Is there any news regarding a Class 483 train being preserved?

1938stock · 31 Dec 2020

341o2 said:
It would appear that the last 483 has already run. No trains between Ryde and Shanklin on the 29 and 30 Dec, and now "no trains until further notice" today (National rail enquiries) Quote

I too, wanted a last ride on a 483, but inadvisible due to lockdown, especially having said a few things myself about those flouting lockdown rules.
Only essential travel allowed, a reduced ferry service,and having gone from Tier 1 to 4 in a matter of days,many Islanders are blaming visitors for the situation.

As for platform heights, how things have changed. Anyone else remember the Bakerloo sharing the tracks and platforms with the Euston electrics to Watford Junction?

Yes I do! I also remember waiting sometimes for fifteen 1956/1959 stock trains to pass to travel on one of the few Piccadilly Line 38s, the first withdrawals in 1972, the Extra Heavy Overhauls for the Bakerloo, their use on the East London Line ( with platform level issues) the last runs on the Northern Line, the Bakerloo running 38s alongside 1972 mk 2s and 59s and the restoration of the final five trains to the Northern, some cars becoming the 483s.
I agree that we may well have seen the last 483 run and it's a miracle that they ran a two train service with two available trains for over a year, an impossible undertaking even with a newer fleet.
Like others I planned to visit the line this weekend but the pandemic put paid to that.
That said it is excellent news that 006 and 007 have found such good homes and I plan to become a member of both the IoWSR and the LTTG with the money that I would have spent on a visit.
Sorry to finish by asking more questions but does anyone have further news on the remainder of the fleet?
002 seems to be destined for scrap having been a donor since 2008 although there may be some fittings left to retrieve? I for one would be interested in an online bid for some memento especially if it were for charity.
004 was withdrawn after almost constant service in 2019 and is in less good cosmetic condition but could make a static display?
O08 was withdrawn in early December having had a major failure and ran for a while this year with only one car in passenger service with the other indicating a major electrical problem) but, like 006, is in acceptable withdrawn cosmetic condition.
009 hasn't been in revenue earning service since 2016 but is presumably reasonably complete as a depot shunter.
I would have loved to rehome one of these in a different life, but I have two expensive daughters!

RailUK Forums

lttgroup · 31 Dec 2020

It had been planned for a basic sort of event to be run, with original plans including three units in operation, a four car formation and services running on the IoWSR. The IoWSR took the decision to not run services due to social distancing concerns around passengers joining at Smallbrook, If I remember correctly, and a Ryde Fitter pointed out to me that since 008's withdrawal and subsequent removal of parts three units would've been impossible. As 007 has not been equipped for multiple working during its last overhaul a 4-Car set wasn't actually possible either, despite what SWR management wanted. The LTTG hoped to have some kind of stand at one of the stations, but this never really got anywhere as the tiers were increased before anything had been confirmed with SWR. After that we proposed numerous virtual ideas, but even these are unlikely to be able to come to much. Ultimately, with so few people likely to be travelling and with the struggles of maintaining the service it seems like any kind of celebration has had to fall by the wayside.

A small part of me still hopes that there will yet be more 483 workings on Island Line, but that hope is fading. I suppose all I can say is that if you want to see more 483 running in the future then please get behind us as we raise funds for 483006! Of course, 483007 is going to the IoWSR who will doubtless be grateful of any support too.

1938stock · 31 Dec 2020

43096 said:
They still do north of Queens Park, to Harrow & Wealdstone. Quite a step down into the 72 tube stock.

9

lttgroup said:
It had been planned for a basic sort of event to be run, with original plans including three units in operation, a four car formation and services running on the IoWSR. The IoWSR took the decision to not run services due to social distancing concerns around passengers joining at Smallbrook, If I remember correctly, and a Ryde Fitter pointed out to me that since 008's withdrawal and subsequent removal of parts three units would've been impossible. As 007 has not been equipped for multiple working during its last overhaul a 4-Car set wasn't actually possible either, despite what SWR management wanted. The LTTG hoped to have some kind of stand at one of the stations, but this never really got anywhere as the tiers were increased before anything had been confirmed with SWR. After that we proposed numerous virtual ideas, but even these are unlikely to be able to come to much. Ultimately, with so few people likely to be travelling and with the struggles of maintaining the service it seems like any kind of celebration has had to fall by the wayside.

A small part of me still hopes that there will yet be more 483 workings on Island Line, but that hope is fading. I suppose all I can say is that if you want to see more 483 running in the future then please get behind us as we raise funds for 483006! Of course, 483007 is going to the IoWSR who will doubtless be grateful of any support too.

Many thanks for this. It is good to know the details of the planned events even though extreme weather, the pandemic/ low passenger numbers and the understandable technical difficulties at this late stage in their incredibly long service lives have all conspired against. The line equipment is equal need of renewal too!
Enthusiasts' runs are almost impossible to organise owing to social distancing which is presumablly why the LT museum's 38 (much of which is the other half of 007) has seen action this year.

VEP3417 · 31 Dec 2020

i did take a trip a few months back and took lots of photos, most of wich where to document things as they where then before any changes, i havnt got round to posting yet, mabey i might start a thred at some point where people can add photos if they wish

if someone could take a few pics and vids of them being loaded onto trucks to be taken away that would be great

when ever that happens

pdeaves · 31 Dec 2020

Seeing as 483006 has been mentioned a few times in this thread, may I share two of my photos of it?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/pdeaves/44760079722/ (super close up of cab) and https://www.flickr.com/photos/pdeaves/44809794231/in/photostream/ (super low down at Lake).

Journeyman · 31 Dec 2020

I agree it seems highly unlikely that any more 483s will run on Island Line. What was the last train to operate?

1938stock · 1 Jan 2021

Looks as though one of the two remaining units in service has escaped onto the line today. Is it 006 or 007?

lttgroup · 1 Jan 2021

WesternLancer · 1 Jan 2021

Great to see that on the railcam - had hoped to go over but not now possible of course.

Would be great if the service can make it thru to end of sunday as intended. A tall order but fingers crossed....!

1938stock · 1 Jan 2021

lttgroup said:
006

Thanks.

WesternLancer · 2 Jan 2021

Trains rolling again today that I have seen. Nice to see.

hermit · 2 Jan 2021

Yes, I’ve just been for a valedictory ride from Brading to Shanklin and back. 006 bouncing along in apparently good form. Not many on board, unsurprisingly in view of Covid restrictions and the limited ferry services at the moment.
A significant moment for me - I was brought up near an open-air section of the Piccadilly Line and could hear the trains passing. As children we called the 38 stock ‘the new trains’ in contrast to the 1920s stock which still ran most of the services. I think I can remember being allowed in the cab on a journey from Southgate to Oakwood to visit my grandmother. Now, about 70 years later, I can hear the same trains (or at least the same design) from my house on the island. Quite something.

WesternLancer · 2 Jan 2021

hermit said:
Yes, I’ve just been for a valedictory ride from Brading to Shanklin and back. 006 bouncing along in apparently good form. Not many on board, unsurprisingly in view of Covid restrictions and the limited ferry services at the moment.
A significant moment for me - I was brought up near an open-air section of the Piccadilly Line and could hear the trains passing. As children we called the 38 stock ‘the new trains’ in contrast to the 1920s stock which still ran most of the services. I think I can remember being allowed in the cab on a journey from Southgate to Oakwood to visit my grandmother. Now, about 70 years later, I can hear the same trains (or at least the same design) from my house on the island. Quite something.

Excellent post - thanks. And good to hear a report from on the spot! I hope they can make it for the last scheduled day tomorrow. I will take a look at the Railcam to see.

Bearing in mind the age of the 38 stock when it started on the Island (1989?), is the new vivarail stock (1972?) that much younger when it starts.

Journeyman · 2 Jan 2021

WesternLancer said:
Excellent post - thanks. And good to hear a report from on the spot! I hope they can make it for the last scheduled day tomorrow. I will take a look at the Railcam to see.

Bearing in mind the age of the 38 stock when it started on the Island (1989?), is the new vivarail stock (1972?) that much younger when it starts.

The D Stock is a bit newer than that, it was built between 1978 and 1983. In context, though, that makes it roughly the same age as the Standard Stock was when it was shipped to the island in 1967.

WesternLancer · 2 Jan 2021

Journeyman said:
The D Stock is a bit newer than that, it was built between 1978 and 1983. In context, though, that makes it roughly the same age as the Standard Stock was when it was shipped to the island in 1967.

Thanks for clarifying. And I guess D stock has had a fairly thorough re-build for this purpose. Seems a shame a to me bit more of it was not ordered for the project.

Journeyman · 2 Jan 2021

WesternLancer said:
Thanks for clarifying. And I guess D stock has had a fairly thorough re-build for this purpose. Seems a shame a to me bit more of it was not ordered for the project.

The D Stock has had by far the biggest rebuild of any of the former Underground trains for the island, so it's in far better condition at the start of its island career than the previous trains.

Five units is more than enough given the proposed level of service.

WesternLancer · 2 Jan 2021

Journeyman said:
The D Stock has had by far the biggest rebuild of any of the former Underground trains for the island, so it's in far better condition at the start of its island career than the previous trains.

Five units is more than enough given the proposed level of service.

Glad to hear that - I was comparing the stock for the new trains with the levels of stock provided (as shown on wikipedia at least) back in 1967 and also when the 1938 stock came over - as I'd recalled longer trains in my youth on visits to the Island in the 1970s and 80s. I'd assumed that with a new fleet usage levels could maybe be built up to the numbers that must have needed that amount of stock back in those days (or was significant amounts of it for holiday traffic that simply does not exist any more?)

Journeyman · 2 Jan 2021

WesternLancer said:
Glad to hear that - I was comparing the stock for the new trains with the levels of stock provided (as shown on wikipedia at least) back in 1967 and also when the 1938 stock came over - as I'd recalled longer trains in my youth on visits to the Island in the 1970s and 80s. I'd assumed that with a new fleet usage levels could maybe be built up to the numbers that must have needed that amount of stock back in those days (or was significant amounts of it for holiday traffic that simply does not exist any more?)

Yeah, the only reason the original 1967 fleet was so big was because summer holiday traffic at the time was still significant - 42 out of the 43 cars were needed in service on summer Saturdays, but in the winter, only an hourly service operated, using a single 4-car unit. Within a couple of years, peak demand had dropped sufficiently for service cuts to come into effect - this primarily allowed one train to operate the Ryde Pier Head to Esplanade shuttle, which in turn allowed the pier tramway to close in 1969.

The plan with the 38s was to operate 6 car trains at peak times, on 20 minute frequencies in the summer, but this mostly never happened, so for most of its existence the fleet was bigger than necessary, but given the dire spares situation in recent years, it's just as well.

The current fleet is big enough for 4-car half-hourly trains to operate, which given typical loads these days should be absolutely fine. That needs 4 out of 5 units in service, but will only likely be needed in the summer. 2-car trains will be fine off-season, so only 2 out of 5 units will be needed for that, giving plenty of time for heavy maintenance during the winter.

WesternLancer · 2 Jan 2021

Journeyman said:
Yeah, the only reason the original 1967 fleet was so big was because summer holiday traffic at the time was still significant - 42 out of the 43 cars were needed in service on summer Saturdays, but in the winter, only an hourly service operated, using a single 4-car unit. Within a couple of years, peak demand had dropped sufficiently for service cuts to come into effect - this primarily allowed one train to operate the Ryde Pier Head to Esplanade shuttle, which in turn allowed the pier tramway to close in 1969.

The plan with the 38s was to operate 6 car trains at peak times, on 20 minute frequencies in the summer, but this mostly never happened, so for most of its existence the fleet was bigger than necessary, but given the dire spares situation in recent years, it's just as well.

The current fleet is big enough for 4-car half-hourly trains to operate, which given typical loads these days should be absolutely fine. That needs 4 out of 5 units in service, but will only likely be needed in the summer. 2-car trains will be fine off-season, so only 2 out of 5 units will be needed for that, giving plenty of time for heavy maintenance during the winter.

Thanks - interesting to read that synopsis. I guess I probably recall mixes of 4 cars and maybe 7 car services (a VEC and a TIS?) from those 70s and 80s visits, and maybe 4 and 6 car '1938' trains from the 90s perhaps. I hope the investment about to start will indeed boost passenger numbers. Logic would suggest it will.

Journeyman · 2 Jan 2021

WesternLancer said:
Thanks - interesting to read that synopsis. I guess I probably recall mixes of 4 cars and maybe 7 car services (a VEC and a TIS?) from those 70s and 80s visits, and maybe 4 and 6 car '1938' trains from the 90s perhaps. I hope the investment about to start will indeed boost passenger numbers. Logic would suggest it will.

Yeah, I suspect the extremely poor reliability of late will have put off anyone who wants to travel regularly. The new trains will operate to a better timetable, are much more spacious, will ride better and have nice modern features like USB charging. Much as I'll miss the 38s, they honestly can't carry on, and I'm glad there's finally been some proper investment in both the rolling stock and the infrastructure.

WesternLancer · 2 Jan 2021

Journeyman said:
Yeah, I suspect the extremely poor reliability of late will have put off anyone who wants to travel regularly. The new trains will operate to a better timetable, are much more spacious, will ride better and have nice modern features like USB charging. Much as I'll miss the 38s, they honestly can't carry on, and I'm glad there's finally been some proper investment in both the rolling stock and the infrastructure.

Completely agree with you here. 1938s nice to see but should have bowed out probably 10 years ago at least.

Maybe off topic, but was there a reason that back in 1966-67 BR(SR) didn't electrify to the LUL standard system so that a more ongoing easy supply of ex LU stock could have been used without so much expense. Is it a more costly electrification system to install?

I mean that would have surely allowed easy cascades of stock in the early 80s or like ex Northern Line stock (1959 stock?) when that became available, and no doubt other ex LU trains, to have been moved on to the Island over the years and used to replace aging trains, or even a small run on order of new stock (as happened when the Waterloo and City Line had it's old SR rolling stock replaced IIRC, though I can imagine that brand new stock may never have stacked up cost wise). Maybe it was just not that simple...

pdeaves · 2 Jan 2021

WesternLancer said:
Maybe off topic, but was there a reason that back in 1966-67 BR(SR) didn't electrify to the LUL standard system so that a more ongoing easy supply of ex LU stock could have been used without so much expense. Is it a more costly electrification system to install?

I suspect one facet (amongst many) of the decision would be that the South Western staff (generally) would already be familiar with BR third rail, its components, limitations, etc. If something failed in the power supply, for example, it would be far easier to get a standard bit from Portsmouth than source one from further afield or have expensively sitting in stock 'in case'.

Journeyman · 2 Jan 2021

pdeaves said:
I suspect one facet (amongst many) of the decision would be that the South Western staff (generally) would already be familiar with BR third rail, its components, limitations, etc. If something failed in the power supply, for example, it would be far easier to get a standard bit from Portsmouth than source one from further afield or have expensively sitting in stock 'in case'.

Yeah, that makes sense. Modifying the Standard Stock for third rail use apparently wasn't complicated, and it allowed trial runs and delivery to Portsmouth to be carried out on the mainland under the units' own power. It probably ultimately made life a bit easier.

Modifying the 1938 stock was a bit more complicated as the wiring was found to be in very poor condition. As a result, the units had to be completely rewired, and the electrical arrangements were modified rather more than originally intended. This did, however, result in the units being in very good condition when sent to the island, and that's why they've had a long life there.

The Vivarail units, of course, have very few (if any) of their LU-era electric components left.

Bedpan · 2 Jan 2021

For me, and I would hope for many non enthusiast visitors to the island, the attraction was the type and vintage of the rolling stock in use. On that basis I can't say that I'm over enthralled by the introduction of the D stock because of the scale of alterations carried out by Vivarail. If only they had gone ahead with the 1965 proposals to ship 10 84XXXs to the island; I bet that they would still be in use today....although
on the other hand would the IOWSR be in existence?

43096 · 2 Jan 2021

Bedpan said:
For me, and I would hope for many non enthusiast visitors to the island, the attraction was the type and vintage of the rolling stock in use. On that basis I can't say that I'm over enthralled by the introduction of the D stock because of the scale of alterations carried out by Vivarail. If only they had gone ahead with the 1965 proposals to ship 10 84XXXs to the island; I bet that they would still be in use today....although
on the other hand would the IOWSR be in existence?

Depends if you want a museum piece or a public transport system.

bramling · 2 Jan 2021

Bedpan said:
For me, and I would hope for many non enthusiast visitors to the island, the attraction was the type and vintage of the rolling stock in use. On that basis I can't say that I'm over enthralled by the introduction of the D stock because of the scale of alterations carried out by Vivarail. If only they had gone ahead with the 1965 proposals to ship 10 84XXXs to the island; I bet that they would still be in use today....although
on the other hand would the IOWSR be in existence?

I’ve wondered what level of work / expenditure would have been required to keep the 483s going essentially indefinitely. It does seem though like it’s got the point where parts quite simply aren’t available.

I must admit I’m not really enthralled with the idea of D stock, they were never a type of train which really “did it” for me, though in general when on LU they were always regarded as fit for purpose and relatively successful, the only reason they went slightly early was in order to achieve standardisation.

Clearly the situation with ever-decreasing 483 availability was unacceptable, however it’s still a rather sad moment. One wonders how the rather spartan 484 interior will be received by non-enthusiasts, I’d say the 483 interior is superior.

Bedpan · 2 Jan 2021

43096 said:
Depends if you want a museum piece or a public transport system.

Well, at least in my lifetime, going back to the fleet of O2s with vintage coaching stock, it has always had a vintage feel to it, as indeed had the railway system(s) on the Isle of Man, the idea presumably being to attract visitors to the island to include a train ride during their stay. I would imagine that this was the thinking behind the proposal to perpetuate steam haulage on the island when it was being withdrawn everywhere else. The difference of course s that back then, the island was a popular summer holiday destination. I don't know how popular it is nowadays but for me personally, the cost of the car ferry seems exorbitantly expensive.

Journeyman · 2 Jan 2021

Bedpan said:
Well, at least in my lifetime, going back to the fleet of O2s with vintage coaching stock, it has always had a vintage feel to it, as indeed had the railway system(s) on the Isle of Man, the idea presumably being to attract visitors to the island to include a train ride during their stay. I would imagine that this was the thinking behind the proposal to perpetuate steam haulage on the island when it was being withdrawn everywhere else. The difference of course s that back then, the island was a popular summer holiday destination. I don't know how popular it is nowadays but for me personally, the cost of the car ferry seems exorbitantly expensive.

It's never been the plan to run the line as some sort of rolling museum. In the fifties and early sixties there was a lot of pressure placed on BR from Island residents, councillors and MPs to modernise. The 84xxx plan was only formulated because they happened to be surplus, and the railway wasn't expected to last more than a few years.

However much I like the 483s, they're completely knackered and should have been replaced years ago. Island line is not a heritage railway and it's time it was treated as a proper part of the network.

DelW · 2 Jan 2021

Bedpan said:
The difference of course s that back then, the island was a popular summer holiday destination. I don't know how popular it is nowadays but for me personally, the cost of the car ferry seems exorbitantly expensive.

Mostly I visit by train, a through ticket onto Island Line is quite reasonably priced (especially with a railcard) and the Island has a pretty comprehensive bus service.
I did take my car over a couple of years ago, when we'd rented a cottage for a few days, and we were able to book the ferry via the cottage agency quite a bit cheaper than directly on the Wightlink website. IIRC it was about £60 return for a Focus and two people via Lymington and Yarmouth.

WesternLancer · 2 Jan 2021

pdeaves said:
I suspect one facet (amongst many) of the decision would be that the South Western staff (generally) would already be familiar with BR third rail, its components, limitations, etc. If something failed in the power supply, for example, it would be far easier to get a standard bit from Portsmouth than source one from further afield or have expensively sitting in stock 'in case'.

Thanks - fair points, and if as @Journeyman says the conversions were not that hard to do it makes sense. Just shows that subsequent post privatization lack of renewals up to now must have been down to DfT indecision and lack of desire to invest in what might have been simple renewals then, eg a batch of hand me down 1959 stock for example.

Is there any news regarding a Class 483 train being preserved?

Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member