Class 701 'Aventra' trains for South Western Railway

[brownandrew15]

Does anyone know what unit is running tests today?

701002

 

[brownandrew15]

Was 701005 out on test last night as 5Q52 Eastleigh TRSMD to Eastleigh TRSMD?

 

[Ian Hardy]

701002 has just gone through Hounslow (14:00) on the following test working:
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K03054/2020-08-12/detailed

 

[lsdghasu]

Was 701005 out on test last night as 5Q52 Eastleigh TRSMD to Eastleigh TRSMD?

Yes it was.

 

[brownandrew15]

Yes it was.

Do you know what happened to it, RealTimeTrains is inconclusive, Open Train Times says that it was cancelled due to "Train-crew/loco/stock/unit diagram issues" and charlwoodhouse.co.uk says that it went off route, terminated and then went off route again...
I am trying to find out the time that it returned to Eastleigh TRSMD

 

[swt_passenger]

Do you know what happened to it, RealTimeTrains is inconclusive, Open Train Times says that it was cancelled due to "Train-crew/loco/stock/unit diagram issues" and charlwoodhouse.co.uk says that it went off route, terminated and then went off route again...
I am trying to find out the time that it returned to Eastleigh TRSMD

This suggests it got back nearly 3 hours early, but I expect the passing time for Shawford (at 0006) is really what happened:

Realtime Trains - 5Q52 2018 Eastleigh Trsmd to Eastleigh Trsmd

Realtime Trains provides live realtime running information for the Great British railway network using open data.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[Dibbo4025]

Do you know what happened to it, RealTimeTrains is inconclusive, Open Train Times says that it was cancelled due to "Train-crew/loco/stock/unit diagram issues" and charlwoodhouse.co.uk says that it went off route, terminated and then went off route again...
I am trying to find out the time that it returned to Eastleigh TRSMD

Turned at Brockenhurst then ran as booked, gaining time on schedule, returning to Eastleigh about 0025

 

[GW43125]

Would SWR want to attempt a diagram change this complex as they introduce the 701s, as opposed to leaving existing units more or less where they are and replacing them that way?

Because Reading diagrams are largely captive, ie with a few exceptions a unit which is put on a Reading in the morning will stay there all day. Saves having to chase it around.

 

[Goldfish62]

One would like to think they were thinking of the pax sweating in the 455s and concentrate on those first, or maybe putting them on the Reading first will allow 458s to displace 455s. But it's entirely likely they're not thinking like that either.

For the avoidance of doubt I'll quote from The August issue of Modern Railways:

"701s destined for Reading line debut.

A second Class 701 has been delivered by Bombardier to SWR as the operator confirmed plans to introduce the first unit on the Reading line later this year."

Hopefully this avoid further debate as to SWR's intentions.

 

[spark001uk]

Anyone know what 5Z70 is today? Eastleigh - Staines - Windsor - Staines - Eastleigh. I was initially dubious of 701 because firstly it's Arlington not TRSMD, and it's on a Z headcode. But I guess it's possible?

 

[ThameslinkUser]

Anyone know what 5Z70 is today? Eastleigh - Staines - Windsor - Staines - Eastleigh. I was initially dubious of 701 because firstly it's Arlington not TRSMD, and it's on a Z headcode. But I guess it's possible?

Gen states 701002

 

[ThameslinkUser]

I caught 002 on its test run yesterday. Apart from some delays and headlight issues, it seemed to be working fine. I imagine they're doing door testing/ gauging with all of the station stops on their paths?

 

[spark001uk]

Gen states 701002

Oh ye the gen groups, I keep forgetting! Duh!
Thanks.
.
On another note, anyone noticed coach 5 of 10 (484xxx) has an inset bogie where it meets coach 6, but it appears coach 6 itself doesn't (unless I'm blind and it is). What's the idea there? Would have thought that would alter its counterswing geometry? I guess it doesn't affect it much, or they wouldn't have done it.!

 

[James James]

Haven't really been able to see much - but assuming that the train can be split in the middle (someone mentioned whistles on 5 and 6, which suggests these trains are usable as half-units), it would make sense for the geometry on the ends of 5 and 6 to be different - and ideally match the cab ends. If they were to match the cab-ends, then you could mix and match half a 10-car with a 5-car if needed in special cases (but that's just a wild theory).

(Sounds crazy? Perhaps, but I've seen it done in similar situations on other networks.)

Certainly, the class 720 thread suggests the 10-car 720s can be split/have lights and cameras in the middle, but no idea about geometry.

But different geometry on 5 and 6 would be weird - certainly I can't find any good photos myself.

 

[swt_passenger]

Haven't really been able to see much - but assuming that the train can be split in the middle (someone mentioned whistles on 5 and 6, which suggests these trains are usable as half-units), it would make sense for the geometry on the ends of 5 and 6 to be different - and ideally match the cab ends. If they were to match the cab-ends, then you could mix and match half a 10-car with a 5-car if needed in special cases (but that's just a wild theory).

(Sounds crazy? Perhaps, but I've seen it done in similar situations on other networks.)

Certainly, the class 720 thread suggests the 10-car 720s can be split/have lights and cameras in the middle, but no idea about geometry.

But different geometry on 5 and 6 would be weird - certainly I can't find any good photos myself.

I think it’s only a splitting capability for depot internal purposes, a bit like on Thameslink 700s, (and originally on GatEx 460s.). Will never be seen on the network as a half train.

 

[Energy]

Certainly, the class 720 thread suggests the 10-car 720s can be split/have lights and cameras in the middle, but no idea about geometry.

They can be split fairly easily but for maintenance, I haven't heard that they have lights in the middle.

 

[Train Boy]

Fifth delivery due tomorrow, 6X24 0735 Derby Litchurch Lane to Eastleigh TRSMD

 

[swt_passenger]

They can be split fairly easily but for maintenance, I haven't heard that they have lights in the middle.

From what I can see from pausing and slowing YouTube videos, the full width gangway “bellows” at the 5/6 position looks just like any other.

 

[Domh245]

Haven't really been able to see much - but assuming that the train can be split in the middle (someone mentioned whistles on 5 and 6, which suggests these trains are usable as half-units), it would make sense for the geometry on the ends of 5 and 6 to be different - and ideally match the cab ends. If they were to match the cab-ends, then you could mix and match half a 10-car with a 5-car if needed in special cases (but that's just a wild theory).

(Sounds crazy? Perhaps, but I've seen it done in similar situations on other networks.)

Certainly, the class 720 thread suggests the 10-car 720s can be split/have lights and cameras in the middle, but no idea about geometry.

But different geometry on 5 and 6 would be weird - certainly I can't find any good photos myself.

The train will be splittable in the middle by all accounts, but not usable as two halves, not least as there'll be a great big hole in the front of the 5 car portion, before any considerations about coupler compatibility! The oddity that @spark001uk has noticed is that the geometry on vehicles 5 & 6 doesn't appear to match

They can be split fairly easily but for maintenance, I haven't heard that they have lights in the middle.

If you look at this screenshot from this youtube video, you can see some sort of lamp on the vehicle just approaching the camera, just in line with the windows. I've also drawn on the apparent geometry mismatch. Having watched another video of this unit going in the other direction, the offset does appear to also be in place on the vehicle with the 'short' one marked here, so I suspect it is just an optical illusion

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Today's delivery is 701 007.

 

[James James]

The train will be splittable in the middle by all accounts, but not usable as two halves, not least as there'll be a great big hole in the front of the 5 car portion, before any considerations about coupler compatibility! The oddity that @spark001uk has noticed is that the geometry on vehicles 5 & 6 doesn't appear to match

The hole isn't a problem elsewhere, I imagine they can find a solution! But indeed, not relevant if they won't operate that way (the mix of half/full trains is definitely useful for smaller fleets - e.g. if half a 7-car unit is damaged by a rock as has happened for some trains I've seen - but probably not on the huge SWR fleet).

What kind of couplers are they using in the middle though? I can imagine them using bar couplers for most carriages, but if the splitting into half in depots is somewhat common, will they still use bar couplers - or auto-couplers (in which case, why not Dellner as on the front)? I have no idea how common the splitting might be though.

 

[Bigfoot]

I have no idea how common the splitting might be though.

Spliting will only really be needed for some visits to the wheel lathe and the bogie drop/roof crane at Wimbledon Park.

 

[spark001uk]

@Domh245 I think you're right, I purposely followed the centre of the unit on today's delivery, and it is somewhat of an illusion. I think because of the fact they're inner-frame bogies, so you're seeing the sides at rail gauge basically, against the what is it, about 9ft? body, from the angle you're standing, it makes it look like one is inset near and the other not.
.

 

[Domh245]

The shoes (and guards) also threw the perspective off a little I found! Your video also reveals how the half units are coupled together - fairly standard looking Dellners, so it probably is possible to couple an inner end to a cab end!

 

[spark001uk]

Those shoe guards certainly do stand out like a sore thumb don't they! I guess this is just down to the ever tightening health and safety measures?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

@Domh245 I think you're right, I purposely followed the centre of the unit on today's delivery, and it is somewhat of an illusion. I think because of the fact they're inner-frame bogies, so you're seeing the sides at rail gauge basically, against the what is it, about 9ft? body, from the angle you're standing, it makes it look like one is inset near and the other not.
.

Is it running with the 701 unbraked with all those extra wagons with at the rear with concrete slabs on?

 

[swt_passenger]

Is it running with the 701 unbraked with all those extra wagons with at the rear with concrete slabs on?

Yes, it is.

 

[aleggatta]

Those shoe guards certainly do stand out like a sore thumb don't they! I guess this is just down to the ever tightening health and safety measures?

I wouldn’t say that, but with the inboard bogies leaving no height beam fixings on the outside the arm is more vulnerable from impact risking damage to the frangable material. Better an arc shield takes the brunt of the impact than losing a shoe altogether? Also, this is more akin to the latest shoe gear fitted to the desire city’s and likely to be from the same manufacturer (I would guess brecknell Willis), so get used to this being a common sight for new DC stock

edit: also there needs to be an arc shield between bogie and shoe arm/slipper. Older stock had this between the lateral damper and the bottom of bogie so was relatively unobtrusive, so with the damper moved in the new design it was always going to be more visible.

 

[swt_passenger]

I wouldn’t say that, but with the inboard bogies leaving no height beam fixings on the outside the arm is more vulnerable from impact risking damage to the frangable material. Better an arc shield takes the brunt of the impact than losing a shoe altogether? Also, this is more akin to the latest shoe gear fitted to the desire city’s and likely to be from the same manufacturer (I would guess brecknell Willis), so get used to this being a common sight for new DC stock

edit: also there needs to be an arc shield between bogie and shoe arm/slipper. Older stock had this between the lateral damper and the bottom of bogie so was relatively unobtrusive, so with the damper moved in the new design it was always going to be more visible.

I expect another bonus from the shoes being shielded this way is that it reduces the hazard to anyone working near a train, the shoes that aren’t directly in contact with the third rail being live all the time because of cross connections.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I expect another bonus from the shoes being shielded this way is that it reduces the hazard to anyone working near a train, the shoes that aren’t directly in contact with the third rail being live all the time because of cross connections.

Is the shielding attached the shoegear arm or the bogies - point being if its fixed to bogies shoes are still exposed when there down. Presumable the 710/2's have same arrangement?