Confirmation of rolling stock changes at Southeastern, including 707s

[urpert]

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

Still holding out hope we end up with the 458s too!

 

[hwl]

Can't use 10 cars on Vic - Orp services as they'll foul the junction at Brixton and Herne Hill. They're going on to London Bridge Metro Stuff where the need for additional capacity is greatest.

Herne Hill - the track circuits are longer than 10 car. The theoretical problems is the location of the platform door monitors which are positioned for 8 car networkers but which is completely academic with 707s as they have bodyside camera and in cab monitors! Brixton down side is the only real problem but that has solutions too.

707 on the ex-LCDR side would also mean far more 12 car running on the via London Bridge side.

 

[urpert]

will these trains recieve the full blue livery (375) or the 465/466 livery?

They'll receive a "southeastern" sticker on top of the SWR logo if we're lucky.
Even then they will be an enormous upgrade for those of us used to Networker interiors.

 

[Energy]

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

Not exactly going well for TPE!

 

[brad465]

Still holding out hope we end up with the 458s too!

If you mean 458s for SE, please no, while their reliability maybe better it's hardly a knock to low Networker reliability by receiving another fleet that has a poor reliability history. Besides 3 metro classes is more than enough hassle let alone 4.

If any fleet has to leave to accomodate 707s the 466s are the only ones that make sense, considering the low PRM compliance and restricted working of the latter, while a net gain in carriages is still maintained in the hope 12 car Networkers are more achievable. No 465s should leave until a full replacement is achieved for the entire Networker fleet.

 

[ComUtoR]

Herne Hill - the track circuits are longer than 10 car. The theoretical problems is the location of the platform door monitors which are positioned for 8 car networkers but which is completely academic with 707s as they have bodyside camera and in cab monitors!

The 8 car stop is tight at the London end. Two issues spring to mind about moving closer to the Signal. First. It's not allowed. There is a minimum distance from the signal you are allowed to stop. This is also an issue network wide. Secondly. If the 707s are like 700s and the position the stop it is going to push back the stop car marks further towards the country end. If you look at 700s they stop short of their car marks.

As to the cameras. Will they be in use ? Will 707s get their own stop marks ?

707 on the ex-LCDR side would also mean far more 12 car running on the via London Bridge side.

LCDR ?

 

[Energy]

in the hope 12 car Networkers are more achievable.

At this point I would order more 707 cars to extend the 707s to 6 cars for 12 car working as well as additional ones to replace the rest of the metro fleet, but I'll leave this to the more 707s thread.

 

[Domh245]

As to the cameras. Will they be in use ? Will 707s get their own stop marks ?

I would have thought so? Surely they are of higher quality than the platform equipment and so it's safer to use them, not to mention operationally easier as sighting the monitors from the cab is going to be tricky. I wouldn't think that dedicated stop boards will be necessary unless they're going to start doing SDO with them - the main reason for the 700 ones is to ensure that the middle of the train always lines up in the same place for wheelchair access - nothing comparable with the 707s.

LCDR ?

London, Chatham and Dover Railway - ie Victoria Side

 

[mervyn72]

If the 707's allow more 12 car 465's, can these be made of 465+465+466+466 in order to use up the 466's?

 

[Dr_Paul]

The acceleration on a 707 is hardly 'poor'.

Exactly my impression! I've been impressed by the 707s' performance, not least its acceleration. I was on one last year around the Kingston loop; four minutes late at Twickenham, it went off like a rocket from each station and arrived at Kingston on time.

 

[43096]

If you mean 458s for SE, please no, while their reliability maybe better it's hardly a knock to low Networker reliability by receiving another fleet that has a poor reliability history. Besides 3 metro classes is more than enough hassle let alone 4.

If any fleet has to leave to accomodate 707s the 466s are the only ones that make sense, considering the low PRM compliance and restricted working of the latter, while a net gain in carriages is still maintained in the hope 12 car Networkers are more achievable. No 465s should leave until a full replacement is achieved for the entire Networker fleet.

458s are not unreliable. I’ve been a daily traveller on them for much of the last 10 years and can count the number of failures I’ve experienced on my fingers. The 458s are by far the most comfortable of the SWR suburban fleet - enjoy the ironing boards in the 707s!

 

[brad465]

If the 707's allow more 12 car 465's, can these be made of 465+465+466+466 in order to use up the 466's?

466s can't be part of 12 car sets as the extra cabs compared to 3 x 465s make them too long for most platforms.

 

[ComUtoR]

I would have thought so? Surely they are of higher quality than the platform equipment and so it's safer to use them, not to mention operationally easier as sighting the monitors from the cab is going to be tricky.

I would hope so too. However, the 377 cameras are not in use.

I wouldn't think that dedicated stop boards will be necessary unless they're going to start doing SDO with them

If you line them up along side the existing DOO monitors but can't see out the side window to align the stop correctly then its a guessing game where your stopping.

- the main reason for the 700 ones is to ensure that the middle of the train always lines up in the same place for wheelchair access - nothing comparable with the 707s.

In the core and at London Bridge that's how they have been designed and its critical because of the platform humps. Outside the core is different. 700 stop marks have been placed to the current standards and because the cab design is prohibitive. Same when they are being dispatched by Bat and Flag. The cab design forces the way in which they need to be dispatched. As 700s and 707s are pretty much identical ? I would hope that they align to the 700 RLU marks. There will also need to be consideration for TPWS and AWS location etc.

London, Chatham and Dover Railway - ie Victoria Side

Cheers.

 

[Fincra5]

707s will have to use the DOO Equipment as the driver, unlike the current metro stock, cannot see out the side window. Like a 700 its behind the driver, so you'd have to leave the seat each time and lower the window. No point when you have DOO Equipment...

 

[pompeyfan]

707s will have to use the DOO Equipment as the driver, unlike the current metro stock, cannot see out the side window. Like a 700 its behind the driver, so you'd have to leave the seat each time and lower the window. No point when you have DOO Equipment...

would that involve a change to the drivers T&Cs?Would strike me as odd that they’re not in use on 377 DOO services if there was nothing contractual stopping it.

 

[Fincra5]

would that involve a change to the drivers T&Cs?Would strike me as odd that they’re not in use on 377 DOO services if there was nothing contractual stopping it.

Do they need to be used on 377s? Surely it depends on the route. If they're used on routes where a Guard works them (past Orpington for example) they won't be needed. Like the 375s.

I can't say I know if the 377/5s have had their cameras upgraded like our 377s.

 

[Mikey C]

They'll receive a "southeastern" sticker on top of the SWR logo if we're lucky.
Even then they will be an enormous upgrade for those of us used to Networker interiors.

The aircon and larger doors will be nice, but the seating is hardly an upgrade, especially in the bizarre 2 + 1 section

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Still holding out hope we end up with the 458s too!

Given the sheer state of them I believe 458s are to scrap. Relatively sure Porterbrook own them and confirmed that as the construction was a bit, erm, bad.

 

[TEW]

would that involve a change to the drivers T&Cs?Would strike me as odd that they’re not in use on 377 DOO services if there was nothing contractual stopping it.

I don't believe there are any locations where 377s would be DOO self dispatch on Southeastern. I think it's like the 375s where they are either platform staff dispatch, or guard dispatch.

 

[43096]

Given the sheer state of them I believe 458s are to scrap. Relatively sure Porterbrook own them and confirmed that as the construction was a bit, erm, bad.

Porterbrook do own them, but I have never seen any comment from them about the standard of construction or that they are definitely for scrap. Remember it is not that long since they were converted to 5-car: I doubt that investment has been recouped yet.

 

[pompeyfan]

Ah fair enough, I was under the impression they were monitor dispatch in the London area and then the guard does the dinging outside the metro. I’m not 100% up to scratch on SE operations. Thanks for clarifying. Obviously for clarity I’m 100% for guards retaining status quo and don’t wish to see any operational duties removed.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Herne Hill - the track circuits are longer than 10 car. The theoretical problems is the location of the platform door monitors which are positioned for 8 car networkers but which is completely academic with 707s as they have bodyside camera and in cab monitors! Brixton down side is the only real problem but that has solutions too.

707 on the ex-LCDR side would also mean far more 12 car running on the via London Bridge side.

I'm relatively sure the points posted before are all correct, namely they not only aren't slated for the Victoria side (as there genuinely is nowhere near enough demand to warrant them even in the peaks on the Bexleyheath line or of course on the Chatham Main Line Metro), but that we are looking to these to work alongside 376s on the 10-car limited and also very busy Woolwich line (and possibly Hayes as I know it's got some 8 car diagrams that are very comfortably coping) meaning that 465s will do more work as 12-car and potentially biased to Cannon Street work due to the operational constraints of using them if platforms at Charing Cross get knocked out of action.

Based on the fact that more 10 car diagrams can be filled by 376s and 707s, and as the fleet availability should be better, a quick fag packet back calculation suggests that:
- 36 x 376
- 30 x 707
- 43 x 466
- 35 x 465/9 (deliberately kept separate as they can have First Class reinstated)
- 112 x 465/x (suburban) can be formed into...

- 17 x 10/376 formations
- 14 x 10/707 formations (option of course for one 5 car working into/out of Victoria at shoulder peak as used to happen with a 376 which stayed at Grosvenor during the day, which would be crewed by someone like Dartford or Slade Green)
- 16 x 465/9 465/9 466 formations (could do Tunbridge Wells side, peak Ashford stopper sorts such as 16:51 Charing Cross to Folkestone Central) meaning at least 3 465/9s sat on depot.
- 17 x 465/x 466 466 formations as 8 car (deliberate action to use up 466s as they are attached to a compliant 465)
That means 376s, 707s and 465/9s as well as 466s are used up; and only 17 of 112 465/x suburban types are used. Therefore, you're looking at upwards of 30/31 12-car 465 formations although obviously some might be in 8s.

If diagrams are tightened up a touch to keep them captive, we're basically suggesting the Hayes line at peak would be 6-7 circuits, or 12-14 units (most of the 376 capacity therefore used although some 8/465 would work), and the Woolwich line if everything was 707 would therefore have some spare 376s to use, and some 12/465 if they use them on a small number of through services from Gravesend and Strood to Abbey Wood, Woolwich and London not calling at Dockyard and going via Blackheath to give much-needed capacity out of Blackheath and Lewisham).

It's not impossible, it's just sensible maths and matching capacity to lines. That I can gather, 4 circuits are used on Orpington - Victoria, 4 circuits Bromley South - Victoria (possibly 7 circuits between them, can't quite tell) and 2 circuits for Beckenham - Blackfriars. That's 9-10 of the 17 465/466/466 'unit user' 8-cars sorted, meaning 7-8 circuits potentially for the more lightly-used Victoria - Dartford diagrams which is no more than 6 circuits from memory. Units can be swapped on/off maintenance via Grosvenor Sidings or simply having an inbound Orpington in peak then go off to Dartford and vice-versa so they're back to somewhere like Slade Green.

465/9s, as was always the case, cycle on and off Slade Green by having them go into London early doors off North Kent services and then outwards to Tunbridge Wells at 0600/0700 and then back in for 0830/0930. Same at the end of the night.

12-car 465s would need to be formed up off Gillingham or Grove Park, and at shoulder peak be split on/off services at places like Cannon Street and Dartford to go off to depot. Not sure how you'd do it overnight with the exception of transit moves.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Porterbrook do own them, but I have never seen any comment from them about the standard of construction or that they are definitely for scrap. Remember it is not that long since they were converted to 5-car: I doubt that investment has been recouped yet.

I get the distinct feeling the investment was recouped in 'over the odds' rental costs... They are shot.

 

[fgwrich]

I get the distinct feeling the investment was recouped in 'over the odds' rental costs... They are shot.

I rather agree with you. I did use them for the best part of the last 3 years as part of my job, and they weren't in the best of condition. Mind you, I travelled on a few ScotRail examples in what you could have called last summer too, they didn't exactly feel that well loved either. Part of me wonders if we'll see a wholesale replacement of the Juniper fleets over the next decade, with them becoming the first proper post privatisation unit going for scrap.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

I rather agree with you. I did use them for the best part of the last 3 years as part of my job, and they weren't in the best of condition. Mind you, I travelled on a few ScotRail examples in what you could have called last summer too, they didn't exactly feel that well loved either. Part of me wonders if we'll see a wholesale replacement of the Juniper fleets over the next decade, with them becoming the first proper post privatisation unit going for scrap.

Quite what Scotland wish to do with them is entirely up to them, but a former colleague now at Wimbledon Park / East Wimbledon suggests that the two toilets were the single biggest issue (334s don't have toilets from memory) as they were so sha**ed that they were putting effluent where it shouldn't have been, leading to heavy rusting, bubbling floors and such. I'm sure the 458s will head to the scrap pile, not least because they were only hashed up to use up 460s as Porterbrook didn't want all that stock sitting about.

 

[43096]

I get the distinct feeling the investment was recouped in 'over the odds' rental costs... They are shot.

Given that Porterbrook said at the time of conversion that they were prepared to take the risk over the then-SWT franchise end, then unless they have been fleecing SWR since because they don't want them full term (if they are, well done!) then they haven't recouped the investment.

Quite what Scotland wish to do with them is entirely up to them, but a former colleague now at Wimbledon Park / East Wimbledon suggests that the two toilets were the single biggest issue (334s don't have toilets from memory) as they were so sha**ed that they were putting effluent where it shouldn't have been, leading to heavy rusting, bubbling floors and such. I'm sure the 458s will head to the scrap pile, not least because they were only hashed up to use up 460s as Porterbrook didn't want all that stock sitting about.

The 458/460 programme provided the best value to DfT for the Windsor Lines 10-car project (which also debunks your "over the odds" rental costs claim) - that is why they were chosen. Quite why you think they were to "use up" the 460s I don't know - the availability of the 460s was obviously why Porterbrook could offer the solution in the first place, and probably influenced the commercial terms.

334s do have a toilet, btw....

 

[ComUtoR]

Will 707s need route certification ?

 

[Islineclear3_1]

will these trains recieve the full blue livery (375) or the 465/466 livery?

Far too early to splash out on a complete relivery or revinyl I would have thought.

And let's face it, the 376's are long overdue for relivery and should be first in the queue if SouthEastern keep them

 

[brad465]

Far too early to splash out on a complete relivery or revinyl I would have thought.

And let's face it, the 376's are long overdue for relivery and should be first in the queue if SouthEastern keep them

I agree 376s should be done first; I'm pretty sure they've never had a refurbishment in their entire existence. In general though I doubt a proper livery will happen without a full franchise award or whatever the Williams' review decides happening that will make a 707 relivery worthwhile.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Will 707s need route certification ?

700s clear already Victoria - Catford - Shortlands, Victoria - Herne Hill - Shortlands, Shortlands - Swanley - Sevenoaks, Shortlands - Orpington - Sevenoaks, Blackfriars - Herne Hill / Cambria, London Bridge - Greenwich - Dartford - Rainham, North Kent East - Lewisham - Charlton and Blackheath - Bexleyheath - Crayford Creek. Can’t see much precluding them via Sidcup, Grove Park and to Hayes; Nunhead - Lewisham and Hayes.