Class 707 - SWT: Introduction into service

[cjmillsnun]

The DfT might specificy they want so many 707s to the point where all the 707s would be spoken for (units needed for service + those undergoing maintenance). My gut feeling is that the 707s will end up being used just on the routes that the DfT are going to take over.

Not sure that 456s would be any good on the Lymington branch due to the level crossing and the risk of them getting gapped.

What routes are the DfT taking over??? I know TfL are going to specify some routes.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What routes are the DfT taking over??? I know TfL are going to specify some routes.

I don't think they've specified what routes yet, but it's probably (for SWTs) some or all of the "red routes"

 

[Goldfish62]

Not guaranteed at all. This common misunderstanding is that it's a hand over. SWT could still operate the units. All TfL is proposing to do under this consultation is control the Standards etc not fully control the service a la LO. Separate business units is what the next SW franchise has to achieve. Don't forget GTR has four separate business units but isn't stopping stock moving between them.

I can assure you that it is TfL's aspiration that it becomes part of LO. That has been publicly stated in interviews by both Mike Brown and Isabel Dedring.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

I can assure you that it is TfL's aspiration that it becomes part of LO. That has been publicly stated in interviews by both Mike Brown and Isabel Dedring.

Would LO want the 707s or would they prefer units based on Electrostars to be used on the routes that they take over?

 

[D365]

Would LO want the 707s or would they prefer units based on Electrostars to be used on the routes that they take over?

Bear in mind that TfL are also looking at taking over the Great Northern routes out of Moorgate, where a Desiro City variant is also being ordered.

The only suitable existing units that I can think of (without scrapping) would be the 376s?

 

[cjmillsnun]

I don't think they've specified what routes yet, but it's probably (for SWTs) some or all of the "red routes"

Again that's TfL not DfT looking at those routes!

 

[Class377/5]

I can assure you that it is TfL's aspiration that it becomes part of LO. That has been publicly stated in interviews by both Mike Brown and Isabel Dedring.

No its not. If you actually read what TfL/DfT put out for consultation (ie getting public opinion not a cast iron guarantee it'll happen) they want control not to run. That leaves the ability for the same TOCs to run the trains but with difference standards for different routes.

There also the factor of if all these routes do go over to TfL control, simple orange lines isn't going to work anymore on the maps and separate branding is going to be required.

 

[Goldfish62]

No its not. If you actually read what TfL/DfT put out for consultation (ie getting public opinion not a cast iron guarantee it'll happen) they want control not to run. That leaves the ability for the same TOCs to run the trains but with difference standards for different routes.

There also the factor of if all these routes do go over to TfL control, simple orange lines isn't going to work anymore on the maps and separate branding is going to be required.

Fine, if that's what you want to believe I'm not going to argue with you. It's just that I'm on the inside and I'm guessing you're not.

 

[Class377/5]

Fine, if that's what you want to believe I'm not going to argue with you. It's just that I'm on the inside and I'm guessing you're not.

That's fine if you believe that. Good luck with it too.

 

[Goldfish62]

That's fine if you believe that. Good luck with it too.

No probs. As I say I'm somewhat on the "inside" with all this.

 

[TRAX]

Will be fun when you realise how much Class 377/5 is on the inside.

 

[Minstral25]

No its not. If you actually read what TfL/DfT put out for consultation (ie getting public opinion not a cast iron guarantee it'll happen) they want control not to run. That leaves the ability for the same TOCs to run the trains but with difference standards for different routes.

There also the factor of if all these routes do go over to TfL control, simple orange lines isn't going to work anymore on the maps and separate branding is going to be required.

"That leaves the ability for the same TOCs to run the trains but with difference standards for different routes."

The biggest problem of the proposal - the service levels, station deep cleans, staffing etc standards should apply to all the routes not just the heavily subsidised ones with cheap fares in London

 

[ScotGG]

Bear in mind that TfL are also looking at taking over the Great Northern routes out of Moorgate, where a Desiro City variant is also being ordered.

The only suitable existing units that I can think of (without scrapping) would be the 376s?

Given that coupled 5-car 376s are a major waste of the newly completed 12-car suitable infrastructure on Southeastern metro routes, them going would be a good thing to an area where 10 car running is the limit.

Replace on SE Metro routes with 4 or 6-car 700 variants to utilise the 12 car platforms and upgraded power supply. Their SDO would also allow them to stop at Woolwich Dockyard and Charing Cross.

Once SE Metro is removed from the rest of Southeastern the business case looks better too. SE as a whole requires more subsidy than other TOCs due to very high HS1 costs. Split that away and the rest of the franchise (London metro routes seeing very high growth) stops being starved.

 

[Class377/5]

"That leaves the ability for the same TOCs to run the trains but with difference standards for different routes."

The biggest problem of the proposal - the service levels, station deep cleans, staffing etc standards should apply to all the routes not just the heavily subsidised ones with cheap fares in London

Agreed. As its a governance thing, it just requires more guidance than present. All can be done.

However TfL ability to run a railway has been overstated. So far they've only run simple systems (SSL isn't applicable in this instance as they control everything). The feeling I've seen on the ex Anglia lines seem to be things are just the same. New trains and new paint job could be done under a TOC as much as TfL control if the DfT wanted it. The roll out of LO brand was possible without TfL if the DfT had wanted too but it seems they were happier to off load the lines and issues to another party.

And this is without commenting on the report release a week before the plans were announced where the extra capacity raised will be brought about in South London by removing some services to provide simply high frequencies lines meaning many people will have to change en route compared to today. Also removing seats to provide standing areas is another solution that along with ATO is aimed at giving up to 40% (IIRC) extra capacity than today.

 

[ScotGG]

Governance is key. That's very true, and the issue is for too long and in too many areas is that DfT goverance has failed. As a Southeastern metro user this is all too clear. So good riddance and welcome to TfL.

Many have no faith in the DfT specifying needed upgrades when letting franchises given the history here.

Also, LO roll outs have led to changes on Anglia lines. The simple job of staffing stations, increasing safety and far greater publicity and brand trust/awareness has seen a sizable spike off-peak according to a document I recently read. This starts to impact upon congestion and bus overcrowding.

Changing lines en route is no issue for most if users aren't stung for extra cash. Most of London isn't when changing onto the DLR or tube. SE London is which prevents people doing it if they can.

 

[Helvellyn]

And this is without commenting on the report release a week before the plans were announced where the extra capacity raised will be brought about in South London by removing some services to provide simply high frequencies lines meaning many people will have to change en route compared to today. Also removing seats to provide standing areas is another solution that along with ATO is aimed at giving up to 40% (IIRC) extra capacity than today.

Indeed. You could have four trains per hour each way on the Kingston Loop at the expense of Shepperton being served by a shuttle from Kingston Bay. Or four trains per hour to Windsor (two via Richmond/two via Hounslow) by operating a Weybridge shuttle from Staines. But how would that hypothetical plan go down with those passengers who appreciate the through services?

 

[7031]

Indeed. You could have four trains per hour each way on the Kingston Loop at the expense of Shepperton being served by a shuttle from Kingston Bay. Or four trains per hour to Windsor (two via Richmond/two via Hounslow) by operating a Weybridge shuttle from Staines. But how would that hypothetical plan go down with those passengers who appreciate the through services?

In all honesty I think at least for off-peak services this could be preferable if it means a higher frequency of services.

The only downside is, if you've then effectively got everyone changing (i.e. not many people particularly fussed about getting off at Kingston), what's platform capacity going to be like for that many people being fed on and off trains at a regular interval?

Also, how might this affect dwell times of trains?

No its not. If you actually read what TfL/DfT put out for consultation (ie getting public opinion not a cast iron guarantee it'll happen) they want control not to run. That leaves the ability for the same TOCs to run the trains but with difference standards for different routes.

There also the factor of if all these routes do go over to TfL control, simple orange lines isn't going to work anymore on the maps and separate branding is going to be required.

Based on what you're saying, would I be right to assume that what this could mean is that you'd have say, London Overground branding (or some other TfL branding), and TfL setting the standards, but having the day to day operations ran by the franchise holders?

 

[swt_passenger]

Indeed. You could have four trains per hour each way on the Kingston Loop at the expense of Shepperton being served by a shuttle from Kingston Bay. Or four trains per hour to Windsor (two via Richmond/two via Hounslow) by operating a Weybridge shuttle from Staines. But how would that hypothetical plan go down with those passengers who appreciate the through services?

Also, how do such plans fit in with the existing proposals in the Wessex route study to run 6 tph to Ascot, 4 of which will continue to Reading?

At least on the SW division there isn't the problem of origins having services split between different main terminals. Imagine if Clapham Junction really was a junction, and half of SWT's stations had trains to Victoria, and half of Southern's stations ran into Waterloo. It would make operations much more complex and if suggested we'd probably think they were mad. But then look to the southeastern at places like Lewisham and how you could simplify things...

 

[jopsuk]

Indeed. "sorting" the south central and south east sectors of London would be much simpler if south central (Southern) all went to Victoria (and maybe the bays at Blackfriars) and all the south east went in to London Bridge/Cannon Street/Charing Cross.

 

[Class377/5]

Indeed. "sorting" the south central and south east sectors of London would be much simpler if south central (Southern) all went to Victoria (and maybe the bays at Blackfriars) and all the south east went in to London Bridge/Cannon Street/Charing Cross.

So you want to divert all Southern services from London Bridge including everything off the Sydenham corridor? That's madness. Why should one TOC have one terminal and another three?

 

[jopsuk]

of course it's madness- and would require a stupid amount of rebuilding and rerouting (and we're miles away from new red Desiro City trains). And there would still be Thameslink along the Sydenham corridor

Though at the moment SWT serve 1 "Terminal", Southern 2 and Southeastern (including HS1) 5, so the number of terminals a TOC serves is not a matter for any sort of "fairness".

But then the tangled inner suburban services of south central and south eastern London are madness anyway. They're certainly a case of "well I wouldn't do it like that if I was starting again"

 

[Class377/5]

of course it's madness- and would require a stupid amount of rebuilding and rerouting (and we're miles away from new red Desiro City trains). And there would still be Thameslink along the Sydenham corridor

Though at the moment SWT serve 1 "Terminal", Southern 2 and Southeastern (including HS1) 5, so the number of terminals a TOC serves is not a matter for any sort of "fairness".

But then the tangled inner suburban services of south central and south eastern London are madness anyway. They're certainly a case of "well I wouldn't do it like that if I was starting again"

Right you do realise that most of the Sydenham corridor isn't served by Thameslink even post 2018? Or are you suggesting people change at New Cross for 2tph to London Bridge? And that's without the trains from South Bermondsey direction.

As for SE serve 5 terminals and Souther serves two, how does that apply to Southern suddenly abandoning one terminal? I'd also state that London Bridge is in your terminals counts twice as all Cannon Street and Charing Cross trains will soon call there so for SE it's a terminal station not a terminal. Same with Thameslink as it serves three London Terminal stations but goes through them.

As for serving terminals fairness, well that's a product of history. Just because one company serves more places doesn't mean it's unfair to other TOCs, just they serve different routes. Don't forget that SE runs more trains than Switzerland so if your logical truly applies to operations then you should tell them they should only have one terminal station.

 

[yorkie]

This thread is about Class 707. If you wish to discuss anything else please start a new thread. Thank you.

(I've split Comparison of number of trains operated by Southeastern vs all of Switzerland into a new thread, but I'm not splitting anything else into a new thread, due to time constraints. Simply click the "New Thread" button if you wish to discuss anything other than Class 707 and if there isn't already an appropriate thread)

 

[randompixel]

Looks like the demo unit is at Waterloo today

https://mobile.twitter.com/SiemensUKNews/status/712598162222026752

 

[wastedlife]

Looks like the demo unit is at Waterloo today

https://mobile.twitter.com/SiemensUKNews/status/712598162222026752

Well, there's about a quarter of one end of a carriage to be more precise. Still seemed to be cordoned off at 7.45am when I walked past, but presumably they are allowing people up to have a look around during the day.

 

[bb21]

It's not actually a 707, but an amended 700, to give the general public a feel for the new trains.

 

[Matt Taylor]

The seats are similar to the 377/6 seating from what I could see, DOO cameras fitted, bigger internal PIS than currently on Desiros etc. Looked good but I'll see what the real thing is like before having a full opinion.

 

[Class377/5]

It's not actually a 707, but an amended 700, to give the general public a feel for the new trains.

Actually its a new build 707 mock up. The 707 along with the 700 and 701 are amended Desiro Cities (the trains family name).

Back to the mock up, it'll be there for a week.

 

[class387]

Any pictures of the interior?

 

[Deepgreen]

Well, there's about a quarter of one end of a carriage to be more precise. Still seemed to be cordoned off at 7.45am when I walked past, but presumably they are allowing people up to have a look around during the day.

I had been wondering whether it would be in red or blue livery, but expected red owing to its suburban configuration.