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

[swr444]

It looks like the two 701/5 units then join together in platform 18 at Waterloo and then depart as the:
5Q45 1207 London Waterloo to Clapham Yard Sidings
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:Q74050/2026-01-28/detailed#allox_id=0

PTI and attach / detach tests are happening today on the /5s. They’re checking to see that the trains can attach easily on the tightly curved platforms at Waterloo

 

[GW43125]

A good sign is the drag appears to have been manually activated judging by the time.
But I will wait and see how well the unit talks with 57306 and they get beyond Worcester before believing it is arriving today !.

Does anyone know which 701 (I assume one of 023, 045 or 049) ?.

57306 + 701023 showing

 

[WWTownEnth]

It even left ontime for once!

 

[SeaKing]

57306 + 701023 showing

Just left Worcester yard.

 

[LUYMun]

701021 currently having an issue leaving Waterloo on the 1620 to Woking. Chances of a diagram swap to a 455 is increasing!

 

[CR165022]

701021 currently having an issue leaving Waterloo on the 1620 to Woking. Chances of a diagram swap to a 455 is increasing!

Been cancelled, there's already 2 455s out on the 1650

 

[WWTownEnth]

We now have 17 ten car units on the SWR network but not in passenger service.

A record, I think.

 

[Nogoohwell]

Was on 021 yesterday when the driver had reset a few things at Motspur Park.
A two minute delay and all working again, but its clearly not a happy unit atm.

 

[Peter Sarf]

We now have 17 ten car units on the SWR network but not in passenger service.

A record, I think.

It has been said that not much was happening over the Christmas break which is reasonable but I would only allow a two week gap for that.

 

[WWTownEnth]

January is looking like the first month in a good while that we’ve had no new units into passenger service. Unless something happens today, of course……

 

[Andy1673]

January is looking like the first month in a good while that we’ve had no new units into passenger service. Unless something happens today, of course……

What about 701047 an 701054?

 

[norbitonflyer]

What about 701047 an 701054?

701054's first day in service was indeed in January (2nd), but 701047's debut was last month - New Year's Eve to be precise.

 

[Andy1673]

701054's first day in service was indeed in January (2nd), but 701047's debut was last month - New Year's Eve to be precise.

Perhaps

 

[Dan G]

We now have 17 ten car units on the SWR network but not in passenger service.

A record, I think.

Seventeen out at once? How many were carrying passengers?

 

[CarrotPie]

Seventeen out at once? How many were carrying passengers?

I think WWTownEnth meant that there are 17 units on the SWR network (e.g. at Wimbledon depot) that haven't yet entered service, but are being used for testing and training.

 

[WWTownEnth]

I think WWTownWnth meant that there are 17 units on the SWR network (e.g. at Wimbledon depot) that haven't yet entered service, but are being used for testing and training.

Indeed I did!

 

[Goldfish62]

It does seem strange that 701 introduction has ground to a halt, but it does tally with SWR's statement that they intend to introduce just another 10 units by the summer.

 

[WWTownEnth]

It does seem strange that 701 introduction has ground to a halt, but it does tally with SWR's statement that they intend to introduce just another 10 units by the summer.

I thought they said 50 by the summer? So that would be another 13/14.

 

[absolutelymilk]

Is this because driver training needs to catch up with the number of units available?

 

[Siemens Staines]

It does seem strange that 701 introduction has ground to a halt, but it does tally with SWR's statement that they intend to introduce just another 10 units by the summer.

It is not so strange when SWR are relying upon the advertised 94% fleet availability and 34 * 1/0.94 = 36. So 36 is all they require for 34 diagrams so on paper you should not need to expand the fleet to cover the existing diagrams. Of course, in practice it is a different story!

I took a look at the availability figures that GA were aiming for with their comparable 720 fleet as their source diagrams are available on their website. They appear to have 125 diagrams for 133 units which is 94%, so the same. However 22 of the diagrams appear to be tied up in Q path stock transfers and the vast majority of these don't run. If you take these diagrams out of the equation, then 103 diagrams from 133 units is 77% so they have a lot of slack in their fleet when compared to SWR.

 

[Andy1673]

It is not so strange when SWR are relying upon the advertised 94% fleet availability and 34 * 1/0.94 = 36. So 36 is all they require for 34 diagrams so on paper you should not need to expand the fleet to cover the existing diagrams. Of course, in practice it is a different story!

I took a look at the availability figures that GA were aiming for with their comparable 720 fleet as their source diagrams are available on their website. They appear to have 125 diagrams for 133 units which is 94%, so the same. However 22 of the diagrams appear to be tied up in Q path stock transfers and the vast majority of these don't run. If you take these diagrams out of the equation, then 103 diagrams from 133 units is 77% so they have a lot of slack in their fleet when compared to S

We also shouldn't forget that there is a significant amount of unused (spare) rolling stock that needs to be placed somewhere. And it requires space.

 

[Goldfish62]

It is not so strange when SWR are relying upon the advertised 94% fleet availability and 34 * 1/0.94 = 36. So 36 is all they require for 34 diagrams so on paper you should not need to expand the fleet to cover the existing diagrams. Of course, in practice it is a different story!

But that implies "job done" with no plans to replace the 450s or 458s on metro work. On that basis 24 701/0s and 30 701/5s are surplus to requirements, but we know that's not the case, at least in respect of the 701/0s.

In respect of spare requirements the % spare has less meaning that the actual number spare the smaller the fleet is. In the current case I'd suggest just two spares is a tall order when expecting to reliably cover 34 diagrams daily. Back in the day only 24 458/0s were diagrammed daily with the remaining 6 as spares.

 

[CarrotPie]

In the current case I'd suggest just two spares is a tall order when expecting to reliably cover 34 diagrams daily. Back in the day only 24 458/0s were diagrammed daily with the remaining 6 as spares.

One hopes the 701s will be less unreliable than the 458/0s, especially as time goes on...

 

[43096]

One hopes the 701s will be less unreliable than the 458/0s, especially as time goes on...

Given that the 458/0s were the most reliable trains in the country for a while once Porterbrook and SWT worked through their issues, you may be waiting some time.

 

[nctd2306]

One hopes the 701s will be less unreliable than the 458/0s, especially as time goes on...

Well that would be quite some reliability considering the 458/0s went on to win Golden Spanners and become the most reliable fleet in the country

 

[Stephen42]

I thought they said 50 by the summer? So that would be another 13/14.

It's 50 diagrams as well not units in service. There are currently 34 diagrams which makes at least another 16 and rarely 34 have been out. That would be 17 to 19 more in passenger service depending on unit availability.

Is this because driver training needs to catch up with the number of units available?

There's enough drivers for the current diagrams which aren't all running as 701s due to lack of serviceable units.

The Clapham test runs had a break for three weeks (excluding a single run by 701028) making much of the gap the festive break.

It is not so strange when SWR are relying upon the advertised 94% fleet availability and 34 * 1/0.94 = 36. So 36 is all they require for 34 diagrams so on paper you should not need to expand the fleet to cover the existing diagrams. Of course, in practice it is a different story!

It would be bizarre to rely on a fleet availability figure they know doesn't hold up in practice. With small numbers it's harder to achieve, scheduled maintenance and two unlucky events together means game over.

 

[WWTownEnth]

At Waterloo just now. I think reported yesterday as well.

 

[Siemens Staines]

In respect of spare requirements the % spare has less meaning that the actual number spare the smaller the fleet is. In the current case I'd suggest just two spares is a tall order when expecting to reliably cover 34 diagrams daily. Back in the day only 24 458/0s were diagrammed daily with the remaining 6 as spares.

I agree entirely, but I was just trying to think of a reason as to why the fleet has stuck at 36 units since the number of diagrams changed to 34 and a paper fleet availability of 94% was one possible answer. The current LTP diagrams end in a weeks time, so I imagine things will change within the next week in the run up to the next LTP period. Having only two units spare clearly has not worked or else we would not have the semi-permanent 2*450 vice 701 (2M03 etc) and 2*455 vice 2*450 (2J08 etc). Since 5th Jan, you can count on the fingers of one hand the number of peaks where 34 701s have been in service at the same time and is very definitely the exception not the rule.

 

[Goldfish62]

I agree entirely, but I was just trying to think of a reason as to why the fleet has stuck at 36 units since the number of diagrams changed to 34 and a paper fleet availability of 94% was one possible answer. The current LTP diagrams end in a weeks time, so I imagine things will change within the next week in the run up to the next LTP period. Having only two units spare clearly has not worked or else we would not have the semi-permanent 2*450 vice 701 (2M03 etc) and 2*455 vice 2*450 (2J08 etc). Since 5th Jan, you can count on the fingers of one hand the number of peaks where 34 701s have been in service at the same time and is very definitely the exception not the rule.

Agreed. I'd have thought that SWR would have gone all out to get 2-3 more 701s available for service so the 455s could finally be eliminated. But then maybe they have been going all out, but the remaining units are proving too problematic. They are after all mostly the earlier units, which have been in store for the longest.

 

[adc82140]

Alternatively they could be thinking that the 455s are available, so why not run them in to the ground and take the time to get the next batch of 701s properly right before introducing them.