Which company/route(s) are most in need of new rolling stock where none is ordered as of June 2021?

[The Ham]

My suggestion is going to be a little left field and may cause some great scratching, however I'll explain a little why beforehand.

Whilst many have looked at one end (i.e. those units which need to be replaced) that may not be the best place to put the new trains.

As such it might be good to replace units like the 159's with a new bimodal train, with extras ordered so more services to Weymouth could be run on the substandard electrification.

That would then create a large(ish) pool of units which could then be used to replace units which are on routes where new trains may not be justified but newer trains are needed.

 

[Whistler40145]

In my humble opinion, I can't see the Class 769s being a long term solution for Northern and I'd definitely be looking at an order of Class 195s to replace 150s with 156s being the standard for local journeys

I wonder if a bi mode CAF unit could replace the 769s

 

[RobShipway]

Given we don't want to order more DMUs but the alternatives aren't here yet, isn't a full refurb in a few years -probably a bit more than a refurb if some systems are approaching unmaintainable - about all we can do? how much life has a 158 structure got left?

At what point does the cost of running the HSTs as they are overtake the cost of the option of regearing & refurbing DVTs, I wonder... far past that now, but I bet the sets hang around longer than planned.

Part of the solution is already here in the shape of the Stadler flirt bi-mode units which can be driven by overhead electric lines, on-board batteries or a diesel generator. In the same way that the diesel generators for the Hitachi AT300's can be taken out and replaced with battery units. Hitachi I believe make the same offering on a bi-mode version of the AT200, which if you want to keep the fleet with one manufacturer would be an answer. There is also a bi-mode option from what I have read on the CAF Civity fleet of trains.

Whilst it is good that GWR have kept with a fleets that they know in refurbishing both the HST and turbo fleet, I suspect that is actually cheaper than them being the first to try a bi-mode version of the AT200 or with trying a bi - mode version of the CAF Civity. I am surprised that they did not follow Greater Anglia or Transport for Wales down the Stadler flirt path (Class 755/756)? Maybe, bringing in one brand new fleet over the last 4 years has paid too high a price to be doing it again within a 10 - 15 year period? Before anyone remarks that the class 769 fleet is a new fleet, it is to GWR. But not to the market as it has been around for 20 plus years as the class 319 and that is the difference.

 

[driverd]

Given we don't want to order more DMUs but the alternatives aren't here yet, isn't a full refurb in a few years -probably a bit more than a refurb if some systems are approaching unmaintainable - about all we can do? how much life has a 158 structure got left?

I think the no new DMU policy is a real problem. Simply, we don't have the technology or infrastructure not to have DMUs. Given the pace of rail projects, I can't see that changing significantly enough within the next 30 years. Moreover, this 'no DMU' policy was ignored entirely by Northern in their bid (and, TfW/WMT) so its clearly more guidance than gospel.

The real risk we face here is that we'll either end up with 50+ year old DMUs that aren't fit for purpose, or technology rushed through that doesn't really work too well, all in aid of a broader policy goal, which was always a little bit ambitious in the first place.

My point is simply that 158s and 166s are reaching the end of what should be their life. Whilst you can refurb the interior to a high spec, you can't get rid of the inefficient, loud and invasive engine (admittedly nothing on the 150 but my point is in relation to these units). The train only has a fineite amount of spare capacity to run auxiliaries so passenger amenities will always suffer, short of a full and comprehensive re-engineering. The problem then is, as we have seen with the 769s and 230s, at what point is it simply more sensible to just order a complete new system, over re-using what we have, when in reality all that is being saved are a body shell and some bogies.

 

[ABB125]

I'd quite like to see a new fleet of class 755s for XCs "regional" routes to replace the class 170s. Though I admit the electric capability would be slightly wasted: the only electrified sections are Cardiff to Severn Tunnel Junction, Bromsgrove to Birmingham, and Ely to Stansted (and I'm not sure if the OHLE at STJ or BMV is suitably specified for pantograph up/down at speed).

Alternatively, some class 755s to replace everything on GWR's west of England operations. Quite a big fleet!

 

[Irascible]

Part of the solution is already here in the shape of the Stadler flirt bi-mode units which can be driven by overhead electric lines, on-board batteries or a diesel generator. In the same way that the diesel generators for the Hitachi AT300's can be taken out and replaced with battery units. Hitachi I believe make the same offering on a bi-mode version of the AT200, which if you want to keep the fleet with one manufacturer would be an answer. There is also a bi-mode option from what I have read on the CAF Civity fleet of trains.

Whilst it is good that GWR have kept with a fleets that they know in refurbishing both the HST and turbo fleet, I suspect that is actually cheaper than them being the first to try a bi-mode version of the AT200 or with trying a bi - mode version of the CAF Civity. I am surprised that they did not follow Greater Anglia or Transport for Wales down the Stadler flirt path (Class 755/756)? Maybe, bringing in one brand new fleet over the last 4 years has paid too high a price to be doing it again within a 10 - 15 year period? Before anyone remarks that the class 769 fleet is a new fleet, it is to GWR. But not to the market as it has been around for 20 plus years as the class 319 and that is the difference.

If Stadler do a bimode diesel/battery, maybe... but that would mean inserting two powercars or making a long one, or murdering performance. Chances of any wires getting anywhere near where most of the 90s fleet works is miniscule to zero, so no point lugging unused full-electric mode kit around. If the others have something that's been tested in anger then perhaps yep - although even though we know the 158/166 fleets are getting towards EoL they've got a little left ( I hope, or we're going to be using HSTs for everything down here... ) so there's time to prove technology a bit - and hopefully work out a configuration that can manage repeated steep climbs while still having enough battery onboard for it to be worth it.

 

[RobShipway]

If Stadler do a bimode diesel/battery, maybe... but that would mean inserting two powercars or making a long one, or murdering performance. Chances of any wires getting anywhere near where most of the 90s fleet works is miniscule to zero, so no point lugging unused full-electric mode kit around. If the others have something that's been tested in anger then perhaps yep - although even though we know the 158/166 fleets are getting towards EoL they've got a little left ( I hope, or we're going to be using HSTs for everything down here... ) so there's time to prove technology a bit - and hopefully work out a configuration that can manage repeated steep climbs while still having enough battery onboard for it to be worth it.

Well, the other possibility is to have class 230 Diesel-Battery Hybrids as per TFW. But as you say there is time to prove that technology on the routes that the class 230 units will be serving with TFW before hopefully it can be fitted to another manufacturers types of unit.

 

[JonathanH]

Bromsgrove to Birmingham

Only if you are going to put them on the slow line between Longbridge and Kings Norton.

755s would be a bit wasted at the moment as XC replacements for 170s as you say. They probably are a bit lacking on fuel tank capacity for XC as well.

 

[ABB125]

Only if you are going to put them on the slow line between Longbridge and Kings Norton.

Of course, I can't believe I forgot that!

They probably are a bit lacking on fuel tank capacity for XC as well.

That too

 

[Trainician]

I will say Southeastern need new stock especially the High Speed Stock

 

[RobShipway]

I will say Southeastern need new stock especially the High Speed Stock

I presume that this comment was done tongue in cheek, as the class 395 units are only 12 years old! That is like still school age, compared to the 45 years of the class 313's.

 

[JonathanH]

I presume that this comment was done tongue in cheek, as the class 395 units are only 12 years old! That is like still school age, compared to the 45 years of the class 313's.

I think the implication was that the fleet of 29 395s needs to be increased not replaced.

 

[Bayum]

West Highland Line 156s
Although the stock isn't unusable, the 5 hour "world's most scenic railway journey" deserves better in 2021.
How about some panoramic stock, a proper buffet (post COVID) and maybe a commentary to really make it a tourist attraction.

I agree though to that XC need more stock and 313s are in dire need of retirement.

Just look at the sort of panoramic trains other countries have like Japan or Switzerland. I’d argue we should have something similar for Leeds - Carlisle