Class 701 'Aventra' trains for South Western Railway

[fgwrich]

And before SWT he was responsible for Desiro UK at Siemens. Is it coincidence that the Desiro and Aventra feature the flat roof profile?

Mr Roth was also ex-Siemens, of course, and closely involved in all of the new Desiro orders that SWT placed...

But what were DfT's issues with the 707s: seemed perfectly OK as a fleet, if a bit spartan?

Indeed, a man for some considerable time, known as Mr Desiro.

It’s funny how Siemens roof design has almost effectively become the norm now, with Bombardier / Alstom and CAF all going for a very similar design.

 

[hwl]

Yet the Desiro City design was fine for Thameslink and the crush loading there. Never, never, never let DfT civil servants near train design and specification, because they will screw it up. Every time.

Except the lessons learned showed things could be better as the desired standing densities weren't being achieved. DfT realised they could improve on the omissions they made in the Thameslink contract.

But weren't the 707s also done to meet a spec given by the DfT for the suburbans?
Or did SWT design and implement a new fleet off of their own back?

The latter seems risky with the amount of involvement the DfT have in retendering, and the former makes me think of that classic line "I have altered the deal, pray I don't alter it further"

DfT were very hands off with the tender that produced the 707s (which were surprisingly expensive compared to all other recent EMU purchases.

Quoting from the RAIL article which quotes from the ASLEF letter to members there are 23 faults that require resultion before acceptance, the most serious of which appears to be the obstacle detection equipment. Changing the cab ends wouldn't resolve that!

Surely 23 faults can be resolved. ASLEF is prepared to accept the units with the other 67 identified faults still present. No train is ever going to be completely fault-free.

but why would the obstacle detection be different to other Aventras? or need to be?
This sounds like drivers concerned about being blamed for trap and drag in the future when door opening and closing compared to that risk falling with the guards now.

 

[Bayum]

Maybe using the 720s isn't the best example considering how late the first one was to enter service due to various issues

Still in service before the 701s though!

 

[43096]

DfT were very hands off with the tender that produced the 707s (which were surprisingly expensive compared to all other recent EMU purchases.

Perhaps not surprisingly when you consider it was a low quantity of units for an operator coming to the end of its franchise and no Section 54 agreement for the trains. That means higher risk = higher price.

 

[Goldfish62]

Still in service before the 701s though!

Indeed. Liverpool Street is wall-to-wall Aventras these days.

 

[ashkeba]

Indeed. Liverpool Street is wall-to-wall Aventras these days.

Except for the flagship Intercity service, which has Stadlers not dodgy Aventras.

 

[Goldfish62]

Except for the flagship Intercity service, which has Stadlers not dodgy Aventras.

Although a driver friend of mine much prefers driving the 720s.

 

[AM9]

And before SWT he was responsible for Desiro UK at Siemens. Is it coincidence that the Desiro and Aventra feature the flat roof profile?

Can somebody please explain what the "flat roof profile" is and what relevance it has to the class701 issues?

 

[boiledbeans2]

For example, the Siemens Combino tram delivered to many cities throughout Europe were prone to a very serious design flaw, leading to hairline cracks in joints which could result in a collapse of the vehicle's roof. This led to mass withdrawals from service of vehicles pending reinforcement of 454 intermediate modules.

If I understood that Wikipedia article correctly, the Combino trams were actually built by Duewag, which Siemens later bought. So Siemens inherited Duewag's issues, just like Alstom are getting into the 701 mess right now.

 

[Gag Halfrunt]

If I understood that Wikipedia article correctly, the Combino trams were actually built by Duewag, which Siemens later bought. So Siemens inherited Duewag's issues, just like Alstom are getting into the 701 mess right now.

The Combino was introduced after Siemens had acquired Duewag, but IIRC it was based on a flawed bodyshell design inherited from Duewag.

 

[Invincible]

Still in service before the 701s though!

The 701 was held up as the MD of SWR wanted to confront the union, even if it meant years of strikes and discomfort for passengers.

Timeline: The South Western Rail guard dispute

After a strike lasting four years and 74 days, the dispute between the RMT and UK rail provider South Western Rail has reached its conclusion.

www.railway-technology.com

There was a change of MD and the RMT agreed on a settlement, but SWR had not listened to the SWR drivers concerns. Hopefully to be sorted soon.

 

[DanNCL]

The Combino was introduced after Siemens had acquired Duewag, but IIRC it was based on a flawed bodyshell design inherited from Duewag.

The design in question from Duewag is the Type R trams in Frankfurt, which are slated for early replacement in the next few years having been plagued with problems for their entire service lives.

The 701 was held up as the MD of SWR wanted to confront the union, even if it meant years of strikes and discomfort for passengers.

Timeline: The South Western Rail guard dispute

After a strike lasting four years and 74 days, the dispute between the RMT and UK rail provider South Western Rail has reached its conclusion.

www.railway-technology.com

There was a change of MD and the RMT agreed on a settlement, but SWR had not listened to the SWR drivers concerns. Hopefully to be sorted soon.

That is far from the only reason behind the delays to the 701s. You’ve only got to read through a few pages of this thread to find out about the many technical and quality issues the units still have!

 

[Goldfish62]

That is far from the only reason behind the delays to the 701s. You’ve only got to read through a few pages of this thread to find out about the many technical and quality issues the units still have!

And that article is from nearly a year ago.

 

[Invincible]

That is far from the only reason behind the delays to the 701s. You’ve only got to read through a few pages of this thread to find out about the many technical and quality issues the units still have!

But the problems with the dispute meant that problems with the 701 were not being sorted.

 

[Goldfish62]

Shall we try to move on from a continual post mortem on the 701 issues?

Some issues have been dealt with, including a complete rebuild of the drivers desk from the as delivered standard Aventra version to a bespoke SWR version.

The current reported situation (which may have moved on since publication) is that 23 faults are outstanding resolution. Once they're dealt with ASLEF will accept the trains.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Some issues have been dealt with, including a complete rebuild of the drivers desk from the as delivered standard Aventra version to a bespoke SWR version.

presumably the early deliveries will need to have to be returned to derby to have a new drivers desk retrofitted?

 

[Goldfish62]

presumably the early deliveries will need to have to be returned to derby to have a new drivers desk retrofitted?

Reportedly the conversion programme started some time ago and several have been done.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Still in service before the 701s though!

But ordered a year before, so they should be.

 

[Goldfish62]

But ordered a year before, so they should be.

On that basis the 701s should have entered service last year.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

On that basis the 701s should have entered service last year.

That's not what I was saying. I'm sure I don't need to tell you that not all trains take the same time to enter service. What I was saying, was that it wouldn't be unexpected for a train class ordered first to be accepted before a class ordered a year later.

 

[Goldfish62]

That's not what I was saying. I'm sure I don't need to tell you that not all trains take the same time to enter service. What I was saying, was that it wouldn't be unexpected for a train class ordered first to be accepted before a class ordered a year later.

I see.

 

[43096]

That's not what I was saying. I'm sure I don't need to tell you that not all trains take the same time to enter service. What I was saying, was that it wouldn't be unexpected for a train class ordered first to be accepted before a class ordered a year later.

Whatever, both the 701 and 720 Aventra orders have been very late into traffic.
Class 701: ordered June 2017, planned acceptance Sep 2019-Dec 2020, actual in service, who knows...
Class 720: ordered August 2016, planned acceptance Feb 2019-Aug 2020, actual in service November 2020.

 

[Energy]

Whatever, both the 701 and 720 Aventra orders have been very late into traffic.
Class 701: ordered June 2017, planned acceptance Sep 2019-Dec 2020, actual in service, who knows...
Class 720: ordered August 2016, planned acceptance Feb 2019-Aug 2020, actual in service November 2020.

Bombardier were very optimistic with their delivery times given the large number of Aventra cars which were in the backlog.

 

[trainloverboy]

I was travelling past Wimbledon depot today and I saw a 701 moving. I though they were all exploding?

They were on test out of Eastleigh last week but it seems they've now approved movements elsewhere. Does anyone know if they've fixed the issues yet?

 

[swt_passenger]

I was travelling past Wimbledon depot today and I saw a 701 moving. I though they were all exploding?

They were on test out of Eastleigh last week but it seems they've now approved movements elsewhere. Does anyone know if they've fixed the issues yet?

It’s a class problem affecting Crossrail 345s as well - and they’re operating pretty normally. I suspect a permanent fix to 701s is a lower priority. But they were only grounded on SWR for a couple of days even when it first came to notice.

 

[Elorith]

I was travelling past Wimbledon depot today and I saw a 701 moving. I though they were all exploding?

They were on test out of Eastleigh last week but it seems they've now approved movements elsewhere. Does anyone know if they've fixed the issues yet?

At least 701014 and 701038 both appear to be allowed to move. Possibly others now too. Last I saw, the ones at Clapham Yard were there with the portable red lights still fixed.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

It’s a class problem affecting Crossrail 345s as well - and they’re operating pretty normally. I suspect a permanent fix to 701s is a lower priority. But they were only grounded on SWR for a couple of days even when it first came to notice.

Well given the risk of a equipment cabinet door flying off in the constraints of a tunnel environment is deemed acceptable for 345's it must be acceptable for all units in the class if the mitigation measures are followed. Given they aren't doing much with the 701s currently it makes sense to power them all down until they need them.

 

[444045]

At least 701014 and 701038 both appear to be allowed to move. Possibly others now too. Last I saw, the ones at Clapham Yard were there with the portable red lights still fixed.

See post #3,894 re units allowed on test runs :

In addition any recent 701 arrivals from Derby or Worksop will have been given clearence before departure to come south.

U.701045 was on test run yesterday and today as it had been cleared before coming south.

 

[WarrenTManager]

Any test runs won’t be on SWRs safety case. It will be Alstom/GBRf

 

[Railhawk]

701047 at Waterloo last night