Class 701 'Aventra' trains for South Western Railway

[Wyrleybart]

With a life-long interest in railways, I find the present situation the Class 701s incredibly sad and frustrating.
As a tax-payer, I am incandescent with rage that such a situation should be allowed to continue. Situations such as this make me think that it is time to cut our losses, drastically slim-down the network for freight only and abandon passenger operations on our railways altogether. The whole situation is beyond ridiculous!

I share your dismay Mike. I have been on the railway for 44 years and have never known such vast sums of money be p1ssed up the wall in the name of modernisation of infrastructure, traction and fleets. Much but not all Alstom nee Bombardier. Obviously not in the case of 701s which only work on 750V DC, but diesel and Bimode trains being hauled around diesel locos just beggards belief.

 

[spark001uk]

5Q10 0911 Derby Litchurch Lane to Eastleigh Trsmd
47739 + 701050
Currently 149L through E.mids Pkwy.

 

[VWRO2]

5Q10 0911 Derby Litchurch Lane to Eastleigh Trsmd
47739 + 701050
Currently 149L through E.mids Pkwy.

With the rear cab door open, a fault that has plagued these units since the first one was delivered.

 

[alf]

I left Waterloo for Bournemouth on the 11.05am today.

On the adjacent platform 7 was a 701 unit.

Its coach end information panels on these 10 20m long coaches
shows the width at 2.77 metres.

The old 455s & Thameslink 319s are 2.82m for the same coach length. 377s are 2.80m
Why does almost every new generation of train
have to be thinner than the one before for the same coach length ?

A secret way of saving weight &/or cost or a morbid fear that Network Rail will deem a new train design out of Gauge?

This is not a nerdy question.
The pre privatisation 2.82 width allows 3x2 seating or wider corridor, so more standing or a better ambience.

 

[Recessio]

With the rear cab door open, a fault that has plagued these units since the first one was delivered.

Christ alive, how hard is it to have a sensor to check a door is closed work properly? My garage doors were installed in 1989 and they can tell me if it's open or shut perfectly fine...

Are the doors on 701 cabs even any different from other Aventra cabs?

 

[Energy]

Christ alive, how hard is it to have a sensor to check a door is closed work properly? My garage doors were installed in 1989 and they can tell me if it's open or shut perfectly fine...

Are the doors on 701 cabs even any different from other Aventra cabs?

They are a different style of door to other Aventra. Not sure about the supplier / model but the Electrostar ones are similar.

Edit: its Nabtesco Oclap who supply the aventra cab doors, IFE (part of Knorr Bremse) supplied the passenger doors for both, not sure about electrostar cab doors.

Its the same supplier for all Aventra cab doors and IETs and 395s, unless its because they are a different style its a Bombardier/Alstom issue.

 

[mightyena]

Are the doors on 701 cabs even any different from other Aventra cabs?

Yes. The previous Aventras all used hinged doors that swing inward, the 701s use sliding plug doors.

Not that that should really make much difference, we've had the concept of a plug door on a train since at least the 80s

 

[Flange Squeal]

701034 is, as of tonight, a third unit now at Farnham depot - joining 004/023 that have been there for a while now.

 

[the sniper]

With the rear cab door open, a fault that has plagued these units since the first one was delivered.

I blame ASLEF for standing in the way of progress if they're not allowing these automatically opening doors into service...

 

[Islineclear3_1]

I blame ASLEF for standing in the way of progress if they're not allowing these automatically opening doors into service...

Probably a bit late now for summer air conditioning

 

[Goldfish62]

Yes. The previous Aventras all used hinged doors that swing inward, the 701s use sliding plug doors.

Not that that should really make much difference, we've had the concept of a plug door on a train since at least the 80s

The Class 730s also use sliding plug cab doors.

 

[Invincible]

I left Waterloo for Bournemouth on the 11.05am today.

On the adjacent platform 7 was a 701 unit.

Its coach end information panels on these 10 20m long coaches
shows the width at 2.77 metres.

The old 455s & Thameslink 319s are 2.82m for the same coach length. 377s are 2.80m
Why does almost every new generation of train
have to be thinner than the one before for the same coach length ?

A secret way of saving weight &/or cost or a morbid fear that Network Rail will deem a new train design out of Gauge?

This is not a nerdy question.
The pre privatisation 2.82 width allows 3x2 seating or wider corridor, so more standing or a better ambience.

Is it due to the sliding plug doors? Internally the 701 could have 3x2 seating as the similar 720 has. But as the 701 is for suburban use (although some will go to Reading or Alton), before Covid the peak trains between say Staines and Surbiton and Waterloo will be full, so better to have 2x2 seating and more space for standing.

 

[Goldfish62]

I left Waterloo for Bournemouth on the 11.05am today.

On the adjacent platform 7 was a 701 unit.

Its coach end information panels on these 10 20m long coaches
shows the width at 2.77 metres.

The old 455s & Thameslink 319s are 2.82m for the same coach length. 377s are 2.80m
Why does almost every new generation of train
have to be thinner than the one before for the same coach length ?

A secret way of saving weight &/or cost or a morbid fear that Network Rail will deem a new train design out of Gauge?

This is not a nerdy question.
The pre privatisation 2.82 width allows 3x2 seating or wider corridor, so more standing or a better ambience.

The 455s are restricted. They are not passed to operate south of Haslemere and are restricted to 20mph through Ascot, for example. As will be noted from the extensive testing/mileage accumulation to date the 701s have penetrated every single part of the network. makes perfect sense to have a "go anywhere" unit.

Note that the standard Mk 3 Intercity coach is 2.74m wide.

Looking up the Aventra classes they are all 2.77m wide, so Bombardier/Alstom have settled on a standard width for all units, with length and door configuration tailored to customer needs.

It's pretty obvious from views of the interior that the 701s have wide internal gangways that are imperceptibly different from the 707s.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

The 455s are restricted. They are not passed to operate south of Haslemere and are restricted to 20mph through Ascot, for example

Absolutely so. Although in their case much of the route restriction was due to the donuts (suspension cushions) I believe.

 

[dctraindriver]

The 455s are restricted. They are not passed to operate south of Haslemere and are restricted to 20mph through Ascot, for example. As will be noted from the extensive testing/mileage accumulation to date the 701s have penetrated every single part of the network. makes perfect sense to have a "go anywhere" unit.

Note that the standard Mk 3 Intercity coach is 2.74m wide.

Looking up the Aventra classes they are all 2.77m wide, so Bombardier/Alstom have settled on a standard width for all units, with length and door configuration tailored to customer needs.

It's pretty obvious from views of the interior that the 701s have wide internal gangways that are imperceptibly different from the 707s.

10 mph through P2 Ascot.

 

[Goldfish62]

10 mph through P2 Ascot.

Thanks for the correction. Yes, whenever I've been on one through there it's quite painful.

 

[Juniper Driver]

The 707 lease ends this month. Will they go to Southeastern or will they still be needed as 701s still are not in service?

The remaining 707s are staying for now.

 

[Snow1964]

The remaining 707s are staying for now.

I think the new 707 lease is SE, but they are sub-leasing them back to SWR

Legally the sub-lease is a separate transaction (from the main lease) so in theory nothing to stop SE charging a higher rate if they want, especially if SE have to hire in other trains in meantime to cover their own services.

Ultimately SE could charge ten fold and really upto SWR if it wants them to stay instead of putting 701s into service.

 

[SolomonSouth]

The remaining 707s are staying for now.

And that isn't good, because SE's 376s are due a refurb and without the extra 707s to cover for them while they get refurbished, they might have to stall it...

 

[Goldfish62]

I think the new 707 lease is SE, but they are sub-leasing them back to SWR

Legally the sub-lease is a separate transaction (from the main lease) so in theory nothing to stop SE charging a higher rate if they want, especially if SE have to hire in other trains in meantime to cover their own services.

Ultimately SE could charge ten fold and really upto SWR if it wants them to stay instead of putting 701s into service.

Given that the DfT pays SWR's operating costs in full and also controls SE I doubt if that would be a problem, unless the DfT wants to charge itself more, which it would effectively be doing.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

With a life-long interest in railways, I find the present situation the Class 701s incredibly sad and frustrating.
As a tax-payer, I am incandescent with rage that such a situation should be allowed to continue. Situations such as this make me think that it is time to cut our losses, drastically slim-down the network for freight only and abandon passenger operations on our railways altogether. The whole situation is beyond ridiculous!

And freight never wastes money? How about the 10 year old class 70s in store?

 

[45076]

With a life-long interest in railways, I find the present situation the Class 701s incredibly sad and frustrating.
As a tax-payer, I am incandescent with rage that such a situation should be allowed to continue. Situations such as this make me think that it is time to cut our losses, drastically slim-down the network for freight only and abandon passenger operations on our railways altogether. The whole situation is beyond ridiculous!

The general idea is to get people and freight off the roads, to abandon passenger operations is a ridiculous idea and will never happen. Yes the situation with the 701's is as you put it sad and frustrating but it is recoverable.

 

[camerar1]

701006 has lost its cab fairings at both ends. The result is aesthetically atrocious.



This may have been a first run in this condition: 5Q61 1334 Bournemouth T&R.S.M.D to Eastleigh Trsmd.

 

[43102EMR]

701006 has lost its cab fairings at both ends. The result is aesthetically atrocious.

View attachment 119502

This may have been a first run in this condition: 5Q61 1334 Bournemouth T&R.S.M.D to Eastleigh Trsmd.

I’ve noticed that on the 730/0s (albeit not completely removed and definitely looking a lot better than that!)

 

[Davester50]

701006 has lost its cab fairings at both ends. The result is aesthetically atrocious.



This may have been a first run in this condition: 5Q61 1334 Bournemouth T&R.S.M.D to Eastleigh Trsmd.

Taken off, or fallen off?!?

 

[Towers]

Is this some new defect that's surfaced?!

 

[Elorith]

Is this some new defect that's surfaced?!

A new feature from Derby maybe?

 

[spark001uk]

This may have been a first run in this condition: 5Q61 1334 Bournemouth T&R.S.M.D to Eastleigh Trsmd.

No, it went down to Bournemouth on 21st Feb (5Q69) with the fairings removed. A quick search on YouTube will confirm this.
I've extensive footage of movements of this class, and they tend to run around in various states, it's not unusual to see them with one or both ends missing.

 

[43096]

I think the new 707 lease is SE, but they are sub-leasing them back to SWR

Legally the sub-lease is a separate transaction (from the main lease) so in theory nothing to stop SE charging a higher rate if they want, especially if SE have to hire in other trains in meantime to cover their own services.

Ultimately SE could charge ten fold and really upto SWR if it wants them to stay instead of putting 701s into service.

They couldn’t charge SWR what they want. Any and every lease agreement with the (formerly) franchised TOCs has to be agreed with the DfT, and they are not going to agree to such terms. The vehicle owner will also have to agree to the terms of any sub-lease.

 

[tasky]

This thread is quite sprawling now, so could I ask – has anyone written a single comprehensive post summarising all the problems with the 701s and what is causing the delay in their introduction?