Greater Anglia Bombardier Aventras (Class 720): Technical discussion and introduction

[JTP1973]

Seen several go through Hockley recently. Didn't see numbers, but looks like test runs/mileage accumulation may be taking place

 

[Dave242]

Thanks, at least the 720 rollout is going quite smoothly, albeit a little late

”a little late” A year late at leat from today, planning permission has still to be given for Platform Extension at Hertford East

Dave

 

[LAX54]

We are polite, just smile, join a queue & get on with it. What else can you do?

But the 720 delay was not of GA's making ? or is that wrong ?

 

[dk1]

But the 720 delay was not of GA's making ? or is that wrong ?

Of course it wasn't. But let's not let that fact get in the way for GA bashers haha!

 

[F Great Eastern]

But the 720 delay was not of GA's making ? or is that wrong ?

GA had unrealistic time-frames in their plan - many in the industry with experience of similar rolling stock projects or those who had been involved in them in the past said that from the moment that the order was announced. This is what happens when you fill the team at the top table with people who have no experience in similar projects as they are either finance people or bid managers and the engineering director previously had no experience of trains but plenty with planes.

If that makes me a GA basher that is up to them but I'd like to remind people that I was one of Abellio's biggest supporters for their first three or four years, they were miles better than NXEA prior to the new franchise starting and what has put me off is the poor project planning, endless spin and refusal to take any responsibility for anything at all.

However by appointing Dave Kaye as COO who is now essentially group lead of operations and fleet management, we hopefully should see better decisions going forward, although some of the mistakes of the past of course it will be too late to change or fix, but Dave is someone who has been there and done that and the kind of person Abellio was lacking.

 

[hwl]

GA had unrealistic time-frames in their plan - many in the industry with experience of similar rolling stock projects or those who had been involved in them in the past said that from the moment that the order was announced. This is what happens when you fill the team at the top table with people who have no experience in similar projects as they are either finance people or bid managers and the engineering director previously had no experience of trains but plenty with planes.

If that makes me a GA basher that is up to them but I'd like to remind people that I was one of Abellio's biggest supporters for their first three or four years, they were miles better than NXEA prior to the new franchise starting and what has put me off is the poor project planning, endless spin and refusal to take any responsibility for anything at all.

However by appointing Dave Kaye as COO who is now essentially group lead of operations and fleet management, we hopefully should see better decisions going forward, although some of the mistakes of the past of course it will be too late to change or fix, but Dave is someone who has been there and done that and the kind of person Abellio was lacking.

Agreed. GA did also request some changes is is part of but not the main reason for delay.
(A fellow member of the "what were Abellio's bid team smoking" school of thought).
Their budgeting for change was also way off e.g. new depot costs and station /platform alteration costs - this also suggests little attention to detail.

 

[Pumbaa]

No - it suggests the objective was to win the bid, rather than ensure the business had a sound financial foundation.

 

[Dave242]

A perfect example of poor project management and leadership with both the Stadler and Bombardier orders, mistake after mistake from the beginning. And more will crop up, especially putting the 745 1XX on the stansted‘s especially if one breaks down on the W Anglia side and it needs to be dragged to Norwich for repairs.
The Stansted trains should have been based on the 720’s

And example of the poor management is Wickford and Hertford East Stations. Both should have been ready for the interdiction of 720’s at the start of last year.

And I expect GA will try and blame COVID-19 for their mistakes

Dave

 

[samuelmorris]

GA had unrealistic time-frames in their plan - many in the industry with experience of similar rolling stock projects or those who had been involved in them in the past said that from the moment that the order was announced. This is what happens when you fill the team at the top table with people who have no experience in similar projects as they are either finance people or bid managers and the engineering director previously had no experience of trains but plenty with planes.

If that makes me a GA basher that is up to them but I'd like to remind people that I was one of Abellio's biggest supporters for their first three or four years, they were miles better than NXEA prior to the new franchise starting and what has put me off is the poor project planning, endless spin and refusal to take any responsibility for anything at all.

However by appointing Dave Kaye as COO who is now essentially group lead of operations and fleet management, we hopefully should see better decisions going forward, although some of the mistakes of the past of course it will be too late to change or fix, but Dave is someone who has been there and done that and the kind of person Abellio was lacking.

I agree re: the questionable proposals for the new stock but honestly, just as a TOC I think Anglia 2016 are better than their 2012 and 2014 iterations. We had to campaign fairly hard to get them to carry out basic maintenance and their customer service wasn't ideal to begin with either. They've improved greatly since their initial takeover I feel. Their implementation team have also done an admirable job of turning a difficult proposal into some sort of reality. Look at the attention to detail with this new fleet compare to what other TOCs have delivered.

 

[Bikeman78]

A perfect example of poor project management and leadership with both the Stadler and Bombardier orders, mistake after mistake from the beginning. And more will crop up, especially putting the 745 1XX on the stansted‘s especially if one breaks down on the W Anglia side and it needs to be dragged to Norwich for repairs.
The Stansted trains should have been based on the 720’s

I'd have kept the 379s. There are enough to form nine 12 car sets. That was the original plan.

 

[Class 170101]

I'd have kept the 379s. There are enough to form nine 12 car sets. That was the original plan.

Ten actually. 30 units.

 

[InOban]

A perfect example of poor project management and leadership with both the Stadler and Bombardier orders, mistake after mistake from the beginning. And more will crop up, especially putting the 745 1XX on the stansted‘s especially if one breaks down on the W Anglia side and it needs to be dragged to Norwich for repairs.
The Stansted trains should have been based on the 720’s

And example of the poor management is Wickford and Hertford East Stations. Both should have been ready for the interdiction of 720’s at the start of last year.

And I expect GA will try and blame COVID-19 for their mistakes

Dave

Surely work on stations is the responsibility of NR? GA are tenants.

 

[Bikeman78]

Ten actually. 30 units.

Well yes but you can't have all 30 running every day. The quarter hourly Stansted service needs nine trains so 27 units with three maintenance spares.

 

[43096]

Ten actually. 30 units.

Presumably none of them ever get overhauled then?

 

[Bald Rick]

Surely work on stations is the responsibility of NR? GA are tenants.

Tenants on a ‘full repairing’ 99 year lease, ie responsible for almost everything, and a franchise obligation to have the stations ready for the new trains.

 

[Class 170101]

Well yes but you can't have all 30 running every day. The quarter hourly Stansted service needs nine trains so 27 units with three maintenance spares.

Presumably none of them ever get overhauled then?

Not the question that was asked. However yes you can't operate all 30 without risk of breakdowns and short forms. They also won't finish their days on Stansted Airport services due to Class 745s entering traffic (eventually).

 

[InOban]

Tenants on a ‘full repairing’ 99 year lease, ie responsible for almost everything, and a franchise obligation to have the stations ready for the new trains.

But is the work on the station buildings, which would be carried out by GA, or to the platforms, which would surely be NR?

 

[Bald Rick]

But is the work on the station buildings, which would be carried out by GA, or to the platforms, which would surely be NR?

Don’t confuse who owns the asset with who has been instructed and provided the funding to deliver it.

 

[Astro_Orbiter]

I'd have kept the 379s. There are enough to form nine 12 car sets. That was the original plan.

Pretty sure it was all part of the Stadler deal that they order around 20 EMU's, which means a small approx 10 unit allocation for something, and that fits well with the requirements for stanex. Having said that, a small subfleet of 720's with more luggage space etc would have been fine. A 720 as is on Stansted Express would be a disaster, 3+2 seating and almost no luggage space or racks.

As for 379, isn't their lease prohibitively expensive for long term, otherwise I'm sure they would have kept them on as their interior is ideal for the work they do, and imo one of the nicest first class sections on any EMU especially for a London commuter line

 

[47421]

Don’t confuse who owns the asset with who has been instructed and provided the funding to deliver it.

The Franchise Agreement includes the below. Requires GA to spend a minimum amount on platform lengthening and other works, eg moving signals and crossovers and associated overhead works at Hert East, so that 10 car trains can call by 1 Sept 2018. A nice example of the wishful thinking / confusion that runs through the GA franchise agreement (and the others of that era, Northern, TPE, SWT, but that is beyond scope of this thread). Requires expenditure by GA where they are not actually able to do the work without NRs agreement, and NR are not a party to the agreement. Also need planning permission at some of these sites, and no provisions on how / when that will be applied for. At Hert East I note that the first application (denied cus it involved removing to a heritage railway the old signalbox which the local historical society or some such objected to) was made by NR, not GA. 10 cars? My understanding was that TSR2 was for 12 cars to Hert East. But then virtually all of TSR2 due May 2019 never happened (extra TPH off peak to Hert East and Southend V, extension of LivSt-Ips semi-fast through to Norwich never happened, Nin90 did as did extension of some Nor-Camb to Stansted A). 1 Sept 2018 - was never any prospect of that happening - almost 2 years later has the work been done at any of these locations?

I know it is easy for armchair experts to criticize, but it is a strange business for DfT / GA to spend vast amounts of time and money negotiating, and get top law firms to draft, contracts that were from day 1 almost certainly undeliverable.

Will be interesting to see what happens on West Anglia when the 720s come. Wont be able to run to Hert East as 10cars until work done, as platform end signal is too close to buffers. Will 10cars be able to stop Elsenham or Enfield Lock? Both cases if stop at signal on up platform rear of train will overhang busy level crossings.


105. Infrastructure upgrades

105.1 By no later than 1 May 2019, the Franchisee shall make all necessary changes to the infrastructure of the Stations (including relevant associated infrastructure surrounding such Stations) in order to accommodate the Passenger Services as set out in TSR2 and the Franchhisee shall incur a minimum expenditure of [REDACTED120] in doing so.

105.2 Pursuant to paragraph 105.1 such changes to the infrastructure shall include such infrastructure works at each of Hertford East, Wickford, Manningtree, Kings Lynn, Elsenham, Ware, St Margarets and Enfield Lock Stations as are necessary to enable any Passenger Services comprised of 10 rolling stock vehicles to call at such Stations by no later than 1 September 2018

 

[DBS92042]

720539 & 720540 were out on mileage accumulation runs today. 5Q27/5Q29 Wolverton-Crewe-Wolverton. 720516 is also at Wolverton Works at the moment.

 

[JamesC357]

My Dad reports that 720537 is currently parked in the sidings at Southend Victoria. This was one of the units that was tested on the WCML right?

 

[DBS92042]

My Dad reports that 720537 is currently parked in the sidings at Southend Victoria. This was one of the units that was tested on the WCML right?

That's correct. 720537 & 720538 were together for the WCML runs and they went to Ilford from Wolverton on 18/07/20 I believe.

 

[yorkie]

Just a gentle reminder this thread is to discuss class 720 trains; to discuss anything else please create a new thread in the appropriate forum section ( if there isn't an existing thread)

If anyone wishes to discuss the platform lengthening at Hertford East please use:: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-planning-permission-has-been-granted.207436/

 

[DBS92042]

Quick update for the units at Wolverton:
720516 & 720518 are both yet to do their mileage accumulation runs
720539 & 720540 have been doing mileage accumulation for the past two weeks
720542 is currently on its way to Wolverton from Litchurch Lane

 

[1D54]

720542 has just gone North through Nuneaton on mileage accumulation with another that I was unable to see.

 

[DBS92042]

720542 has just gone North through Nuneaton on mileage accumulation with another that I was unable to see.

The other one is reported elsewhere as 720518

 

[1D54]

Thanks. They have just gone back south.

 

[Shunter_69]

It seems almost certain the 10 cars will no longer be built and will be replaced with more 5 cars. Will help with maintenance, increase flexibility and should help speed up the build process.

 

[fat_boy_pete]

It seems almost certain the 10 cars will no longer be built and will be replaced with more 5 cars. Will help with maintenance, increase flexibility and should help speed up the build process.

Source?