Class 707 - SWT: Introduction into service

[Via Bank]

They might explain it on leaflets, but even then, most people will just use their logic on the colour. For example, when I see red, I immediately think 'busy'. When I see green, I think 'not so dense'

Regrettably it's useless for the 8% of men who are red/green colourblind. All they'll see is a row of rectangles in various shades of grey.

Why not use icons, or words (à la the Japanese railways)?

 

[J-2739]

Regrettably it's useless for the 8% of men who are red/green colourblind. All they'll see is a row of rectangles in various shades of grey.

Why not use icons, or words (à la the Japanese railways)?

I think that's one of the major problems with the system SWT decided to customise for itself, and you'd think it was accessible to all.

(#200)

 

[LLivery]

The 700s are to make longer journeys so the case for first class is strong. The 707 meanwhile, are to make shorter inner-suburban journeys.

First Class on a 700 or any Southern Region train is just about "Premium Economy". Calling it First Class is a joke, its one of the reasons why so many people ignore it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As for the 707s, they look great.

 

[J-2739]

First Class on a 700 or any Southern Region train is just about "Premium Economy". Calling it First Class is a joke, its one of the reasons why so many people ignore it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As for the 707s, they look great.

Oh dear, stupid mistake

Agreed, love the look of the 707's in SWT red. Inside and out is simple yet smart.

 

[jon0844]

Regrettably it's useless for the 8% of men who are red/green colourblind. All they'll see is a row of rectangles in various shades of grey.

Why not use icons, or words (à la the Japanese railways)?

The 700s aren't just using colours but graphics to show more people, solving that problem.

Maybe the test trains use a setup for another country and the final ones will get the same build?

 

[Haydn1971]

I can't help but think that this information is required on the platform before passengers board, rather than on the train after people are caught up in a crush loaded carriage - I accept that on a train with through gangways this is less of an issue, but nevertheless.

 

[Dr_Intoxicated]

Seeing the chap sitting is spreading over more than one seat it looks like they have not left enough lateral space between the seats. I like the extra space between the seats in the 488s, much more comfortable than the 450s, and it appears the 707s

 

[infobleep]

I can't help but think that this information is required on the platform before passengers board, rather than on the train after people are caught up in a crush loaded carriage - I accept that on a train with through gangways this is less of an issue, but nevertheless.

I think it's fairly important if passengers inside don't spread out and someone wants to get further down.

I do think to have it on the platform to would be useful though.

I think such a thing would be useful all peak trains leaving Waterloo for all routes. I admit it probably couldn't be retrofitted to existing stock so it wouldn't happen.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[jon0844]

There will be passenger loading info on platforms later won't there?

The trains are connected so that should be a very easy, and useful, feature.

 

[swt class 450]

Although i havent been on a 707 yet i must say they do seem slightly better than the 700s. Especially as the 707s will have free WIFI and plug sockets throughout the train.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think it's fairly important of passengers inside pint spread out and someone wants to hey further down.

I do. Think have it on the platform top would be useful though.

I think such a thing would be Seoul on all peak trains leaving Waterloo for all routes. I admit it probably couldn't be retrofitted to existing stock so it. Wouldn't happen.

Quite a few typos or autocorrect failures there. Please check before posting.

 

[J-2739]

Although i havent been on a 707 yet i must say they do seem slightly better than the 700s. Especially as the 707s will have free WIFI and plug sockets throughout the train.

To be fair, the 700's had their specs frozen in 2008 when plug sockets and Wi-Fi wasn't considered top priority for commuter services.

 

[43021HST]

I think the monitors in the train maybe more beneficial in getting the corridor connection dwellers to move down the train rather than trying to act as human pinch points.

Although I'm going to be the luddite and suggest that personally I find monitors that size to be over-bearing, on top of existing audio announcements and the barrage of information that overwhelms the average passenger nowadays.

 

[infobleep]

Quite a few typos or autocorrect failures there. Please check before posting.

My apologies. Now corrected.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

To be fair, the 700's had their specs frozen in 2008 when plug sockets and Wi-Fi wasn't considered top priority for commuter services.

Would it ever be possible not to freeze specs so far in advance of building and delivering trains or does it take ages to design and build coaching stock now, owing to the fact of them being far more complicated then steam engines were?

Of course within a few years it may be that plug sockets are not required, owing to batteries being of better lasting length. However WiFi will still be required.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Class377/5]

Plug sockets will be in spec for many years yet as replacing the entire UK infrastructure os a major headache. USB however keeps changing spec with the latest C variant meaning to will change many times during the 707s life time. It's far better to adopt a national standard (plugs) that a forever changing one like USB.

 

[Tom m]

Plug sockets will be in spec for many years yet as replacing the entire UK infrastructure os a major headache. USB however keeps changing spec with the latest C variant meaning to will change many times during the 707s life time. It's far better to adopt a national standard (plugs) that a forever changing one like USB.

It is possible to use the big end of a type C cable with the earlier type of port for charging.

 

[Class377/5]

It is possible to use the big end of a type C cable with the earlier type of port for charging.

Yet that doesn't supply enough power for the newer devices so the end result is the passenger sees slow charging times. And with a standard that changes ever few years, how long is the traditional USB socket going to last?

The plug has been a standard of decades and will remain so to avoid billions of
pounds worth of changes. USB is not tied down like this.

When your designing something that has to last 30 years, what do you go with? The standard that will last and not the fashionable ever changing one like some suggest.

 

[J-2739]

Would it ever be possible not to freeze specs so far in advance of building and delivering trains or does it take ages to design and build coaching stock now, owing to the fact of them being far more complicated then steam engines were?

Of course within a few years it may be that plug sockets are not required, owing to batteries being of better lasting length. However WiFi will still be required.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

I guess not, due to design and specs have to be complete before manufacturing. Changing the specs during construction sounds expensive.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Could the trainload information system be retrofitted to SWT's 444s and 450s whenever they have their major overhaul and refurb?

 

[Class377/5]

Could the trainload information system be retrofitted to SWT's 444s and 450s whenever they have their major overhaul and refurb?

The system is rather extensive. It will require a lot of work but generate no money so reality is its unlikely.

 

[infobleep]

I guess not, due to design and specs have to be complete before manufacturing. Changing the specs during construction sounds expensive.

How long was the design stage on the class 700?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[SpacePhoenix]

How long was the design stage on the class 700?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Would they have started completely from scratch or have used the design of the 380s as a starting point?

 

[Class377/5]

Would they have started completely from scratch or have used the design of the 380s as a starting point?

The class 380 is based on the Desiro City body wise. The 700/707/717 are all pure Desiro City designs.

How long was the design stage on the class 700?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Somewhere around 2006-2008 for the Desiro City framework with the 700 offered up in 2008. Its worth noting the 717 design work isn't 100% yet (but the contract is very different to the 700 and similar to the 707 order).

 

[infobleep]

The class 380 is based on the Desiro City body wise. The 700/707/717 are all pure Desiro City designs.



Somewhere around 2006-2008 for the Desiro City framework with the 700 offered up in 2008. Its worth noting the 717 design work isn't 100% yet (but the contract is very different to the 700 and similar to the 707 order).

As a complete outsider to this, what way is the contract different? Surely the design process would be much the same, unless newer technology is allowing the design process to be very different.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Class377/5]

As a complete outsider to this, what way is the contract different? Surely the design process would be much the same, unless newer technology is allowing the design process to be very different.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

The 700s were ordered by the DfT to a spec where the trains are not brought out right when completed. The owners, Cross London Trains or XLT, only get paid when a train has completed a days work. For full payment the unit must not break down, toilets, PIS etc must all be fully working with deductions made if they fail any of the setting. The same is true if Siemens does not have enough 12 cars and puts a 8 car out instead. The 20 or so banks are funding the fleet in the interim and expect to be paid as the units earn. However any alterations to the fleet requires all parties, ie Siemens, DfT and all those banks to agree with their own lawyers etc etc.

The 707/717 are ordered by a traditional ROSCO for a TOC and brought once they complete commissioning. Any alterations will be a matter for the ROSCO and TOC to sort with possibility the DfT stamping the deal.

As you can see the 700s are a lot more complex than the 707s to deal with. This is why the 700 spec was frozen in 2008 even tho the deal wasn't signed until many years later. The 707 deal is much more flexible.

 

[infobleep]

The 700s were ordered by the DfT to a spec where the trains are not brought out right when completed. The owners, Cross London Trains or XLT, only get paid when a train has completed a days work. For full payment the unit must not break down, toilets, PIS etc must all be fully working with deductions made if they fail any of the setting. The same is true if Siemens does not have enough 12 cars and puts a 8 car out instead. The 20 or so banks are funding the fleet in the interim and expect to be paid as the units earn. However any alterations to the fleet requires all parties, ie Siemens, DfT and all those banks to agree with their own lawyers etc etc.

The 707/717 are ordered by a traditional ROSCO for a TOC and brought once they complete commissioning. Any alterations will be a matter for the ROSCO and TOC to sort with possibility the DfT stamping the deal.

As you can see the 700s are a lot more complex than the 707s to deal with. This is why the 700 spec was frozen in 2008 even tho the deal wasn't signed until many years later. The 707 deal is much more flexible.

Thanks for that. Fascinating.

So the former is more rigid but perhaps allows for more deductions should things not be right than the latter. You have to be right to start with though and not much room for error.

Which type of contract offers th best overall?

Are there any plans for WiFi on the 700s or is it simply to complicated to introduce, given what you've outlined?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Class377/5]

Thanks for that. Fascinating.

So the former is more rigid but perhaps allows for more deductions should things not be right than the latter. You have to be right to start with though and not much room for error.

Which type of contract offers th best overall?

Are there any plans for WiFi on the 700s or is it simply to complicated to introduce, given what you've outlined?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Without trying to make this into another 700 thread, its fairly simple. The 700 have space for the equipment where as the 707 come with it already in place. The 700s have wifi for maintenance anyway on board which I guess the 707 will have too.

 

[infobleep]

Without trying to make this into another 700 thread, its fairly simple. The 700 have space for the equipment where as the 707 come with it already in place. The 700s have wifi for maintenance anyway on board which I guess the 707 will have too.

Thanks. That's clear. I don't want to turn it into a 700. Just curious about the differences and how the contracts work etc.

Part of me thinks being flexible is good but then part of me has heard stories of people constantly changing their minds whilst something is being designed. That isn't helpful either.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[jon0844]

Plug sockets will be in spec for many years yet as replacing the entire UK infrastructure os a major headache. USB however keeps changing spec with the latest C variant meaning to will change many times during the 707s life time. It's far better to adopt a national standard (plugs) that a forever changing one like USB.

Stick with USB-A ports, then let people use micro-USB, Lightning, USB-C and whatever else comes out in the future.

I have a feeling USB-A will be with us for many, many years. I don't think it's a massive problem about power output. Even 5V/2A should be good for most people.

And you can potentially upgrade the supply (9, 12, 18V and 3A and beyond) without changing the sockets later on if you want.

People are still buying powerbanks with 1A outputs, and there doesn't seem to be mass outrage. I suspect many people don't even know!

 

[Class377/5]

Thanks. That's clear. I don't want to turn it into a 700. Just curious about the differences and how the contracts work etc.

Part of me thinks being flexible is good but then part of me has heard stories of people constantly changing their minds whilst something is being designed. That isn't helpful either.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Both have advantages and disadvantages.

Stick with USB-A ports, then let people use micro-USB, Lightning, USB-C and whatever else comes out in the future.

I have a feeling USB-A will be with us for many, many years.

I don't. We already have laptop that are powered via micro USB and C can provide even more power. The smaller and thinner devices go, the useful C will be over A. Especially over the next 30 years.