Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Traction & Rolling Stock' started by pompeyfan, 20 Jun 2017.
A couple of tight platforms length wise being the other space issue.
To meet the specific passenger capacity and dwell time requirements of the DfT’s “southwestern” franchise specification. Which is not necessarily the same as any other routes. This requirement is the main reason why they are being introduced.
DfT understanding also moved on in the interim and moved on again with the aborted SE specification. They know they oops'd up several on key details on Anglia stock.
Yeah but because they’re more flat at the front they don’t look so ugly......
It will, with the LNWR units running at 110 and the C2C only at 75 (albeit being rated for 100).
Was a trade off between providing extra seats (and for an order of this size would have been quite easy to have built slightly longer carriages to fit more seats in) and keeping within an overall length. However as virtually every station on SWR network has had its platforms lengthened using modular parts, could easily have been specified couple of metres longer overall.
I have forgotten, but I think the vehicles with cabs are marginally longer so possibly 2 5car units are longer than a 10car unit.
Most stations aren't a problem (those lengthened with the modular parts and with a sensible bit of excess length already but a handful (typically with bridges are problematic.)
The short list of problems stations is some where on the thread some where most of the issues end up being signalling (including sighting) issues with no cheap / quick /easy solutions.
I have forgotten, but I think the vehicles with cabs are marginally longer so possibly 2 5car units are longer than a 10car unit.[/QUOTE]
Correct but by less than a metre though.
The WMT Aventras will have the same cab profile, albeit with a gangway connection fitted.
The Class 458 driving cars are 21m long against 20m for the intermediate cars.
I think the issues are that the ITT specified maximum 20m cars and the space taken up by toilets requires squeezing in more seats somewhere.
Correct but by less than a metre though.[/QUOTE]
Does the shortened cab provide any benefit for signal sighting at those problem stations? That may well have been something they considered.
It's not just the size of the cab, but the layout that was problematic too.
And air conditioning. That’s why I can’t wait for the 455s to be replaced
The rest of us were talking about 707s...
Does the shortened cab provide any benefit for signal sighting at those problem stations? That may well have been something they considered.[/QUOTE]
A 10 car 458 is 203.7m long and has a restricted view through the small windscreen. If a 10 car 701 is no more than 200m long then with its much larger windscreen it's going to be a lot better for signal sighting, surely?
Almost certainly but 701s will operate routes that 458s do not, they have to be able to go pretty much everywhere within 40 miles of Waterloo, so if there were any cases where there'd be an issue, I'd expect them to come up.
The main issues with the cabs on 701s were the ergonomics, the cramped ness and sighting of buffer stops etc I believe.
Interestingly, I noticed the other day that when you compare a 450 to a 377, the cab depths are the same but there’s a metre of electrical Gibbins directly behind the drivers seat, something that doesn’t exist on a 377. Iirc that was part of the reason for smaller cab
There is still a bit of electrical stuff behind the driver on every unit just traditionally less on Bombardier but the 701 design reduces this compared to the earlier Aventras. They had to find space elsewhere for the displaced electronics.
The seats would probably be KIEL as used in the class 720
The images of the interior show ironing boards.
Are there actually any images or do you mean the computer generated one from a year or so ago
I understand there isn't the same urgency for new stock as other operators but wouldn't new trains be the perfect thing for SWR to show off to hopefully bring about some positive opinions and PR. SWR seems to have been very quiet about the 701s so far.
Erm ... no:
Kiel seats are a special 'concession' if you will arranged by Greater Anglia, they aren't going to become the norm for Aventra units. I don't know if it's been stated yet if the 730s will have them as that's another Abellio TOC, but I'm pretty certain it'll be ironing boards for at least the 701s, probably the c2c units too.
Class 730 interior mock-up images show Kiel seats.
Although I don't doubt it will be ironing boards, why would they have removed the second half of seat grab handles, seems counter productive for a train that's supposed to have maximum standing capacity. From that mock up they'll be just as poor as Desiro cities for standee handle provision as Desiro cities except a few extra poles by the doors. TFL could teach them something.
They look worst than Desiro cities if that photo is the final spec. They’ve gone for the one piece hand grips as aposed to the one with the divider in the middle, the aisle looks to be smaller than the 707s, they haven’t installed any of the rubber loops from the ceiling for passengers to use and I don’t see how they’ll get past disability regulations with those grey centre poles in the vestibule.
The sidewalls look heavily sloped (like a Turbostar) rather than almost vertical as is norm for Aventras?
Is it possible that everyone is looking too much into a 2 year old artists impression? I mean look at the CGI for the refurbished desiros.
Looking at GA's Aventra interiors I don't see any taper. Unless SWR are secretly planning on tilting their 701s on the curves between Battersea and Waterloo I would imagine they'll be no different.
Probably not, though of note is that Siemens have produced Desiros with vertical sides (most of them) and sloped sides (ScotRail 380s). Not sure why the difference.