Seating layouts for metro type services

[Bletchleyite]

From the thread on Southeastern's Metro stock replacement:

Interestingly the people of Tyne and Wear were surveyed with regard to their new stock and did favour that layout - that's why the 555s and 777s look very different despite both being Stadler METRO units. I think that sort of layout is the norm now for very short distance metro-type operation.

The norm for metro lines is increasingly fully or partly longitudinal - and it has lots of advantages. Is this the way to go for Southeastern and others?

My personal view is that the Class 345/S8 layout is pretty good - some longitudinal and some facing. Though on the Bakerloo trains the facing seating typically is only occupied by one or at most two people as it's so cramped.

 

[JonathanH]

Though on the Bakerloo trains the facing seating typically is only occupied by one or at most two people as it's so cramped.

Do you mean that one person sits in each bay for four when the train is full? Therefore, only four people in a space for sixteen, which seats twelve when arranged longitudinally.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do you mean that one person sits in each bay for four?

Typically only one or two in my observation, yes. People stand in preference to cramming in - the facing seats on the Bakerloo are very narrow and have very poor legroom.

 

[778]

Interestingly the people of Tyne and Wear were surveyed with regard to their new stock and did favour that layout - that's why the 555s and 777s look very different despite both being Stadler METRO units. I think that sort of layout is the norm now for very short distance metro-type operation.

Should anyone wish to speculate on the benefits and disbenefits of this layout, here's a thread:

Seating layouts for metro type services

From the thread on Southeastern's Metro stock replacement: Interestingly the people of Tyne and Wear were surveyed with regard to their new stock and did favour that layout - that's why the 555s and 777s look very different despite both being Stadler METRO units. I think that sort of layout...

www.railforums.co.uk

Souteastern metro services are not very short distance operation, so longitudinal seating would not be suitable for those routes. The new trains for the south west metro services (701s) have 2+2 seating so there is no reason the new southeastern trains should not have that layout.

 

[Sorcerer]

Longitudinal seating works best with rapid transit networks because most people using them most likely won't be making end-to-end journeys and will only be going a few stops. It provides plenty of standing space as well which means you can get more people on a single train which is handy for a busy network, so I think they made the right choice going for it on the Class 555s. I know the 777 is also a Stadler Metro unit but Merseyrail isn't really a metro so the roles aren't quite the same.

With regards to Southeastern though, I'd say it was quite different because of it's regional and suburban style of operation where sometimes people will be making longer journeys such as Bedford or Brighton to London. The 345 is good for having some regular bay seating and longitudinal seating since it works like a hybrid style of suburban and rapid transit operation (particularly where the core of the Elizabeth Line is concerned). However for the 555 I definitely think they made the right choice going for the layout they did.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With regards to Southeastern though, I'd say it was quite different because of it's regional and suburban style of operation where sometimes people will be making longer journeys such as Bedford or Brighton to London. The 345 is good for having some regular bay seating and longitudinal seating since it works like a hybrid style of suburban and rapid transit operation (particularly where the core of the Elizabeth Line is concerned). However for the 555 I definitely think they made the right choice going for the layout they did.

Southeastern don't operate Bedford or Brighton to London, you're thinking of Thameslink there.

The Southeastern services in question are metro services with typical journeys of about 30 minutes at most. They are the sort of journeys London Overground provide on the Chingford and Watford DC lines using units with longitudinal seating, though I'd agree the 345/S8 mixed layout is better. Indeed, aside from level boarding, I'm not sure there has ever been a better interior design for short distance metro type heavy rail services than the 345 or S8.

 

[Sorcerer]

Southeastern don't operate Bedford or Brighton to London, you're thinking of Thameslink there.

Oh indeed, my mistake. So much for being a rail enthusiast. I realise now that I was also mixing up the Brighton to London services with Southern.

The Southeastern services in question are metro services with typical journeys of about 30 minutes at most.

Perhaps a hybrid layout like on the 345 would be the right choice in that situation. Bay seating for longer journeys and longitudinal for shorter journeys that also enable standing. I don't regularly commute on Southeastern so I can't say with confidence, but since it's not a rapid transit system I don't think longitudinal seating alone would be suitable.

 

[30907]

Southeastern don't operate Bedford or Brighton to London, you're thinking of Thameslink there.

The Southeastern services in question are metro services with typical journeys of about 30 minutes at most. They are the sort of journeys London Overground provide on the Chingford and Watford DC lines using units with longitudinal seating, though I'd agree the 345/S8 mixed layout is better.

The bulk of the SE suburban routes are rather longer than Chenford (15-17 miles within the Zones rather than 10-11) though comparable with Watford, and TBH I don't think the all-longitudinal style suits suburban routes. This view is shared by my sister who used 378s regularly until she moved onto SE territory, so it's not just me liking to look out of the window Longitudinal seating suits routes where there is a high proportion of short-hop (say 10-15 min) travellers, cross-city routes for example.

Indeed, aside from level boarding, I'm not sure there has ever been a better interior design for short distance metro type heavy rail services than the 345 or S8.

Inclined to agree from limited experience.

 

[JonathanH]

The bulk of the SE suburban routes are rather longer than Chenford (15-17 miles within the Zones rather than 10-11) though comparable with Watford, and TBH I don't think the all-longitudinal style suits suburban routes. This view is shared by my sister who used 378s regularly until she moved onto SE territory, so it's not just me liking to look out of the window Longitudinal seating suits routes where there is a high proportion of short-hop (say 10-15 min) travellers, cross-city routes for example.

Orpington, Hayes, Dartford are all short distance routes in the grand scheme of things within London or just over the border in the case of Dartford, even Gravesend and Sevenoaks aren't really that far out. Clearly, many of the journeys people make go all the way into London rather than being short hops, but longitudinal seating offers more capacity without needing long train lengths.

I don't subscribe to the 'no one sits in the middle of 3+2 seats'. I sat in a centre seat when I boarded a London bound train at Feltham last Wednesday morning, and others did too. However, it is obvious to me that the 6-car 730 formations working out of Euston with 2+2 seating and a wide gangway can carry a lot of standees, and longitudinal seats allow even more of that. It does however require passengers to understand that they shouldn't expect to sit down.

 

[southern442]

I think perhaps what might be a good compromise for services such as southeastern metro would be to try and create more standing space whilst still prioritising comfort for those seated. I think not having three sets of double doors per side of each carriage is hugely missing a trick here - you could have three quite large areas dedicated solely to standing customers, PLUS much more efficient boarding and alighting, and therefore could keep 2+2 seating and still have a huge capacity uplift.

 

[PeterC]

I don't subscribe to the 'no one sits in the middle of 3+2 seats'. I sat in a centre seat when I boarded a London bound train at Feltham last Wednesday morning, and others did too. However, it is obvious to me that the 6-car 730 formations working out of Euston with 2+2 seating and a wide gangway can carry a lot of standees, and longitudinal seats allow even more of that. It does however require passengers to understand that they shouldn't expect to sit down.

As a regular Met Line user, commuting from the outer suburbs, in the days of the A stock I would say that people were reluctant to sit in those central seats. There would always be a significant number choosing to stand rather than sit in one on services north of Baker Street.

In the central area the lack of standing space meant that the doors could be jammed with people unable to board despite empty seats bring available. No joke if you were trying to get from Kings Cross to Chesham. (Before anybody comments I do know, and use, all the hacks about taking the first train down the line and changing. They didn't help when the first train in was the half hourly Chesham departure)