Rolling Stock - masses of stock coming off lease

[Bletchleyite]

They (769) aren't Northern Connect, but the overall service would be so much upgraded (from 2 hourly to hourly Barrow, from 4tpd to hourly Windermere) that I think a change to the franchise agreement would be justified.

I think it's a real shame something dedicated to (and absolutely perfect for) that service group wasn't ordered i.e. 4-section bi-mode FLIRTs with an IC interior.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

They (769) aren't Northern Connect, but the overall service would be so much upgraded (from 2 hourly to hourly Barrow, from 4tpd to hourly Windermere) that I think a change to the franchise agreement would be justified.

I think it's a real shame something dedicated to (and absolutely perfect for) that service group wasn't ordered i.e. 4-section bi-mode FLIRTs with an IC interior.

The Northern franchise when announced seemed like several Christmases coming at once, but since then subsequent new agreements have been even more generous in terms of fleet upgrades/expansions.

 

[geoffk]

I live in Northern territory, where the bi-mode 769s are awaited with interest. A battery version would be suitable for Windermere but only if it's refurbished/reseated to Northern Connect standards, also perhaps for Morecambe. Some interesting comments and of course an obvious one is that more electrification would help absorb some of the emus facing redundancy, particularly if the ORR can be persuaded to drop its opposition to more third rail on Southern territory (Ashford- Hastings, Uckfield and Reading - Gatwick).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Aircon would be difficult, but I think the other aspects of Northern Connect standard could be met by installing low-density, high quality seating like the Brighton Express 319s plus things like sockets.

 

[IanXC]

Might have to split the Coast service at Barrow if they can't go round the Coast (I think only narrower 23m stock fits there) but that's no massive thing if the connections are planned well.

Nothing from the Airport does, or is proposed, to go further than Barrow currently.

Whether some of the currently planned (Preston?/) Lancaster starters in the 'Windermere hours' are planned to go further than Barrow I'm not sure.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Nothing from the Airport does, or is proposed, to go further than Barrow currently.

Whether some of the currently planned (Preston?/) Lancaster starters in the 'Windermere hours' are planned to go further than Barrow I'm not sure.

My idea would be for an hourly perfect clockface through service, i.e. abolition of the short workings to Lancaster/Oxenholme and everything calling all stations.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

On the contrary, I seem to remember being told that it'd be one of the last to go - I guess we'll see eventually!

That makes sense from a users' point of view, but I'd expected the bean-counting realities to take precedence...

 

[Mordac]

Instead of mucking about with 319s, why not fit a battery pack to the 331s, thereby using the rolling stock that had been originally planned for the route, and done by a company which actually has experience of doing this in real life (CAF Urbos trams have a battery powered option, in using in, e.g. Zaragoza, and to be used by Birmingham trams in the current city centre extension).

 

[Wivenswold]

It seems to me that there's a lot of speculation about all these units being left spare, but it seems to be forgotten that even the newest ex-BR units are over 22 years old and even that is a fair old innings for an EMU.

The venerable class 302s which arguably out-stayed their welcome on the LTS started to be scrapped at the ripe old age of 27, the last AC slam-doors (GE's 312s) were only 28 when they were put to the torch, the superb 309's faired slightly better with 32 years' front-line service on the GE. By comparison, the oldest class 317s are now approaching their 35th birthday and the Renatus life-extending work on some of the 29 year old class 321s is comparable to similar attempts to extend the life of the Class 307 and 309s which were the same age when they were heavily refurbished.

Perhaps this is the first mass-replacement programme that many fans of EMUs have experienced, having been too young when the slam-doors disappeared en-masse a decade ago, but it's pretty clear from looking at past life-spans of trains that most if not all ex-BR stock is now living on borrowed time. Sad as that may be to enthusiasts.

 

[PeterC]

I suspect that a lot of the enthusiasm for reusing "spare" units is from people of my generation who remember the slam door stock. It comes as a bit of a shock to realise just how old units such as the 321 actually are.

 

[jonesy3001]

will the 323s have new homes when the lease is up from northern/LM or do you think they will rust in storage till they get scrapped?

 

[urpert]

Roger Ford in MR this month states again that it’s as good as certain that the Networkers are for the chop in the new SE franchise. As someone who’s been using them since new, I can’t say I will miss them at all - the years of reluctance to do anything to brighten the interiors makes them particularly unlovable trains imo.

 

[3141]

It seems to me that there's a lot of speculation about all these units being left spare, but it seems to be forgotten that even the newest ex-BR units are over 22 years old and even that is a fair old innings for an EMU.

The venerable class 302s which arguably out-stayed their welcome on the LTS started to be scrapped at the ripe old age of 27, the last AC slam-doors (GE's 312s) were only 28 when they were put to the torch, the superb 309's faired slightly better with 32 years' front-line service on the GE. By comparison, the oldest class 317s are now approaching their 35th birthday and the Renatus life-extending work on some of the 29 year old class 321s is comparable to similar attempts to extend the life of the Class 307 and 309s which were the same age when they were heavily refurbished.

Perhaps this is the first mass-replacement programme that many fans of EMUs have experienced, having been too young when the slam-doors disappeared en-masse a decade ago, but it's pretty clear from looking at past life-spans of trains that most if not all ex-BR stock is now living on borrowed time. Sad as that may be to enthusiasts.

On the other hand, some class 411 units built for the Kent coast electrification were over 45 years old when they were withdrawn. Arguably, the 312s would and should have lasted longer, except for the drive to replace all slam-door stock. (Incidentally, didn't some 309's last longer than 32 years, because they reappeared on services on the WCML north of Birmingham in the later 1990s.)

There's a significant difference with the mass extinction that's currently in prospect, which is driven not by a need to remove trains of a certain layout, but because new trains are relatively cheap at the moment and the DfT's model for replacement franchises encourages bidders to propose them. Then there's the point that the classes facing mass extinction fall into several groups. 313s and 455s are definitely old and it's understandable that they should go, though wasteful in the case of the SWT 455s that have just had new traction packages. The most recent BR stock such as 321s, 323s and 465/466s are certainly capable of further service, especially the considerable number of 321s being refurbished. Earlier post-privatisation stock such as the 360s and 458s are even more capable of continuing in service. Then there's the astonishing case of the 707s, lined up for withdrawal even before they'd entered service.

Some posters on this and other threads confidently assert that several of the classes to be replaced will find new homes, but no-one can say where and there aren't many new homes in existence. I wonder if this explains the delay in issuing the South Eastern ITT. If the DfT is realising that making it more or less essential for bidders to propose new trains there could lead to an outcry about hundreds of coaches being scrapped, it just possibly may be trying to construct an ITT that will get some of them back in service.

 

[Mikey C]

Roger Ford in MR this month states again that it’s as good as certain that the Networkers are for the chop in the new SE franchise. As someone who’s been using them since new, I can’t say I will miss them at all - the years of reluctance to do anything to brighten the interiors makes them particularly unlovable trains imo.

Personally, I find them pretty decent trains. They're looking a bit shabby, but nothing that a decent refurbishment wouldn't resolve.

After all, the 365s seem pretty popular on this board, and the 165s and 166s will be service for another 10-20 years probably!

I suspect the Networkers will be axed as the SE London routes need higher density stock, and there's nowhere else for them to go in 3rd rail land. What happens to the 376s though?

 

[Wivenswold]

The situation with the 707s is astonishing, the apparent net waste could have reopened a couple of old branch lines. The 1st January 2020 deadline for DDA compliance has been on the horizon for a long time, yet we have 30 Class 321s being refurbished even though they'll be lucky to run in service much beyond 2019, traction package upgrades and a whole fleet of DDA compliant trains with no home.

It's a shambles and it all rests at the door of the Department for Transport. But this short-termism is not exclusive to that one Government department, so you'll be certain that similar wastes of money go on in other service industries.

Yes, the Class 411's lasted a long, long time, a handful of 309s saw further service in the North West until 2001ish but they were in a poor state by the end. The relative cheap cost of leasing new trains is certainly a factor
for the situation but so is the relatively lower running and maintenance costs of owning a fleet of new trains, then there's the lower financing costs, DDA compliance, better braking and acceleration and finally (Thameslink commuters might want to look away now) there's the "wow" factor of having a new fleet.

Those holding out hope that the Networkers (north and south of the river) and Mk3 based EMUs will be around well into the 2020s should be well advised to buy a Network Card and enjoy them now.

 

[urpert]

Personally, I find them pretty decent trains. They're looking a bit shabby, but nothing that a decent refurbishment wouldn't resolve.

After all, the 365s seem pretty popular on this board, and the 165s and 166s will be service for another 10-20 years probably!

I suspect the Networkers will be axed as the SE London routes need higher density stock, and there's nowhere else for them to go in 3rd rail land. What happens to the 376s though?

Yes, I wonder about the 376s. Captive diagrams on the Hayes line?

 

[Mikey C]

The situation with the 707s is astonishing, the apparent net waste could have reopened a couple of old branch lines. The 1st January 2020 deadline for DDA compliance has been on the horizon for a long time, yet we have 30 Class 321s being refurbished even though they'll be lucky to run in service much beyond 2019, traction package upgrades and a whole fleet of DDA compliant trains with no home.

It's a shambles and it all rests at the door of the Department for Transport. But this short-termism is not exclusive to that one Government department, so you'll be certain that similar wastes of money go on in other service industries.

Yes, the Class 411's lasted a long, long time, a handful of 309s saw further service in the North West until 2001ish but they were in a poor state by the end. The relative cheap cost of leasing new trains is certainly a factor
for the situation but so is the relatively lower running and maintenance costs of owning a fleet of new trains, then there's the lower financing costs, DDA compliance, better braking and acceleration and finally (Thameslink commuters might want to look away now) there's the "wow" factor of having a new fleet.

Those holding out hope that the Networkers (north and south of the river) and Mk3 based EMUs will be around well into the 2020s should be well advised to buy a Network Card and enjoy them now.

It does seem ironic that the Mk3 based DMUs and the Network Turbos are likely to outlast their electric counterparts, when environmentally they are far worse...

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

The irony though, booting out the 0 year old 707s yet bringing the 40 odd year old 442s back in to use.

 

[D365]

The irony though, booting out the 0 year old 707s yet bringing the 40 odd year old 442s back in to use.

Ironic indeed - they're not 40 years old at all.

 

[LOL The Irony]

The irony though, booting out the 0 year old 707s yet bringing the 40 odd year old 442s back in to use.

LOL The Irony of it....

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

LOL The Irony of it....

I was going to say that but thought it corny!

 

[Bletchleyite]

The irony though, booting out the 0 year old 707s yet bringing the 40 odd year old 442s back in to use.

Yeah. The more I think about it, the more I think...why not seat the 707s to proper 2+2 with armrests like the ScotRail 380s? They'd be very suitable then, as what's needed is basically a 350/1-a-like - suburban door layout but decent 2+2 seating.

I guess "Wessies are cheaper and will impress people"?

 

[D365]

The Desiro City is an metro design. The Class 442 is (or was) built to InterCity standard.

See the difference?

 

[Chester1]

707s will likely be altered and converted to AC and then be found a home elsewhere. They are fundamentally flawed as they are now. No toilets, underpowered and poor seats. Its hardly surprising that First had no interest in using them any longer than they have to.

Hopefully most off lease sets will be sold abroad. I know the loading gauge limits options but they could be a bargain for any railway that can use them. I suspect the Mark IIIs will go abroad because of developing countries preference for loco hauled trains and their reliable record. Slam doors wouldn't be an issue and they could be sold at barely more than their scrap value + cost of altering them for a different track gauge + shipping. Multiple units will be harder to export. Pacers, 153s and old EMUs will nearly certainly be scrapped.

 

[Class465fan]

Instead of leaving these young fleet of trains to rust in a shed then get scrap, how about selling them to other countries like they did with the MK2 coaches that were shipped to new Zealand a few years ago?

 

[D365]

Instead of leaving these young fleet of trains to rust in a shed then get scrap, how about selling them to other countries...

Which particular "young fleets" are you referring to?

 

[Class465fan]

Which particular "young fleets" are you referring to?

Desiros, electrostars and the networkers (if the networkers ever get replaced).

 

[D365]

Networkers (when they are replaced) will go straight to scrap. They're obsolete and too specialised.

And what benefit would exporting see to the UK network?

 

[Chester1]

Networkers (when they are replaced) will go straight to scrap. They're obsolete and too specialised.

And what benefit would exporting see to the UK network?

If old trains are exported it will be because they have been replaced by new stock and that there is sufficient off lease stock to meet UK needs. Its better for the rosco and for the environment that they are sold /exported and see years of potential use.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Desiro City is an metro design. The Class 442 is (or was) built to InterCity standard.

See the difference?

No. Where the doors are makes no difference to the seating type you install, and in any case an outersuburban/regional unit (like a 350/1) is a unit with a metro style layout but InterCity style seats, which is exactly what is needed for the Pompey Direct were it available. A 450 with a 350/1 interior layout would actually be perfect. Note what kind of unit Southern use on all their services.