What's the difference between class 345, 710 and 720 trains?

[miklcct]

I can't recognise the difference between these 3 classes of trains. What's the difference between them?

 

[JonathanH]

I can't recognise the difference between these 3 classes of trains. What's the difference between them?

345s have three sets of doors on each carriage for a start. They have slightly different cab designs and different carriage lengths - eg 710 are '20m' vehicles, 720 and 345 are '24m' vehicles, although the actual carriage lengths aren't so simple. Different interiors as well.

 

[pdeaves]

Door positions I think are one difference.

 

[swt_passenger]

They’re all similar variations on the Bombardier(now Alstom) Aventra platform, as is also the SWR 701, and WM 730.
If you wanted to order a fleet, you could vary the number of vehicles, (3,4,5,9,10), the individual vehicle body lengths, the door numbers, the door locations, the power supply, (ie AC, DC, dual), the top speed, the seat layout, the toilets, the signalling systems, or add end gangways, and you’d still be buying an Aventra.

Wiki has a page on the Aventra range. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alstom_Aventra

 

[Recessio]

Power supplies as well. 345 and 720 are 25kV AC pantograph only, while 710 are a mixed fleet because of the different supplies on London Overground: the 710/1 are AC pantograph only, the rest are dual voltage, also having shoegears for 750V DC third-rail.

 

[Wyrleybart]

AIUI the class 345 has a different electronics and drive package so is not a 7xx series Aventra rather than a hybrid.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There must be major software differences, or all the Aventra fleets would be in full service, as they are on Crossrail.
Not that you can see software...
Maybe Crossrail is the issue - solving the class 345 problems has maybe impacted everything else.

 

[miklcct]

They’re all similar variations on the Bombardier(now Alstom) Aventra platform, as is also the SWR 701, and WM 730.
If you wanted to order a fleet, you could vary the number of vehicles, (3,4,5,9,10), the individual vehicle body lengths, the door numbers, the door locations, the power supply, (ie AC, DC, dual), the top speed, the seat layout, the toilets, the signalling systems, or add end gangways, and you’d still be buying an Aventra.

Wiki has a page on the Aventra range. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alstom_Aventra

Won't it simplify maintenance if we just have a single class instead, using the same door configuration, body length, etc. while having various number of carriages to suit the line needs?

 

[jopsuk]

345s have three sets of doors on each carriage for a start. They have slightly different cab designs and different carriage lengths - eg 710 are '20m' vehicles, 720 and 345 are '24m' vehicles, although the actual carriage lengths aren't so simple. Different interiors as well.

it's definitely not so simple- class 345 are 22.5m intermediate vehicles, with a nine car set clocking in at 204m. class 720s meanwhile come in at 122m for a five vehicle set

 

[TheEdge]

Won't it simplify maintenance if we just have a single class instead, using the same door configuration, body length, etc. while having various number of carriages to suit the line needs?

No.

Firstly its not like they are all being maintained in the same place by the same company so that really has no relevance. And as a modular design the differences won't be so much as to cause any sort of real issue, look at Ilford where they happily maintain 720, 345 and maybe 710s as well.

Secondly one universal configuration in different lengths is totally unsuitable for the differing work the different classes do. The 345 is excellent as a high capacity rapid loading and unloading metro unit with transverse seating and no toilets. It would however be awful doing the outer suburban and long distance work of the 720s and 730s.

 

[D365]

Also worth pointing out (as alluded to above) that each Aventra class is an incremental development on the previous.

 

[jopsuk]

Won't it simplify maintenance if we just have a single class instead, using the same door configuration, body length, etc. while having various number of carriages to suit the line needs?

yes and no. Whilst the class 720 interior is maybe not ideal, what they don't need is the class 710 or 345 interior. Similarly, the 710 and 345 don't want anything like the current or a better 720 interior- because they're for different jobs. Perhaps the 710 and 345 being identical (with 345s as 10x20m, rather than 9x22m) could have been clever, but it isn't really needed.

The Avnetras are essentially though a 3rd generation of the Networker concept, where the idea was to have a common design platform for modern units for Network SouthEast, with variations appropriate to the services required. The Turbostar/Electrostar being the second generation of that.
If they had had more funding, and privatisation didn't get in the way, NSE hoped to deploy some form of Networker/Networker Turbo across their whole network.* One proposed version had three sets of door per side per carriage, was designated class 341 and would have been for Crossrail.

*I lack evidence, but I suspect there was some hope that Regional Railways would get much more electrification allowing the various mark 3 electrics to be displaced off to a sector that already had a load of Sprinters. Certainly the 159s were not meant for NSE, they should have been on TransPennine services with a Netwroker Turbo version serving Salisbury & Exeter.

 

[JonathanH]

Perhaps the 710 and 345 being identical (with 345s as 10x20m, rather than 9x22m) could have been clever, but it isn't really needed.

The 345 may well have been envisaged as 10x20m but were changed to 9-car because it provides better on board capacity and allows the three doors on each coach.

 

[D365]

Perhaps the 710 and 345 being identical (with 345s as 10x20m, rather than 9x22m) could have been clever, but it isn't really needed.

The 345 may well have been envisaged as 10x20m but were changed to 9-car because it provides better on board capacity and allows the three doors on each coach.

Less space (and weight) wasted by losing one set of gangways, bogies, jumper cables.

And as I alluded to earlier, the 710s would never have been 345s. LOTrain was a completely different project with very different requirements.

 

[100andthirty]

Class 345 was ordered before the new software system for the Aventra family was ready, so it has what is best described as upgraded Electrostar software. the class 345 team had to integrate ETCS/AWS-TPWS/Siemens TrainguardMT into this TCMS which, using typical British understatement, took some time. Of course, as it turned out the Aventra software wasn't ready for the class 710/720/701/730 either, but that's another story.

 

[linmanfu]

outer suburban and long distance work of the 720s and 730s

Everyone (these fora and railway press) says the 730/1s will be used for "outer suburban" services, which can be traced back to the LNWR press release.

But does anyone know exactly what these services they will run on? London-Northampton and Northampton-Birmingham New Street?

And does anyone have any more information about the definition of the term "outer suburban" in general? A search of the English Wikipedia suggests that it is mainly used when discussing British and New South Wales rolling stock/railway services and has been used that way since at least the 1890s (maybe since the 1880s).

 

[Mikey C]

It's interesting that the Aventras have a lot more bodywork variety already than the Electrostars, which were all 20 carriages with 2 doors (with varying doors and gangway treatment)