The next five classes to be withdrawn

[tbtc]

What will the next five classes of train (locomotive or unit) to be withdrawn from regular "mainline" service in the UK?

Whilst new trains are being built (and planned for), there's still no end in sight for trains that *should* have been scrapped by now (HSTs and Pacers weren't meant to still be running in 2010 when they were built).

Even when new trains are built, the older units are either cascaded elsewhere or coupled together to provide additional capacity.

So, what do you reckon will be next?

(obviously "should be withdrawn next" and "will be withdrawn next" are different)

 

[starrymarkb]

314, 43, 143, 144, 142

 

[CROMPTON 33]

it's got to be the class 58 when they return . and the class 60 just look at all that stock at toton rotting away. emu class 460 when they are split up for swt class 458. class 483 iow stock. class 90 as there are some that have not moved for a long time.

 

[mumrar]

it's got to be the class 58 when they return . and the class 60 just look at all that stock at toton rotting away. emu class 460 when they are split up for swt class 458. class 483 iow stock. class 90 as there are some that have not moved for a long time.

Being as 58s were never TPWS or OTMR fitted, it could be argued they were withdrawn some time ago

 

[poshbakerloo]

143, 144, 142

Hurray!

 

[Dreadnought]

it's got to be the class 58 when they return .

Surely these will be ideal to be used in the construction of HS2 (if it ever happens!!)

As for the next withdrawal, 3-CIGs finish in May bringing an end to slam door units (except 2 bubble cars) in regular service.

If IEP gets off the ground then HSTs and 91s must be candidates for withdrawal as there is limited cascade options for these then.

The electrification projects could spell the start of the end for pacers but I'm sure some will continue somewhere in the country for many years to come

Then who knows, 60s are always mentioned but keep soldiering on, and I'm sure I read that 314s are going to be retained in Scotland even after the new 380s are delivered.

 

[TDK]

What will the next five classes of train (locomotive or unit) to be withdrawn from regular "mainline" service in the UK?

Whilst new trains are being built (and planned for), there's still no end in sight for trains that *should* have been scrapped by now (HSTs and Pacers weren't meant to still be running in 2010 when they were built).

Even when new trains are built, the older units are either cascaded elsewhere or coupled together to provide additional capacity.

So, what do you reckon will be next?

(obviously "should be withdrawn next" and "will be withdrawn next" are different)

321, 319, 317, class 90's, 323's

 

[Jordy]

I'd highly doubt those 4 will. Compared to some rolling stock, 321s and particularly 323s are fairly new! 323s were only built 1992-93. I don't think class 90s will go anywhere particularly soon, as there is no alternative loco suitable for passenger and freight work available. Many 319s and 317s have both been refurbed fairly recently and I cant see them going anywhere yet either.

 

[Royston Vasey]

I suspect that these days, the answer to this question may also have something to do with how saleable the assets are. We have seen the 87s and 86s sold abroad and I have a suspicion that they won't be the last.

A combination of a high-profile replacement being built (IEP) and the fact that they are highly saleable means that the HSTs are my nominations for next withdrawal. 150s, 142s etc are ready to go, but nothing is coming to replace them - and as the OP stated, most new stock these days leads to cascading or capacity additions to existing services.

New stock is coming for Thameslink, but the 319s are candidates for cascading to local services elsewhere (North West, Thames corridor?) I suspect the reasons the Mk III EMUs are quoted here are cosmetic not practical. Funds will be under pressure in a stagnant economy where IEP is sapping what investment is available - so refurb and life-extend are likely to be the preferred option over new build.

The 91s won't be scrapped - in fact the 91s could be used on the GEML with either Mk 3s or Mk 4s as an alternative to 90s. But a possibility could be that the 91s be used on the freight they were originally destined for - electric freight may have a renaissance when more of the country is electrified - and may be a better option than unreliable 90s or power-hungry 92s.

Just a thought!

 

[The Planner]

I cant see an awful lot being taken out of service at all. HSTs will find a natural home back doing XC work. 319s as already mentioned seem to be going everywhere as part of the "planned" electrification works. 323s have years left in them. 90s will still be hauling freight and expect 92s to come back with a vengance as freight along the WCML is getting longer and longer. A 92 hauled the HOBC up and down the WCML in a test a while back without breaking into a sweat.

 

[GNERman]

class 142, 143, 60, 31, 313

 

[A60K]

It's interesting to hear thoughts that 90s, 317s and 150s should be withdrawn soon - the very oldest of these are all less than 30 years years old. In Switzerland, which is a reasonably efficient and modern country, there is still stock in service that is considerably older than this, sometimes twice the age.

Are we (specifically British Rail workshops) really useless at making stock to last, or is it just a case of "it's old, so it's no good"?

 

[poshbakerloo]

Are we (specifically British Rail workshops) really useless at making stock to last, or is it just a case of "it's old, so it's no good"?

I think with the 150s it is a case of "it's old, so it's no good"...If they had a decent amount of money spent on them, then they really could be great! The 142s however...

 

[Oswyntail]

....
Are we (specifically British Rail workshops) really useless at making stock to last, or is it just a case of "it's old, so it's no good"?

I think we do make things to last (and there is no way that most of the classes being mentioned are anything like being life expired). Where we do seem to fall down (and this is a national thing, IMHO, not confined to rail) is in looking after things properly. We seem to have had a "replace not maintain" attitude drummed in to us, with the consequence that items with a lot of life left in are simply left to rot. Apply some of the modern maintenance techniques (as used by, eg Siemens) to even 142s and the could go on for years. And, by not replacing usable stock, we could actually use funds to expand stock holdings.

 

[Failed Unit]

If IEP gets off the ground then HSTs and 91s must be candidates for

Remember the IEP sets that would replace the 91's are only an option to the main order, one that could very easily be cancelled when someone works out we can't afford to replace perfectly serviceable trains with 20 years life left. I will be amazed if the 91's will get withdrawn.

The HST may gain some extra life once it starts been removed from the mainline with open access operators trying to buy them up. As long as they work they will be good for an open access operator to test the market before buying other stock. I am sure WSRC would have gone for them over the Mk3's + 67's if they could have.

Anyway back to the question,

The PEP's for me 313, 314, 507/8, 143, 153

Could be wrong about the PEP's they are simple things and don't have the next round of passengers access issues like the 153's do.

 

[The Planner]

The HST may gain some extra life once it starts been removed from the mainline with open access operators trying to buy them up. As long as they work they will be good for an open access operator to test the market before buying other stock. I am sure WSRC would have gone for them over the Mk3's + 67's if they could have..

If you mean WSMR then I doubt they would have ever got paths if they used HSTs, a 67 would thrash it from a standing start and up to speed.

 

[SouthEastern-465]

The Class 313s for a start there only a couple of years younger than the Class 423 VEPs.

 

[Ivo]

If I had my way, the list would look like this:

142 143 144 150 321

...but we all know that DafT loves its Pacers! I can see the 150s being among the next to go, though. Similarly, as much as I would prefer otherwise, the 43s must be candidates for the next major withdrawal, unless as previously suggested they all end up in XC livery (No!!!!! I'll do anything!!!!! I'll buy them all if I have to!!!!! ...on a student loan? ). I honestly can't see any of the 313/4/5 series going, because they're cheap (and not just to maintain!), and other AC EMUs are too modern.

Ultimately, I think that the following would be a reasonable estimate:

43 90 150 507 508

 

[tbtc]

Interesting that some think the 150s will go before the 142/143/144s

The 90s may have more of a life hauling freight if/ when more of the country is wired up - for example a fair bit of freight comes through Sheffield, which could be (at least part) electric hauled if the MML was electrified - there may be little short term use for them, but more scope in a few years time

I suspect that these days, the answer to this question may also have something to do with how saleable the assets are. We have seen the 87s and 86s sold abroad and I have a suspicion that they won't be the last

Whilst we've sold trains to Bulgaria/ Iran/ Canada etc, we've never imported units from elsewhere have we? That'd be one way of scaring the ROSCOs :roll:

 

[Failed Unit]

If you mean WSMR then I doubt they would have ever got paths if they used HSTs, a 67 would thrash it from a standing start and up to speed.

I did and you know more than me but a 67 would be better than a 5 car HST for point-to-point? Didn't HST's used to be able to use sprinter differentials, they certainly could in the days of the Cleethorpes - London service.

I was that WSMR would have prefered a known set as would GC rather than the problems of getting Mk3's converted to work with HST's or 67's respectively. Maybe failed trains limited may start his Edinburgh - Penzance via WCML service (OK maybe not as HST's don't tilt!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If I had my way, the list would look like this:

142 143 144 150 321

321? The most reliable EMU in of the BR generation in the UK?

Ultimately, I think that the following would be a reasonable estimate:

43 90 150 507 508

I would think that the 150 would outlast both the pacer and the 153. The 150 can be converted (not sure about economically) to have a disabled toilet and all the other things the 2020 regulations require whereas the 14x's and the 153's can't. In fact I doubt a wheelchair would be able to fit through the doors at the toilet end!

 

[Ivo]

321? The most reliable EMU in of the BR generation in the UK?

Most reliable? Maybe [I actually thought that the 357s were, once the initial problems were ironed out]. Nice to travel on? No!!!!! Why do they have to run the Southend Victoria line? Bah! I hate them! Prefer them to Pacers though. Then again, who wouldn't?

I would think that the 150 would outlast both the pacer and the 153. The 150 can be converted (not sure about economically) to have a disabled toilet and all the other things the 2020 regulations require whereas the 14x's and the 153's can't.

Yes, fair argument, and I did initially put the 153 in that list instead of the 508. But I honestly believe that DafT will find some cheap way to bail the Pacers to keep the cost down. For all we know, they might make them more bus-like (heaven forbid!) and remove the central doors, thus giving each units doors only at the cab ends, to provide more room for a toilet! If anyone at DafT reads this, please note that I am an Aspie and therefore have no sensible opinions and should thus be ignored.

 

[Failed Unit]

Most reliable? Maybe [I actually thought that the 357s were, once the initial problems were ironed out]. Nice to travel on? No!!!!! Why do they have to run the Southend Victoria line? Bah! I hate them!

Of the BR generation, the 357's are privatisation EMU's hence fall into a different class. May 4th generation?

There is hope for the 321's if you want to improve the seats then imagine if they were refurbished to the same standard as either the 317/6 or 317/7's

 

[tbtc]

I honestly believe that DafT will find some cheap way to bail the Pacers to keep the cost down. For all we know, they might make them more bus-like (heaven forbid!) and remove the central doors, thus giving each units doors only at the cab ends, to provide more room for a toilet!

(I'm being Devil's Advocate here - not saying "this should happen", just "what if this did happen")

What if they got rid of toilets from the Pacers? Wouldn't that be a way of getting round the Disability legislation? After all, not all new trains have toilets. Making things worse for able bodied passengers would be a backwards step, obviously, but is there anything to stop them doing it (and would this allow the Pacers to continue for years to come)?

(again, I'm being Devil's Advocate here - not saying "this should happen", just "what if this did happen")

 

[Failed Unit]

(I'm being Devil's Advocate here - not saying "this should happen", just "what if this did happen")

What if they got rid of toilets from the Pacers? Wouldn't that be a way of getting round the Disability legislation? After all, not all new trains have toilets. Making things worse for able bodied passengers would be a backwards step, obviously, but is there anything to stop them doing it (and would this allow the Pacers to continue for years to come)?

(again, I'm being Devil's Advocate here - not saying "this should happen", just "what if this did happen")

Not sure if the pacers would still fail, no step free access although that isn't an issue on most of the routes they work on. Likewise there is legislation about the amount of force that a wheelchair can exhert on the door without it damaging. I doubt a pacer would ever meet that standard.

If however the pacer did have its toilets removed to let it solider on, lets hope it would be the end of it on journeys above 1 hour! Sheffield to Lincoln would be even more unpleasent as most of the rural stations don't have toilets to relieve yourself before you board.

Not sure what the longest journey time is in the UK on trains without a toilet. Quite a few in London around the hour mark. Won't count Cockfosters - Heathrow on the tube for 2 reasons. 1 very few people choose to do it and 2. due to its high frequency you could get off at many of the stations on route with a toilet to relieve yourself and continue without too much delay.

 

[Ivo]

Of the BR generation, the 357's are privatisation EMU's hence fall into a different class. May 4th generation?

There is hope for the 321's if you want to improve the seats then imagine if they were refurbished to the same standard as either the 317/6 or 317/7's

Sorry. My mistake. I didn't realise you said "BR". I still don't like them though!

(I'm being Devil's Advocate here - not saying "this should happen", just "what if this did happen")

What if they got rid of toilets from the Pacers? Wouldn't that be a way of getting round the Disability legislation? After all, not all new trains have toilets. Making things worse for able bodied passengers would be a backwards step, obviously, but is there anything to stop them doing it (and would this allow the Pacers to continue for years to come)?

(again, I'm being Devil's Advocate here - not saying "this should happen", just "what if this did happen")

Oh, no! No! NO!!!!! Never mind Devil's Advocate, that's Serpell's Advocate! In theory, a good call. In practice, still probably a good call (just keep Pacers on the shorter routes as Failed Unit suggests). To those who know even the slightest about Pacers... [searches for shotgun; aiming for minister who enforces this idea]

 

[tbtc]

Not sure if the pacers would still fail, no step free access although that isn't an issue on most of the routes they work on. Likewise there is legislation about the amount of force that a wheelchair can exhert on the door without it damaging. I doubt a pacer would ever meet that standard.

If however the pacer did have its toilets removed to let it solider on, lets hope it would be the end of it on journeys above 1 hour! Sheffield to Lincoln would be even more unpleasent as most of the rural stations don't have toilets to relieve yourself before you board

That's a very fair response, thanks.

I'm not suggesting it'd be a good idea to take toilets out, but a Pacer would still be suitable for stand alone lines like Manchester to Marple, the Barton line, Wakefield to Pontefract etc (note, I'm not mentioning the Anniesland line, whatever my feelings about it!) - relatively short rotes where it wouldn't stray onto anything longer distance

(and, believe me, as a Crohn's sufferer, knowing whether a train has a toilet or not is an important consideration!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Oh, no! No! NO!!!!! Never mind Devil's Advocate, that's Serpell's Advocate! In theory, a good call. In practice, still probably a good call (just keep Pacers on the shorter routes as Failed Unit suggests). To those who know even the slightest about Pacers... [searches for shotgun; aiming for minister who enforces this idea]

Sorry

(won't do it again, promise!)

 

[A60K]

Whilst we've sold trains to Bulgaria/ Iran/ Canada etc, we've never imported units from elsewhere have we? That'd be one way of scaring the ROSCOs :roll:

You would be lucky to find any stock from overseas (apart from Ireland) that will fit within our vehicle loading gauges, even on the Great Western.

Some RhB stock from Switzerland would fit, but you would need to rebogie it to standard track gauge. And they tend to keep hold of stock for quite a while, think this year they've been withdrawing some stock built in 1909!

 

[jopsuk]

large parts of the fleets at SWT, LM, fTPE, some of NXEA and soon ScotRail are imports, no? Plus a fleet at SE. And most of the diesel freight locos. Though if the point is no second hand imports, then that is true.

 

[Fincra5]

Not really sure that any will be withdrawn for several years. Even though the 313s are about 30years old they still seem to run fine and (i believe) meet all the saftey criteria etc. The thing is with the pacers they are dirt cheap to run, so i reckon they will be run to the ground.

 

[Failed Unit]

The thing is with the pacers they are dirt cheap to run, so i reckon they will be run to the ground.

I bet the BR management at the time wouldn't agree with you with the amount of money they spent modifying them to make the fit for purpose. They are cheap to lease but are they cheap to run. I know they MPC has increased a lot, but surely it is better to have a train that can do 7000MPC rather than one that struggles to make 5000MPC. Less money spent compensating passengers and other operators.

The safety criteria is interesting, people were calling for them to go with the mk1s as they are not better structually then the mk1. (Look at todays railway UK this month and the photo of one visiting Liverpool Lime Street to see what I mean). We have just been lucky that all the accidents with them have been ECS