Class 701 'Aventra' trains for South Western Railway: progress updates

[Domh245]

just been sent a photo of 701006 at Southampton by a friend and the number is now on the front, with the first 3 digits on the left side of the windscreen wipers with the last 3 digits on the right side, and also the side below the driver's door.

The numbers on the side have been there since the start, but the full number on the front is new on 006. Not sure about the looks of it, but it is rather superfluous. Also notable though is that 006 is the first one to be delivered with the lower valances on both ends.

 

[WarrenTManager]

The valances weren’t on 6 either initially

The numbers on the side have been there since the start, but the full number on the front is new on 006. Not sure about the looks of it, but it is rather superfluous. Also notable though is that 006 is the first one to be delivered with the lower valances on both ends.

 

[spark001uk]

The numbers on the side have been there since the start, but the full number on the front is new on 006. Not sure about the looks of it, but it is rather superfluous. Also notable though is that 006 is the first one to be delivered with the lower valances on both ends.

Also worth adding that 006 appeared to have the full number applied on one end, and just last 3 digits at the other.!
(As above photo (and a few of mine) concur).

 

[MatthewRead]

View attachment 85029
The valances weren’t on 6 either initially

Great photo with a good contrast between trains

 

[Peter Sarf]

Also worth adding that 006 appeared to have the full number applied on one end, and just last 3 digits at the other.!
(As above photo (and a few of mine) concur).

And I seem to recall that, if there is a number on the front, it is usually on the right.[/nitpicky]

 

[spark001uk]

Next delivery booked for tomorrow.
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/R07669/2020-10-26/detailed
.
Edit: Looks like a non runner again.

 

[Train Boy]

Another delivery showing in the system for tomorrow: (looking unlikely to run)

6X24 0758 Derby Litchurch Lane to Eastleigh Trsmd

 

[spark001uk]

Another delivery showing in the system for tomorrow: (looking unlikely to run)

6X24 0758 Derby Litchurch Lane to Eastleigh Trsmd

Now cancelled.

 

[Train Boy]

Maybe this time; another delivery showing in the system for Monday:

6X24 0758 Derby Litchurch Lane to Eastleigh Trsmd

This will be the ninth delivery should it run.

 

[The Speculator]

6X24 just passed Derby, with 66 727 and 66 702. Anyone know what number the 701 is?

 

[spark001uk]

6X24 0758 Derby Litchurch Lane to Eastleigh Trsmd
.
66702
701013
66727
.
Currently 129L through Kettering

 

[The Speculator]

Thanks for the update, spark001uk - much appreciated.

 

[Juniper Driver]

Nice photo,thank you...

 

[traji00]

701006 on test as 5Q53 Reading - Waterloo.
It’ll shortly be returning to Eastleigh as 5Q54.

 

[spark001uk]

Yes, if anyone's interested it's going round Hounslow loop, Staines, Woking, then down the PDL and round to Fareham and Eastleigh.
.
5Q54 2042 London Waterloo to Eastleigh TRSMD

 

[hst43102]

One question. Most of the units being replaced by the 701's have gangways. Is the lack of gangways on the 701's a step backwards?

 

[Domh245]

One question. Most of the units being replaced by the 701's have gangways. Is the lack of gangways on the 701's a step backwards?

No, as most of the units being replaced run around in multiple, the 701s will mostly run as single 10 car units

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

One question. Most of the units being replaced by the 701's have gangways. Is the lack of gangways on the 701's a step backwards?

No. I live on a line served by 455s and 458s and the guards never open them, the 458 gangway is almost always locked, which is very irritating. 455s gangways have never been open in my experience. 456s and 707s have none, of course.

 

[Goldfish62]

No. I live on a line served by 455s and 458s and the guards never open them, the 458 gangway is almost always locked, which is very irritating. 455s gangways have never been open in my experience. 456s and 707s have none, of course.

In the early days a few guards opened the gangways on the 455s, but quite rarely. Bit like the 458s now.

 

[TEW]

455 gangways are designed for staff use only.

 

[hst43102]

I see, so the benefit of the 701's would be a better view for the driver and lower maintenance costs?

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I see, so the benefit of the 701's would be a better view for the driver and lower maintenance costs?

not to mention that most (non gangway) 701s you can walk through ten carriages, whereas with a standard gangwayed 455 formation you can only walk through four!

 

[Bletchleyite]

455 gangways are designed for staff use only.

Given that they are basically the same bodyshell as a Class 150/2, which are open to passengers when Northern's random unit generator comes up with two the same in a formation (rare though that is), why does the 455 differ, out of interest?

 

[TEW]

Given that they are basically the same bodyshell as a Class 150/2, which are open to passengers when Northern's random unit generator comes up with two the same in a formation (rare though that is), why does the 455 differ, out of interest?

The non-drivers side of the cab is unable to be blocked off, so passengers would have access to it if the gangway were open. The cab vestibule door is also not on the interlock circuit when the door key switch is active at that cab, which may also be an issue if passengers had access. Not insurmountable problems for sure, but enough that they are not suitable for passenger use as they are.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The non-drivers side of the cab is unable to be blocked off, so passengers would have access to it if the gangway were open. The cab vestibule door is also not on the interlock circuit when the door key switch is active at that cab, which may also be an issue if passengers had access. Not insurmountable problems for sure, but enough that they are not suitable for passenger use as they are.

Cheers. As an aside, the 150/2's "crew door" has passenger controls as well for when it is in the middle of a formation.

 

[DorkingMain]

Also worth noting the 458s are extremely awkward to work when the gangway is open. The side portions of the cab are so cramped you can't move and the side doors are not designed to be opened and closed regularly. You're also limited for choice when it comes to other positions to work from as they only have one guards panel per unit (middle coach). As a result very
few guards will open it up as it isn't worth it.

As TEW says the 455 gangways are also not suitable for passenger use as there's no way to lock the non-drivers' side of the cab and the guards panels and cab egress treadle are accessible.

707s of course don't have gangway ends.

The only difference the lack of gangways will make on the 2x5 formation 701s is staff are unable to move between the units. Of course as SWR still (for now) runs all trains with guards this issue isn't insurmountable.

 

[Gag Halfrunt]

Am I right in thinking that passengers couldn't walk between units before the 458/5 rebuild?

 

[Goldfish62]

Am I right in thinking that passengers couldn't walk between units before the 458/5 rebuild?

Correct.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Nov 2020 ==

455 gangways are designed for staff use only.

Just to clarify, they weren't designed like that when new, because as a passenger I've used both the crew door and the gangway. This was in the 1980s.

My last OT comment!

 

[spark001uk]

701011 was moved to Wimbledon Park yesterday (Fri) on 5Q60.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Nov 2020 ==

.
===
.
6Z24 0800 Chaddesden Sdgs to Eastleigh Trsmd
6X23 0757 Eastleigh Trsmd to Worksop Down Yard
.
66717 + 66778 on way down with the 701 barrier set. Return to Worksop tomorrow.
Either 002 going back up for completion, or another for storage, not 100% sure yet.

Edit 10/11:
6X23 over battledown flyover 147L.
66778 + 701002 + 66717.

 

[ComUtoR]

Evening,

Any truth to the rumor that the 10-cars have been passed for service but the 5's haven't (or vice versa) ? Cheers in advance.