• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Class 710 LO

Phil Scott

Member
Joined
21 Aug 2017
Messages
206
Thought I’d try and summarise the different stages of this 710 order in one place.

About 2016:
54 trains in total (made up of 48 x 4 car and 6 x 5 car) consisting of
  • 30 for West Anglia as above
  • 0 for Romford to Upminster. Now to be a retained 315.
  • 8 for Gospel Oak to Barking as above
  • 2 additional for Gospel Oak to Barking Riverside extension
  • 6 for The Watford DC lines as above
  • 1 additional for Watford DC lines to allow 4tph.
  • 1 previously Romford to Upminster now transferred to Watford DC lines to allow 4 tph.
  • 6 additional 5 car trains for the NLL/WLL...
  • ... which releases 6 existing 378s for ELL frequency improvements.

Note. The reason the latest 6 new 5 car units can’t go directly to the ELL is that trains with emergency access end doors need to be used in the ELL Thames Tunnel. It is easier to transfer existing than build a few special 710s.

Is the numbering confirmed for all these units yet? I always thought it was a bit strange to start the 710/2s from 710256, when the 710/1s stopped at 710130...
Will the 5-car units be 710/2 or something else?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,446
Is the numbering confirmed for all these units yet? I always thought it was a bit strange to start the 710/2s from 710256, when the 710/1s stopped at 710130...
Will the 5-car units be 710/2 or something else?
No idea really. I’m sure someone might have an idea, didn’t someone reckon the gaps were for future follow on options, while having no duplicate ‘last two digits’?

By the way, does the decision to transfer the “Rominster” unit to the DC lines mean one less AC and one more dual voltage, compared to earlier plans?
 
Last edited:

HLE

Established Member
Joined
27 Dec 2013
Messages
1,405
Then hook up a laptop and change the software code to accept up to 29kv. This is basic stuff which shouldn't be occuring, it isn't new information if that's the tolerances OHLE operates too.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
Then hook up a laptop and change the software code to accept up to 29kv. This is basic stuff which shouldn't be occuring, it isn't new information if that's the tolerances OHLE operates too.

You can only do that if the components are capable of dealing with such voltages. The software may have been configured such for a reason. Here's hoping this doesn't also trip up 345s when they transition from GE to core to GW later on.
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,851
Location
St Neots
Yes, but 710's software sees anything over 27.5 kV (it can be up to 29 kV) as an error and shuts down.

Then hook up a laptop and change the software code to accept up to 29kv. This is basic stuff which shouldn't be occuring, it isn't new information if that's the tolerances OHLE operates too.

You can only do that if the components are capable of dealing with such voltages. The software may have been configured such for a reason. Here's hoping this doesn't also trip up 345s when they transition from GE to core to GW later on.

Charge the running rails to +4kv. ;)
 
Joined
27 Aug 2017
Messages
43
The overheads should be 25kv nominal. 27.5 is 10% over voltage before shutting off, which seems fairly respectable.

29kv is almost 20% over voltage, which is quite wide of the mark. The only reason I can see for feeding this high is to counter voltage drops in high load situations.

It's quite possible the more sensitive modern electricals can't handle voltages that far out of spec. Design flaw or poor network rail power supplies, that's the question.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,446
The overheads should be 25kv nominal. 27.5 is 10% over voltage before shutting off, which seems fairly respectable.

29kv is almost 20% over voltage, which is quite wide of the mark. The only reason I can see for feeding this high is to counter voltage drops in high load situations.

It's quite possible the more sensitive modern electricals can't handle voltages that far out of spec. Design flaw or poor network rail power supplies, that's the question.
AIUI 29 kV can come into play under regeneration conditions, although only for a short duration.
 

GreatAuk

Member
Joined
16 Jan 2018
Messages
60
I think GL/RT1210 says that 29kV is acceptable for up to 5 minutes, so shouldn't be an issue.

I suspect that older rolling stock would probably tolerate an even wider range of voltages too.
 
Joined
27 Aug 2017
Messages
43
I think GL/RT1210 says that 29kV is acceptable for up to 5 minutes, so shouldn't be an issue.

I suspect that older rolling stock would probably tolerate an even wider range of voltages too.

Yes, but Bombardier were also not aware of the requirement in the rulebook for trains to be able to coast under an obstruction on the OLE, so I doubt they read that.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
Bring back these lovely clicking camshaft controllers and resistors eh. No software problems there eh
Perhaps things are getting a bit too tech.
K
I'm not sure we need go back that far, the 378s seem to deal with the situation perfectly adequately don't they? I'd even take PWM over the jerky ride of a camshaft controlled unit.
 

ijmad

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2016
Messages
1,810
Location
UK
It still seems bizarre to keep a 315 for the Romford-Upminster line. I guess they'll have a lot of spare parts when they throw out the entire West Anglia fleet, but there must be some cost associated with maintaining the institutional knowledge required to do the regular maintenance and safety checks, and training costs for drivers who would otherwise only have to learn the 710s.

Maybe they're hopeful there will be a train available as the 710s become more reliable after a few years of bedding in?

Maybe they will chuck in a sneaky follow-on order for the 710s, 345s or some other Aventra order to get a broadly similar train when the coffers aren't looking so empty? The Aventra production line will be pumping out trains for at least 3 years.
 

Phil Scott

Member
Joined
21 Aug 2017
Messages
206
It still seems bizarre to keep a 315 for the Romford-Upminster line. I guess they'll have a lot of spare parts when they throw out the entire West Anglia fleet, but there must be some cost associated with maintaining the institutional knowledge required to do the regular maintenance and safety checks, and training costs for drivers who would otherwise only have to learn the 710s.

Maybe they're hopeful there will be a train available as the 710s become more reliable after a few years of bedding in?

Maybe they will chuck in a sneaky follow-on order for the 710s, 345s or some other Aventra order to get a broadly similar train when the coffers aren't looking so empty? The Aventra production line will be pumping out trains for at least 3 years.
Will they not need to actually keep two 315s? One for service and the other as a spare....
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,773
it does seem a weird bit of penny pinching NOT to order sufficient 710 to allow one to be used on Romford-Upminster.

Maybe there's some secret yet somehow funded plan to create an outer East London/west essex light rail scheme, from Romford to Upminster and maybe on down to Tilbury
 

sheepy1991

Member
Joined
28 Feb 2009
Messages
32
Would it not make more sense to rip down the OHLE on the Romford - Upminster and convert and merge the branch into the District Line? Or is that not as simple as it sounds?

Stock can be maintained at Upminster Depot with a direct link and the national rail connection at Romford could then be severed. It would stop the pain in the arse shunts that have to be carried out on the GE when stock needs to be changed or rescued.

At the moment its running as the line that nobody wants... Its not in Crossrails remit, its commercially and operationally a pain for GA so ARL have been lumped with it due to being in TFL’s area of responsibility. Even if the idea for the 315’s to remain is scrapped and the 710’s brought in to cover it there is still the issue that while ARL operates the line they still employ GA (originally) and MTR (currently) drivers to operate the line with GA fleet support when things go wrong.

If there are any major obstacles for converting the line to the District Line that I am not aware of please post as its always intriqued me as to the current set up, but I am not very familair with the Undergrounds tech side of running or the layout at Upminster.
 

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
There is a alternative operator apart from London Overground or Greater Anglia who could operate it in the form of C2C who could out-base a unit at Ilford on a weekly basis (C2C sign Barking to Liverpool St or they did not sure if they still do so if they don't sign Liverpool Street to Romford, they could be route conducted) as they could on a Sunday at end of service for example have a ECS from East Ham depot to Ilford depot which then forms the unit on the branch for the following week with the previous week's unit run ECS to East Ham or to Fenchurch Street to start a peak service for Monday morning.

OR add it to Crossrail remit (as a feeder service to their Crossrail services from Romford to London) and use the former Heathrow Connect Class 360s on the branch.
 

Buggleskelly

Member
Joined
28 Jun 2017
Messages
93
Location
Bishops Wallop
Would it not make more sense to rip down the OHLE on the Romford - Upminster and convert and merge the branch into the District Line? Or is that not as simple as it sounds?

Stock can be maintained at Upminster Depot with a direct link and the national rail connection at Romford could then be severed. It would stop the pain in the arse shunts that have to be carried out on the GE when stock needs to be changed or rescued.

At the moment its running as the line that nobody wants... Its not in Crossrails remit, its commercially and operationally a pain for GA so ARL have been lumped with it due to being in TFL’s area of responsibility. Even if the idea for the 315’s to remain is scrapped and the 710’s brought in to cover it there is still the issue that while ARL operates the line they still employ GA (originally) and MTR (currently) drivers to operate the line with GA fleet support when things go wrong.

If there are any major obstacles for converting the line to the District Line that I am not aware of please post as its always intriqued me as to the current set up, but I am not very familair with the Undergrounds tech side of running or the layout at Upminster.

Well for one thing, the platforms on the whole line are only long enough to accommodate 4 car units. There doesn't seem to be the room to lengthen any of the platforms because all S Stock I presume is all 6 car. Apparently there was going to be some connection from the District a long time ago, there was also supposed to be a half finished set of points at the London end of P5 at Upminster apparently, not sure if that's true or not though.
 

K.o.R

Member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
658
Well for one thing, the platforms on the whole line are only long enough to accommodate 4 car units. There doesn't seem to be the room to lengthen any of the platforms because all S Stock I presume is all 6 car. Apparently there was going to be some connection from the District a long time ago, there was also supposed to be a half finished set of points at the London end of P5 at Upminster apparently, not sure if that's true or not though.

District line is S7, but if you say the platforms are for 4 cars (80m) then you could stop an S7 train with all 5 centre cars (5 x 15m) in line with the platform and use SDO (don't know if middle cars only is an actual mode of SDO but hey...)
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
Seems like far too much investment for the minimal revenue the line generates, the situation with the 315 has only come about I suspect since nobody is willing to pay for an entire new unit just to run that branch. I think it's quite foolish personally, it'll work for a while when they still have spare parts for the unit but they'll need either two of them, or a 710 to be able to substitute for it when it fails, so 710s will still need to be cleared for the route. Otherwise, as suggested a 360/2 could be used if you lop out one of the trailer vehicles (don't know how practical that is to achieve) or otherwise perhaps a 360/1 or two could be retained with minimal conversion, but it'd have to be more than one unit or you're in the same situation as using a 315. The comparable upside is that 315s are entirely reasonable to scrap and there will soon no longer be any requirement for drivers to retain knowledge of them. 360s are units that will still exist on the mainline elsewhere for decades to come and have worked the area (if not the route) before.

In all honesty, even though it's wasteful, I think having an extra 710 for the branch in commonality with the rest of the fleet is the most efficient way of dealing with it. If you think TfL are poor now though, the imminent effects of brexit plus the NtFL order are not going to make that situation any better. I'm really not sure how the situation is likely to end.
 

ijmad

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2016
Messages
1,810
Location
UK
Well for one thing, the platforms on the whole line are only long enough to accommodate 4 car units. There doesn't seem to be the room to lengthen any of the platforms because all S Stock I presume is all 6 car. Apparently there was going to be some connection from the District a long time ago, there was also supposed to be a half finished set of points at the London end of P5 at Upminster apparently, not sure if that's true or not though.

The junction is the wrong way round for through running of the District, unless you sent a one out of every six trains up there after reversing at Upminster. Also the line is apparently entirely unsignalled, and is only safe because only one train operates at any given time. If you operated it as a branch of the District Line you'd need to put in proper bi-di signalling and trainstops, as well as third and fourth rails (and that wouldn't make much sense to do so before the SSL gets resignalled now, does it).
 

plcd1

Member
Joined
23 May 2015
Messages
788
It still seems bizarre to keep a 315 for the Romford-Upminster line. I guess they'll have a lot of spare parts when they throw out the entire West Anglia fleet, but there must be some cost associated with maintaining the institutional knowledge required to do the regular maintenance and safety checks, and training costs for drivers who would otherwise only have to learn the 710s.

Maybe they're hopeful there will be a train available as the 710s become more reliable after a few years of bedding in?

Maybe they will chuck in a sneaky follow-on order for the 710s, 345s or some other Aventra order to get a broadly similar train when the coffers aren't looking so empty? The Aventra production line will be pumping out trains for at least 3 years.

TfL have received over £5m from Bombardier for non delivery of the class 710s (as reported in recent TfL Board papers). Now I've no idea how much a 4 car 710 unit actually costs in capital terms (rather than lease) but wasn't the ballpark some time ago around £900k per car for a EMU? Therefore £5m would probably have paid for the extra train. This does, though, ignore whatever extra costs TfL may have incurred in the meantime due to the delayed deliveries.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
TfL have received over £5m from Bombardier for non delivery of the class 710s (as reported in recent TfL Board papers). Now I've no idea how much a 4 car 710 unit actually costs in capital terms (rather than lease) but wasn't the ballpark some time ago around £900k per car for a EMU? Therefore £5m would probably have paid for the extra train. This does, though, ignore whatever extra costs TfL may have incurred in the meantime due to the delayed deliveries.
A long time ago. I believe the current benchmark for big orders (i.e. more for singular units) is £1.5m per car for 20m EMUs. By comparison the 800s are almost £3m per vehicle. This includes maintenance agreements, however.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,446
Will they not need to actually keep two 315s? One for service and the other as a spare....
Yes. There’s a sort of precedent in SWT keeping two 3 car Mk 1 EMUs to run alternately on the Lymington Branch. They didn’t last too long as it turned out.
 

Ethano92

Member
Joined
26 Jun 2017
Messages
415
Location
London
Seems like far too much investment for the minimal revenue the line generates

But surely this is only because there's nowhere you can really go on it. There are literally buses that mirror the route that are much faster if you just missed one.

Upminster has links to London
Emerson park essentially serves hornchurch from the north but it's easier for residents to use hornchurch tube stop from the south because they have a direct route to London. Both are quite some distance from the town centre so there is the opportunity to get people using Emerson park if it had a through link to London.

Might be a bit far fetched but how about an extension of crossrail to Grays. Follows the Emerson park line then somehow makes it over to the ockendon line terminating at Grays. C2c currently terminate trains via Rainham at Grays but what if these became through trains to Southend etc instead to replace the through trains from the ockendon line.

Logistically, chances of that are slim I guess. How would you extend platforms? How would it cross over at upminster to the ockendon line?

I still believe that some sort of through service to London could be used to attract people onto the line.

Alternatively, would conversion to a tram be cheaper to operate?

Edit: sorry to stray off topic
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,554
How much longer do buses take in rush hour?
If reasonable just shut the line. Otherwise use 315s til they fall apart then call Vivarail
 

Railperf

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2017
Messages
2,943
How much longer do buses take in rush hour?
If reasonable just shut the line. Otherwise use 315s til they fall apart then call Vivarail
How Ironic it would be to have a Vivarail DMU running into Upminster - its old stamping ground !!
 

Top