Class 707 - SWT: Introduction into service

[spark001uk]

The seating per train is hardly any different to the 455s, it's just spread out amongst the extra coach.

But as the comments below the article correctly point out, the trains won't actually serve the area the paper is targeted at...

Almost. Ashford to Weybridge is all in Surrey.

Also the wiki entry mentions the intention to use some to Basingstoke. How true that is I wouldn't like to say however.

 

[Monty]

The seating per train is hardly any different to the 455s, it's just spread out amongst the extra coach.

2 x 5 car 707 = 542 seats, 640 standing, with wide gangways, access throughout train.
2 x 4 car 455 + 1 x 456 = 591 seats, 569 standing, narrow or no gangways, access along train pretty useless.

Figures from the Southwestern franchise ITT, table 5.3.

But as the comments below the article correctly point out, the trains won't actually serve the area the paper is targeted at...

It's just the people of Surrey having a moan for the sake of having a moan which is something they do very well.

Though it the trains will regularly call at Staines, Ashford, Chertsey and Weybridge which are obviously in Surrey and it's highly likely they will be seen on the odd Woking bay too. But I digress it is just people having a bit of a winge for the sake of if.

 

[Hophead]

Surrey commuters are complaining already: http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/south-west-trains-passengers-brand-12354388#rlabs=2%20rt$sitewide%20p$2

Apparently they're "cattle trucks," with "nowhere to sit or stand." :roll:

That would appear to be uniquely ineffective interior design!

 

[swt_passenger]

It's just the people of Surrey having a moan for the sake of having a moan which is something they do very well.

Though it the trains will regularly call at Staines, Ashford, Chertsey and Weybridge which are obviously in Surrey and it's highly likely they will be seen on the odd Woking bay too. But I digress it is just people having a bit of a winge for the sake of if.

For some reason I thought "Get Surrey" was aimed more towards the Guildford area, but anyway, here are the comparative figures for people using a 458/5 currently:

2 x 5 car 707 = 542 seats, 640 standing, with wide gangways, access throughout each unit.
2 x 5 car 458/5 = 540 seats, 558 standing, doors between cars.

Showing again that the basic premise of the article, about reduced seats, is just so much rubbish...

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Also the wiki entry mentions the intention to use some to Basingstoke. How true that is I wouldn't like to say however.

Complete fabrication I would have thought. These are inner suburban trains, pure and simple. 455s and 458/5 never reach Basingstoke, why should these?

 

[fgwrich]

Complete fabrication I would have thought. These are inner suburban trains, pure and simple. 455s and 458/5 never reach Basingstoke, why should these?

It's very rare that they do, although the 455s have done in the past. Usually now substituted with a 450 or 444.

 

[absolutelymilk]

Complete fabrication I would have thought. These are inner suburban trains, pure and simple. 455s and 458/5 never reach Basingstoke, why should these?

The Wiki article is sourced to an article

http://www.rail.co.uk/rail-news/2014/swt-new-train-order/

The longer trains will also serve places such as Staines and stations to Bracknell, Ascot and Reading and on some mainline services between Basingstoke and Waterloo.

 

[swt_passenger]

The Wiki article is sourced to an article

http://www.rail.co.uk/rail-news/2014/swt-new-train-order/

Still wouldn't trust it. They've likely mistaken Basingstoke for Woking...

 

[Class377/5]

The Wiki article is sourced to an article

http://www.rail.co.uk/rail-news/2014/swt-new-train-order/

But that doesn't have to apply to the 707 as longer trains will be on the mainline with the released 450s making 8 car trains 12 car.

The full quote is

The 10 car trains will be used on the busy Waterloo to Windsor services enabling existing trains to be re-allocated across the network to provide significant extra capacity on other key routes into Waterloo.

The longer trains will also serve places such as Staines and stations to Bracknell, Ascot and Reading and on some mainline services between Basingstoke and Waterloo. Ten carriage trains will operate on the main suburban network for the first time serving Kingston, Epsom, Hampton Court and Guildford via Effingham Junction.

Its worth looking at the bold bit where it states the 450's being re-allocated to make services from Reading, Basingstoke etc longer.

Whoever did the wiki entry simply doesn't understand what is actually being talked about. A common issue with the train wiki pages.

 

[swt_passenger]

Its worth looking at the bold bit where it states the 450's being re-allocated to make services from Reading, Basingstoke etc longer.

Whoever did the wiki entry simply doesn't understand what is actually being talked about. A common issue with the train wiki pages.

Agree, I think you've nailed it there, the article is clearly discussing the overall network benefits as well as the 707s in particular...

 

[OFFDN]

Indeed, I'd agree the article has confused overall vs 707s.

To quote the vehicle change notice proposed by SSWT and put out by Network Rail for 707's (a process for consulting other users of the network about the introduction of new vehicles or existing vehicles on new routes) the following is said...

"...the introduction of Class 707 units for operation on a number route on the Wessex Route. SSWT wishes to introduce 30 five-car Class 707 EMUs to its train fleet to enable SSWT to operate 10-car trains on its services from Windsor & Eton Riverside and Weybridge via Staines to London Waterloo and also to provide additional peak services from Reading and Hounslow to London Waterloo. This forms part of the Waterloo & South West Upgrade and will displace the current rolling stock on the Windsor and Weybridge Services to strengthen other services."

 

[spark001uk]

"...the introduction of Class 707 units for operation on a number route on the Wessex Route."

That first line right there I bet will get misused. Not for the poor grammar, but for the fact that it has 707 and Wessex in the same sentence - you and I know what the article means in general, but undoubtedly some are sure to misquote it and say 707s will be used into Wessex!

 

[XDM]

The seating per train is hardly any different to the 455s, it's just spread out amongst the extra coach.

2 x 5 car 707 = 542 seats, 640 standing, with wide gangways, access throughout train.
2 x 4 car 455 + 1 x 456 = 591 seats, 569 standing, narrow or no gangways, access along train pretty useless.

Figures from the Southwestern franchise ITT.

The 455 units were built & run by BR with about 100 extra seats per 2 units than now. In the 21st century SWT scrapped seats to make more standing room. The old 455 seating total compares better versus the 707 if SWT had not made thousands of extra Surrey commuters stand each day.

 

[BestWestern]

In the 21st century SWT scrapped seats to make more standing room. The old 455 seating total compares better versus the 707 if SWT had not made thousands of extra Surrey commuters stand each day.

Are you referring to the generally rather highly regarded refurbishment? Presumably the changes were made for a reason, rather than just to irritate people. They are suburban units, not long distance trains; in the Waterloo suburban rush hour what matters most is capacity. Seats are of little use to passengers left standing on the platform waiting for the next train.

 

[spark001uk]

The 455 units were built & run by BR with about 100 extra seats per 2 units than now.

I remember those days, the blue/grey livery outside, the green tartan pattern half-height seats, cushions that popped out of their balljoint and were a bugger to get back in!

Cleaned many of those units out back in the day at Staines CHS.

 

[Class377/5]

The 455 units were built & run by BR with about 100 extra seats per 2 units than now. In the 21st century SWT scrapped seats to make more standing room. The old 455 seating total compares better versus the 707 if SWT had not made thousands of extra Surrey commuters stand each day.

The issue here is the choice is quite clear. Thousands stand or thousands less can travel in peak. For the distances the 455s do, I sure most commuters would prefer to be able to board a train and get to work rather than queuing just to board a train.

The difference between BR and the 21st century is a huge increase in passenger numbers that requires assets to be made to hold more people (more standing, long as possible trains). The BR managed this vs today argument often overlooks the huge increase. Waterloo is a very good example of this.

 

[absolutelymilk]

It's worth looking at the bold bit where it states the 450's being re-allocated to make services from Reading, Basingstoke etc longer.

Whoever did the wiki entry simply doesn't understand what is actually being talked about. A common issue with the train wiki pages.

Thanks, I have fixed this now.

 

[Goldfish62]

For some reason I thought "Get Surrey" was aimed more towards the Guildford area, but anyway, here are the comparative figures for people using a 458/5 currently:

2 x 5 car 707 = 542 seats, 640 standing, with wide gangways, access throughout each unit.
2 x 5 car 458/5 = 540 seats, 558 standing, doors between cars.

Showing again that the basic premise of the article, about reduced seats, is just so much rubbish..

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



Complete fabrication I would have thought. These are inner suburban trains, pure and simple. 455s and 458/5 never reach Basingstoke, why should these?

Despite there being a lot of 2+1 seating on the 707 the seating capacity is obviously close to a 458 due to it being predominantly airline layout, of which there's little in the 458s and no toilets.

The amount of standing room is purely theoretical. Read the excellent article in Modern Railways which illustrates perfectly why the standing room is actually reduced due to not using seat spacers meaning that seated passengers splay out into the standing area.

In the 2+1 seating area there is also the lack of poles or grab handles which will reduce practically amount of standing.

 

[swt_passenger]

Despite there being a lot of 2+1 seating on the 707 the seating capacity is obviously close to a 458 due to it being predominantly airline layout, of which there's little in the 458s and no toilets.

The amount of standing room is purely theoretical. Read the excellent article in Modern Railways which illustrates perfectly why the standing room is actually reduced due to not using seat spacers meaning that seated passengers splay out into the standing area.

In the 2+1 seating area there is also the lack of poles or grab handles which will reduce practically amount of standing.

Is it 'a lot' of 2 + 1? The recent video (in the Get Surrey article) suggests it is a couple of short sections between gangway and first vestibule in different carriages..

However I did see the MR article, and it is quite justifiable, but it doesn't really affect the main point that the basic premise of the news article is flawed, because the seating and standing space in the 707 is generally in the same ball park as the trains that are already running.

 

[Bigfoot]

Here is a spanner in the works. The 707s are being route cleared by network rail to run everywhere on Swts network...

 

[adc82140]

Is there likely to be a need to send them to Bournemouth depot or elsewhere for some maintenance jobs? I presume the acceptance testing will be done towards Weymouth like the 458/5s? That'll need a fair bit of route clearance outside their normal stamping ground.

 

[HeelBurton]

Is there likely to be a need to send them to Bournemouth depot or elsewhere for some maintenance jobs? I presume the acceptance testing will be done towards Weymouth like the 458/5s? That'll need a fair bit of route clearance outside their normal stamping ground.

Reading Alton and Haslemere for testing. Well, that's the theory. They are looking for drivers to volunteer who sign these roads.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[swt_passenger]

Is there likely to be a need to send them to Bournemouth depot or elsewhere for some maintenance jobs? I presume the acceptance testing will be done towards Weymouth like the 458/5s? That'll need a fair bit of route clearance outside their normal stamping ground.

I don't see why they wouldnt do maintenance elsewhere than Wimbledon at some later stage. 10 years ago it's possible no-one would have assumed that Desiros would go through Eastleigh works for more involved overhauls. It's possible that at some time Wimbledon, like Northam, will be fully occupied with regular maintenance.

 

[D365]

Here is a spanner in the works. The 707s are being route cleared by network rail to run everywhere on Swts network...

Don't forget that the Class 707s can be reconfigured with toilets and a different seating configuration.

 

[43096]

Here is a spanner in the works. The 707s are being route cleared by network rail to run everywhere on Swts network...

Why is that a spanner works? Seems sensible to me.

Deployment of the first 30 707s is known, as is the internal cascade that results.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

2 x 5 car 707 = 542 seats, 640 standing, with wide gangways, access throughout each unit.
2 x 5 car 458/5 = 540 seats, 558 standing, doors between cars.

As a comparison, 2 x 4-car 450 = 532 seats.

So on the Reading line, the extra 2 vehicles once they go 10-car is all about standing room.

 

[spark001uk]

Don't forget that the Class 707s can be reconfigured with toilets and a different seating configuration.

I did ask SWT on twitter about this. They said there have been some requests from customers for toilets, and that they are fairly simple to retro-fit, however there's currently no plans to do so.

I would think it's quite possible SWT may end up making a sub-class if they see fit, with, as you said, different internal layout, and toilets. They did it with the HC 450/5.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

How many seats would be lost toilets were fitted and no other changes to the seating configuration were made?

 

[spark001uk]

How many seats would be lost toilets were fitted and no other changes to the seating configuration were made?

Well as it happens I was on a few class 700s on Thursday, one of which I was sat by the toilet (manual one), and I looked at its footprint compared to the seats I was at, and it looks like it would displace 8 seats (assuming airline style, 2+2 layout). Not sure about the disabled loo, I would say about 12 seats on the side it's fitted, plus removal of seats on the opposite side of the train as well, though I think from memory there are a few perch seats put there. So probably in the order of 15-20ish lost in total for one of those.

 

[Class377/5]

Here is a spanner in the works. The 707s are being route cleared by network rail to run everywhere on Swts network...

No that's yourself just misunderstanding what's going on. They are route clearing the Desiro City on all the routes. Makes sense to do it now, especially as in disputation or engineering works may see the 707 used to shuttle passengers around different parts of the network. It's a very sensible idea to ensure the SWT maintained 707s can access all parts of the main network so they can be moved if the need every arises.

It's called sensible planning to allow flexibility. As the 707s have been designed to easily allow retrofitting of toilets and the very design of the Desiro City allows changes to the seating layout to be made easily.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In the 2+1 seating area there is also the lack of poles or grab handles which will reduce practically amount of standing.

That's because the 2+1 area is designed to allow wheelchairs to move about so ensure a limit to standing area to provide the requirement for diabale access.

Also as mentioned countless times on this forum, the Desiro Cities cannot grab poles into the ceiling due to the face the ceiling pivots down to allow access to the equipment there. This is why you gave the grab handles on seats that so far I've not seen any really issues with. And personally I prefer holding onto something at that level than stretching towards the roof.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't see why they wouldnt do maintenance elsewhere than Wimbledon at some later stage. 10 years ago it's possible no-one would have assumed that Desiros would go through Eastleigh works for more involved overhauls. It's possible that at some time Wimbledon, like Northam, will be fully occupied with regular maintenance.

Indeed. If Crossrail 2 does chuck SWT out of Wimbledon the maintenance will have to change it to this is another reason why the clearing of the units now is sensible.

Don't forget clearing now while units aren't required in service is easy. Try doing that when the fleet is full in service and you release units from daily duties (ie reduce capacity) to clear them in the future.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What's SWT's current policy on route clearing of classes? Are all 444s, 450s and 458s cleared for any electrified section of track (inc sidings and depots) throughout SWT's network (except obviously Island Line)? Are the 158s/159s cleared for the whole of the SWT's network (again excluding Island Line)? Are the 455s & 456s cleared for all red routes and selected blue routes?

If XRail did kick SWTs out of Wimbledon, could the knock-on affect of a maintenance location reshuffle increase what works can/would get done at Bournemouth? Would the 455s and 456s even be around by then anyway?

 

[D365]

What's SWT's current policy on route clearing of classes?

Why would it be a SWT policy when it's Network Rail infrastructure that they have to be cleared on?

Also, I think the rest of your post is going wildly off-topic.