Class 701 'Aventra' trains for South Western Railway

[nctd2306]

Which makes me confused why so many people - the same names over and over again too - keep posting the same thing, i.e. simply to moan that they've seen a 455 on the Reading line again, or that the situation is a disgrace... I think everyone knows now that the 701 introduction is a farce, the waste of the 458/5s is poor, and that Reading is getting 455s. It'd be nice to click on a thread alert and see an actual update rather than re-hashed ground being hashed again.

For the record, I personally don't have much issue with a 455 on Readings as long as its an 8 car, which is adequate for most services capacity wise. If anything when we get a loud thrashy unit like 856 today, I welcome it as an enthusiast
But I understand that others have their issues and want to be kept up to date
It's also worth remembering that the 455s actually have the same seats as 450s and in a 2+2 configuration rather than 3+2 so it certainly isn't all bad

 

[OneTrackMinded]

It was ever thus. Rumours fill the vacuum left by lack of information. Some of the rumours will be true (law of probability and relying on informed guesses). When the truth becomes unavoidably obvious the rumour mill will then gain further credibility.

It is important to look at the visible progress that has been made.

That's true but there hasn't really been that much visible progress since the soft launch started 2 and a bit months ago

 

[The_Train]

Which makes me confused why so many people - the same names over and over again too - keep posting the same thing, i.e. simply to moan that they've seen a 455 on the Reading line again, or that the situation is a disgrace... I think everyone knows now that the 701 introduction is a farce, the waste of the 458/5s is poor, and that Reading is getting 455s. It'd be nice to click on a thread alert and see an actual update rather than re-hashed ground being hashed again.

Anyone on here moaning about 455s to Reading should leave the hobby* - shame I can't be down there regularly so I could get to enjoy this

*this is a joke, please don't jump down my throat!!!!

 

[norbitonflyer]

For the record, I personally don't have much issue with a 455 on Readings as long as its an 8 car, which is adequate for most services capacity wise.

It's a long time to be on a train not fitted with toilets. (yes, very few people go all the way, but Richmond to Reading or Earley to Waterloo are busy flows.

 

[gabrielhj07]

Anyone on here moaning about 455s to Reading should leave the hobby* - shame I can't be down there regularly so I could get to enjoy this

Call me strange but in winter I'd take a 455 over a 450 just for the heaters.

 

[Dr_Intoxicated]

Call me strange but in winter I'd take a 455 over a 450 just for the heaters.

But we are heading into summer not winter and 455s are hell in hot weather.

 

[gabrielhj07]

But we are heading into summer not winter and 455s are hell in hot weather.

No question, but I was looking forward to next winter when we’ll be down to single 455s on the Reading line no doubt

 

[brad465]

Even Chris Grayling MP (remember him?) is saying the capacity of morning peak provided by SWR needs fixing


Note the SWR wording, roll out the fleet, (doesn't say part of fleet) this year

Surrey MP appeals for more train services in constituency

Chris Grayling says that people have contacted him about the busyness of services.

www.bbc.co.uk

Perhaps he should try talking to the person who was Transport Secretary when SWR were awarded the franchise and approved the 701 order. Oh hang on...

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

They would probably be closer to entering service, but with guard close the massive elephant in the room is crush loaded peak services and event days.

Platform infrastructure at stations with curves would need CCTV aided dispatch at the back cab for worst case scenario and also signal dispatch aides if signal sighting is unavailable. GOPs not being at opposite doors doesn't help for functionality either.

Thameslink 12 car 700's manage to do this at London Bridge and Farringdon with double reverse curves reliably day in day out without any extra CCTV or a second person.

Not forgetting short platforms which can't be stopped at. (This is all worst case scenario of course) but all possible eventualities have to be covered.

and they have SDO

These trains are not designed for a second member of staff onboard and SWR know that. Maybe that is causing more issues than any of us know.

There not designed for a second member of staff to have to do anything involving platform dispatch but one hopes they are onboard providing a visible presence and doing ticket checks.

 

[TEW]

Thameslink 12 car 700's manage to do this at London Bridge and Farringdon with double reverse curves reliably day in day out without any extra CCTV or a second person.

and they have SDO

There not designed for a second member of staff to have to do anything involving platform dispatch but one hopes they are onboard providing a visible presence and doing ticket checks.

There are stations where the guard is required to dispatch on the current services. If they were peak services and crush loaded it would be very difficult for the guard to dispatch as the only door controls are in the passenger saloon.

 

[DMckduck97]

Thameslink 12 car 700's manage to do this at London Bridge and Farringdon with double reverse curves reliably day in day out without any extra CCTV or a second person.

and they have SDO

There not designed for a second member of staff to have to do anything involving platform dispatch but one hopes they are onboard providing a visible presence and doing ticket checks.

Thameslink is DOO is it not? My point still stands overall, SWR have got themselves into this mess and now a DFT funded minimal pay rise simply isn't going to be enough for SWR drivers to take on or even consider running services DOO.

The soft launch has been running for two months and I'm sure the guard still has to dispatch from select stations? Doesn't give you much confidence really does it.

 

[CarrotPie]

Thameslink is DOO, is it not?

It is, yes.

 

[Carlisle]

now a DFT funded minimal pay rise simply isn't going to be enough for SWR drivers to take on or even consider running services DOO.

They’ve been paid for DCO since their 2019 pay settlement

 

[Mainsideman]

There are stations where the guard is required to dispatch on the current services. If they were peak services and crush loaded it would be very difficult for the guard to dispatch as the only door controls are in the passenger saloon.

Northern manage it on their 195s and 331? Wmr new ones only have gops in the saloon if im correct

 

[SEtrains]

Today’s 2U93/2U94 should be running like normal if there aren’t any problems

 

[Fincra5]

There's no staff shortages currently trained on them, as far as I'm aware they are in a closed pool of crew who only work 701s or sit spare on a just in case basis.

It's not

They’ve been paid for DCO since their 2019 pay settlement

Indeed!
So who knows, SWR could actually force in DCO if they want. Just need to make sure the lighting at stations is suitable for DOO Equipment etc.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Today’s 2U93/2U94 should be running like normal if there aren’t any problems

RTT says it did - 701037 did the honours (at least, RTT shows it operated 2U91 and 2U92, and that 2U93 left Waterloo from the same platform 2U92 arrived at)

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

There are stations where the guard is required to dispatch on the current services. If they were peak services and crush loaded it would be very difficult for the guard to dispatch as the only door controls are in the passenger saloon.

Forty years ago DOO was bought in on BedPan without guards yet we now have this nonsense despite having trainborne cameras and monitors. SWR just need to force the issue when they've got the lighting correct at all stations.

 

[DMckduck97]

It's not

There is 8 DI's trained... its a closed pool

Forty years ago DOO was bought in on BedPan without guards yet we now have this nonsense despite having trainborne cameras and monitors. SWR just need to force the issue when they've got the lighting correct at all stations.

Maybe you should have a read of the current agreement SWR have with drivers and realise they won't be forcing or even attempting to force through DOO.

SWR drivers are not going to be accepting more responsibility for peanuts, simple as.

And forcing the issue or imposing terms is asking for trouble and serious strike action.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

There is 8 DI's trained... its a closed pool


Maybe you should have a read of the current agreement SWR have with drivers and realise they won't be forcing or even attempting to force through DOO.

SWR drivers are not going to be accepting more responsibility for peanuts, simple as.

And forcing the issue or imposing terms is asking for trouble and serious strike action.

Thats what it took in 82 for both BR to realise they needed to pay an appropriate rate and for ASLEF to agree to it. Same again with Southern in 2015 but that railway is now transformed in reliability because station dwell times are deliverable when just the driver is involved. Next step there is to go down the Thameslink route and make all stations self despatch.

 

[DMckduck97]

Thats what it took in 82 for both BR to realise they needed to pay an appropriate rate and for ASLEF to agree to it. Same again with Southern in 2015 but that railway is now transformed in reliability because station dwell times are deliverable when just the driver is involved. Next step there is to go down the Thameslink route and make all stations self despatch.

You mean the southern rail dispute that cost 28% over 5 years to accept DOO and not even on all services?

If the TOCS/DFT wanted to impose terms on drivers they would have done it already in the past 4 years...

On paper it all sounds so easy, yet this mess carries on with no end in sight. Maybe some people on this forum should be consulting the DFT and TOCs

 

[Fincra5]

There is 8 DI's trained... its a closed pool


Maybe you should have a read of the current agreement SWR have with drivers and realise they won't be forcing or even attempting to force through DOO.

SWR drivers are not going to be accepting more responsibility for peanuts, simple as.

And forcing the issue or imposing terms is asking for trouble and serious strike action.

Don't they have DCO agreed however? Which really is DOO...

 

[43096]

Maybe you should have a read of the current agreement SWR have with drivers and realise they won't be forcing or even attempting to force through DOO.

SWR drivers are not going to be accepting more responsibility for peanuts, simple as.

And forcing the issue or imposing terms is asking for trouble and serious strike action.

It has been stated before that SWR drivers accepted DOO as part of driver restructuring back in the late 1990s. If - and I stress the "if" - that is the case then they need to get on with it, with no additional payment, as they have been paid to do it for the last 25 years or so.

 

[TEW]

It has been stated before that SWR drivers accepted DOO as part of driver restructuring back in the late 1990s. If - and I stress the "if" - that is the case then they need to get on with it, with no additional payment, as they have been paid to do it for the last 25 years or so.

The wording in the 1990s deal was at least potentially subject to argument. It's been superseded now anyway. SWR drivers have agreed to operate the doors on any stock potentially, but there must always be a guard on board.

The 701s are operating in accordance with this on the limited runs they are doing. The guard has to operate the doors at some stations which are not signed off for DOO dispatch, above this is stated to be for lighting reasons. The guard can also operate the doors as required anywhere where the equipment fails.

Whether the real issue on 701s is that the DOO equipment is especially unreliable compared to other trains, or whether ASLEF on SWR are being particularly fussy, who knows. But since the trains have to have guards on anyway there's not a lot to save not training them to operate the doors, and SWR are no longer pursuing that anyway.

 

[Electrostar387]

Next step there is to go down the Thameslink route and make all stations self despatch.

*Nearly all stations - still despatched by platform staff at Brighton, Horsham, London Bridge Low Level, Kings Cross, Peterborough - possibly even East Grinstead and a few others.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

*Nearly all stations - still despatched by platform staff at Brighton, Horsham, London Bridge Low Level, Kings Cross, Peterborough - possibly even East Grinstead and a few others.

Can't vouch for E.Grinstead but been self despatched off KX, L.Bdge Ctl & Horsham recently unless the dispatchers don't come to the driver like they do with Southerns.

 

[Electrostar387]

Can't vouch for E.Grinstead but been self despatched off KX, L.Bdge Ctl & Horsham recently unless the dispatchers don't come to the driver like they do with Southerns.

lol. 100% not the case, have been despatched at London Bridge Low Level (platforms 10-15), Kings Cross and Horsham all in the last month!!

City Thameslink has been self despatch for a few years now (not that I mentioned it before…)

 

[43066]

Forty years ago DOO was bought in on BedPan without guards yet we now have this nonsense despite having trainborne cameras and monitors.

Yet later this afternoon, in 2024, I will work a train over the bedpan route which will have a guard .

SWR just need to force the issue when they've got the lighting correct at all stations.

Force what issue? It has never been intended that SWR trains would self-dispatch at all stations, unless I’m missing something? If the relevant method for any location cannot be safely used for whatever reason, that’s an issue that needs to be resolved, irrespective of method of operation.

 

[CarrotPie]

Yet later this afternoon, in 2024, I will work a train over the bedpan route which will have a guard .

EMR, is it?

 

[43066]

EMR, is it?

I can neither confirm nor deny .