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

1938stock

Member
Joined
30 Dec 2020
Messages
19
Location
Bruton
Yes, but only spent half that time as electric trains, so the traction equipment had a fairly typical lifespan.
Fair point. And presumably they had time out for overhauls and spent most of their lives underground in fairly dry conditions, like the Class 482 1940 stock.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
2,907
Well, looks like the final northbound run made it within 3 to 4 mins of booked time, on the last day in general service - not bad going at all. Well done to all who have kept them running all this time and good luck to their next owners!
 

1938stock

Member
Joined
30 Dec 2020
Messages
19
Location
Bruton
Well, looks like the final northbound run made it within 3 to 4 mins of booked time, on the last day in general service - not bad going at all. Well done to all who have kept them running all this time and good luck to their next owners!
Yep. Just watched the last run back to the depot on the railcam. The end of an era and totally deserted. Not even anyone on the footbridge. Thanks Covid! An amazing feat to keep the service going for so long and to bring 006 out for its last two 18 hour days . Best wishes to the IoWSR and the LTTG /EOG. Look forward to seeing them again in their new homes. Hope that some of the others find homes too! Who knows, I might make it to the last day of the 484s in 2053, aged 91!
 

Dhansak

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2021
Messages
6
Location
West Sussex
Did I hear somewhere that a set may be kept on static display (either as a display, or used for other purposes such as a gift shop) at Brading?
 

northernbelle

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2018
Messages
389
Much like the rest of the SWR fleet. The scorched earth fleet maintenance policy of WorstGroup.
It was Stagecoach who ran the 483s (and rest of the line's infrastructure) into the ground over the years and Firstgroup who actually developed and agreed a plan to replace the trains and upgrade the infrastructure.

Despite it not aligning with your usual agenda, you'll find that the Island Line - including the rolling stock, stations and p-way - has been decaying all the way through the Stagecoach era and is only now receiving the investment it needs.


Oh, come on. It's got far more to do with the trains being 80 years old than anything else. SWT were concerned about how long they'd last twenty years ago! This was always going to happen, however much money and TLC you throw at the problem.
Indeed - having to have spares hand made to keep a front line fleet going is never going to a viable approach. Ryde St John's has worked miracles sustaining them as long as they have. The truth is that the 483s should have been replaced 10-15 years ago.
 

Chris125

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2009
Messages
2,721
Did I hear somewhere that a set may be kept on static display (either as a display, or used for other purposes such as a gift shop) at Brading?

I'm afraid not. There was an impression given by at least one individual that this was a 'done deal', however it subsequently emerged that the Town Council decided not to support it.
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
4,610
I'm afraid not, there was an impression given by at least one individual that this was a done deal. Alas it was not, and the Town Council decided not to support it.
It was a nice idea, but keeping a set out in the open with the corrosion issues they've suffered was going to present problems. The steam railway is going to keep a set preserved on the island, so that's all pretty good.
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
2,907
It was a nice idea, but keeping a set out in the open with the corrosion issues they've suffered was going to present problems. The steam railway is going to keep a set preserved on the island, so that's all pretty good.
I did think this was a sub optimal idea - esp in terms of keeping it looking smart over time and the costs they would accrue. They could have bid for a Pacer in any case..:lol:

Indoor preservation at IoWSR is of course a superb idea.
 

jumble

Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
550
Oh, come on. It's got far more to do with the trains being 80 years old than anything else. SWT were concerned about how long they'd last twenty years ago! This was always going to happen, however much money and TLC you throw at the problem.
It can be done if one has deep enough pockets
We travelled on a 1948 Remanufactured San Francisco Tram that had returned from Brookville 2 weeks before
It looked and rode like brand new
Of course it is probably not sensible to do this on IOW
It looks like Muni paid £1 Million a tram in 2009
I wonder how much a 484 would cost to buy outright

 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
11,338
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
It can be done if one has deep enough pockets
We travelled on a 1948 Remanufactured San Francisco Tram that had returned from Brookville 2 weeks before
It looked and rode like brand new
Of course it is probably not sensible to do this on IOW
It looks like Muni paid £1 Million a tram in 2009
I wonder how much a 484 would cost to buy outright


Like everything, it comes down to cost. However with elderly vehicles there does come a point where seemingly everything goes wrong, then there’s corrosion on top of that.

Modern rolling stock tends to work on a modular basis - if a part fails then it’s simply swapped out with a new part from the stores. It’s only things like wiring, water ingress or bodywork damage which require more detailed attention.

I’m keeping a 20-year old car going. Despite having been pretty well maintained over the years, it’s still costing significant sums now, and is having an increasing number of trips to and from the local garage despite reduced mileage. Anyone else other than the regular (semi-specialist) garage touching it tends to result in it coming out with new issues which weren’t there when it went in, and unlike the 38 stock parts availability generally isn’t an issue. Just based on my own experience I can well see why they have issues, though I still wonder that part of the issue is they don’t seem to have had any kind of heavy refurbishment expenditure at any point during their time on the island. Ryde has kind of had to function as a “works” as well as a running depot, and being only a tiny depot I’d say that was quite an ask of them. But then who else has the expertise? Even Acton doesn’t work on such trains nowadays.
 

43096

Established Member
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
9,017
It was Stagecoach who ran the 483s (and rest of the line's infrastructure) into the ground over the years and Firstgroup who actually developed and agreed a plan to replace the trains and upgrade the infrastructure.

Despite it not aligning with your usual agenda, you'll find that the Island Line - including the rolling stock, stations and p-way - has been decaying all the way through the Stagecoach era and is only now receiving the investment it needs.
As I suspect you know full well, Stagecoach could only do with the railway what DfT allowed. But that obviously doesn't align with your agenda.
 

jumble

Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
550
Like everything, it comes down to cost. However with elderly vehicles there does come a point where seemingly everything goes wrong, then there’s corrosion on top of that.

Modern rolling stock tends to work on a modular basis - if a part fails then it’s simply swapped out with a new part from the stores. It’s only things like wiring, water ingress or bodywork damage which require more detailed attention.

I’m keeping a 20-year old car going. Despite having been pretty well maintained over the years, it’s still costing significant sums now, and is having an increasing number of trips to and from the local garage despite reduced mileage. Anyone else other than the regular (semi-specialist) garage touching it tends to result in it coming out with new issues which weren’t there when it went in, and unlike the 38 stock parts availability generally isn’t an issue. Just based on my own experience I can well see why they have issues, though I still wonder that part of the issue is they don’t seem to have had any kind of heavy refurbishment expenditure at any point during their time on the island. Ryde has kind of had to function as a “works” as well as a running depot, and being only a tiny depot I’d say that was quite an ask of them. But then who else has the expertise? Even Acton doesn’t work on such trains nowadays.
Vivarail ?
LOL
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
24,065
I did think this was a sub optimal idea - esp in terms of keeping it looking smart over time and the costs they would accrue. They could have bid for a Pacer in any case..:lol:

Indoor preservation at IoWSR is of course a superb idea.
I‘d have thought having one at Brading as well as one at the IOWSR would simply result in two separate organisations unnecessarily competing with each other?
 

JamesT

Member
Joined
25 Feb 2015
Messages
771
The report on the end of the 483s on South Today mentioned one going to the Steam Railway. Interestingly there was mention of trying to fit a battery or Diesel engine to allow it to move around on their railway.
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
4,610
I‘d have thought having one at Brading as well as one at the IOWSR would simply result in two separate organisations unnecessarily competing with each other?
I think the idea for the unit at Brading was to use it as some sort of community space, so there was room for it in that sense, but however nice an idea it is, I'd worry about the effects of the weather. I agree that the steam railway's plans are likely to keep a unit in much better condition.
 

northernbelle

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2018
Messages
389
As I suspect you know full well, Stagecoach could only do with the railway what DfT allowed. But that obviously doesn't align with your agenda.
Stagecoach could have included any improvements they liked in their second franchise bid that began in 2004 but nothing was forthcoming.

The DfT doesn't need to "allow" for basic housekeeping such as paintwork to be maintained properly - it is built into franchise finances as ongoing maintenance.
 

pdeaves

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2014
Messages
3,799
Location
Gateway to the South West
Stagecoach could have included any improvements they liked in their second franchise bid that began in 2004 but nothing was forthcoming.

The DfT doesn't need to "allow" for basic housekeeping such as paintwork to be maintained properly - it is built into franchise finances as ongoing maintenance.
Quite, and even if things were different, it's no more First's fault (who have done something about the problem quite quickly in the scheme of things) than Stagecoach's. Some folk refuse to understand.
 

jumble

Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
550
They don’t manufacture their own parts, so I don’t see how that would help with the 483s.
As my old boss used to say
If someone at Vivarail was made the offer of a personal bonus of £50k if they could produce a plan that would enable a full remanufacture would they still say it could not be done.
No they would use subcontractors

In this or another thread someone said it was impossible and too dangerous to run the 483s a final time in The spring because of the raised platforms.
I think this is nonsense as TFL do so by running their 483 on the North end of the MET quite often, and TFL run heritage routemasters with a big step up onto the Platform
Just imagine how many reasons one could have come up as to why running the Steam Trains on London Underground 150 would be impossible
It would set off fire alarms
Wooden coaches are now so dangerous that Network Rail ban them completely
Open windows on coaches in tunnels are too dangerous.
Slam doors are too dangerous
Etc Etc
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
4,610
As my old boss used to say
If someone at Vivarail was made the offer of a personal bonus of £50k if they could produce a plan that would enable a full remanufacture would they still say it could not be done.
No they would use subcontractors

In this or another thread someone said it was impossible and too dangerous to run the 483s a final time in The spring because of the raised platforms.
I think this is nonsense as TFL do so by running their 483 on the North end of the MET quite often, and TFL run heritage routemasters with a big step up onto the Platform
Just imagine how many reasons one could have come up as to why running the Steam Trains on London Underground 150 would be impossible
It would set off fire alarms
Wooden coaches are now so dangerous that Network Rail ban them completely
Open windows on coaches in tunnels are too dangerous.
Slam doors are too dangerous
Etc Etc
LU have grandfather rights to run tube and surface stock on the same lines, and the platforms are at what is known as "compromise height", which minimises the step down into tube stock and the step up into surface stock. It's still quite steep, though, and makes accessibility a problem.

These rights will never be granted to a railway again, and as the platforms on the island will be raised to full height to allow level access to the 484s, the step down for tube stock will be significant, and there could be clearance issues.

Island Line is also not a heritage railway. The 483s are completely worn out, and the staff have got better things to do than attempt to keep them going even longer for the sake of enthusiasts. Have you seen how difficult it's been to keep the service running recently?

They've gone. Let's move on.
 

1938stock

Member
Joined
30 Dec 2020
Messages
19
Location
Bruton
As someone who has had these trains as part of their life ever since I would make my Parents wait for up to ten 59s to pass on the Picc so that we could go home on a 38 (1966 onwards) I think it amazing that they lasted until 2021. The plans for 006 and 007 are sound and excellent news. Sad but probably only 008 is in restorable condition now with regard to the other units. Would have thought that the steam railway could haul theirs on the line with a loco at first as is done on the Alderney Railway with 59s (and before that the 38 unit 177 which was previously used on the Epping Ongar shuttle in the fifties). History repeats itself.
I also run cars into their 20s which gives great insight into the bathtub curve of reliability. They can fly through an MOT one year and be rusted out the next. It was astonishing that the team at Ryde kept them going for so long without the leeway of a spare train.
43096 seems to have it in for Stagecoach and I am not a fan of First Group but mostly they did OK within the constraints of their franchises. Well after 2010 it was a possibility that the line would close or converted to light rail/ tram with end of the 483s.
I watched the last run on the railcam. It was odd to see it so deserted. My main reason for not visiting after July was the failure rate meaning that it was quite likely a bus would be running. This is a railway for local people but since the withdrawal of 004 in Oct 2019 I don't see how the locals, including schoolchildren,could rely on it. The last month was quite hairy with the failure of 006, bogie repairs, 008 withdrawn and 007 recommisioned. I gather that the last day saw 007 up to 11am and 006 to finish but pretty well everyone had their fingers crossed. I can see that the new custodians of 006 and 007 are keen to receive them in as withdrawn condition and soon, and the changes to the line probably preclude any more 483 running there. But the story continues on at least two preserved lines.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
24,065
LU have grandfather rights to run tube and surface stock on the same lines, and the platforms are at what is known as "compromise height", which minimises the step down into tube stock and the step up into surface stock. It's still quite steep, though, and makes accessibility a problem.

These rights will never be granted to a railway again, and as the platforms on the island will be raised to full height to allow level access to the 484s, the step down for tube stock will be significant, and there could be clearance issues.

Island Line is also not a heritage railway. The 483s are completely worn out, and the staff have got better things to do than attempt to keep them going even longer for the sake of enthusiasts. Have you seen how difficult it's been to keep the service running recently?

They've gone. Let's move on.
As you say, and as a reminder of the info posted in the infrastructure forum, there’s to be a 470mm (19”) height increase at Ryde Pier Head, only slightly less at Esplanade. There‘s no way that would be accepted for passenger use; what happens at LU compromise height stations is nothing like that much difference.
 

1938stock

Member
Joined
30 Dec 2020
Messages
19
Location
Bruton
As you say, and as a reminder of the info posted in the infrastructure forum, there’s to be a 470mm (19”) height increase at Ryde Pier Head, only slightly less at Esplanade. There‘s no way that would be accepted for passenger use; what happens at LU compromise height stations is nothing like that much difference.
Yes. A great mystery to me though is that some stations on the Hounslow (sorry, Heathrow) branch of the Picc still have compromise platforms but haven't seen surface stock for decades!

As you say, and as a reminder of the info posted in the infrastructure forum, there’s to be a 470mm (19”) height increase at Ryde Pier Head, only slightly less at Esplanade. There‘s no way that would be accepted for passenger use; what happens at LU compromise height stations is nothing like that much difference.
I think I raised the initial question about the 483s running post-blockade. This is before I knew that the LU platforms were a compromise height and that the heights on the Island Line would be greater. Whilst the 484s will give greater space the works are necessary because the decision was never taken to have some tube stock around the early 2000s. The 59/62 stock was withdrawn in poor condition but the 72 MK 1 stock was withdrawn early in 1999 except for a few units which joined their MK2 cousins on the Bakerloo where they still run. Failing that, 67 stock would have cost less to modify than all the stations and the Ryde Tunnel.
But my reason for asking was a percieved shortage of 484s on re-opening. Vivarail haven't met a deadline yet, even pre-Covid with the 230s. There seems to be only one 484 on the island and whilst much of the 700 miles of testing could be done on the mainland it seems that if the works are finished on time there could be a stock shortage if the stock is not line ready.
 
Last edited:

MatthewRead

On Moderation
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Messages
1,516
Location
West london
Yes. A great mystery to me though is that some stations on the Hounslow (sorry, Heathrow) branch of the Picc still have compromise platforms but haven't seen surface stock for decades!


I think I raised the initial question about the 483s running post-blockade. This is before I knew that the LU platforms were a compromise height and that the heights on the Island Line would be greater. Whilst the 484s will give greater space the works are necessary because the decision was never taken to have some tube stock around the early 2000s. The 59/62 stock was withdrawn in poor condition but the 72 MK 1 stock was withdrawn early in 1999 except for a few units which joined their MK2 cousins on the Bakerloo where they still run. Failing that, 67 stock would have cost less to modify than all the stations and the Ryde Tunnel.
But my reason for asking was a percieved shortage of 484s on re-opening. Vivarail haven't met a deadline yet, even pre-Covid with the 230s. There seems to be only one 484 on the island and whilst much of the 700 miles of testing could be done on the mainland it seems that if the works are finished on time there could be a stock shortage if the stock is not line ready.
1983 tube stock was also mooted but dropped due to it's poor reliability!
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
4,610
Given that Island Line operated with only one working train for over a year, will anyone notice the difference???
 

1938stock

Member
Joined
30 Dec 2020
Messages
19
Location
Bruton
Given that Island Line operated with only one working train for over a year, will anyone notice the difference???
Only if 484001 is more reliable than 483006.

1983 tube stock was also mooted but dropped due to it's poor reliability!
Yes. The D78s were a successful class but the 83s were similar. They weren't that bad and could be consideredas the last old fashioned stock before the 92s.
 

lttgroup

Member
Joined
13 Jun 2020
Messages
59
Location
Multiple locations across former NSE territory!
Just a quick update on 483 preservation, for those who may have missed it - We (The London Transport Traction Group) will be taking on units 483006 and 483008 for future operation at the Epping Ongar Railway.

With 483007 heading for the Isle of Wight Steam Railway and 483002 already condemned for scrap, that leaves 483004 and 483009 unaccounted for. I gather that 483004 is in better structural condition than 483009 and one unit is supposed to be going for use as holiday accommodation so it seems likely that 483004 will be saved also.
 

WesternLancer

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
2,907
Just a quick update on 483 preservation, for those who may have missed it - We (The London Transport Traction Group) will be taking on units 483006 and 483008 for future operation at the Epping Ongar Railway.

With 483007 heading for the Isle of Wight Steam Railway and 483002 already condemned for scrap, that leaves 483004 and 483009 unaccounted for. I gather that 483004 is in better structural condition than 483009 and one unit is supposed to be going for use as holiday accommodation so it seems likely that 483004 will be saved also.
all good news - thanks for update.
well, old railway carriages have a proud history as accom on the island and other parts of the south coast around there - so that paves the way for a lottery funded conversion back to rail use in eg 50 or 60 years time! :D
eg
 

Top