Class 710 LO

[greatkingrat]

That reply was out of date before it was even made as one of the eight Class 172s has already gone, hence the cancellation of the extra peak services. They may have a lease agreement to keep some 172s until December, but is for all seven remaining trains, or will other trains need to be sent North before December?

 

[theking]

The May timetable got rid of the peak extras so there is no "missing train" it was never planned to be there in the first place.

 

[Wivenswold]

There's always more at play than meets the eyes when politics gets involved. The Government is desperate to devolve itself of responsibility leaving it to take the credit only when it suits them. As an example, just wait for the next company in the care sector to get involved in controversy (it won't take long, some utter cowboys are getting involved in that sector). When the S hits the F, the government will distance itself and make it look like, while concerned, it's really not their responsibility.

You can apply that to every sector too. If Whitehall can dispatch a chunk of the network into someone else's control they will. The Mayor's office obviously wants more control as it means more funding for Transport. This is how Government works. The constant reminder that Brexit is "the will of the people" means they will blame "the people" when it eventually goes to H in a HC, in fact, the EU ref and the upcoming disaster will be forever used as evidence that Government knows best. They're slippery Fs and sadly "the people" usually bear the brunt of it.

Not an anti-Tory rant (though they are the current focus of my ire). It's been the way of Governments since the 80's.

 

[Class 466]

The May timetable got rid of the peak extras so there is no "missing train" it was never planned to be there in the first place.

Exactly, it was put in under STP arrangements for 6 weeks - The May 18 timetable is based around 710s - hence the lack of PIXC busters.

 

[rebmcr]

How about this as a potential solution:

• Bombardier acquire a lease for some Sprinter trains that WM drivers already sign
• WM sublease the 172s that Goblin drivers sign back to TfL for the short term
• Bombardier allow WM to use 'their' Sprinters for however long it takes for the 710s to be fit for use

 

[twpsaesneg]

How about this as a potential solution:

• Bombardier acquire a lease for some Sprinter trains that WM drivers already sign
• WM sublease the 172s that Goblin drivers sign back to TfL for the short term
• Bombardier allow WM to use 'their' Sprinters for however long it takes for the 710s to be fit for use

There's a small problem with that which is that there aren't any sprinters available either...

 

[AlanFry1]

Could there be a Barking to Enfield service in the future with the same stock on both lines?

 

[SteveOfTheStow]

Could there be a Barking to Enfield service in the future with the same stock on both lines?

Not impossible, but needs to pass several questions:

- Who is the service for? It goes from North London through some heavily residential areas to East London, not really going through any major destination. Not necessarily an issue, since the GOBLIN arguably does the same and yet is overcrowded.
- Are the paths available? Leaving South Tottenham, a train has to cross the oncoming line into South Tottenham station, go across the curve, then cross the oncoming line from Seven Sisters. That will be tricky to path.
- On that point, how many tph? The GOBLIN has a fair amount of freight alongside passenger services; throwing in more trains will be challenging (and you can't really lose more than 1tph out to Gospel Oak, so anything is going to need to be additive, really). And reversing points need to be available - is Barking Riverside being built with enough capacity? Or will it be possible to reverse some trains at Barking and others at Riverside?
- What are the consequences of meshing the West Anglia timetable with the GOBLIN? An issue on one could spill over to the other, which would make things harder to recover.
- Stock - It's an added service on top of what's already running, so actually I think more stock would be required, and there is unlikely to be enough.

Whilst it would be interesting and potentially useful to some, I think it'll be too difficult to pull off. It'd be better to strengthen the interchanges in that area between South Tottenham and Seven Sisters if possible. Not sure how as the main roads are at an awkward angle.

 

[plcd1]

How about this as a potential solution:

• Bombardier acquire a lease for some Sprinter trains that WM drivers already sign
• WM sublease the 172s that Goblin drivers sign back to TfL for the short term
• Bombardier allow WM to use 'their' Sprinters for however long it takes for the 710s to be fit for use

If we end up with a mess with no trains then I expect TfL would revert to a bus replacement service with the bill being sent to Bombardier. After all those of us who live on or near the GOBLIN are well used to rail replacement bus services with an enforced change by Tube across the Walthamstow - Seven Sisters section.

 

[plcd1]

The Mayor's office obviously wants more control as it means more funding for Transport.

Actually from now on I doubt it does mean more funding. The same residual Overground "grant" goes in a couple of years. DLR has to be self funding by then. LU already is and Crossrail will be post 2019. By this I mean revenue exceeds running costs. Investment spend is a different issue.

When West Anglia transferred from DfT it was on the basis that it broke even so no extra grant was payable. TfL's operational policy means costs went up (lots more station staffing) but TfL had to cover that itself. I am very sceptical that future devolution to TfL will involve transfer of revenue grant support in future. I expect DfT to argue strongly that the GN Inners and residual WLL services "wash their face" financially and, if TfL are so wonderful, that their plans should improve ridership and thus revenue. The real question is what happens if capital investment is needed - I'd say that was certainly an issue on parts of the GN inners. TfL may struggle badly to find money even in 2021 to sort out the decay on the F Park - Moorgate section. I suspect some of the surface stations also need a lick of paint and tidying up too. Not sure DfT would fund that.

 

[plcd1]

Could there be a Barking to Enfield service in the future with the same stock on both lines?

Steve of the Stow has given a good answer. There won't be enough stock and it's questionable if there will be enough paths north of Seven Sisters in the peak. If I was TfL I think my answer would be "passengers can change at Blackhorse Rd to the Victoria Line which runs every 1-2 mins daily and then change again to the Overground at Seven Sisters". The interchanges aren't brilliant but they do exist and the journey would be charged as one through fare. If you were prepared to do it then it's not too much of a walk from S Tottenham to Seven Sisters either on the main roads or cutting through the housing estate. There is an out of station interchange at S Tott / S Sisters so no fare penalty if you interchange within the time parameter (20 minutes).

A fair while ago there was a suggestion that TfL might want to run extra Enfield Town - S Sisters peak workings. They'd reverse via S Tottenham curve and the tracks towards Stratford. Clearly there is still a pathing issue with this idea and I suspect it may have quietly died given no extra West Anglia trains were ordered. However TfL do face a considerable challenge in the future when the peak semi fast Greater Anglia trains omit Edmonton Green (the stop isn't in the future DfT train spec for GA). Quite how they absorb the extra loadings from such a busy stop is beyond me (even with the class 710s).

 

[AlanFry1]

Currently at peaks there are 8tph btwn Hackney and Edmonton?

 

[700007]

I may have managed to possibly find a solution to using 7 units whilst providing extra capacity where possible on the Gospel Oak to Barking line during the peak which involves increasing the frequency to about every 12 minutes during the peak between Barking and South Tottenham and then trains every 15-25 minutes South Tottenham to Gospel Oak. I know it is not ideal West of South Tottenham but it alleviates the worst crowding. It may not initially make sense but I will link a draft schedule that I think could work unless I am missing something (which I I am bound to be!)

 

[plcd1]

I may have managed to possibly find a solution to using 7 units whilst providing extra capacity where possible on the Gospel Oak to Barking line during the peak which involves increasing the frequency to about every 12 minutes during the peak between Barking and South Tottenham and then trains every 15-25 minutes South Tottenham to Gospel Oak. I know it is not ideal West of South Tottenham but it alleviates the worst crowding. It may not initially make sense but I will link a draft schedule that I think could work unless I am missing something (which I I am bound to be!)

While I understand the logic given the huge overcrowding at Blackhorse Rd and east thereof you are missing the fact that trains leave Gospel Oak full and standing and are pretty awful from Upper Holloway which has decent patronage levels. Obviously things thin a little bit as people alight at Crouch Hill and Harringay but plenty board at the latter stn. You get a decent volume of boarders and alighters at South Tottenham and then it becomes carnage from Blackhorse Road eastwards.

Stretching the headway to 25 mins at Gospel Oak to Harringay in the peak would give a worse service level than late evenings which I just can't see being tenable. I can't see TfL deliberately inviting the ire of local MPs and Assembly Members any more than they have already done. Reputationally they're not in a good place over the GOBLIN electrification fiasco, delayed new trains and loss of peak time extra trains and they have to turn it round. The line's user group has very good links to politicians which means very targeted questions get put to the Mayor with great regularity. It even resulted in Sir Peter Hendy being "told off" by my local Assembly Member in one Assembly Cttee session a few years back.

The fact we will have class 710s breaking down in service hasn't been publicly disclosed yet but that's the next storm of bad news that has to be weathered as Arriva, their drivers and Bombardier climb up their respective learning curves with brand new stock. There is a Mayor's answer which says that TfL are not going to go for mass deployment of 710s until they are content they are working properly on the GOBLIN. This, of course, delays other service improvements elsewhere which are reliant on the cascade of 378s from the Watford route.

 

[swt_passenger]

I may have managed to possibly find a solution to using 7 units whilst providing extra capacity where possible on the Gospel Oak to Barking line during the peak which involves increasing the frequency to about every 12 minutes during the peak between Barking and South Tottenham and then trains every 15-25 minutes South Tottenham to Gospel Oak. I know it is not ideal West of South Tottenham but it alleviates the worst crowding. It may not initially make sense but I will link a draft schedule that I think could work unless I am missing something (which I I am bound to be!)

It will need more units anyway once they extend to Barking Riverside, I understand they are part of the order so already on their way.

 

[matt_world2004]

If the 710s arent ready in time and the 345s replace the heathrow connect trains. Could the 360s go to gospel oak

 

[swt_passenger]

If the 710s arent ready in time and the 345s replace the heathrow connect trains. Could the 360s go to gospel oak

They’ll probably accept the 710s long before they get the Heathrow tunnel ETCS working for 345s. I think that’s a very unlikely solution...

As well as not being enough, probably being too long for some platforms, and having no DOO cameras...

 

[plcd1]

If the 710s arent ready in time and the 345s replace the heathrow connect trains. Could the 360s go to gospel oak

The 360s are unreliable - endless cancellations on the TfL Rail service to Heathrow. Also, as SWT Passenger says, they are likely to be needed out west for a long time to come. There's little sign of the signalling issues being resolved until the HEX fleet is swapped for 387s and the old BR ATP system can be removed from the Heathrow tunnel. I don't see TfL putting unreliable 360s on the GOBLIN and are there even enough of them to run the full GOBLIN timetable? Nope, Bombardier have to be forced to get the 710s into service and working reliably.

 

[47802]

Havent they built quite a few of these so far, so presumably they will be introduced with a higher level of maintenance spares initially to help mitigate any unreliability.

Bottom line will be 710's or buses.

 

[swt_passenger]

Havent they built quite a few of these so far, so presumably they will be introduced with a higher level of maintenance spares initially to help mitigate any unreliability...

I believe so, because back in April the local user group had reported that 16 units, (including all 14 dual voltage units for Goblin and Watford-Euston), had already been physically completed. It would be odd if that number hadn’t been significantly increased.

 

[plcd1]

I believe so, because back in April the local user group had reported that 16 units, (including all 14 dual voltage units for Goblin and Watford-Euston), had already been physically completed. It would be odd if that number hadn’t been significantly increased.

A July newsletter from the User Group said over 30 class 710s had been completed at Derby. A couple have now made it to Willesden but the production line has had to be slowed down because there is no storage space left.

 

[swt_passenger]

A July newsletter from the User Group said over 30 class 710s had been completed at Derby. A couple have now made it to Willesden but the production line has had to be slowed down because there is no storage space left.

Further to your info, recent update posts in the UKModernEMU yahoo group reckon 6 units are now at Willesden:
710261, 262, 263, 265, 266, 277

 

[superkev]

Has it been published as to what's wrong with them or is it red tape. Presumably drivers will need training when they eventually start running
K

 

[swt_passenger]

Has it been published as to what's wrong with them or is it red tape. Presumably drivers will need training when they eventually start running
K

Most suggestions here and in other sources such as the line’s user group reports have been about software issues.

 

[Class 170101]

There probably is demand for a service between Enfield / Cheshunt and Stratford via Seven Sisters, if it were possible to stop at South Tottenham there would be interchange possibilities to make journeys described easier.

In terms of the DMUs - have they now potentially got a stay of execution at LO because West Midlands have been told they cannot introduce any extra services in December 2018 and will have to wait until at least May 2019 due to the timetable fiasco?

 

[HLE]

No as WMT class 153’s are due to transfer to EMT in December 2018

 

[rebmcr]

If the 710s arent ready in time and the 345s replace the heathrow connect trains. Could the 360s go to gospel oak

They’ll probably accept the 710s long before they get the Heathrow tunnel ETCS working for 345s. I think that’s a very unlikely solution...

As well as not being enough, probably being too long for some platforms, and having no DOO cameras...

The 360s are unreliable - endless cancellations on the TfL Rail service to Heathrow. Also, as SWT Passenger says, they are likely to be needed out west for a long time to come. There's little sign of the signalling issues being resolved until the HEX fleet is swapped for 387s and the old BR ATP system can be removed from the Heathrow tunnel. I don't see TfL putting unreliable 360s on the GOBLIN and are there even enough of them to run the full GOBLIN timetable? Nope, Bombardier have to be forced to get the 710s into service and working reliably.

Hang on a minute — there are plenty of spare 345s, under TfL's control, and both trains are Aventras so driver training wouldn't be wasted...

They have the DOO cameras too, so the only remaining question is — just how short can you form a 345 and still have it functional?

 

[47802]

Hang on a minute — there are plenty of spare 345s, under TfL's control, and both trains are Aventras so driver training wouldn't be wasted...

They have the DOO cameras too, so the only remaining question is — just how short can you form a 345 and still have it functional?

Why would you want to do that similar trains similar problems I expect, except of course 345 carriages are longer which may cause issues in itself, they are also effectively 2 EMU's joined together and I expect it would be a non starter.

 

[transmanche]

Hang on a minute — there are plenty of spare 345s, under TfL's control, and both trains are Aventras so driver training wouldn't be wasted...

Not directly under TfL control, in the manner of LU stock. More like the bus fleets companies operating tendered bus routes.

The 345s are under the control of MTR Crossrail. To transfer them across to Arriva Rail London (ARL), even temporarily, would require a lot of co-operation from MTR - for which naturally they'd require payment. Plus MTR would have to train ARL's drivers (more payments) - and it might also affect MTR's own driver training programme meaning that they might not be able to meet the 9 December start date.

 

[Steve wakerly]

That reply was out of date before it was even made as one of the eight Class 172s has already gone, hence the cancellation of the extra peak services. They may have a lease agreement to keep some 172s until December, but is for all seven remaining trains, or will other trains need to be sent North before December?

172002 is one that has gone from Lo, should be at Ilford depot (bombardier) to have toilet fitted before going to west midlands.