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

[Pugwash]

I'd love to see the actual stats for peaks post and pre covid.

I am 100% wfh, about 5% of my team work from the office fully. A few do hybrid. Most are like me. All of my friends are either full wfh or hybrid.

Of course this only works for office staff but I'd be amazed if it ever went back to what it was.

Whilst I would like to see the Stats as well, peak trains have been full and standing this week.

 

[43096]

Whilst I would like to see the Stats as well, peak trains have been full and standing this week.

How many peak trains are running compared to pre-pandemic, though. You cannot just compare on the basis of one train.

As an example my train into London in the peak yesterday was full and standing like ye olde days. But the service is now about half what it was, ergo it follows that peak loadings are around 50% of what they were.

 

[Jammy Dodger]

Felixstowe is the obvious one as there are big benefits for freight, especially with GBRf’s order for 30 Stadler electro-diesels.

I thought that was already electrified, seems I was wrong!

Would definitely make sense, and would allow the new 93's to be a little more energy efficient!

 

[43096]

I thought that was already electrified, seems I was wrong!

Would definitely make sense, and would allow the new 93's to be a little more energy efficient!

93s are the ROG contraptions.

 

[AC47461]

Felixstowe is the obvious one as there are big benefits for freight, especially with GBRf’s order for 30 Stadler electro-diesels.

Agreed, but even then there would need to be a significant potential increase in ridership to justify lengthening platforms on the route to take a 5 car 720 over a 755.

 

[43096]

Agreed, but even then there would need to be a significant potential increase in ridership to justify lengthening platforms on the route to take a 5 car 720 over a 755.

Good point. So easier to just put the pan up on the 755 if the wires go up!

 

[Bikeman78]

Yes, if only GA and DfT could have predicted covid when they were ordered 6 1/2 years ago.

If Covid had not happened then you'd have at least four of the nine Stansted turns covered by 720s. Not ideal.

 

[Trainbike46]

If Covid had not happened then you'd have at least four of the nine Stansted turns covered by 720s. Not ideal.

Clearly, there are things that could have been done better, for example, they should have specced the 720s for level boarding similar to the 745s and 755s. In addition, having all 745s specced as the IC units would probably have been better, as well as maybe having slightly more 745s.

However, overall the new fleet strategy has been an amazing improvement across the GA network, and sometimes people seem somewhat unfairly critical of the new fleets

 

[Jammy Dodger]

However, overall the new fleet strategy has been an amazing improvement across the GA network, and sometimes people seem somewhat unfairly critical of the new fleets

These new trains are without a doubt better than their predecessors (if you ignore 379's), however the criticism of them is mainly due to the fact that for something so expensive (rumored at ~£1bn), it is perceived to be of a lower overall value than it otherwise could have been.

Clearly, there are things that could have been done better, for example, they should have specced the 720s for level boarding similar to the 745s and 755s. In addition, having all 745s specced as the IC units would probably have been better, as well as maybe having slightly more 745s.

I don't think level boarding on Aventra's is possible on only the train side, given the 720's bodyshell is identical to the same of the rest of the Aventra family, at the fast-becoming unofficial standard height (~1,100mm). Level boarding was achieved on the FLIRTs by having smaller overall profile and Jacob's bogies, thus leading to less overall floor space, something which would be ill-advised for a "regional metro" style train with stops approximately every 5 mins.

 

[Trainbike46]

These new trains are without a doubt better than their predecessors (if you ignore 379's), however the criticism of them is mainly due to the fact that for something so expensive (rumored at ~£1bn), it is perceived to be of a lower overall value than it otherwise could have been.

I don't think level boarding on Aventra's is possible on only the train side, given the 720's bodyshell is identical to the same of the rest of the Aventra family, at the fast-becoming unofficial standard height (~1,100mm). Level boarding was achieved on the FLIRTs by having smaller overall profile and Jacob's bogies, thus leading to less overall floor space, something which would be ill-advised for a "regional metro" style train with stops approximately every 5 mins.

During the procurement process, it would have been possible to require it to be at standard platform height, like the FLIRTs are. This should really be a requirement for ALL new rolling stock orders, no exceptions. It improves accessibility, is highly popular with train users, and speeds up boarding, particularly for people with a lot of luggage, strollers or people in wheelchairs

Of course, whether aventras would have been selected if that requirement had been put in during procurement process, is another matter

 

[Milo T.K]

or just do an interior mod like they have had 2 times now

With this surplus of 720's (which won't be as bad as predicted the peaks are beginning to recover), any idea to immediately put them into SX operation would be nuts, given their stupid layout, and any "refurb" after less than 2 years of operation would be bonkers.

 

[Domh245]

During the procurement process, it would have been possible to require it to be at standard platform height, like the FLIRTs are. This should really be a requirement for ALL new rolling stock orders, no exceptions. It improves accessibility, is highly popular with train users, and speeds up boarding, particularly for people with a lot of luggage, strollers or people in wheelchairs

A requirement to have floor level at the standard (ish!) platform height however would have been fundamentally incompatible with the main objective of the tender which gave us the 720s, which was (paraphrasing) "as many seats as is possible into Liverpool Street in the morning & evening peaks". A train can only be a certain width at 915mm above the rail defined by the routes it will run and it's vehicle length/bogie pivot positions - if you have shorter vehicles you can go wider (up to a certain point) though this will never give as much floorspace (and thus make 3+2 even less comfortable) as a higher floored vehicle, whilst also coming at the expense of a lot of bogies which will make it very expensive to run in terms of track access charges.

It's easy to forget in the post-2020 world what these trains were intended to do, but there's plenty of reminders of it that GA will be stuck with for the forseeable now

 

[RailWonderer]

The Stadlers were a lot more expensive and each carriage could not provide enough capacity for the demand at the time and projected demans on the GE and WA so Aventras were a no-brainer. As said before there is little to no chance the DfT will authorise funding to convert 20 720s to Stansted spec with 2+2 and extra luggage space.

 

[ashkeba]

Agreed, but even then there would need to be a significant potential increase in ridership to justify lengthening platforms on the route to take a 5 car 720 over a 755.

Oh no, are the 720s another fleet without selective door opening, or the Felixstowe line another line with obstacles close to platform ends?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Stadlers were a lot more expensive and each carriage could not provide enough capacity for the demand at the time and projected demans on the GE and WA so Aventras were a no-brainer. As said before there is little to no chance the DfT will authorise funding to convert 20 720s to Stansted spec with 2+2 and extra luggage space.

StanEx is basically the Northampton line but swapping Northampton for a third rate budget airport. 3+2 is fine, all they need do is take a few rows out so there's more luggage room, though the overheads are generous.

Ryanair passengers aren't going to be bothered about the slightly rubbish seating.

 

[Jammy Dodger]

Oh no, are the 720s another fleet without selective door opening, or the Felixstowe line another line with obstacles close to platform ends?

They do have SDO, if If I believe. Only really used in smaller towns and villages when running in a 10-car formation, as well as Northumberland Park for definite.

StanEx is basically the Northampton line but swapping Northampton for a third rate budget airport. 3+2 is fine, all they need do is take a few rows out so there's more luggage room, though the overheads are generous.

I wouldn't consider Stansted a 3rd rate airport, it's the 2nd busiest airport in the country (based on passenger numbers in 2021), and Ryanair's main operating base for the whole company!

Ryanair passengers aren't going to be bothered about the slightly rubbish seating.

They may not be bothered about the one-step-from-terrible seating, but those of us who use them for non-airport use would, and currently are!

 

[Bald Rick]

I wouldn't consider Stansted a 3rd rate airport

and Ryanair's main operating base for the whole company!

on these grounds alone, third rate is rather overstating matters.


Anyway, Gatwick is now the country’s 2nd busiest airport, and Manchester is 3rd.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

it's the 2nd busiest airport in the country

That's only because it serves predominantly leisure travel, and the reduction in business travel has hit Gatwick and Manchester, which historically were always ahead, but busy or not, it is served almost exclusively by budget airlines and most will be using the airport as a low cost alternative to flights or packages using Heathrow or Gatwick, therefore the fact it even gets a fast service to London is impressive. If I flew to the secondary airport in most cities (and this isn't even that, 2021 loadings aside Gatwick is generally seen as the 2nd airport of London, not Stansted) then I'd usually have to get a bus or taxi.

 

[Cowley]

Just to say that this thread is about the technical discussion and introduction of the 720s, so let’s try keep it on that where possible.

Thanks and have a good Friday.

 

[60159]

Correct, using spotter data from TrainLogger all those 720s are not yet in service. 123 to 144 are not yet being built. I won't go into a breakdown of where everything undelivered is since some 720s might have been moved since they have been last logged.

Can tell you that 541 and 583 have been spotted testing on the Greater Anglia network multiple times.

As far as I can see the only 720’s (incl /6s) not been seen or stated as built are 119, 21 and 22 and given all710s built then presumably Alston will be concentrating on 701s and 730s.

 

[Bikeman78]

Clearly, there are things that could have been done better, for example, they should have specced the 720s for level boarding similar to the 745s and 755s. In addition, having all 745s specced as the IC units would probably have been better, as well as maybe having slightly more 745s.

However, overall the new fleet strategy has been an amazing improvement across the GA network, and sometimes people seem somewhat unfairly critical of the new fleets

I'm not having a go at the 720s. They're not my cup of tea but they've got from A to B on time without fuss every time I've used one so that's fine by me.

The point is, they aren't really designed for use on Stansted Express but they will inevitably turn up on there almost daily if the service is increased again. The biggest problem is where to put the luggage. It was bad enough on a pair of 317s. The peak hour trains are full to bursting with a mix of commuters and airport passengers. The 1654, for example, often had all six seats in a bay of six occupied as far as Harow Town. At least the 317s could fit cases between the seat backs. A pair of 720s is longer of course but a single would be unbearable.

 

[William3000]

It may have been said before so apologies if it has but I think the 720s are a massive missed opportunity. The 379s were excellent and provided tables and 2 plus 2 seating - in my opinion the best ride and the quality even made me use the Cambridge to London Liverpool St line in preference to the London King’s Cross line. The 720s look sleek from the outside but inside the 3 plus 2 seating is a real bugbear - anybody with broad shoulders expands beyond the seat widths and virtually all the middle seats of the 3 are unoccupied. Also the 5 car trains mean now many of the stations aren’t long enough if they are extended to 10 cars. The 3 plus 2 seems a retrograde step and 2 plus 2 would be far better. The aisles are far too narrow as well - especially with luggage etc. and the lack of tables is also disappointing.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

It may have been said before so apologies if it has but I think the 720s are a massive missed opportunity. The 379s were excellent and provided tables and 2 plus 2 seating - in my opinion the best ride and the quality even made me use the Cambridge to London Liverpool St line in preference to the London King’s Cross line. The 720s look sleek from the outside but inside the 3 plus 2 seating is a real bugbear - anybody with broad shoulders expands beyond the seat widths and virtually all the middle seats of the 3 are unoccupied. Also the 5 car trains mean now many of the stations aren’t long enough if they are extended to 10 cars. The 3 plus 2 seems a retrograde step and 2 plus 2 would be far better. The aisles are far too narrow as well - especially with luggage etc. and the lack of tables is also disappointing.

As is said before, these were designed as people movers, get as many people into Liverpool Street as possible in morning peak. The 745s are the luxury ones

 

[Mikey C]

It's not entirely fair to just contrast the 720s with the 379s, as they also replaced the 321s and 360s, which both had high density seating, albeit slightly more comfortable due to the wider carriages.

 

[ashkeba]

Also the 5 car trains mean now many of the stations aren’t long enough if they are extended to 10 cars.

Not surprising if you realize they are trains designed for the Great Eastern again being dumped on the West Anglia so the GE can take more of our nicer trains. The Anglia bait and switch forces on.

 

[robert west]

Not surprising if you realize they are trains designed for the Great Eastern again being dumped on the West Anglia so the GE can take more of our nicer trains. The Anglia bait and switch forces on.

720120 on 0748 liv st to braintree and 0900 return this morning

 

[PHWO]

Derby - Saturday 21st January,

720119 visible from City Gate (no bino's required)
720516 visible from Zaytouna School Car Park off London Road. An un-numbered GA unit is also in the sidings here and looks to have been there for a while.
Off thread but 720601 was also visible from London road next to 516. (Need bino's for 516 and 601)
Also off thread but coaches for 730024 were also visible from Litchurch Lane. (No bino's required)

 

[MDB1images]

720120 on 0748 liv st to braintree and 0900 return this morning

Thanks for the info Robert.
Anyone able to confirm if it worked in on 1K15 06:25 Southend-Liv Street?

 

[The_Train]

720120 on 0748 liv st to braintree and 0900 return this morning

Anyone know (approx) when this one came off the production line please?

 

[Wivenswold]

Anyone know (approx) when this one came off the production line please?

It left the factory in August 22 but it may have been there some time since it came off the production line.