotiated a tough deal with Stagecoach to deliver extra capacity, higher performance standards and a step change in quality of service for passengers. The original franchise is due to expire in February 2003; the new franchise will operate for 20 years, with provision for shortening the term to 15 years if later capacity schemes are not implemented.

From the start of the new franchise, Stagecoach will be subject to substantially increased penalty payments for poor performance. They have committed to providing better customer service and improved punctuality and reliability, and within the next ten years, aim to run 15 out of 16 trains on time each day, the equivalent of running 93.75% of all trains on time.

Stagecoach has committed, over the remainder of this year, to introduce new trains, take steps to improve security, accelerate training for staff, and improve customer information and to implement a range of other initiatives.

Safety

In line with the Health and Safety Executive's requirement Stagecoach will replace all Mark 1, slam door rolling stock by 31 December 2004. All rolling stock in use after 2003 will be fitted with Train Protection and Warning System (TPWS). Stagecoach is committed to ensuring further continuous safety improvement.

Within the heads of terms, Stagecoach has detailed a set of schemes, which are intended to provide the users of South West Trains with the following benefits.

Early Benefits (by 2004)

* Investment in 800 new vehicles to replace the ageing Mark 1 stock by 2004, to increase the fleet and to help relieve overcrowding
* Stagecoach will undertake a programme to lengthen platforms at Waterloo and throughout the suburban system to allow the use of 10-car trains in place of the current 8-car trains. This will increase the peak capacity on most suburban routes by 25% by the end of 2004
* A recast timetable on the Windsor and Reading lines to provide 14 extra trains in each peak and give 15 minute service frequency on the Suburban lines through Hounslow and Putney
* Doubling of the Portsmouth to Southampton service frequency and provide a new service between Southampton and a re-opened station at Chandlers Ford
* Integrated transport projects including three new Rail link buses from Waterlooville to Petersfield, from Yately to Farnborough and from Alton to Winchester via Alresford. Existing Stagecoach bus services in Hampshire and Surrey will be re-organised to provide a Rail Connections Network. Timetables will be changed to improve rail connections, and there will be through ticketing

Longer Term Benefits

* The re-development by 2007 of Clapham Junction, one of the busiest interchange stations on the railway network. The upgrade is designed to make the station more comfortable and convenient for local passengers and for those who change trains. There will be a new overbridge or upper concourse with lift or escalator access to platform level, passenger lounges and improved passenger shelter on platforms
* Improvements at Waterloo Station to provide for the safe and convenient circulation of a growing number of passengers
* Upgrading of Wimbledon and Vauxhall stations to improve interchange with the Underground * A programme of investments in infrastructure designed to overcome major causes of delays to trains. The programme includes installing stronger rail and more reliable signalling components on the most critical sections of the network (between Waterloo and New Malden, and between Havant and Portsmouth)
* Stagecoach is committed to providing 3,400 new car park spaces by May 2006
* Bringing facilities at all stations up to an improved standard to increase passenger comfort and personal security. CCTV will be installed at all stations and linked to the British Transport Police management information control centre. Waiting areas will be improved and toilets will be provided at all staffed stations. Stagecoach is committed to a phased programme to provide disabled access to all platforms by 2014

Also contained in the document are a set of aspirations. These are projects that will be brought forward subject to feasibility studies, and, where appropriate, passenger growth.

Aspirations

* Introduction of 16 car trains on long distance routes by extending platforms at Waterloo and other stations (2006)
* Extension of platforms 1-6 at Waterloo for 12 car suburban trains (2009)
* Various infrastructure schemes to ease delays, including new platforms at Havant and Portsmouth and Southsea (End 2009)
* Introduction of double deck trains between Waterloo , Guildford, Basingstoke, Chessington, Hampton Court and Kingston
* Restoring passenger services between Bournemouth and Swanage and between Southampton and Hythe, as well as doubling the frequency of services between Weymouth and Poole

Chief Executive of the SRA, Mike Grant said:
'I am delighted to announce the Heads of Terms for this exciting new franchise deal with Stagecoach. South West Trains is one of the South East's most congested networks. Everyday thousands of passengers use it and the number is still increasing.
'I believe the Stagecoach deal includes significant passenger benefits and addresses the key issues that affect passengers at an early stage. It represents a commitment to help resolve capacity problems on the busiest rail network in Britain, while keeping disruption to services to the minimum. Stagecoach have learned lessons from their existing tenure, and acknowledge the need for further progress. Passengers can now look forward to a step change in customer service.
'Investment is the key to improving the rail network, and as part of the deal, around £700 million will be invested in new trains, most of which are planned to be in service by 2004. A further £1 billion will be invested in new infrastructure to help ease congestion problems and to improve reliability.
'The decision to select Stagecoach was a tough one. It was a highly competitive process, offering us a choice of strong proposals. However, we are confident we have made the right decision and I look forward to substantially improved performance from Stagecoach and the South West Trains franchise going forward.'

Chairman of the SRA, Sir Alastair Morton, said:
'With this decision for South West Trains, we have taken a crucial step in the franchise replacement programme described in our Strategic Agenda. I look forward to the SRA agreeing a number of others this year.
'New investment is key to the success of the rail industry and rolling stock replacement plays a major part, as this deal demonstrates. I am pleased by the benefits generated from competitive bidding; in particular, Nederlandse Spoorwegen (Dutch State Railways) joined FirstGroup in submitting a very challenging bid. I hope we shall see more from them.
'Change cannot happen overnight, but over the next few years passengers on the South West Trains franchise will see marked improvements to their service.'

I assume that figure was intended for 4x four-car units?

Yes but was referring to fact of not being able to get 16 car out of 5 car trains.
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,864
Not sure how 5 car units could be used in 16 car formations.......

I'm quoting what's in Modern Loco Illustrated Desiro special on here. Original SWT Desiro order was supposed to be

100x 450/0 four cars
32x 450/1 five cars
45x 444 five car units

And I quote "the five car Class 450s were ordered to allow operation of 15 car trains on the busiest routes".
Obviously they wouldn't, that was only an aspiration and presumably would have required more stock. I'd take 'facts' in Modern Locomotives Illustrated with a degree of caution, Colin Marsden has a bit of a reputation for not checking the validity of his facts. The 5-car 450s were for the 10-car Windsor line project, which is now finally being delivered, instead using lengthened Class 458s.
 

AndyLandy

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2011
Messages
1,323
Location
Southampton, UK

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
Obviously they wouldn't, that was only an aspiration and presumably would have required more stock. I'd take 'facts' in Modern Locomotives Illustrated with a degree of caution, Colin Marsden has a bit of a reputation for not checking the validity of his facts. The 5-car 450s were for the 10-car Windsor line project, which is now finally being delivered, instead using lengthened Class 458s.

Ah thanks. I didn't know the background to most of this but there's little else to go off.
 

tcm1106

Member
Joined
4 Jan 2010
Messages
268
Location
UK
For all this talk about the 3+2 seated /2's being less comfortable than the 2+2 /1's, aren't the actual seats virtually the same though? I've done Stoke-Euston several times and travelled on both /1's and /2's without any noticeable difference in comfort. The legroom is the same so the only difference is having an extra seat next to you. And if there's still only 2 people sitting in an airline row, or 3/4 sat around a bay, I can't see how it makes the slightest bit of difference to being sat on a forward facing row or around a table on a /1 set.

I believe the seats are the same however the 350/2s don't have the armrests that the /1s do.
It's the armrests that make the difference if you're sat next to someone or sat next to the window as its an extra few cm of space per seat.
The collective width of the six armrests across the /1 vehicles essentially adds up to the width required for the extra seat on the /2 vehicles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top