Does it make sense that the Class 730 is counted as an Aventra?

[AnonymeggAB12]

The Alstom Aventra family of trains is made almost entirely of streamlined EMUs, except for the Class 730, which has a flat front and cab-end gangways.

The images from left to right are an Elizabeth Line Class 345, SWR Class 701, London Overground Class 710 and c2c Class 720. Below is a West Midlands Trains Class 730, which is very different from its fellow Aventras.

While the Class 730 shares a lot of the technology in other Aventras, it looks nothing like the rest. Does it belong in the Aventra family? And more importantly, should trains be classified by appearance, technology or both?
I believe that the Class 730 should not be classed as an Aventra, and trains should be classified by both shape and technology.

 

[JamesT]

The Alstom Aventra family of trains is made almost entirely of streamlined EMUs, except for the Class 730, which has a flat front and cab-end gangways.

The images from left to right are an Elizabeth Line Class 345, SWR Class 701, London Overground Class 710 and c2c Class 720. Below is a West Midlands Trains Class 730, which is very different from its fellow Aventras.

While the Class 730 shares a lot of the technology in other Aventras, it looks nothing like the rest. Does it belong in the Aventra family? And more importantly, should trains be classified by appearance, technology or both?
I believe that the Class 730 should not be classed as an Aventra, and trains should be classified by both shape and technology.

Surely the fact that Alstom who make them call them all Aventras trumps any aesthetic differences? You say the streamlined ones look the same, doesn't different lengths or different numbers of doors per carriage make them look different from the sides? Infamously the Class 701 cab is not the same as the other Aventras, which caused issues with their introduction. The class numbers already deal with differences, it seems entirely reasonable for manufacturers to group a family of trains together based on the underlying technology.

 

[The Pelican]

In Biology, this is called convergent evolution. Sometimes animals which are only very distantly related to each other end up looking very similar- e.g. porcupines, echidnas and hedgehogs are all a long way apart in the tree of life.

 

[Kite159]

Just look at the Electrostar & Turbostar products. A 172 (2/3) looks different to a 170 or a 172/0 or /1. Etc

 

[frankmoh]

Just look at the Electrostar & Turbostar products. A 172 (2/3) looks different to a 170 or a 172/0 or /1. Etc

Don't forget the Clubman!

 

[NCT]

The manufacturer says it's an Aventra - it's an Aventra. Gangway end or not bears no relevance to whether something is or isn't an Aventra. The Aventra is a modular platform. End gangways are one of the modular component choices.

 

[357 LTSRail]

Surely the fact that Alstom who make them call them all Aventras trumps any aesthetic differences? You say the streamlined ones look the same, doesn't different lengths or different numbers of doors per carriage make them look different from the sides? Infamously the Class 701 cab is not the same as the other Aventras, which caused issues with their introduction. The class numbers already deal with differences, it seems entirely reasonable for manufacturers to group a family of trains together based on the underlying technology.

What the front of a train looks like isn’t really relevant to what family they belong to.

“Aventra” refers to the architecture of the train - things like all the electrical and mechanical systems, software, body construction methods and materials. They are all Aventras where they are developed from the same basic design.

It’s also entirely up to the manufacturer how it brands and sells its product. Alstom would’ve chosen to keep the naming the same because of how much these trains have in common.

 

[Clansman]

Look no further than Pendolinos too!

 

[Cach17]

By your logic, 376s and 378s aren't Electrostars.

Gangway or no gangway, it makes plenty of sense!

 

[Tetchytyke]

While the Class 730 shares a lot of the technology in other Aventras, it looks nothing like the rest.

The name is based on the underlying product, not the front.

That said, the only difference I see is the presence of the gangway. Otherwise it looks very similar to the other trains.

Gangways can make trains look different. Compare a 185 or a 360 to a 350, or compare a 170 or a 357 to a 375.

 

[stevieinselby]

Compare a 185 or a 360 to a 350

or even more so, to a 380!

 

[Sorcerer]

There is a greater distinction between the Class 390, ETR 410, ETR 470 and ETR 610, yet they are all still classed as Pendolino because their tilting technology shares the same roots (in fact the platform name now extends to non-tilting variants like the PKP ED250 and Italo ETR 675) therefore I see no reason for a mere gangway to be a disqualifier for the 730 to be classed as an Aventra when the technology is similar to the 701, 710 and 720 and is also part of a train family that is an exclusively British design and not one with different international variants.