Class 701 'Aventra' trains for South Western Railway: progress updates

[norbitonflyer]

(so 2x5-car takes up the same length as 1x10-car)

Wasn't it more specifically to do with door positions?

The one follows from the other.

 

[The_Train]

701521+528 are running 5Q52 (currently at Bournemouth)

I don't even have 528 as having come off Litchurch Lane
Anybody know (roughly) when it did come out of Derby please?

 

[Snow1964]

(so 2x5-car takes up the same length as 1x10-car)

The one follows from the other.

The door position thing was a solution to a non-problem

At time of the 701 order, the Waterloo suburban happily operated with mix of 455s (often with a 456 coupled at front or rear), or 458s or 707s, where the door positions varied by couple of metres between them.

Why is suddenly became necessary to have doors in exactly (to virtually same centimetre) in the same position on a 10car 701 as a pair of 5car 701s is a mystery to me.

 

[3973EXL]

I don't even have 528 as having come off Litchurch Lane
Anybody know (roughly) when it did come out of Derby please?

Earlier working, 5Q50, reported as 521 & 508

It was 701521 and 508.

Not seen 528 leave Derby for EH.

 

[NSEWonderer]

The door position thing was a solution to a non-problem

At time of the 701 order, the Waterloo suburban happily operated with mix of 455s (often with a 456 coupled at front or rear), or 458s or 707s, where the door positions varied by couple of metres between them.

Why is suddenly became necessary to have doors in exactly (to virtually same centimetre) in the same position on a 10car 701 as a pair of 5car 701s is a mystery to me.

I can only assume it was something to do with ABDO.

 

[OneTrackMinded]

I can only assume it was something to do with ABDO.

Most definitely. Probably the trackside beacon equipment.

 

[Meerkat]

The door position thing was a solution to a non-problem

At time of the 701 order, the Waterloo suburban happily operated with mix of 455s (often with a 456 coupled at front or rear), or 458s or 707s, where the door positions varied by couple of metres between them.

Why is suddenly became necessary to have doors in exactly (to virtually same centimetre) in the same position on a 10car 701 as a pair of 5car 701s is a mystery to me.

Did the Waterloo suburban happily operate?
when I went on it in rush hour pre-Covid it didnt seem very happy at all - crush loaded trains, crowded platforms, difficult dispatch.
AIUI they wanted to speed up dwell time, and standard door positions would contribute, particularly for dealing with those needing assistance.

 

[Goldfish62]

The door position thing was a solution to a non-problem

At time of the 701 order, the Waterloo suburban happily operated with mix of 455s (often with a 456 coupled at front or rear), or 458s or 707s, where the door positions varied by couple of metres between them.

Why is suddenly became necessary to have doors in exactly (to virtually same centimetre) in the same position on a 10car 701 as a pair of 5car 701s is a mystery to me.

This has been discussed so many times on this thread previously. Being able to fit 2 x 5 cars in P1-4 at Waterloo being the most significant factor as well as minimising dwell times.

Did the Waterloo suburban happily operate?
when I went on it in rush hour pre-Covid it didnt seem very happy at all - crush loaded trains, crowded platforms, difficult dispatch.
AIUI they wanted to speed up dwell time, and standard door positions would contribute, particularly for dealing with those needing assistance.

Quite.

 

[CarrotPie]

Did the Waterloo suburban happily operate?
when I went on it in rush hour pre-Covid it didnt seem very happy at all - crush loaded trains, crowded platforms, difficult dispatch.
AIUI they wanted to speed up dwell time, and standard door positions would contribute, particularly for dealing with those needing assistance.

Identical door positions and ABDO will allow them to put (say) stickers on the floor showing you (to high degree of accuracy) where the doors will "land", allowing people to stand in front of away from the doors to allow quicker alighting.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

Identical door positions and ABDO will allow them to put (say) stickers on the floor showing you (to high degree of accuracy) where the doors will "land", allowing people to stand in front of away from the doors to allow quicker alighting

Taking in to account the very salient points made by Goldfish62 just above, the working method requiring ABDO (to speed up dwells and allow for accurate/identical stopping of all services at given locations) was all part of the FG timetable bid for the SW franchise (as it was then) as I understand it. As that original TT bid is now residing in the long-long grass, some might say aspects of it were unrealistic from the off, is ABDO in the suburban still on the cards I wonder, or has that too been binned for the foreseeable? Apologies if this has been commented on earlier btw.

 

[The_Train]

Earlier working, 5Q50, reported as 521 & 508

Not seen 528 leave Derby for EH.

Thanks for clarifying

 

[Invincible]

Taking in to account the very salient points made by Goldfish62 just above, the working method requiring ABDO (to speed up dwells and allow for accurate/identical stopping of all services at given locations) was all part of the FG timetable bid for the SW franchise (as it was then) as I understand it. As that original TT bid is now residing in the long-long grass, some might say aspects of it were unrealistic from the off, is ABDO in the suburban still on the cards I wonder, or has that too been binned for the foreseeable? Apologies if this has been commented on earlier btw.

Thought the projection was the lines will get busier towards 2030, then Cross rail 2 will also be needed.
But Brexit (banks moving HQs to Europe) COVID and homeworking stopped this.

 

[3141]

Yes, the DfT specification for bidders was clear about the need to provide extra capacity, which included additional services which in turn required dwell times to be reduced. The First/MTR bid also proposed a further reduction in the number of long-distances services calling at Clapham Junction in the morning peak, in order to allow additional calls by local services. A standard fleet with doors always stopping at the same place contributed to achieving all that.

I recall reading that Stagecoach's bid failed to meet certain aspects of the specification, because they didn't believe it was achievable.

There was an article in Modern Railways a few months after the First/MTR franchise had begun which seriously questioned whether the reduced dwell times could be achieved, which would leave First/MTR in breach of contract.

This all became irrelevant when Covid arrived and passenger numbers reduced. If Covid hadn't occurred, it is likely that working from home would have become somewhat more common anyway, so perhaps the need for additional services and shorter dwell times would have been less acute. But with no class 701s in service more than six years after the franchise began, First would now definitely be in breach of contract. One can speculate in all sorts of ways what that might have led to, but that takes us into fantasy land.

There are several other aspects of the bid which won't now happen, probably never.

 

[norbitonflyer]

There are several other aspects of the bid which won't now happen, probably never.

Refurbishing the 442s being top of that list

 

[Invincible]

Refurbishing the 442s being top of that list

The 458s will now fill the 442 role on the PDL, or will they?

 

[Big Jumby 74]

I recall reading that Stagecoach's bid failed to meet certain aspects of the specification, because they didn't believe it was achievable.

Wasn't directly involved in that part of the process, although I know some of those who were. But in essence, on a personal note, I would (and did then had I been asked) agree with the last part of your comment in principle. The infrastructure v timetable had all but been pushed to its limit in certain key areas, hence the proposed change in operating aspects we speak of as per the FG/MTR bid.

 

[Gag Halfrunt]

Identical door positions and ABDO will allow them to put (say) stickers on the floor showing you (to high degree of accuracy) where the doors will "land", allowing people to stand in front of away from the doors to allow quicker alighting.

Hong Kong MTR stations have arrows on the floor, so it seems entirely possible that MTR Corp. recommended floor markings when the bid was being developed.

File:Kwun Tong Station Platforms.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

commons.wikimedia.org

(Photo shows platform screen doors and arrow markings on the floor at Kwun Tong station.)

Perhaps this is the real reason for the "Arterio" branding. Telling passengers where to stand is going to be difficult if it only applies to some trains and not others.

 

[MotCO]

But Brexit (banks moving HQs to Europe) COVID and homeworking stopped this.

Ernst & Young estimate that 7,000 staff moved to the EU out of approx 1m workers in the finance sector. Not a significant impact.

Source: https://www.ey.com/en_uk/news/2022/...bilises-five-years-on-from-article-50-trigger

The Global City

With world leading financial expertise, the UK is ready to work with you

www.theglobalcity.uk

 

[OneTrackMinded]

ABDO has been pushed back significantly and it's still not know if it will ever happen.

ABDO will allow them to put (say) stickers on the floor showing you (to high degree of accuracy) where the doors will "land", allowing people to stand in front of away from the doors to allow quicker alighting.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

ABDO has been pushed back significantly and it's still not know if it will ever happen.

That was one difference from previous Aventra builds although whether it contributed to software issues i have no idea hence why a Transport Select Committee would be appropriate to understand the reasons for the significant delays to introduction here and learn lessons.

 

[PG]

hence why a Transport Select Committee would be appropriate to understand the reasons for the significant delays to introduction here and learn lessons.

Fixed that for you!

Does anyone ever act on these lessons learned??
e.g. Network Rail /TOCs don't appear to have learnt from the Kentish Town & Lewisham detrainments, both of which were investigated.

 

[NSEWonderer]

That was one difference from previous Aventra builds although whether it contributed to software issues i have no idea hence why a Transport Select Committee would be appropriate to understand the reasons for the significant delays to introduction here and learn lessons.

ABDO shouldn't cause significant software issues as its basically an adapted ATO except instead of pushing to start ATO the driver is expected to Push to stop.

The whole 701 debacle just summarise how poor the MTR and FG running of SWR has been alongside the recent struggled of Derby to compound it. The decision to bin the 707s without their replacements at the time even in testing before such announcement tells you enough.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

The decision to bin the 707s without their replacements at the time even in testing before such announcement tells you enough.

I think some of these problems may have come out of contract sign off dates perhaps, and suspect (only my personal from armchair observation) that decisions to bin 456s and off load some 455's to razor blade land, were made with best intension of expecting first 701's to be delivered and commissioned to replace same within the same rough time slot. The same possibly with the 707 transfer to SE? The one major factor that has put the spanner in the works throughout, being a lack of physical space to have all fleet types in operational depots on the SW patch at the same time, meaning that any delay in either a) moving some old stock off patch, or b) new stock arriving on patch, was only gong to have disastrous effects. In this case a proportion of old stock was binned in good time to free up space, but then other matters have now delayed the incoming fleet (701's), so SWR as an operator is in a no win situation. Lack of stabling capacity will always have knock-ons that can escalate very quickly....

 

[TEW]

Another factor in reducing the fleet size was a shortage of maintenance staff. At the time Wimbledon Depot was full of units that were unable to be used in service. Concentrating on the smaller fleet has meant more are available for traffic.

 

[NSEWonderer]

I think some of these problems may have come out of contract sign off dates perhaps, and suspect (only my personal from armchair observation) that decisions to bin 456s and off load some 455's to razor blade land, were made with best intension of expecting first 701's to be delivered and commissioned to replace same within the same rough time slot. The same possibly with the 707 transfer to SE? The one major factor that has put the spanner in the works throughout, being a lack of physical space to have all fleet types in operational depots on the SW patch at the same time, meaning that any delay in either a) moving some old stock off patch, or b) new stock arriving on patch, was only gong to have disastrous effects. In this case a proportion of old stock was binned in good time to free up space, but then other matters have now delayed the incoming fleet (701's), so SWR as an operator is in a no win situation. Lack of stabling capacity will always have knock-ons that can escalate very quickly....

That is somewhat fair to be honest

 

[Snow1964]

I think some of these problems may have come out of contract sign off dates perhaps, and suspect (only my personal from armchair observation) that decisions to bin 456s and off load some 455's to razor blade land, were made with best intension of expecting first 701's to be delivered and commissioned to replace same within the same rough time slot. The same possibly with the 707 transfer to SE? The one major factor that has put the spanner in the works throughout, being a lack of physical space to have all fleet types in operational depots on the SW patch at the same time, meaning that any delay in either a) moving some old stock off patch, or b) new stock arriving on patch, was only gong to have disastrous effects. In this case a proportion of old stock was binned in good time to free up space, but then other matters have now delayed the incoming fleet (701's), so SWR as an operator is in a no win situation. Lack of stabling capacity will always have knock-ons that can escalate very quickly....

That is very reasonable assessment.

Although new stabling and servicing was built at Feltham. And the 750 vehicles was virtually identical to combined total of 455+456+458+707 so on paper sufficient siding length.

In reality some of the existing sidings cannot take 10car trains, although they could have continued stabling 8cars during transition. It's not lack of siding length, it's they have too many short sidings unable to take 10cars

 

[norbitonflyer]

. And the 750 vehicles was virtually identical to combined total of 455+456+458+707 so on paper sufficient siding length.

Class 455 = 91 x 4 = 364
Class 456 = 24 x 2 = 48
Class 458 = 36 x 5 = 180
Class 707 = 30 x 5 = 150
Total = 742 (57 x 10 car, 21.5 x 8car)

 

[43096]

I think some of these problems may have come out of contract sign off dates perhaps, and suspect (only my personal from armchair observation) that decisions to bin 456s and off load some 455's to razor blade land, were made with best intension of expecting first 701's to be delivered and commissioned to replace same within the same rough time slot. The same possibly with the 707 transfer to SE? The one major factor that has put the spanner in the works throughout, being a lack of physical space to have all fleet types in operational depots on the SW patch at the same time, meaning that any delay in either a) moving some old stock off patch, or b) new stock arriving on patch, was only gong to have disastrous effects. In this case a proportion of old stock was binned in good time to free up space, but then other matters have now delayed the incoming fleet (701's), so SWR as an operator is in a no win situation. Lack of stabling capacity will always have knock-ons that can escalate very quickly....

That assessment only works in the context of the drop in passenger numbers during/after the pandemic.

There surely must have been a plan for deployment with a full old fleet required. That said, this is the terminally-useless WorstGroup so quite possible they hadn’t thought about that, in the same way they haven’t thought about union agreements for method of working.

 

[Goldfish62]

That is very reasonable assessment.

Although new stabling and servicing was built at Feltham. And the 750 vehicles was virtually identical to combined total of 455+456+458+707 so on paper sufficient siding length.

In reality some of the existing sidings cannot take 10car trains, although they could have continued stabling 8cars during transition. It's not lack of siding length, it's they have too many short sidings unable to take 10cars

Feltham is 10 roads each taking 10 cars. Staines can only take I think 2 10 car trains.

 

[73128]

Fixed that for you!

Does anyone ever act on these lessons learned??
e.g. Network Rail /TOCs don't appear to have learnt from the Kentish Town & Lewisham detrainments, both of which were investigated.

let alone the Bray ones which RAIU reported on recently.