TOPS numbers in the 700 series?

[py_megapixel]

Note to moderators: I put this thread here because this section seems to have a lot of discussion about TOPS numbers and their operational use. If you feel it would fit better in a different section I would much appreciate if you could move it - thanks!

There are various units now numbered in the 700 series, as follows:

Spoiler: List of MUs numbered in the 7xx series

Siemens Desiro City
700 (Gova Thameslink Railway, GTR)
707 (South Western Railway, SWR)
717 (GTR)

Bombardier Aventra
701 (SWR)
710 (London Overground)
720 (c2c / Abellio Greater Anglia, GA)
730 (WMTrains)
(+345 - Crossrail)

Stadler FLIRT
745 (GA)
755 (GA)
756 (Transport for Wales, TfW)
(+231 - TfW)

Others
769 - 319s fitted with diesel gensets
777 - Stadler Metro for Merseyrail

What I find odd about this is that, rather than numbering similar units close together, the numbers have been scattered throughout the range. To me, it seems more logical that (for example) the Desiro Cities could have been numbered together (700, 701, 702), then the Aventras in a different bit (720, 721, 722, 723, 724), then the FLIRTs in another (740, 741, 742, 743). The Merseyrail units could have been numbered 509, following the convention of numbering for stock for that route of using the next available number in the 5xx series.

Does anyone know if there is an operational reason for scattering them like this, rather than numbering similar units together?

 

[swt_passenger]

Note to moderators: I put this thread here because this section seems to have a lot of discussion about TOPS numbers and their operational use. If you feel it would fit better in a different section I would much appreciate if you could move it - thanks!

There are various units now numbered in the 700 series, as follows:

Spoiler: List of MUs numbered in the 7xx series

Siemens Desiro City
700 (Gova Thameslink Railway, GTR)
707 (South Western Railway, SWR)
717 (GTR)

Bombardier Aventra
701 (SWR)
710 (London Overground)
720 (c2c / Abellio Greater Anglia, GA)
730 (WMTrains)
(+345 - Crossrail)

Stadler FLIRT
745 (GA)
755 (GA)
756 (Transport for Wales, TfW)
(+231 - TfW)

Others
769 - 319s fitted with diesel gensets
777 - Stadler Metro for Merseyrail

What I find odd about this is that, rather than numbering similar units close together, the numbers have been scattered throughout the range. To me, it seems more logical that (for example) the Desiro Cities could have been numbered together (700, 701, 702), then the Aventras in a different bit (720, 721, 722, 723, 724), then the FLIRTs in another (740, 741, 742, 743). The Merseyrail units could have been numbered 509, following the convention of numbering for stock for that route of using the next available number in the 5xx series.

Does anyone know if there is an operational reason for scattering them like this, rather than numbering similar units together?

There is no operational reason - the manufacturers aren’t allocated sequential groups, it‘s basically what the first owner/operator wants. It’s been discussed quite a few times since the 700s first arrived, and were followed by 707s.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Out of interest, what exactly does use of the 700 range represent?

I.e.

00-99 = locomotives
100-199 = DMUs
200-299 = DEMUs
300-399 = EMUs (AC or multi-system)
400-499 = EMUs (DC)
500-599 = EMUs (non-Southern DC)
600-699 = not currently used
700-799 = ???
800-899 = Bi-modes
900-999 = Departmental / test units

From what I can see we’ve got a mix of EMUs, bi-mode and tri-mode trains in the 700 sequence, all of which could use other existing number sequences?

 

[swt_passenger]

Out of interest, what exactly does use of the 700 range represent?

I.e.

00-99 = locomotives
100-199 = DMUs
200-299 = DEMUs
300-399 = EMUs (AC or multi-system)
400-499 = EMUs (DC)
500-599 = EMUs (non-Southern DC)
600-699 = not currently used
700-799 = ???
800-899 = Bi-modes
900-999 = Departmental / test units

From what I can see we’ve got a mix of EMUs, bi-mode and tri-mode trains in the 700 sequence, all of which could use other existing number sequences?

On introduction (about 2012) 700-799 was going to be for AC and dual voltage EMUs, to just provide more class numbers.
But then a few years ago (late 2017) it was changed, and 700-749 took on that definition, with 750-799 becoming bimodes. So for example (and with hindsight) 777s are possibly in the wrong range since then,

600-699 is defined, it‘s available for DMUs or alternative fuels if any are ever ordered.

800-899 is defined as high speed (eg 125 mph) fixed formation units, but any type of traction, not just bimodes.

Another regular subject of discussion though, there’s previous threads that have included links to the source group standards, such as from early 2018 here:

Who Chooses The Classification of a Train?

Not quite sure previous posts have given the answer I'm looking for. Who decided what classification is given to new trains? For example the Class 150 is a train (well done!). But the Class 153, then 156 and finally the 158 all look like a development on the previous design. There's loads of...

www.railforums.co.uk

or from July this year:

TOPs Classifications

One question I have with regards to the new class 331s: Their coach numbers are in the 463XXX, 464XXX, 465XXX and 466XXX ranges. Now of those coach numbers, the 466001-031 clash with SouthEasterns 466 units. How has this not been noticed or has a rule change happened where by it doesn't matter?

www.railforums.co.uk

(But the links to group standards no longer work.)

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Thank you, that’s all interesting to read. Quite a mess lol

 

[AverageTD]

On introduction (about 2012) 700-799 was going to be for AC and dual voltage EMUs, to just provide more class numbers.
But then a few years ago (late 2017) it was changed, and 700-749 took on that definition, with 750-799 becoming bimodes. So for example (and with hindsight) 777s are possibly in the wrong range since then,

600-699 is defined, it‘s available for DMUs or alternative fuels if any are ever ordered.

800-899 is defined as high speed (eg 125 mph) fixed formation units, but any type of traction, not just bimodes.

Another regular subject of discussion though, there’s previous threads that have included links to the source group standards, such as from early 2018 here:

Who Chooses The Classification of a Train?

Not quite sure previous posts have given the answer I'm looking for. Who decided what classification is given to new trains? For example the Class 150 is a train (well done!). But the Class 153, then 156 and finally the 158 all look like a development on the previous design. There's loads of...

www.railforums.co.uk

or from July this year:

TOPs Classifications

One question I have with regards to the new class 331s: Their coach numbers are in the 463XXX, 464XXX, 465XXX and 466XXX ranges. Now of those coach numbers, the 466001-031 clash with SouthEasterns 466 units. How has this not been noticed or has a rule change happened where by it doesn't matter?

www.railforums.co.uk

(But the links to group standards no longer work.)

Couldn't 777s be called bi-mode given their battery?

 

[Domh245]

Couldn't 777s be called bi-mode given their battery?

They could, however the battery plan has been abandoned from what I remember

 

[AverageTD]

They could, however the battery plan has been abandoned from what I remember

I think it was abandoned then reintroduced, unless there's been any changes in the last few days. It's only a 20ish mile charge for ECS and a potential service that I can't remember.

 

[Skie]

They could, however the battery plan has been abandoned from what I remember

It has not been abandoned.

 

[Ribbleman]

Certainly not abandoned, just delayed. Every unit will have small batteries enabling movement on depots or to get to the next station in the event of power outage. One or possibly two will be fitted with larger batteries as a trial to determine if low cost extension of services beyond the third rail is feasible. Preston, Wigan, Neston are all possible destinations if the trial is a success.

 

[Energy]

So for example (and with hindsight) 777s are possibly in the wrong range since then,

Merseyrail decided on Stadler in December 2016 about a year before the change. There isn't too much reasoning behind the choice other than they were told they could have any number in the 700-799 range so they decided on the nice number of 777.

 

[swt_passenger]

Merseyrail decided on Stadler in December 2016 about a year before the change. There isn't too much reasoning behind the choice other than they were told they could have any number in the 700-799 range so they decided on the nice number of 777.

I agree, I think people attempting to “reverse justify” it due to the possible battery mode are probably not taking into account the relative dates...

 

[Energy]

I agree, I think people attempting to “reverse justify” it due to the possible battery mode are probably not taking into account the relative dates...

That is according to Merseyrail themselves in one of nodrog's videos on youtube. It is simply because it is a nice number and was free, 777 is a lot easier to remember and a better brand of sorts than say 764.