Future of Class 707

[SpacePhoenix]

Is it know if it's just the SWTs side that they're not wanted for or for the GWR side as well?

 

[The Ham]

Is it know if it's just the SWTs side that they're not wanted for or for the GWR side as well?

Even if they could run under OHLE's then where could GWR want to use them?

 

[infobleep]

Cheap + just about adequate + 4-car... starting to sound more and more like it's going to suit Southeastern!

Surely it wouldn't be politically acceptable in 2017 to scrap trailer cars that had never turned a wheel in passenger service though?

Especially when they talk about the removal of staff responsibilities to save money. Still Chris Grayling could say they are a private company so it's it my place to get involved with the rolling stock they choose to use or not use!

 

[infobleep]

If you buy cheap you buy twice (albeit cheaply specified rather than actually cheap-to-buy).

Parts of the country crying out for more diesel trains with other places overrun with redundant electrics including some that haven't been built yet. You couldn't make it up.

Oh well.

Is that due to the parts of the country running diesels, South West franchise aside, not being up for major franchise renewal at the moment? Or is there some other reason why they are reluctant to order new DMUs?

 

[Townsend Hook]

Is that due to the parts of the country running diesels, South West franchise aside, not being up for major franchise renewal at the moment? Or is there some other reason why they are reluctant to order new DMUs?

When the Northern franchise was re-let Arriva were content to just replace the Pacers (and a limited amount of 150s?). The general idea with DMUs seems to be just waiting for electrification to release units to enable stock to be cascaded.

 

[paok]

Now on BBC News...

Report starts at 2m36s.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08k5fzb/london-news-lunchtime-news-30032017

 

[Bletchleyite]

Now on BBC News...

Report starts at 2m36s.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08k5fzb/london-news-lunchtime-news-30032017

That was an appallingly researched and appallingly presented piece of non-journalism. Reckon the Pompey line would like 707s with 2+2 seating fitted? No, thought not.

 

[Starmill]

That was an appallingly researched and appallingly presented piece of non-journalism. Reckon the Pompey line would like 707s with 2+2 seating fitted? No, thought not.

Are you sure? I think they made a good point about who pays for the ones we leave behind. It had the dates roughly correct and it was factually correct about the 442s and 707s. They could of course have given the other side of the story. They weren't clear that the new trains, while currently homeless, will not be scrapped ahead of the much older stock. They could have pointed out that the 442s will be refurbished, but frankly I can't be sure of that any more than you or BBC London News can, because we've seen a number of 'fake' refurbishments recently.

 

[Starmill]

That was an appallingly researched and appallingly presented piece of non-journalism. Reckon the Pompey line would like 707s with 2+2 seating fitted? No, thought not.

Are you sure? I think they made a good point about who pays for the ones we leave behind. It had the dates roughly correct and it was factually correct about the 442s and 707s. They could of course have given the other side of the story. They weren't clear that the new trains, while currently homeless, will not be scrapped ahead of the much older stock. They could have pointed out that the 442s will be refurbished, but frankly I can't be sure of that any more than you or BBC London News can, because we've seen a number of 'fake' refurbishments recently.

Finally they correctly identified that the cost of finance plays a huge part in the ordering of new railway rolling stock. We could yet see a 'Railway Credit Crunch'.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Trouble is Paul Clifton doesn't know where the 707s will end up, and pretends we will inevitably have to pay for them (ie paying twice for the new trains).
Currently the risk lies with the 707 ROSCO Angel Trains (who also happen to own the 442s).
Who's to say that the deal isn't better for them?
They get to lease unused stock (with upgrade), and can still flog the new 707s elsewhere.
That's probably better than 442s earning no money.
And we don't know which ROSCO will get the 90-train new order.
The 455 retractioning is another part of the jigsaw to be resolved (owned by Porterbrook).

 

[Deepgreen]

So, to summarise (based on information in the BBC News item and elsewhere), is the plan to:

1. Find another use for the whole 707 fleet (30 units/150 cars) before they see service on SWT/FSW,
2. Scrap/re-allocate the 455s (63 units/252ars), with the AC traction conversions ceasing for the time being/permanently,
3. Scrap/re-allocate the 456s (24 units/48 cars)
4. Re-allocate the 458/5 (36 units/180 cars) fleet elsewhere,
5. Refurbish/reinstate the 442s (assume 24 units/120 cars) for the Portsmouth route,
6. Buy 90 new trains (assume 5 car units) to replace the combination of the 707s, 455s, 456s and 458/5s (630 cars) with 450 new cars + the 442 reinstatements, to give 570 cars.

Perhaps my assumption about the 90 new trains' car numbers is wrong?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are you sure?

Yes. It started on the "outrage bus" assumption that the decision is the wrong one. When we don't even know what they are planning yet that assumption cannot be drawn.

I think they made a good point about who pays for the ones we leave behind. It had the dates roughly correct and it was factually correct about the 442s and 707s.

It was, but omitted to mention the reason the 442s will be very popular.

The 442s are irrelevant to the issue, as 707s are not express units.

 

[43074]

So, to summarise (based on information in the BBC News item and elsewhere), is the plan to:

1. Find another use for the whole 707 fleet (30 units/150 cars) before they see service on SWT/FSW,
2. Scrap/re-allocate the 455s (63 units/252ars), with the AC traction conversions ceasing for the time being/permanently,
3. Scrap/re-allocate the 456s (24 units/48 cars)
4. Re-allocate the 458/5 (36 units/180 cars) fleet elsewhere,
5. Refurbish/reinstate the 442s (assume 24 units/120 cars) for the Portsmouth route,
6. Buy 90 new trains (assume 5 car units) to replace the combination of the 707s, 455s, 456s and 458/5s (630 cars) with 450 new cars + the 442 reinstatements, to give 570 cars.

?

Are those numbers correct?

By my reckoning:
455s - 91 units, 364 vehicles
456s - 24 units, 48 vehicles
458s - 36 units, 180 vehicles
707s - 30 units, 150 vehicles
which gives 181 units, 742 vehicles

Which will become
30x5 car (150 vehicles)
60x10 car (600 vehicles), so 750 vehicles

with the 442s as well (18x5 car) that gives 840 vehicles, so a net gain of at least 98 vehicles, and I don't think anything has been said about the 458s going other than in the BBC report - this part of the strategy is the main thing that needs clarifying in my mind, i.e. will Reading be worked by the new suburban stock, a cascade from the Portsmouth line as a result of the 442s, or the 458s as per the original Stagecoach plan etc.

EDIT - the ''Windsor Lines'' (including Reading) are included in those routes which are getting the new trains on the DfT map, what isn't clear is whether or not they will run to Reading, and the First/MTR infographic only talks about the (already known) increase in services to 4tph.

 

[JonathanH]

Platforms on the Reading line are only being extended to about 200 metres (other than Reading 4-6 and Wokingham down platform which are already longer). To maximise capacity 10-car (10x20m) trains need to be used. Cascaded 450s aren't ideal for that.

 

[absolutelymilk]

So, to summarise (based on information in the BBC News item and elsewhere), is the plan to:

1. Find another use for the whole 707 fleet (30 units/150 cars) before they see service on SWT/FSW,

I think the 707s will enter service with FSW, but will be replaced once the new new trains are delivered in a couple of years.

 

[physics34]

Are those numbers correct?

By my reckoning:
455s - 91 units, 364 vehicles
456s - 24 units, 48 vehicles
458s - 36 units, 180 vehicles
707s - 30 units, 150 vehicles
which gives 181 units, 742 vehicles

Which will become
30x5 car (150 vehicles)
60x10 car (600 vehicles), so 750 vehicles

with the 442s as well (18x5 car) that gives 840 vehicles, so a net gain of at least 98 vehicles, and I don't think anything has been said about the 458s going other than in the BBC report - this part of the strategy is the main thing that needs clarifying in my mind, i.e. will Reading be worked by the new suburban stock, a cascade from the Portsmouth line as a result of the 442s, or the 458s as per the original Stagecoach plan etc.

EDIT - the ''Windsor Lines'' (including Reading) are included in those routes which are getting the new trains on the DfT map, what isn't clear is whether or not they will run to Reading, and the First/MTR infographic only talks about the (already known) increase in services to 4tph.

we assume the spare 6x 442 units are either for spare or will be used by Alliance Rail on the open access Waterloo - Southampton service.

 

[Feathers44]

It's easy to criticise a news report but it's put together from a certain viewpoint in much the same manner as some of the posts on this thread. Everyone comes at this stuff from their own angle almost inevitably.

The points made look fair enough when looked at in the light of what the public know (and want to know). Particularly a post-truth, ill-informed public

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

A version of the same story from Paul Clifton was on the 6pm Radio 4 news.
It was a little more circumspect, and said the cost would lie with the "owner" (ie Rosco).
The BBC quoted DfT as saying that choice of trains was down to the operator.

 

[Mikey C]

The BBC report may not have been 100% accurate or fair perhaps BUT it's correct that the fate of the 707s isn't quietly hidden under the carpet, without wider scrutiny than the rail press (and websites like this)

 

[Suraggu]

The BBC report may not have been 100% accurate or fair perhaps BUT it's correct that the fate of the 707s isn't quietly hidden under the carpet, without wider scrutiny than the rail press (and websites like this)

The future of the Class 707 could be... The Class 707. A few 'informed source's' are suggesting that 707's could replace the 707's.

 

[Helvellyn]

Everyone keeps saying the 458s are going, but from what I can see only the 707s seem to be confirmed.

What seems to be forgotten is that First/MTR have promised to go four per hour to Reading, four per hour to Windsor and it seems the Bagshot line might get more through trains to London. I also suspect a lot more 10-car running into Waterloo on both Windsor and Metro sides.

Don't forget, SWT got 24 2-car 456s to work with 91 455s. Once 450s are back on Ascot-Guildford... In 10-car formation that is likely 22 10-car sets (456+455+455) and 21 8-car sets (455+455). Say 707s are 14 10-car sets (707+707). 57 "sets" in use and leaves 2x456, 5x455 and 2x707 spare. (Rough guesses)

The new order from First/MTR seems to allow for the majority of peak workings to be 10-car, with some contra-peak workings being 5-car. The 750 vehicle order would work well for 60 10-car trains (600 vehicles), and then 30 5-car trains (150 vehicles). Some pf the latter will run in pairs in the peaks, others will be 5-car contra-peak workings. Given the 10-car sets effectively replace the 455/456/707 fleet I don't think 30 5-car units are enough to replace the 36 5-car 458s and double services to Reading/Windsor.

The other things is I think I recall being told that the lengthening of platforms 1-4 to 10-car length means longer dwell times at Waterloo. That is because moving the crossings closer to Vauxhall reduces headways slightly. That is partly why platforms 1-6 become Metro platforms from December 2018 - units will need more turnaround time at Waterloo, so you need a handful more units to operate the same service frequency.

So all in all I think we see a largely ten-car railway on the Metro and Reading Lines suburban routes (what today would be classed as red train routes); ten-car railway to Reading with 36 458 units; 12-car railway on outer suburban mainline routes with 450s; 10-car 442s on Fast Pompeys; and 10-car 444s on Southampton/Poole routes (5-car to Weymouth). Okay, some 450s will be on services to Portsmouth/Southampton, but essentially it feels like First/MTR are going to optimise the electric fleet.

For whatever reason ordering 60 10-car 707s to work with the 30 5-car 707s has been discounted but it can only be assumed someone has given them a cracking tender for 750 metro vehicles and First/MTR are taking advantage of not being forced to retain the 707s.

As to why the 444/450 units are staying - Possibly linked to the fact that when acquired a twenty year maintenance deal was apparently signed with Siemens. So that isn't up until 2024. Whereas we have been told the 707s are maintained in-house at Wimbledon (and job adverts to support them seemed to infer that with initial secondments to Siemens but ultimately working for SWT at the Park).

 

[Bletchleyite]

The future of the Class 707 could be... The Class 707. A few 'informed source's' are suggesting that 707's could replace the 707's.

What, different ones?

 

[55003]

I believe that the spec was drawn up by civil servants at the DfT. Yet again this government department is shown to have no grip on tne reality of railway operations.

 

[43074]

What, different ones?

Well if Siemens win the contract to build the new trains then there's no reason why not... money is cheap, if First/MTR have favourable lease costs for the new trains compared to the Stagecoach 707s, and if Siemens are able to offer a product that meets First/MTR's specification for a lower price then there's no reason it couldn't happen.

Obviously it would be a complete and utter farce if Siemens were to win the contract, but it doesn't seem to have been ruled out...

 

[Billy A]

Obviously it would be a complete and utter farce if Siemens were to win the contract, but it doesn't seem to have been ruled out...

Why? Siemens are as entitled to tender as anyone else. It's not their fault that the 707s seem to have become unsuitable despite being built exactly as the customer wanted them.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I believe that the spec was drawn up by civil servants at the DfT. Yet again this government department is shown to have no grip on tne reality of railway operations.

That was true for the GTR 700s.
But for the 707s, they will only have specified overall capacity and things like dwell times, and to conform to whatever infrastructure changes NR is making.
The choice of layout and manufacturer would be down to Stagecoach and the ROSCO.
The ROSCO would insist on AC capability and to be suitable for ETCS fitment, for future-proofing.

 

[43074]

Why? Siemens are as entitled to tender as anyone else. It's not their fault that the 707s seem to have become unsuitable despite being built exactly as the customer wanted them.

I mean the possible situation of nearly-new Class 707s being replaced by brand new 707s is a farce rather than the decisions made by a particular group.

 

[JN114]

The First/MTR press release:

Charging points accessible from every seat for all our mainland trains

* Our new suburban trains, introduced by December 2020, will all have
charging points

* We will introduce charging points on all other mainland trains - Class
442s, Class 444s and 450s by December 2018, Class 158s and 159s by December
2020

No mention of 458s within "all other mainland trains" - nor 707s - hence the fairly well-founded speculation that both are going.

BUT

New Suburban trains have to be tendered for, so they can't at this stage say why they will be until the tender process has been included.

I'm not a bettting man, but if I were I'd wager heavily that the outcome of that tender will be an order of 60 x 10 car Siemens Desiro City units, plus some kind of deal to refit/retrofit the existing 707s to First/MTR's new spec (including toilets, charging sockets, etc).

 

[SpacePhoenix]

This idea will probably be shot down but assuming they actually get rid of the 707s:

707s -> GTR (Gatwick Express)
387s (Current Gatwick Express units) -> GWR

Would that enable any DMUs to be released to either strengthen other GWR services or to goto other TOCs?

If they do decide to keep the 707s but have then retrofit to their own spec, could they stick in an order to extend them to 10 car fixed formation or will they stick with 5 car units?

 

[The Ham]

The future of the Class 707 could be... The Class 707. A few 'informed source's' are suggesting that 707's could replace the 707's.

That could make sense, in that the current configuration isn't good enough, so it could be that the current stock "goes back" and new stock is then provided. The new stock could still use whole carriages from the original order (maybe with some tweeks).

If that is correct, then the rolling stock company isn't it of pocket, in fact could have a much bigger fleet that they are leasing out.