Surely the 15 formations of 30x5 cars will also need to be factored in to this
Correct. That is why in past posts I have been keen to get across the stabling capacity issues that would/will (are?) coming to the fore today when
every suburban train (Readings included) would become 10 car.
I have pointed out before that the 10 car SWT 2006-2017 plan (not the SWR post 2017 class 701) took 10 car stabling capacity to its limits, and a good number of locations had sidings modified/extended to accomplish same. I was involved in same, and I still have my documentation from same.
But that plan still had 3 x 8 car 450 on the Reading road and substantially more 8 car 455 still in the mix. This was largely due to DfT investment restrictions at the time, but one consequence being stabling capacity, which had been maxed out for 10 car suburban services at that time, not by lack of finances, but by lack of physical space on the ground within permitted stabling locations at that time, to extend/modify further siding capacity.
Since then Feltham depot (10 x 10 car roads) has come on line under SWR's ownership, this being the second attempt to build a new (10 car siding length) depot at that location.
Again I was involved in early meetings about the first proposal, a joint venture between SWT and BAA, which thankfully was put to bed very early on, particularly the ramifications to the SW network if Clapham Yard was lost, which formed part of the discussions. I still have details from those meetings, including the proposed track plan for Feltham, which bears little resemblance to that which is there today.
The 5 car 701's will likely be a mix (I would guess) of 5 and 10 car formations from a stabling point of view, depending on where there are sidings currently that can accommodate 5 car units (and I am not about to divulge these in detail here!), but this will (again I guess?) involve a number of early starts being 5 car formed which may well then combine with other 5 car diagrams prior to the core a.m. peak period, and conversely a number of late evening 10 car services (formed of 2 x 5 cars) will need to be divided before working last trains that involve stabling in short sidings. Hence part of the reason for the additional training on 5 car units.
Please refer back to my post #18,412 for a hint of why progress may be seen to be slowing up in this regard.
Why were these problems, ie; a maxed out 10 car stabling capacity when SWT ran the service and a proposed SWR 10 car plan meaning substantially
more fixed 10 car trains to remedy the shortfall as mentioned above (which in the 10 car passenger train service thinking, I have always said was an ideal situation, never made any secret of that), but the stabling problems for a service that required every train being 10 car, seem not to have been taken in to account when the FG/MTR/SWR bid was submitted, possibly?
That is something for those in the industry, be that SWR/DfT to answer possibly?
What I can confirm is that prior to the the 2017 refranchise date change, every piece of stock planning information/references, all internal documents relating to stabling etc, were all passed to DfT as was legally required at the time.
I will say no more!