Class 707 - SWT: Introduction into service

hwl · 25 Jun 2019

pompeyfan said:
Its almost as if the DfT are scorning Siemens. They’re the only manufacturer without any UK surface orders aren’t they? And yet Hitachi and Bombardier have 3 year lead times. Seems suspect to me.

Siemens made the assumption that the Thameslink order would be the template for the next decade of rolling stock. They didn't expect the goalposts to get moved or DfT to notice the limitations in Desiro City (some unexpected) and step up the requirements again so quickly. Siemens will acknowledge that they dropped the ball and got new product thinking wrong (several years of potential M&A distractions too). (also see Verve)
The 2012 WCML saga caused some reassessments in DfT and they became much more on the ball on rolling stock requirements. In this case they realised you needed to the get standing densities safely on moving trains not just in a stationary interior mock ups...
DfT also learned from IET roll out hence the stricter requirements for MML bimodes, it isn't just Siemens seeing the goal posts moved.

Hitachi have very little work in 2020 and beyond.

It looks like DfT realised that lots of potentially short lifespan rolling stock (10-15 years) was being procured, hence they raised the bar to ensure full useful forking life specified from the new. E.g. 701s have the performance to match potential CR2 stock but 707s not. The Aventra platform is also a bit lighter and with better energy efficiency leading to less requirement for power supply upgrades.

RailUK Forums

molecrochip · 27 Jun 2019

Goldfish62 said:
As in stay with SWR?

Run them as 5 cars on the South Hampshire routes: Portsmouth - Southampton Central / Poole; Surrey locals: Guildford - Farnham & Ascot to Aldershot.

Adsy125 · 27 Jun 2019

molecrochip said:
Run them as 5 cars on the South Hampshire routes: Portsmouth - Southampton Central / Poole; Surrey locals: Guildford - Farnham & Ascot to Aldershot.

The problem with using them on those routes is that much of the travel is discretionary, and compared to a 450 (or the 444s in most of the Poole stoppers), they’re a bit of a downgrade.

swt_passenger · 27 Jun 2019

Adsy125 said:
The problem with using them on those routes is that much of the travel is discretionary, and compared to a 450 (or the 444s in most of the Poole stoppers), they’re a bit of a downgrade.

The other point is that they must already have enough 450s in place for their full timetable, once the 442s are all ready, so it sounds like a solution to a non existent problem.

TEW · 27 Jun 2019

I'm not sure about the Southampton routes, but Guildford to Farnham and Ascot to Aldershot are not in need of any extra capacity either, 4 car 450s are fine.

pompeyfan · 28 Jun 2019

The Netley road gets busy for about 2 trains each way a day. The rest of the time it’s pretty much empty apart from when football is on either end of the route.

pompeyfan · 12 Jul 2019

Really random question, but based on the current diagrams, where’s the best time and place to catch one where the driver can open up and get up to a reasonable speed? Is there any fast runs down the main? I’d imagine their jolly on a 2Lxx gave a spirited run as there’s a good gap between Brookwood and Farnborough as well as hook and Basingstoke.

GW43125 · 12 Jul 2019

pompeyfan said:
Really random question, but based on the current diagrams, where’s the best time and place to catch one where the driver can open up and get up to a reasonable speed? Is there any fast runs down the main? I’d imagine their jolly on a 2Lxx gave a spirited run as there’s a good gap between Brookwood and Farnborough as well as hook and Basingstoke.

Haven't done it myself, but if they're on a 2L there's a fair speed to be had. In a 450, 90mph is possible on the nonstop run between Weybridge and Woking.
If you're looking at closer to London, 70mph is not uncommon between Feltham and Ashford (it's 3 miles). If you catch one on the evening Reading diagram (19:35 off Waterloo), you're almost guaranteed 70mph on the 4-mile run Feltham to Staines.

Dibbo4025 · 12 Jul 2019

Also, I don't think at the moment there are any 2Lxx booked for 707s?

pompeyfan · 12 Jul 2019

Dibbo4025 said:
Also, I don't think at the moment there are any 2Lxx booked for 707s?

It was a one off during the latest period of strike action, which also saw a 159 operate a 2Lxx extended to Salisbury.

Mikey C · 7 Aug 2019

Having been on a 707 today, is there a reason why in the middle carriage (3 of 5) at one end there is a section of 2 + 1 seating? There seems to be nothing special about this area, it doesn't obviously need a super wide gangway and there weren't extra grab handles to hold on to either.

samuelmorris · 7 Aug 2019

Mikey C said:
Having been on a 707 today, is there a reason why in the middle carriage (3 of 5) at one end there is a section of 2 + 1 seating? There seems to be nothing special about this area, it doesn't obviously need a super wide gangway and there weren't extra grab handles to hold on to either.

I thought the only 2+1 was in the wheelchair area?

GW43125 · 7 Aug 2019

Mikey C said:
Having been on a 707 today, is there a reason why in the middle carriage (3 of 5) at one end there is a section of 2 + 1 seating? There seems to be nothing special about this area, it doesn't obviously need a super wide gangway and there weren't extra grab handles to hold on to either.

Is it near the wheelchair bay? It could be where the loo would go.

Mikey C · 8 Aug 2019

I found this slightly odd video which shows the section I think (around 7 seconds, 37 seconds and 1:24)

WindsorJoe · 8 Aug 2019

My guess with the 2+1 seating is its near the wheelchair bay and its also deliberate. As those coaches in my observations seem to be the most crush loaded, as many of the station entrances are in the middle of the platform. So more standing room would be required. I’m guessing it also helps ease dwell times at statins as people can board these coaches more freely and move up or down the train without people being in the way. Think of Stains, Clapham junction, Richmond and Vauxhall to name a few all have entrances where these caches line up.

Goldfish62 · 8 Aug 2019

WindsorJoe said:
My guess with the 2+1 seating is its near the wheelchair bay and its also deliberate. As those coaches in my observations seem to be the most crush loaded, as many of the station entrances are in the middle of the platform. So more standing room would be required. I’m guessing it also helps ease dwell times at statins as people can board these coaches more freely and move up or down the train without people being in the way. Think of Stains, Clapham junction, Richmond and Vauxhall to name a few all have entrances where these caches line up.

That's correct. They're in the same location as the inward facing seats on the 455s for the same reason. The design flaw is insufficient handrails for the larger standing area.

Mikey C · 8 Aug 2019

Goldfish62 said:
That's correct. They're in the same location as the inward facing seats on the 455s for the same reason. The design flaw is insufficient handrails for the larger standing area.

To me it just looked like an area with a few seats missing rather than something designed for standees (or wheelchairs), as there were no more handrails (unlike say on the 376) which makes it a bit pointless, especially as the narrow 2+2 seating has plenty of gangway circulation space anyway. This document shows that carriages 1, 3 and 5 all have a section of 2 + 1

https://assets.new.siemens.com/siem...bd35-f74f76a1e600.desiro-city-class707-en.pdf

Goldfish62 · 8 Aug 2019

Mikey C said:
To me it just looked like an area with a few seats missing rather than something designed for standees (or wheelchairs), as there were no more handrails (unlike say on the 376) which makes it a bit pointless, especially as the narrow 2+2 seating has plenty of gangway circulation space anyway. This document shows that carriages 1, 3 and 5 all have a section of 2 + 1

https://assets.new.siemens.com/siem...bd35-f74f76a1e600.desiro-city-class707-en.pdf

Christian Roth, when he was at SWT, stated that it was specifically to create larger standing areas in parts of the train which tend to have heavier loadings due to last minute runners.

hwl · 8 Aug 2019

Goldfish62 said:
Christian Roth, when he was at SWT, stated that it was specifically to create larger standing areas in parts of the train which tend to have heavier loadings due to last minute runners.

Now at Bombardier...
Coach 3 really help at Vauxhall as cars 3 / 8 are near the stairs.

shame anyone forgot to specify enough handrail.

Mikey C · 8 Aug 2019

hwl said:
Now at Bombardier...
Coach 3 really help at Vauxhall as cars 3 / 8 are near the stairs.

shame anyone forgot to specify enough handrail.

I sat in this area again tonight. Ridiculous really, a line of single seats with no luggage rack above them, but NO roof mounted handrails for anyone to hold on to, so other than holding on to the handles on the edge of the seat there's no other option. Indeed the lack of luggage rack means that the option of holding on to that (if you're tall) isn't there either.

The vast empty space was popular with children running up and down it tonight, so not a complete waste

EE Andy b1 · 12 Aug 2019

So do we now have any idea where these Class 707s will be going once they are replaced? Not into storage i hope.

James Kevill · 12 Aug 2019

EE Andy b1 said:
So do we now have any idea where these Class 707s will be going once they are replaced? Not into storage i hope.

They could either go to Southeastern, Great Northern or London Northwestern Railway where they can be supplemented to other fleets.

EE Andy b1 · 12 Aug 2019

James Kevill said:
They could either go to Southeastern, Great Northern or London Northwestern Railway where they can be supplemented to other fleets.

I presume they would need modifications for some of those TOCs to provide overhead 25Kv use?

samuelmorris · 13 Aug 2019

I think Southeastern is the most likely at the moment due to the upheaval with franchising. That said, it depends if yet another 'full fleet replacement' is applied to the Metro fleet, which has certainly been suggested. I'm assuming the new TOC won't be daft enough to replace all the 375s as well.

The way things are going the DfT really ought to disincentivise new stock versus appropriate use of existing assets now there is about to be a glut of surplus EMUs on the scene.

Mikey C · 13 Aug 2019

James Kevill said:
They could either go to Southeastern, Great Northern or London Northwestern Railway where they can be supplemented to other fleets.

GTR Southern might make more sense than Southeastern, as at least there would be strong commonality with the 700s. Maybe they could be reformed into 4 car units and topped up to replace the 455s?

03_179 · 13 Aug 2019

Southern is a good call and could replace someone the 313s on the coastway. Alternatively replace 455s.

I'd like to see them on Southern especially as they are similar to the 700s and 717s.

aleggatta · 13 Aug 2019

As much as this would purely satisfy some sort of low level OCD, I wonder whether it would be viable to have an order for additional carriages (and units and AC gear) and for them to be formed up into 6 car units, set to replace 387s and 365s on the GN, and would make Hornsey a purely 'Siemens' depot (by stock, not by operator) thus releasing 387s to go south. Long term makes traction training and unit availability sense?

hwl · 13 Aug 2019

Mikey C said:
GTR Southern might make more sense than Southeastern, as at least there would be strong commonality with the 700s. Maybe they could be reformed into 4 car units and topped up to replace the 455s?

Many Southern 455s could be replaced with 5 car units but performance match the 377 timings would be useful so some reengineering inevitable if used in south London. The effectively fail the DfT metro stock requirements now so engineering or a move to the country on the cards.

hwl · 13 Aug 2019

aleggatta said:
As much as this would purely satisfy some sort of low level OCD, I wonder whether it would be viable to have an order for additional carriages (and units and AC gear) and for them to be formed up into 6 car units, set to replace 387s and 365s on the GN, and would make Hornsey a purely 'Siemens' depot (by stock, not by operator) thus releasing 387s to go south. Long term makes traction training and unit availability sense?

As extensively previously discussed, they are under powered compared to other desiro cities so would need more traction motors, replacement of existing motors and another set of traction electronics.
6car units also them means 2 EVCs for ETCS rather than 1 with 5 car ( see Bombardier 24m Aventra car orders for how to avoid extra costs)

hwl · 13 Aug 2019

James Kevill said:
They could either go to Southeastern, Great Northern or London Northwestern Railway where they can be supplemented to other fleets.

They fail DfT's metro passenger stock requirements for Southeastern so very unlikely as a permanent measure.
LNWR already have new stock on order (and the 350s from TPE coming) and more GN services will be going over to Thameslink and more 717 stock has been ordered than 313 so enough to up the Moorgate service when the signalling is sorted.

Class 707 - SWT: Introduction into service

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member