Confirmation of rolling stock changes at Southeastern, including 707s

[urpert]

Official confirmation of 707s coming to Southeastern:

Southeastern signs deal to lease unwanted Class 707s

New trains made redundant before they even entered traffic have finally found a new operator

www.railmagazine.com

RAIL Magazine: Southeastern signs deal to lease unwanted class 707s

 

[brad465]

Official confirmation of 707s coming to Southeastern:

Southeastern signs deal to lease unwanted Class 707s

New trains made redundant before they even entered traffic have finally found a new operator

www.railmagazine.com

RAIL Magazine: Southeastern signs deal to lease unwanted class 707s

I was wondering when this would appear online, having read it in their release on Saturday. There's no official confirmation of where they'll be stored (although the article recognises space is an issue with SE) and the belief is they'll share Metro routes with the likes of 376s due to lack of toilets (which in effect rules out the possibility of doing Tunbridge Wells' services as some had suggested, unless they were fitted later).

 

[Class455]

It’s now been confirmed by RAIL Magazine that the 30 Class 707’s due to go off lease from SWR are due to transfer to Southeastern.

Southeastern signs deal to lease unwanted Class 707s

New trains made redundant before they even entered traffic have finally found a new operator

www.railmagazine.com

At least they’ve found a new home!

 

[Islineclear3_1]

How accurate is this considering the first sentence in the article is inaccurate! How long have the 707's been working for SWR ???

And yet another subfleet for SE - really?

 

[Domh245]

It's misleading and a bit of "clickbait journalism" but it's not wrong. At the start of the SWR franchise it was announced that they'd go off-lease having been replaced by the 701s , which was before any 707s had entered service.

 

[Alteran Ancient]

Official confirmation of 707s coming to Southeastern:

Southeastern signs deal to lease unwanted Class 707s

New trains made redundant before they even entered traffic have finally found a new operator

www.railmagazine.com

RAIL Magazine: Southeastern signs deal to lease unwanted class 707s

This one was in the rumour mill for a while, and logically it made sense. Their sister 700s are already a common sight around many of the Kent routes and indeed many of the Orpington drivers already sign them, so conversion to 707s shouldn't be too difficult. I'm not all that set on seeing new units devoid of toilets, but if they're going to be used predominantly to backup the 376 routes, the lack of toilets likely won't be noticed.

But if they want them for the outer-suburban routes like Tun Wells, they're almost definitely going to need toilets and whilst nothing is impossible, I don't know how straightforward it would be to fit them at this stage. Unless, of course, Siemens had the foresight to design the 707s with room for retrofitting the toilets at a later date. I wouldn't put it past them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Given that some of the PRM conversions have, I think, involved fitting the PRM bog in a different place to the regular one, I don't see why that would be impossible. Though I reckon they'll just be used on innersuburbans so it won't be a great issue.

 

[D365]

And yet another subfleet for SE - really?

Maybe they're going for the TransPennine "variety mix" award!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

How accurate is this considering the first sentence in the article is inaccurate! How long have the 707's been working for SWR ???

And yet another subfleet for SE - really?

It's poorly phrased, but it isn't untrue: the SWR franchise agreement sealed their fate as far as operating on the South Western was concerned, before they'd turned a wheel in service.

I'd be more sceptical due the the first sentence of the post, rather than the first sentence of the quote... "Rail" is the "Grauniad" of the railway press!

 

[swt_passenger]

How accurate is this considering the first sentence in the article is inaccurate! How long have the 707's been working for SWR ???

And yet another subfleet for SE - really?

They actually were declared surplus to requirements by FMTR long before they entered service - but IIRC SWT had started testing them by the handover day.

But here’s an idea, as the reasoning behind SWR not keeping them has been explained many times before, how about we leave this thread to discuss the details of how they‘ll be used in their new TOC?

 

[Domh245]

https://assets.new.siemens.com/siemens/assets/public.1536773109.c55d10e1-5179-4904-bd35-f74f76a1e600.desiro-city-class707-en.pdf

Provision for installation of UNI WC (TOS(L)W)

So that's a yes - they can be (relatively easily) retrofitted with a toilet

 

[Goldfish62]

Official confirmation of 707s coming to Southeastern:

Southeastern signs deal to lease unwanted Class 707s

New trains made redundant before they even entered traffic have finally found a new operator

www.railmagazine.com

RAIL Magazine: Southeastern signs deal to lease unwanted class 707s

But.. But... There were people on here who said it was impossible and was never going to happen...

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Here is a question can southeastern order more units if they wanted to?

 

[TheWalrus]

Think this is what we all expected all along!

 

[Mikey C]

This one was in the rumour mill for a while, and logically it made sense. Their sister 700s are already a common sight around many of the Kent routes and indeed many of the Orpington drivers already sign them, so conversion to 707s shouldn't be too difficult. I'm not all that set on seeing new units devoid of toilets, but if they're going to be used predominantly to backup the 376 routes, the lack of toilets likely won't be noticed.

But if they want them for the outer-suburban routes like Tun Wells, they're almost definitely going to need toilets and whilst nothing is impossible, I don't know how straightforward it would be to fit them at this stage. Unless, of course, Siemens had the foresight to design the 707s with room for retrofitting the toilets at a later date. I wouldn't put it past them.

Why would they appear on outer suburban routes like Tunbridge Wells anyway? These trains aren't replacing the Networkers (not the 465s anyway).

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Think this is what we all expected all along!

yes it is what I expected

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Reality is I doubt they will exercise the option to put in the toilets even though it’s a relatively easy fix. Better to keep the readily-configured 465/9s with a 466 tagged on the end for the Tunbridge Wells and any overflow Maidstone East or Longfield ‘stopping’ stuff. Easy.

707s in 10 car are pretty much guaranteed to do Woolwich and Hayes stuff.

 

[43096]

"Rail" is the "Grauniad" of the railway press!

That’s unfair on the “Grauniad” and deeply flattering to “Rail”. I’d say Rail is more like “The Sun”: sensationalist headlines, poor journalism and weak fact checking. For that reason I’ll wait for a more reputable source to confirm the 707 story.

 

[brad465]

I know things are rather up in the air in the wider system because of "you know what" going on, but would SE commit to fitting toilets to them in this extra short term extension? Yes their arrival is progress on expanding the fleet, but something needed to be done to make visible progress, but going to the trouble of toilet fitting strikes me as less essential. There is also the question of how long they would stay in this part of the network, as a new fleet to replace the Networkers could very easily replace any subsidiary fleets as well (by seeing them scrapped or cascaded elsewhere).

 

[D365]

Here is a question can southeastern order more units if they wanted to?

I've started a Speculative Ideas discussion here.

 

[Domh245]

One of the main reasons that they weren't deemed suitable for SWR is that they didn't meet the necessary crush load capacity because of a lack of grab handles. Is this likely to be an issue for them at SouthEastern (or at least, would it have been pre-Covid!) or compared to Networkers?

 

[hwl]

One of the main reasons that they weren't deemed suitable for SWR is that they didn't meet the necessary crush load capacity because of a lack of grab handles. Is this likely to be an issue for them at SouthEastern (or at least, would it have been pre-Covid!) or compared to Networkers?

Same clauses in SE franchise ITT so they only qualify for lower standing capacity as per SW franchise.

...but a big improvement on networkers overall especially wide aisles and large vestibules for dealing with high numbers. A good short term measure. Long term 5car is less useful unless they look at 10car options for the ex-LCDR side of things.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Official confirmation of 707s coming to Southeastern:

Southeastern signs deal to lease unwanted Class 707s

New trains made redundant before they even entered traffic have finally found a new operator

www.railmagazine.com

RAIL Magazine: Southeastern signs deal to lease unwanted class 707s

Would I be right in thinking the DfT must've had quite a big hand in this? SouthEastern only have an 18 month extension, from which I assume we have to subtract however long the Covid-19 suspension of franchising lasts. And if I've read the article correctly, we don't know how long it'll be before the 707s' become available to lease because that depends on the 701s' coming into service. So it's hard to see that the TOC could have much incentive to arrange this - they could well have the 707's for barely a few months before they lose the franchise. So this would seem to be something that would be more likely to have been steered by the DfT. Or am i missing something?

 

[MotCO]

the belief is they'll share Metro routes with the likes of 376s due to lack of toilets (which in effect rules out the possibility of doing Tunbridge Wells' services as some had suggested, unless they were fitted later).

Please can you clarify what you mean here. The 376 Electrostars have toilets, so is the assumption that one train will be a 376 (with toilets) and the next train will be a 707 (without toilets)? Or will the 376s and 707s be joined together?

Also, if the 707s are replacing 465 and 466 Networkers, how many 707s are there and how many 465/466s?

Finally, I thought one of the problems with 707s was their high lease charges. If so, I wonder what deal Southeastern have got?

 

[Mikey C]

Please can you clarify what you mean here. The 376 Electrostars have toilets, so is the assumption that one train will be a 376 (with toilets) and the next train will be a 707 (without toilets)? Or will the 376s and 707s be joined together?

Also, if the 707s are replacing 465 and 466 Networkers, how many 707s are there and how many 465/466s?

Finally, I thought one of the problems with 707s was their high lease charges. If so, I wonder what deal Southeastern have got?

The 376s don't have toilets

These won't replace the Networkers as there are far more of them than 707s, I assume it's mainly additional stock (other than perhaps the unmodified 466s)

 

[Class455]

That’s unfair on the “Grauniad” and deeply flattering to “Rail”. I’d say Rail is more like “The Sun”: sensationalist headlines, poor journalism and weak fact checking. For that reason I’ll wait for a more reputable source to confirm the 707 story.

I've always thought RAIL was a reliable source, although I'd trust Today's Railways more than this.

 

[Domh245]

Please can you clarify what you mean here. The 376 Electrostars have toilets, so is the assumption that one train will be a 376 (with toilets) and the next train will be a 707 (without toilets)? Or will the 376s and 707s be joined together?

Also, if the 707s are replacing 465 and 466 Networkers, how many 707s are there and how many 465/466s?

Finally, I thought one of the problems with 707s was their high lease charges. If so, I wonder what deal Southeastern have got?

376s don't have toilets.

There are 30 total 707s (150 vehicles) - there are a total of 147 465s built and 43 466s but it's worth noting that there are 150 vehicles between the 465/2 and 466 fleet - both of which are owned by Angel, who happen to also own the 707s. But that's speculation as there's nothing officially confirming this, let alone what routes they'll be working or any other details

One backed by the DfT I'd suggest!

 

[Class455]

How accurate is this considering the first sentence in the article is inaccurate! How long have the 707's been working for SWR ???

And yet another subfleet for SE - really?

I believe some SE drivers sign 700's so it shouldn't be too much of a problem since these are basically the same as 700's albeit shorter.

 

[MotCO]

The 376s don't have toilets

Ah, ok. But then I'm confused. I thought there was a problem with running trains without toilets on the Hayes line. How can they continue running trains without toilets on longer routes, e.g. Charing Cross to Orpington?

 

[Mikey C]

Same clauses in SE franchise ITT so they only qualify for lower standing capacity as per SW franchise.

...but a big improvement on networkers overall especially wide aisles and large vestibules for dealing with high numbers. A good short term measure. Long term 5car is less useful unless they look at 10car options for the ex-LCDR side of things.

A sensible short term measure, Southeastern needs more capacity urgently and the 707s are the obvious short term solution

It does look slightly inconsistent though, with the 707s being rejected by SWR due to issues like this and the poor acceleration (and which then gets a common fleet to replace a range of units) but then get passed over to another franchise