Class 701 'Aventra' trains for South Western Railway

[Fincra5]

Alright 701 support club!! Calm down. Firstly the seats are the same. Look at them. Ironing board through and through. I can guarantee the seats are just as bad.

Secondly, how is a tiny table an improvement? even the 377s are better and thats not just because of the bigger table!

thirdly, don’t patronise me, i have every right to reply to this thread and discuss the 701s as do you, do it in a decent way or dont at all. And none of you have been in a 701 either?!

look as much as iam glad the 455s are going. The 707s are an unecessary removal

Unless you're on the "metrofied" 377/3s with their half tables.

 

[SWRtrain_fan]

It’s not the build quality that is the issue, it’s SWR’s “scorched earth” approach to maintenance across the fleet that is the problem.

What do you mean by 'scorched earth'? I do agree though that there are generally more train faults with SWR than SWT.

 

[RealTrains07]

You start by mocking the 701 support club and then a bit later ask to be treated with respect... you also have managed to cause a stir on the SWR repaint thread... just a bit of advice but perhaps you should read your posts 2 or 3 times to see if they’re confrontational?

based purely on the photograph evidence, they look like a 707 mark 2 interior. There is minor improvements but they’ll still be a marked improvement over the 455/456 which they replace. These units on the whole need to move as many people as quickly as possible. It’s not until you start getting at the extremities of their operating area such as New line/Epsom/Reading (possibly shepperton and Chessington) that comfort becomes relevant.

In my opinion they’ll be welcome on the whole, except for replacing 458s which could have been good units had they been looked after.

Any news if the 701s have this special toilet they were supposed to have which converts urine into water and dries faeces and paper?

Like i said cant disagree with the 455 and 456s going as they have had their time. Unfortunately for the 458 their build quality doesnt do them any favours, shame

 

[nlogax]

They look fine from my perspective, which is that of just a regular SWR passenger who just wants to get from A to B on a fairly short inner suburban service. Seats appear a little thin but not as ironing board-y as certain Siemens units I've used in the Thameslink and SWR areas, and I'm sure the end product will be just fine for getting people to where they want to go, be it Chessington or Reading. Why some folk here are so uppity about them really beats me. Don't you have more important things to get bitter about?

Little tables on South Western stock go back to the days of CIGs, CEPs and TCs..it's not a new thing.

 

[swt_passenger]

The 707s are an unecessary removal...

The 707 removal is in line with the requirements of the new franchise ITT, which required greater standing capacity and shorter dwell times than the 707s provided in practice.

 

[swt_passenger]

They look fine from my perspective, which is that of just a regular SWR passenger who just wants to get from A to B on a fairly short inner suburban service. Seats appear a little thin but not as ironing board-y as certain Siemens units I've used in the Thameslink and SWR areas, and I'm sure the end product will be just fine for getting people to where they want to go, be it Chessington or Reading. Why some folk here are so uppity about them really beats me. Don't you have more important things to get bitter about?

Little tables on South Western stock go back to the days of CIGs, CEPs and TCs..it's not a new thing.

...and should really have been provided for the facing bays in the 450s.

 

[Goldfish62]

...and should really have been provided for the facing bays in the 450s.

Agreed. But at least they have seat back tables, unlike some of the LM 350s and the 360s.

 

[Goldfish62]

I note from a clear photo on Twitter by Paul Clifton that each plug socket incorporates two USB ports.

 

[swt_passenger]

Agreed. But at least they have seat back tables, unlike some of the LM 350s and the 360s.

Yes, the various inconsistencies within the same basic trains over the years have always seemed unnecessary. Am I right in thinking that at one stage LM decided that hot drinks weren’t allowed from the trolley on their 2+3 trains?

 

[RealTrains07]

Yes, the various inconsistencies within the same basic trains over the years have always seemed unnecessary. Am I right in thinking that at one stage LM decided that hot drinks weren’t allowed from the trolley on their 2+3 trains?

Did they ever have trolleys?? Blimey, what happened to that?

 

[swt_passenger]

Did they ever have trolleys?? Blimey, what happened to that?

Well that’s another inconsistency previously discussed. We had people saying at one time you couldn’t possibly get a trolley through a 350/2, while SWT were doing exactly that on a 450. Not rocket science, you just had to have the right trolley...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, the various inconsistencies within the same basic trains over the years have always seemed unnecessary. Am I right in thinking that at one stage LM decided that hot drinks weren’t allowed from the trolley on their 2+3 trains?

Yes, I think so, on the grounds of there being nowhere to put them down, and possibly because the trolley wouldn't fit through and so you'd have to go and get them, and they don't like to encourage carrying round of hot drinks without the little bags to catch them if they get dropped.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Did they ever have trolleys?? Blimey, what happened to that?

The same as happened to trolleys on any other short distance[1] service - they don't make money because people buy from the far wider choice of food and drink before they board.

SWT/SWR, by contrast, doesn't have a more expensive but far quicker VT biting at its heels.

[1] Yes, I know, you can go from Euston to Lime St with no change, but those doing that are so price sensitive that they probably don't care as long as it has wheels and seats.

 

[RealTrains07]

Why some folk here are so uppity about them really beats me.

Everyone who dislike them (varies by each TOC obviously) have different criticisms of them. Whether its the cheap build, doors, what they replace or cost.

for SWR the reason why some like me are negative about the 701s are both the cost and what they replace. Main argument is that First wasted tax payers money replacing trains which didn’t necessarily need replacing.

701s are coming whether we like it or not and like new trains that have come before them like the electrostar, commuters will ride them whatever the train. Just depends who complains about ride quality first.

arguing about the incoming 701s maybe is pointless however its an argument worth having. 701 may well be a good ride but its what they represent that annoys people who dont them

 

[Fincra5]

Everyone who dislike them (varies by each TOC obviously) have different criticisms of them. Whether its the cheap build, doors, what they replace or cost.

for SWR the reason why some like me are negative about the 701s are both the cost and what they replace. Main argument is that First wasted tax payers money replacing trains which didn’t necessarily need replacing.

701s are coming whether we like it or not and like new trains that have come before them like the electrostar, commuters will ride them whatever the train. Just depends who complains about ride quality first.

arguing about the incoming 701s maybe is pointless however its an argument worth having. 701 may well be a good ride but its what they represent that annoys people who dont them

First wanted a unified Metro Fleet. You could argue the same for replacing the rebuilt 458s...

Not sure how you can have so much criticism when a 701 isn't even in service. Complain about the smaller tables on a commuter train but the 707s don't even have any.

First didn't want the Desiro City Platform. Simple as. To be the 700s are dire, they're the cheapest units Siemens have built (so I'm told) and it shows. (IMO).

 

[hwl]

First wanted a unified Metro Fleet. You could argue the same for replacing the rebuilt 458s...

Not sure how you can have so much criticism when a 701 isn't even in service. Complain about the smaller tables on a commuter train but the 707s don't even have any.

First didn't want the Desiro City Platform. Simple as. To be the 700s are dire, they're the cheapest units Siemens have built (so I'm told) and it shows. (IMO).

Yep 700 about 300k cheaper than 387s per car but fewer cabs and big order is part of that!
Unified fleets on services in an area reduces costs and makes operations simpler especially when things go wrong but that is lost on some.
The 707 purchase cost was pretty similar to electrostar (+/- in order of 10k /car) but leasing cost the TOC sees is of course different to that!

 

[hwl]

Everyone who dislike them (varies by each TOC obviously) have different criticisms of them. Whether its the cheap build, doors, what they replace or cost.

for SWR the reason why some like me are negative about the 701s are both the cost and what they replace. Main argument is that First wasted tax payers money replacing trains which didn’t necessarily need replacing.

701s are coming whether we like it or not and like new trains that have come before them like the electrostar, commuters will ride them whatever the train. Just depends who complains about ride quality first.

arguing about the incoming 701s maybe is pointless however its an argument worth having. 701 may well be a good ride but its what they represent that annoys people who dont them

I notice that you joined the forum this year so may have missed the previous 5 years of the 707 procurement and delivery discussions.

Why is it wasting tax payers money?
The 707 leasing charges are high because they were a mid-franchise variation and SWR, Angel and Siemens all added healthy margins for the price DfT agreed to and this is come back to haunt them. The 701s are substantially cheaper to lease.
With maintenance capacity being the limiting factor on metro fleet provision (see 455 retractioning business case) having a unified fleet is key to maximising the daily in-service diagrams for a given number of units.

 

[RealTrains07]

First wanted a unified Metro Fleet. You could argue the same for replacing the rebuilt 458s...

Not sure how you can have so much criticism when a 701 isn't even in service. Complain about the smaller tables on a commuter train but the 707s don't even have any.

First didn't want the Desiro City Platform. Simple as. To be the 700s are dire, they're the cheapest units Siemens have built (so I'm told) and it shows. (IMO).

Thats good and all but tell me this.

if a fleet is low cost and is cheaply built then you get what you paid for

but when you paid over £890 million and the trains are and look cheaply built. Are you getting your moneys worth when you could have gotten a better deal elsewhere?

yes 701s look good so far but their are other factors involved which ill save for another thread.

One thing to note, first may not have wanted the platform but that wasn’t their decision in 2014 when the order was announced

 

[Doomotron]

if a fleet is low cost and is cheaply built then you get what you paid for but when you paid over £890 million and the trains are and look cheaply built. Are you getting your moneys worth when you could have gotten a better deal elsewhere?

And exactly how are they badly built? If the Electrostars were as badly built as some say, I highly doubt they'd be the best-selling EMU design this generation. The Coradias and Junipers are actually built badly and look how many orders there were... I think that the ROSCOs made the right choice when the went for Turbostars and Electrostars over Coradias and Junipers. The 'Stars are also very reliable and have a very nice passenger environment. Class 375/6s are by far some of the nicest trains in the country!

What better deal could you get? Alstom weren't offering the X'Trapolis (not they'd get any orders anyway since the 458s were built better by some men in Wimbledon), Siemens physically cannot make a cheap train that people like (Class 700), CAF was/is unproven and Hitachi will take so long building the trains that it would be quicker to hand-craft a cruise ship. Out of uranium.

yes 701s look good so far but their are other factors involved which ill save for another thread.

May I ask what these factors are?

One thing to note, first may not have wanted the platform but that wasn’t their decision in 2014 when the order was announced

That's not really an excuse. The Class 700s weren't even First Capital Connect's decision but GTR stuck with them, although they've admitted they're crap themselves.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's not really an excuse. The Class 700s weren't even First Capital Connect's decision but GTR stuck with them, although they've admitted they're crap themselves.

Er? Who did? The seats might be a bit hard but they are VERY good at what they do. They swallow people in a way the 319s didn't.

 

[EdChap]

In all this criticism of the Class 701, which nobody has travelled on yet, surely one of the biggest improvements is having a toilet on each train. This will make life much easier for many travellers.

 

[Ethano92]

They look fine from my perspective, which is that of just a regular SWR passenger who just wants to get from A to B on a fairly short inner suburban service. Seats appear a little thin but not as ironing board-y as certain Siemens units I've used in the Thameslink and SWR areas, and I'm sure the end product will be just fine for getting people to where they want to go, be it Chessington or Reading. Why some folk here are so uppity about them really beats me. Don't you have more important things to get bitter about?

Little tables on South Western stock go back to the days of CIGs, CEPs and TCs..it's not a new thing.

Indeed, SWR released pictures of these units on their twitter feed today and the responses were:
5% unaware saying things like "why are they in 10 car formations if our current trains are 12"
15%"these look lovely, hope we will get then on the X or Y line"
40%"of course they're delayed like my train daily..."
40%"unnaceptable service, give back the franchise..."

The comments were overwhelmingly negative but not about the trains themselves, hardly any comments were. People just used the tweet to get at SWR for their poor service, delays, short forms and cancellations like they do with every other thing SWR posts.

The majority of passengers don't care, they just want a train. The majority of passengers aren't travelling off peak when there's enough space to walk around and explore all the features of the train or care about small tables. They'll be a great improvement on the 455s in summer, which I for one am looking forward to. The only true negative is the lack of spacers however the extra standing room all around will be appreciated by those boarding at Wimbledon/Earlsfield etc.

Edit: one thing I have just noticed. No glass screens by doors to block wind? Even the tube has these.

 

[swt_passenger]

...One thing to note, first may not have wanted the platform but that wasn’t their decision in 2014 when the order was announced

Exactly which class of trains is this referring to, is it the 707s?

 

[hwl]

Thats good and all but tell me this.

if a fleet is low cost and is cheaply built then you get what you paid for

but when you paid over £890 million and the trains are and look cheaply built. Are you getting your moneys worth when you could have gotten a better deal elsewhere?

What better deal elsewhere is that?

One thing to note, first may not have wanted the platform but that wasn’t their decision in 2014 when the order was announced

700 or 707s? in the later case under the new post section 54 agreement era the succeeding franchises aren't stuck with what the previous lot ordered - this has forced the ROSCOs to sharpen up their act in terms of specification, price and micro fleets.

The original DfT plan was to replace the 455s and 458s along with ordering extra new units in 5car formation address the SW franchise 10 capacity issue. Porterbrook managed to get DfT to buy into the concept bringing the 456s in and adding the 460 coaches to 458s and enlarging the 458 fleet by 6 new units, thus leaving a small capacity gap to be filled with new stock which were 707s.

The original plan is going to happen just a decade after they started thinking about it... (and tried the alternatives that give operation headaches)

 

[RealTrains07]

Hitachi will take so long building the trains that it would be quicker to hand-craft a cruise ship. Out of uranium.

Not like bombardier have been doing any better they are a year behind already.

The Class 700s weren't even First Capital Connect's decision but GTR stuck with them, although they've admitted they're crap themselves.

Explain?

 

[RealTrains07]

Exactly which class of trains is this referring to, is it the 707s?

707s since i didnt intend for the 700s to be in the conversation

 

[hwl]

Not like bombardier have been doing any better they are a year behind already.


Explain?

DfT ran the the Thameslink rolling stock tender and picked the winner. It turned out to be a very long and expensive way of working out what a rolling stock manufacturers credit score was in 2012. Siemens are way better than any other manufacturer globally (they also have a banking licence in Germany)

And the 707s were over a year late too.

 

[pompeyfan]

Back onto actual 701 conversation, full length BBC south news piece on the 701s and the issues although there was a few errors that the RMT will not like. The first unit moved under its own power on AC.

 

[swt_passenger]

707s since i didnt intend for the 700s to be in the conversation

So what had “First” got to do with the 2014 order by SWT?

 

[Bessie]

Back onto actual 701 conversation, full length BBC south news piece on the 701s and the issues although there was a few errors that the RMT will not like. The first unit moved under its own power on AC.

Presumably the main production units will be 750v DC only. Is the Derby test track AC only?