• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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

Invincible

Member
Joined
23 Apr 2022
Messages
451
Location
Surrey
Also the minor issue that most if not all 10 car units are already built.
At Kingston and other stations still with short platforms not all doors will open.
The Ascot to Ash Vale line is currently 8 car 450s and will probably still be 450s rather than 701s.
From RTT 5Q50/1 only ran part 1 of the Eastleigh to Waterloo and return test today
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

TT-ONR-NRN

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
10,546
Location
Farnham
At Kingston and other stations still with short platforms not all doors will open.
The Ascot to Ash Vale line is currently 8 car 450s and will probably still be 450s rather than 701s.
It’s 4 car 450s other than the through services.
The through services to Farnham via Camberley are included on the latest map of planned operations, on which the odd extensions to Farnborough, Witley and also to Alton have been removed, and it is a standard class route after all. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the throughs operated by 701s. Desiros are supposed to be completely removed from the Windsor lines when the 701s are all in place.
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,864
Some of the through Waterloo-Aldershot/ Farnham via Camberley services are currently 10-car 458s. 10-car 701s will be able to operate the line, preferably the fixed 10-coach units because of the short platforms at Frimley and Bagshot.

There are a small number of locations where 10-coach units are unable to operate, this is mainly during engineering work and the 5 cars will be needed for these. Clandon, Kingston Bay, Hounslow for example.
 

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
5,776
Location
Croydon
Don't think it wouldf work on SWR though - I believe there are some lines that can't take more than eight cars - Ascot to Ash Vale possibly - certainly platform 1 at Kingston.
Not sure of your point. If the whole fleet were 5car like GA are now then they could put a single 5car 701 on. SWR could do that regardless of the mix of 5 and 10car unless they ran out of suitable 5car units. But they could put two 5car on with the rear two coaches locked out just the same as if it were a single 10car. So it does not change what happens at short platforms until the platform is only 5 or less coaches long - then a 10car has the benefit that people can walk through. But I don't think 5 or less coach length platforms is a common thing on SWR ?.
 

norbitonflyer

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2020
Messages
2,533
Location
SW London
At Kingston and other stations still with short platforms not all doors will open.

But they could put two 5car on with the rear two coaches locked out just the same as if it were a single 10car.
There is only just room for eight cars between the buffer stops on platform 1 and the fouling point with the track through platform 2. If you run a 10-car into platform 1, nothing can use platform 2. It is for that reason that platform 2, which can take ten cars, has recently been resignalled to allow terminating trains from the west to use it.
One of the plusses to the switch to ten car trains was that it made it difficult for Control to randomly terminate a train short at Kingston for operational convenience, without regard to the inconvenience of its hapless passengers who were dumped two stops short of the junction with the main line where they might expect to find an onward service.
 
Last edited:

TT-ONR-NRN

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
10,546
Location
Farnham
There are a small number of locations where 10-coach units are unable to operate, this is mainly during engineering work and the 5 cars will be needed for these. Clandon, Kingston Bay, Hounslow for example.
Sorry, what do you mean by Clandon and Hounslow?
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,864
Sorry, what do you mean by Clandon and Hounslow?
Sorry, turnbacks at these locations during engineering work cannot be 10-cars, so 5-cars will be needed for these.

Not sure of your point. If the whole fleet were 5car like GA are now then they could put a single 5car 701 on. SWR could do that regardless of the mix of 5 and 10car unless they ran out of suitable 5car units. But they could put two 5car on with the rear two coaches locked out just the same as if it were a single 10car. So it does not change what happens at short platforms until the platform is only 5 or less coaches long - then a 10car has the benefit that people can walk through. But I don't think 5 or less coach length platforms is a common thing on SWR ?.
The only ones where 701s will be calling regularly are Frimley and Bagshot.
 

TT-ONR-NRN

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
10,546
Location
Farnham
Sorry, turnbacks at these locations during engineering work cannot be 10-cars, so 5-cars will be needed for these.


The only ones where 701s will be calling regularly are Frimley and Bagshot.
I see, thanks for the clarification.
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
9,653
hounslow can be 10 car as long as its fixed formation. it changed in the resignalling (they cant shunt via the country end however).
Would that apply to the all 701 formations (as they are all the same length?) or only the 10 car sets?
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,477
Location
West Wiltshire
Aside from the DOO/DCO debacle, the cab sizing has been a hot topic, having been constrained by a requirement to standardise door positions between 2x5 car and 10 car trains. So, at the risk of taking this into speculative territory - what could have been done differently by ordering from a different supplier?

The idea behind the standardised door positions was the busy stations would have platforms markings showing where not to wait so people could get off, something that is only really possible with automatic platform alignment stopping (as used on Elizabeth line etc).

There were some other spins offs eg standard ramp positions but that is not really any better than accurately placed car stop markers on platform.

The alternative would have been to slightly lengthen the middle coaches at one end so they matched the length of two cabs coupled. But I think there are couple of locations that space is so tight an extra half metre on length of train wouldn't have fitted.

Only the 10 car ones as the driver needs to be able to walk through
Many of the unusual reversing locations do not have walkways, and climbing down to track level walkway has fallen out out of favour. Not particularly safe if no walkway at either level, although with hindsight modifying the infrastructure might have been easier than bodging the trains
 

Goldfish62

Established Member
Joined
14 Feb 2010
Messages
10,157
Aside from the DOO/DCO debacle, the cab sizing has been a hot topic, having been constrained by a requirement to standardise door positions between 2x5 car and 10 car trains. So, at the risk of taking this into speculative territory - what could have been done differently by ordering from a different supplier?
The Desiro City appears to have the same coach length irrespective of cab or no cab. No idea about CAF, Hitachi or Stadler designs.

The issues with the cab design are firmly the responsibility of the manufacture in any case. I don't think First / MTR could have been blamed for assuming that Bombardier would supply a design that was fit for purpose, just as SWT couldn't be blamed for the Class 458s being total junk, at least initially.
 

cvinall

Member
Joined
17 Aug 2007
Messages
12
Don’t know if this idea has come up before, but if Crossrail 2 were built, these would probably be the trains to serve it. That could inform the door alignment decision, with platform-edge doors in the tunnels requiring consistent alignment.
 

Goldfish62

Established Member
Joined
14 Feb 2010
Messages
10,157
Don’t know if this idea has come up before, but if Crossrail 2 were built, these would probably be the trains to serve it.
I doubt it. TfL would require bespoke trains as per Crossrail 1 including being equipped with ATO.

Anyway, by the time CR2 is built the 701s will have long gone to Newport and I'll be six feet under. :D
 

Big Jumby 74

Member
Joined
12 Feb 2022
Messages
1,103
Location
UK
The Desiro City appears to have the same coach length
The door stopping position at stations various has obviously been an issue, associated (perhaps) with the ABDO system that was planned in association with the SWR franchise bid, but has since been dropped, as has their proposed enhanced TT. One thing that seems to have escaped the notice of some, is that when the main suburban platforms at Waterloo were extended in the 2016/17 rebuild, the length of 10 car suburban trains, as existed at that time, was 204m. Anything longer (even by a metre or so, it is that tight on some platforms at Waterloo) and there would likely be signal sighting issues to address in relation to the driver(s) of outgoing trains.

BOLD: edited for clarification.
 
Last edited:

Goldfish62

Established Member
Joined
14 Feb 2010
Messages
10,157
One thing that seems to have escaped the notice of some, is that when the main suburban platforms at Waterloo were extended in the 2016/17 rebuild, the length of 10 car suburban trains, as existed at that time, was 204m. Anything longer, and there would likely be signal sighting issues to address in relation to the driver(s) of outgoing trains.
Yes, and an excellent point.

Referring to Wikipedia, based on the Class 710 the length of a 2x5 formation with standard cabs would be 205.72m. So too long for the suburban platforms at Waterloo.
 

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
North West
I would expect SWR would want maximum publicity to say, look these brand new trains in are use.
Admittedly, most of us on here know better than to describe them as brand new trains after all this time.

What would be worse if SWR were to introduce refurbished 458s and try to pass them off as new.
 

Robin Procter

Member
Joined
13 Apr 2023
Messages
151
Location
Dorset
My gut feeling is that this 5Q40 path'd Eastleigh-Staines on 14th December as 100mph EMU will be a 701. Any thoughts anyone please?

 

800001

Established Member
Joined
24 Oct 2015
Messages
3,636
My gut feeling is that this 5Q40 path'd Eastleigh-Staines on 14th December as 100mph EMU will be a 701. Any thoughts anyone please?

Yes,that would indicate it’s a 701
 

Goldfish62

Established Member
Joined
14 Feb 2010
Messages
10,157
Admittedly, most of us on here know better than to describe them as brand new trains after all this time.
I think the vast majority of the travelling public have completely forgotten that they were promised new trains way back in Summer 2017 so SWR will undoubtedly be able to get away with it.

What would be worse if SWR were to introduce refurbished 458s and try to pass them off as new.
Given SWR's rather ancient current fleet they'd probably be able to get away with it! I remember friends of mine thinking the refurbished 455s were brand new when first introduced.
 
Joined
2 Jun 2023
Messages
237
Location
Richmond

Looks like a 701 might be in service this week….
What indicates it could be a 701, and a revenue service? I don't know my way around realtimetrains very well
 

CarrotPie

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2021
Messages
869
Location
̶F̶i̶n̶l̶a̶n̶d̶ Northern Sweden
What indicates it could be a 701, and a revenue service? I don't know my way around realtimetrains very well
It's got a 9 in its headcode, and it's an STP Runs as Required path. In terms of revenue service, Class 2 is stopping passenger. If it were to run ECS it'd be a Class 5. Could just be a press show-off though, as opposed to proper revenue.
 

PG

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
2,884
Location
at the end of the high and low roads

Peter Wilde

Member
Joined
14 Oct 2019
Messages
48
Location
Surrey
I think the vast majority of the travelling public have completely forgotten that they were promised new trains way back in Summer 2017 so SWR will undoubtedly be able to get away with it.


Given SWR's rather ancient current fleet they'd probably be able to get away with it! I remember friends of mine thinking the refurbished 455s were brand new when first introduced.
Yes.

But this saga of delays is a complete sh*t show now, isn’t it?

Whether or not some form of soft launch is actually achieved this year, surely it’s time for all of us who travel on SWR - and are aware - to write to our MPs and the Press, to make sure this disgraceful matter does get some publicity.
 

Dan G

Member
Joined
12 May 2021
Messages
543
Location
Exeter
It's got a 9 in its headcode, and it's an STP Runs as Required path. In terms of revenue service, Class 2 is stopping passenger. If it were to run ECS it'd be a Class 5. Could just be a press show-off though, as opposed to proper revenue.
But what indicates a 701 instead of any other stock?
 

Stephen42

Member
Joined
6 Aug 2020
Messages
255
Location
London
But what indicates a 701 instead of any other stock?
Nothing in the data for that, however the workings for it are:
5U91 0953 Wimbledon Park Depot Sdgs to London Waterloo

2U91 1025 London Waterloo to Windsor & Eton Riverside

2U92 1130 Windsor & Eton Riverside to London Waterloo

5Y89 1240 London Waterloo to Wimbledon Park Depot Sdgs
It's a single return journey off peak 7 minutes apart from regularly timetabled services. It seems entirely pointless apart from if it is used as an opportunity to run the class 701 in passenger service.
 

Top