Had 701017 today and decided try standing for the journey... I'm quite tall and the acceleration/deceleration made it hard to stand upright without holding on to something- other new builds have the same issue (and don't get me started on electric buses!). Compared to the 455s, they are obviously a welcome improvement.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Class 701 'Aventra' trains for South Western Railway: progress updates
- Thread starter WWTownEnth
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
That's simply not true. Less than five units have entered regular service and even the scheduled services are frequently cancelled at the last minute. They are not reliable yet. Also, the coupling issue on the 701/5 is a manufacturing issue, unless SWR can be blamed there as well. Alstom should have spent some money to get these units into full passenger service with SWR, instead of blaming everybody else. The 701 has their name on it. The brand has been damaged and they are as much to blame for it as SWR.
norbitonflyer
Established Member
"Less than five" is a slight exaggeration - there are six in regular service (701017/31/36/37/39/43), and they have all already been in service this week.
Although it's been a while since all six have been in service on the same day, five is quite common - and indeed there are five this morning. (036 was not used yesterday, 043 today)
Nogoohwell
Member
Not quite, cab was agreed with unions and specified before build and what got delivered was not built to agreed spec.
To be faire to SWR, they defended the unions and pushed this back to Alstom, which has then involved a large rectification programme.
Its easy to bash SWR, but back in 2016 when they bid and specified the 701’s, passenger numbers were growing each year and running 12 coach trains is not a flyer.
Private funds were readily available for investment and no reason to suspect anything was going to change.
Covid totally changed everything, no private investment, profits from SWR going to the exchequer instead of back into the region, recruitment freeze, training freeze and a DfT control that removed 456 and some 455’s to save money.
A public enquiry into the managed decline of SWR would be very interesting, but zero chance of that happening.
Rant over for today
Thanks. I will have a look at that when I get a chance. I'm not very familiar with the Windsor line but I don't think that many trains will be crush loaded west of Staines. Same applies to Winnersh, Winnersh Triangle and Earley. The Hounslow loop is a different matter. I think some stations between Staines and Weybridge are shorter than 10 but as those trains run via Hounslow, that is not a big problem. Clearly it makes sense to try and introduce them on routes where the length is not a problem. They can run the Hounslow routes with 458s or 455s until a solution is found.
Given that there is currently no 701 training is currently being undertaken and SWR can't manage to run the current diagrams reliably I think the schedule of introduction is worth as much as the paper it was written on.
Siemens Staines
Member
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,020
They aren't crushed loaded west of Staines under normal circumstances, but they are whenever there are events on at Twickenham or Ascot, or whenever the service between Reading and Paddington is suspended at short notice due whatever the latest problem is to disrupt that route.
I_am_Nobody
Member
There are seemingly more and more events at Twickenham and Ascot. That, or I’m seeing and catching a lot more when out and about.
Siemens Staines
Member
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,020
There are also large numbers of passengers whenever Brentford are at home, although admittedly not to the same degree as Twickenham or Ascot. At the time of the franchise bid, I doubt anyone foresaw that Brentford would be a side in the top half of the Premier League, and the regular 4tph Hounslow loop service was able to cope. Now, the regular service is 2tph, so some of the Readings get diverted to call at Kew Bridge and Brentford instead of Richmond and Twickenham to ease the burden.
I_am_Nobody
Member
Oooooooh, that explains a lot. I had no idea about this, thanks. It adds a lot of context to a lot of the issues I’ve been seeing first hand.
Well yes, but capacity is only 17,000, and Brentford has one of the highest proportion of fans who live in the local area - the highest in the PL (83% of home fans attending live within 7 miles is the stat I saw). Gunnersbury station isn’t that far either. I‘d be surprised if more than a quarter of the attendees travel there by SWR. Albeit that is an hour‘s worth of the normal off peak service.
SWT_USER
Member
455's cannot be run (as more than 4 coaches) on Weybridge via Hounslow services without cancelling stops... that isn't a solution. I think passengers would be ok with 455's returning on all day Hounslow rounder services but that is clearly not going to happen.
Any update on 701 training resuming yet?
TFL tend to close Gunnersbury station for a period after the game. I don't have any numbers to back it up but there are lots travelling to games from Chertsey/ Staines/ Ashford... a couple of 10 coach 701's would be great for clearing the crowds.
I am also surprised no one has bothered with revenue protection on match days.
OneTrackMinded
Member
Doubt it - post 12,128
SWT_USER
Member
Thank you, I had missed that when catching up on the thread. So there's been no training at all in 2025
OneTrackMinded
Member
Amazing how backwards everything is really - the new training course was supposed to shorten the amount of time it took to train drivers but instead it has somehow managed to stop the process entirely
Not when I‘ve been they haven’t!
Arguing over the number of units deployed on a daily basis is entirely pointless. Yes, you may have 5-6 units out on weekdays — not even on weekends — but that misses the point entirely. Just because the units are out doesn’t mean they are running consistently. Rarely are they actually doing a full diagram for the entire day, which is what I would define as REGULAR operation.
For instance, the morning peak service from Shepperton via Wimbledon hasn’t been operated by a 701 since January 27th, and has been a 455 ever since. This Saturday, not a single 701 ran on the Shepperton/Kingston loop at all. Over the past two weeks, the Shepperton diagrams have barely operated as 701s, with 455s covering the majority of them. So, celebrating the fact that a 701 is out for maybe two or three journeys a day is frankly, ridiculous.
Yes, it’s evident that the Windsor side is better equipped to deploy 701s, but the mainline side is clearly failing to run them regularly, which is the unfortunate case at the moment.
SWT_USER
Member
Not my route (hence my continued moaning on this thread) but I understood it was closed for an hour after the match.
A shame there are no quick wins here... Reintroducing the Hounslow rounders even as 8 coaches would solve a lot of issues, but presumably SWR don't have the rolling stock or staff to do this.. and the DfT wouldn't sanction the extra spend anyway.
To be more specific, I was thinking that 455s could run the Hounslow loop services, which they already do. The Weybridge service needs seven pairs of 458s. Assuming that 24 out of 28 are diagrammed, that leaves five pairs to cover most of the Hounslow peak services. The rest could be covered with 450s rather than 455s if necessary, noting that the two service groups interwork in the peaks. Covering all five Windsor diagrams with 701s would free up three pairs of 450s.
Big Jumby 74
Established Member
Just a polite observation about the NR platform lengths document. As it does rightly say at the start of that section (Page 164 or there about? for Wessex side) the lengths indicated are the physical platform (ramp to ramp etc) length vs train length in essence, and no account is taken of signal sighting issues, which (as some on here a few years back ISTR) were I believe surprised to understand was a major factor in the current 12 car 458 discussions!
At terminal stations there is also a recognised stand off gap (additional to the train length) at the buffer stop end. A full survey of Waterloo was undertaken prior to the Desiro introduction, in order that a full understanding could be reached of all scenarios before the Desiro's hit the ground, and it makes for an interesting read - but does show how much variation there is platform to platform at what is essentially still a Victorian station, built on a curve to boot.
Thanks. To save me wasting my time, is anyone aware of any platform issues on the 455 routes through Wimbledon? I think most will be fine because they were extended for 455+455+456 formations, though I seem to recall that the rear cab door is off the platform at a handful of stations. Clearly that won't work with 701s, as has been discussed at length.
Big Jumby 74
Established Member
From memory I think you have summed it up pretty well. Given lack of SDO/ASDO in relation to 455/456 that was the reason no 10 car formations of same were diagrammed West of Twickenham Jct (towards Feltham) on the Windsor side, so the most the 456s got see of the Windsor side was on the Kingston rounders and a dose of down time on Strawberry Hill depot. That was a known part of the original 10 car plan.
norbitonflyer
Established Member
I agree with your conclusion - even six is pathetic. (Not forgetting 701028, which has not been used in passnger service now for nearly a year...........)
So why, if the first one to be delivered was found not to be to spec, did they allow all the rest to be built that way? Should they not have stopped production as soon as this was discovered and changed the tooling, manufacturing process, parts supplier (as appropriate) so that production could be resumed, albeit delayed, with the later ones built to spec, rather than just carrying on down the wrong road?
Last edited:
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 16,814
Of course, 456s got to Ascot before the “full” 10-car implementation used them all.
Peter Wilde
Member
This is all far beyond believable now and is frankly infuriating to travellers in the SWR suburban area. Most of us are heading for yet another year (or more) of no toilets, no air con, and not enough trains to run the previous level of service. And a great deal of expensive new metal is clogging up sidings all over the place.
Surely it is about time for somebody with the right technical background and railway experience in the trade press (Modern Railways?) to produce a properly researched, factual, hard hitting article on just what has gone wrong during the 701 saga.
Yes, one can understand that the magazines usually prefer to remain not too critical of their advertisers (and readers who are employed in the industry), as they fear that exposé type articles may damage sales (or the title's future relationship with sources). But come on, this debacle is extreme, and a one-off from which lessons must be learnt?
Surely it is about time for somebody with the right technical background and railway experience in the trade press (Modern Railways?) to produce a properly researched, factual, hard hitting article on just what has gone wrong during the 701 saga.
Yes, one can understand that the magazines usually prefer to remain not too critical of their advertisers (and readers who are employed in the industry), as they fear that exposé type articles may damage sales (or the title's future relationship with sources). But come on, this debacle is extreme, and a one-off from which lessons must be learnt?
It has been suggested several times in this thread that there are no 701/5s on South Western teritory, but this is not so:
701528 & 701529 have been stabled main line side of the cleaning shed in Clapham yard for near on a year. When they first arrived there 701528 was at the London end, but for many months now they have been the other way round with 701529 at the London end. There must therefore have been some movement in this time, possibly a trip around the Hounslow loop, but to all intents and purposes they have not moved for months !
701528 & 701529 have been stabled main line side of the cleaning shed in Clapham yard for near on a year. When they first arrived there 701528 was at the London end, but for many months now they have been the other way round with 701529 at the London end. There must therefore have been some movement in this time, possibly a trip around the Hounslow loop, but to all intents and purposes they have not moved for months !
weeklycommuter
Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 581
It appears that the only workable way to operate the SWR metro timetable with these class 701 trains is with the driver having complete and sole control over the opening and closing of the train doors. It appears that trying to operate them with the guard being required to close the doors will never work. Clearly it is not acceptable for timetabled station calls to be skipped because it is not operationally possible to open or close the train doors at the station.