Class 701 'Aventra' trains for South Western Railway

[Ethano92]

As a daily user from the outer end of the Reading line I couldn’t give a stuff about loading better or whatever other “benefits” SWR try to sell. I’m after a comfortable seat and a seat back table - both of which the 458s have and the Aventras seemingly won’t.

I think it needs to be acepted that there is a greater need for people to actually be able to get on, throughout the line. Admittedly you said you get on early but the 458s have few seat back tables anyway since they're mostly bays of 4. These will be a big help for the majority of commuters similar to people complaining about 700s and ignoring the fact that they couldn't actually board before they came about. Reading has been 'downgraded' to metro/suburban that's just the way it is.

 

[Dan15812]

Reading has been 'downgraded' to metro/suburban that's just the way it is.

Absolutely true and I think the 701's are a perfectly acceptable replacement!

 

[Goldfish62]

Agreed, the 458s have about 3 door opening chimes simultaneously, and the announcements are a bit distorted. Which is probably due to the poor build quality as you say.

When they were new they had ceiling panels hanging off and Wimbledon depot had to go around filling panel joins with mastick to stop rattling. Then there's the driver's cabs and windows leaking in the rain, the rough ride and poor aircon. Just a few of the things wrong as delivered.

 

[RealTrains07]

When they were new they had ceiling panels hanging off and Wimbledon depot had to go around filling panel joins with mastick to stop rattling. Then there's the driver's cabs and windows leaking in the rain, the rough ride and poor aircon. Just a few of the things wrong as delivered.

Who built them? At least the 701s cant get any worse i guess

 

[SWRtrain_fan]

Who built them?

Alstom.

 

[SWRtrain_fan]

When they were new they had ceiling panels hanging off and Wimbledon depot had to go around filling panel joins with mastick to stop rattling. Then there's the driver's cabs and windows leaking in the rain, the rough ride and poor aircon. Just a few of the things wrong as delivered.

Wow, that's very substandard then.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

As a daily user from the outer end of the Reading line I couldn’t give a stuff about loading better or whatever other “benefits” SWR try to sell. I’m after a comfortable seat and a seat back table - both of which the 458s have and the Aventras seemingly won’t.

I’m on the Ascot line and I would agree that the 458s are really comfortable BUT in the last few years they’ve become so disgusting and so seemingly neglected by SWR that I just cannot bear travel on them anymore. At least the 701s should be clean

 

[Goldfish62]

Wow, that's very substandard then.

Yes, it was extensively covered at the time and hastened the demise of Alstom in the UK.

 

[Dr_Intoxicated]

I don't buy the effect of seat back tables on dwell times. Experienced commuters have the table stowed ready for exit.

(Edit). Also the extra width gained by removing seat spacers, CA 15cm does not make up for the loss of comfort, indeed passengers sitting sidewise with their legs in the aisle because the seats are too close takes up much more room

 

[Bigfoot]

Yes, it was extensively covered at the time and hastened the demise of Alstom in the UK.

Designed by the French, built in Birmingham. Was never going to go well was it...

 

[TRAX]

Come and have a look at the Alstom stuff that wasn’t built in Birmingham, then.

 

[hwl]

As a daily user from the outer end of the Reading line I couldn’t give a stuff about loading better or whatever other “benefits” SWR try to sell. I’m after a comfortable seat and a seat back table - both of which the 458s have and the Aventras seemingly won’t.

And most of those at the inner end (myself included) just want to get on...

 

[Goldfish62]

I don't buy the effect of seat back tables on dwell times. Experienced commuters have the table stowed ready for exit.

(Edit). Also the extra width gained by removing seat spacers, CA 15cm does not make up for the loss of comfort, indeed passengers sitting sidewise with their legs in the aisle because the seats are too close takes up much more room

Indeed. The supposed issue of tables increasing dwell times was proven to be nonsense when DfT sanctioned fitting of tables to the later build 700s.

Ian Walmsley in Modern Railways has covered the impact of removing seat spacers as you correctly highlight.

 

[hwl]

Indeed. The supposed issue of tables increasing dwell times was proven to be nonsense when DfT sanctioned fitting of tables to the later build 700s.

Ian Walmsley in Modern Railways has covered the impact of removing seat spacers as you correctly highlight.

I think everyone has twigged the importance of having the seat spacers now...

 

[Mikey C]

Yes, it was extensively covered at the time and hastened the demise of Alstom in the UK.

A bit off topic, but why were the Junipers so bad when both the 390s and 95/96 Tube Stock, built around the same time seem to be of decent quality?

 

[43096]

Absolutely true and I think the 701's are a perfectly acceptable replacement!

I bet they are a downgrade. And I also bet the fares aren’t downgraded to reflect that. The race to the bottom goes on.

 

[Goldfish62]

I think everyone has twigged the importance of having the seat spacers now...

DfT certainly haven't.

 

[Goldfish62]

A bit off topic, but why were the Junipers so bad when both the 390s and 95/96 Tube Stock, built around the same time seem to be of decent quality?

Poor management and quality control of the project, plus lack of back-up to sort out all the post-build issues.

 

[SWRtrain_fan]

Apologies if it's late to ask this, but why did construction of the 701s start a year late?

 

[Robert Carroll]

A bit off topic, but why were the Junipers so bad when both the 390s and 95/96 Tube Stock, built around the same time seem to be of decent quality?

If I recall correctly, there were issues with the 1995 stock on the Northern Line (first ones with IGBT drives) when new but they were sorted out. The contractual arrangements were different there though as I think Alstom were only paid for providing trains for service. Most of the Juniper issues first time around were sorted and they ended up being pretty reliable. Then they were rebuilt...

 

[Peter C]

Apologies if this has already been posted:
https://twitter.com/anonswr/status/1168225395260440576

How true this is I don't know.

-Peter

 

[XCTurbostar]

Apologies if this has already been posted:
https://twitter.com/anonswr/status/1168225395260440576

How true this is I don't know.

-Peter

I'll be the first to admit that the yellow really does suit that front!

 

[swt_passenger]

Apologies if it's late to ask this, but why did construction of the 701s start a year late?

Because all the previous orders ran very late? Eg the Goblin & West Anglia 710 orders for LO?

 

[hwl]

Apologies if this has already been posted:
https://twitter.com/anonswr/status/1168225395260440576

How true this is I don't know.

-Peter

A higher quality version posted several days ago in post 737 that restarted discussions...
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...h-western-railway.148717/page-25#post-4182811

 

[Peter C]

A higher quality version posted several days ago in post 737 that restarted discussions...
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...h-western-railway.148717/page-25#post-4182811

Apologies - I didn't know. I don't read this thread often and I thought that it hadn't been posted before.

-Peter

 

[Peter C]

I'll be the first to admit that the yellow really does suit that front!

It's good to know that they will have yellow fronts. The concept images that were floating around did look ugly.

-Peter

 

[XCTurbostar]

Here is a photoshop of mine from Nov 2017: https://www.railforums.co.uk/attachments/class701yellowlivery-png.39897/
Looks like SWR took some notice of my suggestions!

 

[Ethano92]

https://twitter.com/anonswr/status/1168217216946495488?s=19

So here's the thing. The 707 5 car set has a seating capacity of 275/533 standing, but the 701 5 car set 269 seats/330 standing. Can you see my issue? ^BRF

Following on, from the linked tweet, this reply is surely incorrect. Unless 2 toilets take up 264 standee spaces. Even if the passengers per m^2 has been reduced for the specification in comparison to the 707s that's still very different.

Also noted speculation of longitudinal seats too. SWR are being very secretive about these units, which does concern me. You'd think they'd want to show off new units like GA. Especially since from the start of the franchise they told people do expect these units from 'mid 2019'.

 

[swt_passenger]

https://twitter.com/anonswr/status/1168217216946495488?s=19



Following on, from the linked tweet, this reply is surely incorrect. Unless 2 toilets take up 264 standee spaces. Even if the passengers per m^2 has been reduced for the specification in comparison to the 707s that's still very different.

Also noted speculation of longitudinal seats too. SWR are being very secretive about these units, which does concern me. You'd think they'd want to show off new units like GA. Especially since from the start of the franchise they told people do expect these units from 'mid 2019'.

This capacity error was previously discussed back in a January, see around post #451 in this thread. They are using a completely wrong figure for 707s the franchise agreement has a far more realistic figure of 320.

Perhaps a helpful twitter user could explain to the “anon SWR team” twitterer where the correct figure can be found, rather than them googling it?

 

[Ethano92]

This capacity error was previously discussed back in a January, see around post #451 in this thread. They are using a completely wrong figure for 707s the franchise agreement has a far more realistic figure of 320.

Will do, thanks. Makes more sense