Which train type will you miss the least when they are all withdrawn?

[W-on-Sea]

Class 360s, have never liked them without ever being able to quantify exactly why

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

How exactly were the 230s a 'vanity project'? Admittedly they took longer to get into service than envisaged but when they worked they were decent units which were much cheaper than buying similarly-specified brand new units which were clearly never going to be procured.

Has the Marston Vale got 'nice new stock' now that the 230s have gone? No.

No because there wasn’t time. Had they ordered it when they ordered the 230s they would have. Your example further proves my point.

 

[Parallel]

For me, I won’t miss the 150s and 156s. I’ve never really liked either.

Class 165s and 166s can also be added to the list. They’re not as bad as the ones above in my opinion but they’re still not pleasant to travel on. They’re noisy, cramped, rattly and sluggish.

 

[Ben Anslow]

Mark 1 coaching stock.

Asbestos riddled things

anything hitachi built would have said caf too but as poor quality as they are I’ve grown fond of 195s over the years awfully fun to be on after a few beers on a Friday night. And as much as it pains me to say it as I really like them 156s need to go they are rotting terribly now going for major strip downs every 3/4 years corrosion is causing to many problems for them and the interiors are knackered and not very well maintained either and a major problem that is part of the corrosion issue is moisture gets trapped between the interior panels the windows and door frames making them rot inside out however can’t think of much suitable rolling stock options for the Cumbria coast lines because the tunnels with the height and width restrictions

 

[12LDA28C]

Asbestos riddled things

Really? Which Mark 1s operative on the national network still contain asbestos?

 

[D6130]

Which Mark 1s operative on the national network still contain asbestos?

None....as far as I'm aware.

 

[12LDA28C]

None....as far as I'm aware.

Well, indeed hence my question. Not actually 'asbestos riddled' then.

 

[D6130]

Well, indeed hence my question. Not actually 'asbestos riddled' then.

Indeed not! I wonder where @Ben Anslow found that little piece of misinformation?

 

[SouthEastern-465]

Class 700s, 707, 717. Just horrid trains all round. Not only super uncomfortable with the notorious ironing board seats. The open corridors between carriages letting sound from the entire train through... Could be sent for scrap tomorrow and I wouldn't bat an eyelid.

 

[Ben Anslow]

Indeed not! I wonder where @Ben Anslow found that little piece of misinformation?

I was told by someone who worked at west coast carnforth quite a few of the mk1s when they acquired them had a lot between interior panels to make them more resistant to fire idk maybe false

 

[androdas]

XC voyagers. Cramped, smelly and noisy and always seem to be used on routes that are way over capacity

 

[D6130]

I was told by someone who worked at west coast carnforth quite a few of the mk1s when they acquired them had a lot between interior panels to make them more resistant to fire idk maybe false

No....it is true that a very large proportion of Mark 1 carriages were insulated with blue asbestos when newly-built, but I believe that most of the vehicles still in main line service have had it removed - at considerable expense.

 

[infobleep]

455. No loos on board. Maybe others with no loos but I don't use the other classes without loos.

 

[LiftFan]

166s for me. I’m no fan of the 165s either but the air cooling seems to redeem it a little. But the 166s were already knackered when sent west, been put on routes entirely unsuitable for them and have the dingiest passenger environment I’ve seen on a train, worsened by that constant high pitch whine the ever weak air conditioning gives off.

 

[DarloRich]

Voyager. Voyager. Voyager.

 

[D6130]

Voyager, Voyager, Voyager, Voyager!

 

[bramling]

166s for me. I’m no fan of the 165s either but the air cooling seems to redeem it a little. But the 166s were already knackered when sent west, been put on routes entirely unsuitable for them and have the dingiest passenger environment I’ve seen on a train, worsened by that constant high pitch whine the ever weak air conditioning gives off.

The situation with the 165/166 is quite sad really, as they are fundamentally quite decent trains. In particular the interior is more roomy than the Turbostars.

The GWR fleet seems to have been pushed from pillar to post as electrification plans have changed, whilst Chiltern’s units are better but seem to suffer from Chiltern’s main depot being chronically under-sized for the fleet it now maintains, and also Chiltern’s transition from the glory days of Shooter to a bargain-basement Arriva operation.

The whole Turbo/Networker fleet is a case of “what might have been”, as none of the fleets seem to have been developed to their proper potential. In the case of Southeastern it’s simply a case of being left to rot, just like many of their stations, and the 365s were the victims of a particularly unfortunate refurbishment which rather spoiled them.

 

[SolomonSouth]

The whole Turbo/Networker fleet is a case of “what might have been”, as none of the fleets seem to have been developed to their proper potential. In the case of Southeastern it’s simply a case of being left to rot, just like many of their stations, and the 365s were the victims of a particularly unfortunate refurbishment which rather spoiled them.

As I said earlier in the thread, I disagree. There are many problems with the Networker design that the Desiro/Electrostar don't have.

 

[SouthEastern-465]

The situation with the 165/166 is quite sad really, as they are fundamentally quite decent trains. In particular the interior is more roomy than the Turbostars.

The GWR fleet seems to have been pushed from pillar to post as electrification plans have changed, whilst Chiltern’s units are better but seem to suffer from Chiltern’s main depot being chronically under-sized for the fleet it now maintains, and also Chiltern’s transition from the glory days of Shooter to a bargain-basement Arriva operation.

The whole Turbo/Networker fleet is a case of “what might have been”, as none of the fleets seem to have been developed to their proper potential. In the case of Southeastern it’s simply a case of being left to rot, just like many of their stations, and the 365s were the victims of a particularly unfortunate refurbishment which rather spoiled them.

Very true. Every SouthEastern franchise since Connex seems to have neglected 465/466s to the point they are in a right state now. Given the right care and overhauls them along with their diesel sisters would be pretty decent units...

They seem to just give them a tidy up on the outside and slap a new livery on thats the only TLC they get.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

I think voyagers suffered from a post privatisation trend in ordering new stock, order fewer carriages than you're replacing. It happened across most franchises at the time, could advertise new stock with the bare minimum orders.

 

[Richard Scott]

I think voyagers suffered from a post privatisation trend in ordering new stock, order fewer carriages than you're replacing. It happened across most franchises at the time, could advertise new stock with the bare minimum orders.

To be honest I don't care how many coaches they have I just don't think they're particularly nice trains. Too much noise and vibration from engines and their environmental credentials must be fairly dire?

 

[D6130]

and their environmental credentials must be fairly dire?

....is that from the engine emisssions or from the toilet fumes?

 

[Richard Scott]

....is that from the engine emisssions or from the toilet fumes?

Engines but point taken on the toilet!

 

[lkpridgeon]

150's hands down. They're loud, vibrate too much, look awful and all the internal layouts I've seen are pretty bad. I think they should have gone before the Pacers, at least they had some character.

 

[bramling]

150's hands down. They're loud, vibrate too much, look awful and all the internal layouts I've seen are pretty bad. I think they should have gone before the Pacers, at least they had some character.

What’s wrong with the GWR / TfW interior layout? I agree that Northern’s units aren’t great (though I personally don’t mind the 150/1s with the 3+2 facing layout, as per the class 317), but there’s nothing really wrong with the ones I’ve mentioned above. I find them quite decent actually, and I’ve always been someone who has never been keen on 150s precisely because of the interior layouts.

 

[popeter45]

175's and 180's
also 92's and 66's

 

[lkpridgeon]

What’s wrong with the GWR / TfW interior layout? I agree that Northern’s units aren’t great (though I personally don’t mind the 150/1s with the 3+2 facing layout, as per the class 317), but there’s nothing really wrong with the ones I’ve mentioned above. I find them quite decent actually, and I’ve always been someone who has never been keen on 150s precisely because of the interior layouts.

The lighting mainly followed by the overhead luggage racks not being available for every seat (generally the one I end up in). I also have an irrational dislike for the door area dividers and the location of the grab poles.

 

[12LDA28C]

175's and 180's
also 92's and 66's

Any particular reason?

Personally I can't stand 66s but 92s are pretty good, extremely powerful locomotives. 66s replaced many 'classic' traction types on UK freight and the design is hideous although I appreciate they are relatively simple and easy to maintain compared to older locos.

 

[popeter45]

Any particular reason?

Personally I can't stand 66s but 92s are pretty good, extremely powerful locomotives. 66s replaced many 'classic' traction types on UK freight and the design is hideous although I appreciate they are relatively simple and easy to maintain compared to older locos.

92's feel like they were designed to do everything but in the process ended up pretty limited
can run on third rail but so power hungry they can only run on very specific routes and even them would impact other traffic due to the power draw so in reality never did such freight
they have TVM so can run on HS1 but only 87mph so cant really take any advantage of HS1 apart from being OHLE to the tunnel, also no KVM and no approval past the fench side of the tunnel so freight always needs to swap locomotives once in france
87mph limit makes them pretty useless for any passenger work bar the sleepers and even then the slow max speed makes making up lost time nearly impossible (unlike the 90's before hand)

66's beacuse the replacements look to finally be bi/tri modes so after 66's hopefully far less disel under wires

 

[gabrielhj07]

The 'half-baked' Electrostars: 376 & 378.

700s