I don't see why UEGs▸ are important for passengers on suburban trains? Operationally I can see the attraction, but I wouldn't have thought pax would care less. The ability to easily walk through 5 carriages to find a less congested part of the train is a big step forward (as well as the additional space the wide gangways give).
You hit the nail on the head: being able to walk through to find a less congested part of the train. I'm sure it has been said on this forum that trains out of Paddington, Waterloo etc. tend to be more-heavily loaded at the end nearest the ticket barriers which shows passengers tend to board the train at or near the first doors they come to. With the 10-car sets, passengers will be able to walk through right to the end if they board a busy carriage, a pair of 5-car units without UEGs is more likely to have a sudden drop in loadings between the 5th and 6th coaches. UEGs would allow passengers to move into that sixth coach and maybe find a seat, a big benifit in my view.
An even bigger reason for UEGs however, from a passenger's perspective, is if the trains are scheduled to divide on route. As noted above, passengers tend to board the doors they come to first; this will be particularly true if they are in a hurry making a tight connection. Thus passengers may need to walk through to the correct portion, and asking them to alight at the next station to move to the other unit is effectively asking them to change trains. This is so important that, in my opinion, franchise agreemeents should forbid advertising trains as through services where units are uncoupled on-route unless the train that divides is gangwayed throughout. Of course if the idea is to run 2x5-car sets into Waterloo in the morning peak then detach a unit in the platform at Waterloo which runs
ECS▸ to depot/sidings leaving a 5-car in the platform to work off-peak services that's not a problem, but anything that divides on route needs UEGs (or the timetable and journey planners need to show it as seperate services, so passengers expect to have to change at the point the service divides).
Operationally the only benifit of UEGs I can see for the
TOC▸ is that a single guard can access the entire train (although the numbers of passengers on a 10-car formation probably requires multiple staff anyway).
lack of toilet provision is uncivilised
I completely agree. The Crossrail trains, for example, really ought to have toilets fitted.
They list enhancements for passengers, including wide gangways, but the accompanying picture shows... no Unit-End Gangways (UEGs). Granted the illustration may be an impression of the 10-car sets, but given we have not seen an Aventra with UEGs I suspect the 5-car sets won't have them either. If you're not only having wide gangways but also promoting them as an enhanced feature then not allowing passengers to move between a pair of 5-car units in multiple leaves a 'bad taste'. If you want to run the railway in the best interests of passengers, then if you order units that are intended to run in multiple you should specify that said units must have UEGs.
The existing 455 units on
SWT▸ have UEGs but they are locked out of use. I suspect the Southern versions are too.
Locked out of use! Why!? I had no idea they didn't use the UEGs on the class 455s.