30 new Desiros for SWT

[Goldfish62]

Would you include Underground trains in your requirement? Do trains such as 378s really need a loo?

The Crossrail trains will also not have toilets.

 

[jopsuk]

One of the comments I've seen here relating to the current Desiros on the inner-suburban routes is that slow doors are leading to longer dwell times and thus slightly late trains.

Forgive my ignorance, but is that something we're likely to see in future with these or is it a non-issue and simply something that is built into the timetable as part of normal business when we know 'what stock goes where' in the future?

The Desiro City uses sliding, not plug, doors which should be quicker.

 

[Feathers44]

The Desiro City uses sliding, not plug, doors which should be quicker.

Ah, OK. Thanks.

 

[Juniper Driver]

The Desiro City uses sliding, not plug, doors which should be quicker.

Yeah,those 450/444 doors really do "clunk" shut,they are amazing.

 

[LexyBoy]

That's a shame. It's a requirement for all trains to be able to accommodate a wheelchair so why isn't it a requirement for them all to have at least 1-2 loos. Not all health issues are confined to just being able to walk.

Indeed, there are a lot of people for whom it is an issue.

Would you include Underground trains in your requirement? Do trains such as 378s really need a loo?

It should be mandatory where reasonably practicable. Underground trains would clearly not be (it would be good if stations had toilets though). For trains which may operate routes with only half-hourly or lower frequency and journey times of over an hour, and which will or could easily use the same depots as other trains with toilets, I can't see a justification really.

At least on the 455s there's a gap in the floor between carriages

 

[phil beard]

The Crossrail trains will also not have toilets.

Well, that's me going to Paddington for a pee for a journey, say, between Maidenhead and Shenfield. With that sort of short sightedness why not just restrict CrossRail to Liverpool Street - Paddington?

 

[JamesRowden]

Well, that's me going to Paddington for a pee for a journey, say, between Maidenhead and Shenfield. With that sort of short sightedness why not just restrict CrossRail to Liverpool Street - Paddington?

It would be faster to change onto a semi-fast or intercity service at Liverpool Street or Stratford.

 

[sprinterguy]

Well, that's me going to Paddington for a pee for a journey, say, between Maidenhead and Shenfield. With that sort of short sightedness why not just restrict CrossRail to Liverpool Street - Paddington?

There surely won’t be much demand at all for end to end journeys on Crossrail. The very furthest I can envisage the majority of passengers travelling would be to Canary Wharf or Stratford from the West, or to Paddington or Heathrow from the East. Though I can’t exactly imagine that there’s a huge demand for travel to Heathrow from Shenfield of itself: The majority of rail passengers heading to Heathrow from the East would probably be coming in from further afield and hence would only change onto Crossrail at Liverpool Street anyway.

I mean, how many people honestly have need to travel the full length of the Central line, for instance?

 

[southern442]

Yeah,those 450/444 doors really do "clunk" shut,they are amazing.

I can imagine fingers being broken if one is stupid enough to insert their hand into the vestibule as the doors are shutting

 

[Alfie1014]

In my opinion I think Stratford will become the main interchange in the East. Other than one Norwich fast per hour off peak and a handful of odd peak services everything on the GE main line stops there these days. Changing there will be a matter of going under the subway to platform 5, whereas at Liverpool Street you'll have to get off of the platform potentially at the rear of a busy 12 car in the peak then make your way down to the Crossrail platforms which will be not only deep but in reality situated between Liverpool St and Moorgate.

Similarly if Old Oak gets the go ahead I believe that it'll become the main easy interchange at the west end of the route, though the Crossrail platforms at Paddington aren't so deep and more conveniently located adjacent to the concourse.

 

[Juniper Driver]

I can imagine fingers being broken if one is stupid enough to insert their hand into the vestibule as the doors are shutting

Nah,they have rubber seals...unlike Southern.

 

[D365]

I was thinking for a second, why couldn't they/SWT (also) take on the 5 5-car 360/1 units made redundant from Heathrow Connect - equip them with third-rail pickup and then the #5 carriage wouldn't have to 'go to waste'.

But among being (somewhat of) an oddity in the Desiro fleet, there's no guarantee of Heathrow even selling them out.

 

[swt_passenger]

I was thinking for a second, why couldn't they/SWT (also) take on the 5 5-car 360/1 units made redundant from Heathrow Connect - equip them with third-rail pickup and then the #5 carriage wouldn't have to 'go to waste'.

Easier all round to just bung em on the Great Eastern really. The only thing they'd have to deal with operationally would be the extra length of a few units.

 

[Class377/5]

The Desiro City uses sliding, not plug, doors which should be quicker.

Your wrong over the Desiro City. The Class 700 Desiro City has sliding doors. You can order the plug door version if you want. Seems SWT has ordered the sliding doors from the renders. Remeber the Class 380 has a Desiro City 23m bodyshell (above the sole bar) and plug doors.

 

[Kite159]

Did I read somewhere that Siemens had to make the doors on a Class 700 slower as they were opening too fast?

If you think the 444/450 doors are slow to open/close, have a go with a 158/159 (when the doors decide they want to open)

 

[Class 170101]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. But I do agree that Class 450's should have been ordered back in 1998, rather than the Alstom class 458's and by now we would have a TOC just running Siemens trains.

The 450s were ordered. They were changed to 350/1s and sent to Central / Silverlink instead - at the behest of the Department or Local Government, Transport and the Regions as I recall.

And a good thing too as it turned out because as I am sure some may remember their 3rd Rail capability was put to good use between Croydon and Milton Keynes when the Southern Class 319s were needed for Key Output 0 to run through the Thameslink core due to the 377/5s introduction ran late when Blackfriars bays and Moorgate branch closed.

 

[455driver]

Did I read somewhere that Siemens had to make the doors on a Class 700 slower as they were opening too fast?

If you think the 444/450 doors are slow to open/close, have a go with a 158/159 (when the doors decide they want to open)

At least the 158/159s dont work on routes where the doors are being used every 3 minutes.

 

[fgwrich]

At least the 158/159s dont work on routes where the doors are being used every 3 minutes.

That said, The Salisbury 6 must cause some slowness on the Romsey to Southampton Central/Redbridge bit? And although I think it's now been replaced by the last internal cascade, there was a 06:XX all stations from Basingstoke which utilised a 159 to get it up to London in the morning - and what a fairly slow trek that was on one of those!

 

[455driver]

there was a 06:XX all stations from Basingstoke which utilised a 159 to get it up to London in the morning - and what a fairly slow trek that was on one of those!

That one was formed out of an 04:XX Portsmouth to Basingstoke which I used to regularly catch.
I think your 06:XX was semi fast from Woking, then fast from Surbiton.

 

[infobleep]

At least the 158/159s dont work on routes where the doors are being used every 3 minutes.

Perhaps it's time they did.

 

[pompeyfan]

What about the AM peak solent shuttles.... Hamble to netley is timed at what....? 3 minutes?

On a more on topic note, I notice the Portsmouth news, and Portsmouth north mp are 'outraged' these new trains will not benefit the south coast.... Short of building a 2nd parallel line, there's not a huge amount you can do.... I'd take an uneducated guess that the PDL is running at about 80% capacity as it is, some people are blinkered, and to some extent plain selfish.

 

[hassaanhc]

Typical "throwing her toys out of the pram" nonsense from her, complete with the usual dig at the 450s :roll:

Portsmouth rail commuters miss out on £210m boost

Published: 05 September
By Stuart Anderson

SOUTH West Trains is pouring £210m into upgrading its rolling stock – but Portsmouth commuters won’t see a penny of it.


The company is placing an order for 150 new carriages from Siemens and Angel Trains for its Waterloo to Windsor route.

Public transport campaigners have criticised the plan, which leaves out improvements to Portsmouth’s cramped and crowded rail links.

A spokeswoman from South West Trains said: ‘There won’t be any changes to Portsmouth services as a result of the new trains.

‘They are designed to provide much-needed extra capacity on some of our busiest routes.’

Portsmouth North MP Penny Mordaunt said commuters had long been getting a raw deal from South West Trains.

Ms Mordaunt said she met with executives from the train company and Rail Minister Claire Perry earlier this week to talk about improving the Portsmouth to London service.

She said: ‘It’s delightful for Windsor but the fight goes on for better services for Portsmouth.’

Ms Mordaunt said the area was served by suburban trains which were not suitable for long-distance travel.

She said: ‘The thing that would make the biggest difference is having trains that are comfortable to sit on, and that have enough seats for people.

‘Surveys show 59 per cent of people cannot fit into the seats when their elbows are taken into account.’

Denis Fryer, of Totton, is co-ordinator of the South Hampshire Rail Users’ Group.

He said he was disappointed by the announcement.

He said: ‘It seems we’re left out time after time.’

Mr Fryer said a Passenger Focus survey placed customer satisfaction in the Portsmouth area 78th out of 79 areas across the country.

He said: ‘Since privatisation, trains on the Portsmouth line in particular have been downgraded.

‘The trains they’re running are not suited to long distance and it now takes 10 per cent longer to get to London.

Campaign for Better Transport head of campaigns James MacColl called on the government to develop a long-term strategy for train improvements: ‘Increased investment in the railways is great news for everybody who relies on these trains.

‘However passengers in Portsmouth will be frustrated that South West’s new trains won’t benefit the city’.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/tr...il-commuters-miss-out-on-210m-boost-1-6280797
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
10% longer journey times amounts to about 10 minutes.
Guess she hasn't tried the 455 "Tin Can"?
While overlooking the fact that the new trains are also suburban trains.

 

[AM9]

Typical "throwing her toys out of the pram" nonsense from her, complete with the usual dig at the 450s :roll:


http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/tr...il-commuters-miss-out-on-210m-boost-1-6280797
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
10% longer journey times amounts to about 10 minutes.
Guess she hasn't tried the 455 "Tin Can"?
While overlooking the fact that the new trains are also suburban trains.

Surely the 450s are quicker than the 444s on that route. They have the same power for 4 cars as the 444s have for 5. They should have shorter dwells as the doors are better positioned. They are both capable of 100mph which I guess is rarely if ever achievable on the PDL. So how can the type of stock be blamed for a longer journey?

 

[455driver]

Surely the 450s are quicker than the 444s on that route. They have the same power for 4 cars as the 444s have for 5.

You are looking at the maximum power they can produce, as has been posted hundreds of times the 450s are restricted to about 60% maximum and the 444s are restricted to about 75% power meaning they accelerate at about the same rate.
Please read, understand, ingest and remember so I dont have to post it again!

They should have shorter dwells as the doors are better positioned.

Thats true.

They are both capable of 100mph which I guess is rarely if ever achievable on the PDL.

Max speed on the Pomey direct is 90 so the trains maximum speed is irrelevant.

So how can the type of stock be blamed for a longer journey?

The trains are making more stops and the passengers want a clockface timetable, that is why the journey is longer.

 

[infobleep]

Actually passengers do better going from Portsmouth to London than the other way round. Before 8.04am there are no fast trains from Guildford to Portsmouth. That isn't the case the other way round. So they should think themselves lucky.

On the 8.36 Guildford to Waterloo passengers were saying how posh the 450 are. Contrast that to Portsmouth commuters.

Is the 450 really a suburban train? I prefer the 444 as it has tables and plug sockets in standard.

Not sure why they don't run more 450s on the Weymouth route.

Perhaps they should run a 455 on the Portsmouth route for commuters to try. How fast do they go?

 

[455driver]

Perhaps they should run a 455 on the Portsmouth route for commuters to try. How fast do they go?

SWT have run 455s to Havant which is the limit of where they are cleared to in passenger service.

 

[Aictos]

Is the 450 really a suburban train? I prefer the 444 as it has tables and plug sockets in standard.

Only in one carriage do they have plug sockets, it really ought to have plug sockets for all seats but I guess that would mean having to upgrade the DC network to supply the extra power needed maybe?

 

[AM9]

You are looking at the maximum power they can produce, as has been posted hundreds of times the 450s are restricted to about 60% maximum and the 444s are restricted to about 75% power meaning they accelerate at about the same rate.
Please read, understand, ingest and remember so I dont have to post it again!

OK Thanks for telling me that. I assume that it is a software setting to prevent excessive draw on routes where multiple sets will be working on long power sections.

Max speed on the Pomey direct is 90 so the trains maximum speed is irrelevant.

I think I have heard that the 444s are speed restricted on the climb to Buriton and through the tunnel to reduce sway where the line has a reduced guage clearance. Is this true and does it affect the 20m 450s as well as the 23m 444s?

The trains are making more stops and the passengers want a clockface timetable, that is why the journey is longer.

Then that is nothing to do with the stock type, - if anything the journeys could be slightly shorter with the 450s with their shorter dwell times, if there was space at each end for longer turnaround or other routes in the diagram.

 

[Class377/5]

Left out time and time again? So they don't have some of the newest stock going then?

You wonder what they'd make of the fare rises needed to require new trains every 15 years. Bet she's against the Northern Hub too as the local area doesn't get benefit from it!

 

[swt_passenger]

.
Not sure why they don't run more 450s on the Weymouth route.

Basically because the extra capacity they have is needed towards the London end of the Portsmouth route. A 12.450 carries significantly more passengers than a 10.444 - around 200 more if you include standees (even though there shouldn't be any on a longer distance service). That's what the whole argument has been about these last few years, and frankly it's getting boring now, and the local MP should know this.

There is an easy solution to the capacity problem though isn't there. Stop calling at Guildford...

Or how about moving Guildford so that it is on the Southampton/Weymouth route? Problem is we have the network that the Victorians thought we needed at the time...

Hint: neither of these suggestions are in any way serious, so no need to dissect them..