Which type of train still in service today will you miss most when they've all been withdrawn from use on the national network?

[Lewisham2221]

170s and 153s.

I must admit to having a bit of a soft spot for 170s and 323s. 153s significantly less so - I certainly won't miss being colder and wetter on the train than the platform.

I can't imagine a time without the Sprinter family of trains though - revving up and making so much noise for so little initial progress when departing a station, so I'd probably say, as a whole family of trains, that I'd miss them the most. There's just something oddly charming about them and their character, and they pretty much define a whole era of local and regional rail travel.

 

[12LDA28C]

Neither can I. I'm surprised, I assumed I was the only one that thought like that. To be honest, I originally quite liked them, I think the problem is nowadays I associate them with all the huge ridiculous fanfare about them, and enthusiasts that go on and on about what really is a rather average train to my mind, and the more I see all of this "frothing" the more I decide I want them gone.

Maybe if you were alive when they were introduced you might have a different opinion. I'm no huge fan of HSTs given that they replaced Deltics and other LHCS on the ECML as well as 45s on the Midland and other classes on CrossCountry services but the undeniable fact is they were and still are comfortable, smooth, quiet and fast and when they arrived in the late 1970s they greatly reduced journey times between cities across the nation.

Whilst I don't really understand the devotion some have for them, conversely people who are desperate to see them gone, to be replaced by noisier, less comfortable trains in most cases need their head examined, in my opinion. The HSTs were and still are a very good train that revolutionised long-distance rail travel. Why the hate?

Indeed. I’m hearing you might want to take a trip north of the border if you want to stay in touch with them.

Not what I've heard, although maybe some are heading there also.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Maybe if you were alive when they were introduced you might have a different opinion. I'm no huge fan of HSTs given that they replaced Deltics and other LHCS on the ECML as well as 45s on the Midland and other classes on CrossCountry services but the undeniable fact is they were and still are comfortable, smooth, quiet and fast and when they arrived in the late 1970s they greatly reduced journey times between cities across the nation.

I'm not being rude but please don't bring my age into any post on the forum. It's a big bugbear of mine.
Very interesting to hear your own take on them though.

Whilst I don't really understand the devotion some have for them, conversely people who are desperate to see them gone, to be replaced by noisier, less comfortable trains in most cases need their head examined, in my opinion. The HSTs were and still are a very good train that revolutionised long-distance rail travel. Why the hate?

Well that's just it really. You've said "less comfortable," which may be your view on it, but it certainly isn't mine! EMT's HSTs with those IC70 seats were utter hell to me, and I'm no fan of the shape of the grammars on ScotRail/GWR ones either. As for noise, I tend to forget about the engine noise after a while but the squeaking the MK3 carriages make and the slamming of the doors is a constant irritant to me. Furthermore, traction noise blocks out people. I hate the sounds of people chatting loudly or little kids making racket and they're all the more evident on hauled stock. And finally, hardcore enthusiasts tend to get on them in big groups, and while I'm not trying to stereotype, in my experience these are not always pleasant to travel alongside as they tend to change seats every five minutes, call incredibly loudly to each other from different parts of the train, and wave cameras everywhere.

 

[12LDA28C]

I'm not being rude but please don't bring my age into any post on the forum. It's a big bugbear of mine.
Very interesting to hear your own take on them though.

It was merely to highlight the fact that those who were around to experience the service improvements brought about by the HSTs would have probably been more complimentary because they realised what a good train they were compared to what had gone before. Not a personal comment on your age, whatever that is.

 

[43096]

Yes, what shall really really wind me up is if they don’t get the same fanfare send off that the LNER HSTs did.

The 225s are far more significant to the ECML than the flipping HSTs, not only did HSTs go just about everywhere while the 225s have spent their whole life on the ECML, but until Azuma-fication the 225s had formed the bulk of services too. The vast majority were 225s, with just a few services to Leeds and Scotland as part of unelectrified diagrams as HSTs. The 91+MK4 sets are synonymous with the ECML and were the flagship of the route from their introduction right up to late 2019/early 2020.

The HST's significance to the ECML is that it revolutionised journey times by allowing the 125mph timetable. Without that, the case for electrification would have been much weaker. Indeed, the future of the long-distance railway would have been questionable without HST.

 

[Kneedown]

Wow, that’s some dedication!

I should've worked the last weekday HST out of Pancras, but was clean bowled when the inbound service was terminated at East Mids P'way. Hoping for better luck this time.

 

[12LDA28C]

Well that's just it really. You've said "less comfortable," which may be your view on it, but it certainly isn't mine! EMT's HSTs with those IC70 seats were utter hell to me, and I'm no fan of the shape of the grammars on ScotRail/GWR ones either. As for noise, I tend to forget about the engine noise after a while but the squeaking the MK3 carriages make and the slamming of the doors is a constant irritant to me. Furthermore, traction noise blocks out people. I hate the sounds of people chatting loudly or little kids making racket and they're all the more evident on hauled stock. And finally, hardcore enthusiasts tend to get on them in big groups, and while I'm not trying to stereotype, in my experience these are not always pleasant to travel alongside as they tend to change seats every five minutes, call incredibly loudly to each other from different parts of the train, and wave cameras everywhere.

It's rather bizarre to see someone extolling the virtues of underfloor engine noise because it blocks out the noise of passengers on the train. Is that because you only ever travel alone (nothing wrong with that by the way) and never need to have a conversation on board with a travelling companion? Some people might like to do that without having to raise their voices over the sound of the engine. And 'little kids making a racket' can be indeed unpleasant but an intolerance of that seems a little like what you were accusing me of just a minute ago! But I'm heading off topic.

I do agree with you however that some enthusiasts can be incredibly annoying when they constantly move seats, hang around in vestibules talking loudly and so on. I had that recently on a railtour and the stewards had to get involved on more than one occasion.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

It was merely to highlight the fact that those who were around to experience the service improvements brought about by the HSTs would have probably been more complimentary because they realised what a good train they were compared to what had gone before. Not a personal comment on your age, whatever that is.

Oh I know don't worry, I just don't like it being highlighted that I'm younger anymore because other forumers have learned this and tried to use it against me in other threads

The HST's significance to the ECML is that it revolutionised journey times by allowing the 125mph timetable. Without that, the case for electrification would have been much weaker.

Thank you for that, very interesting. It's hard to imagine an unnelectrified ECML.

 

[Ken H]

Oh I know don't worry, I just don't like it being highlighted that I'm younger anymore because other forumers have learned this and tried to use it against me in other threads

Thank you for that, very interesting. It's hard to imagine an unnelectrified ECML.

Oh the joys of a 3.5 hour journey from Leeds to KX in a mk 1 or early vb mk 2. Thats why HST is important.

 

[FlyingPotato]

I shall miss the 165/166, used to hate them as a child but now have a fondness for them, the smell and sound.

When they go, the 387s, I'll miss getting the morning speedy ones into London when I was going to the continent

 

[Lewisham2221]

It's interesting to note how attitudes and opinions change over time. Whilst I've never been a lover or a hater of the 390s myself, I'm surprised by the number of people expressing a fondness for them in their thread, given the general disdain for them amongst this type of audience 20 years ago

 

[pokemonsuper9]

I'm surprised by the number of people expressing a fondness for them in their thread, given the general disdain for them amongst this type of audience 20 years ago

That certainly was a long time ago, in the time since, I've grown up where 390s have been the main high speed trains near me. To me, loco hauled passenger trains were almost a myth (And I've still barely seen any).

 

[Master29]

It's interesting to note how attitudes and opinions change over time. Whilst I've never been a lover or a hater of the 390s myself, I'm surprised by the number of people expressing a fondness for them in their thread, given the general disdain for them amongst this type of audience 20 years ago

Like some things in life, at first you may hate them but in time they grow on you. The IET's will one day have some people wax lyrical about them for example.

 

[Box]

455s for me, nothing special in many ways, but remember their introduction and the vast difference from SUBs/EPBs. They’ve been the local trains for the whole of my adult life, the SWT refurb was very good and though they’re undoubtedly life-expired now they may yet make the half-century waiting for the 701s…

 

[FlyingPotato]

It's interesting to note how attitudes and opinions change over time. Whilst I've never been a lover or a hater of the 390s myself, I'm surprised by the number of people expressing a fondness for them in their thread, given the general disdain for them amongst this type of audience 20 years ago

I read somewhere that the HSTs were first disliked at entry into service, people don't like new stuff as it replaces what they have already lived with for a while. But after a while the new stuff is met with fondness as it grows on people

 

[zwk500]

I read somewhere that the HSTs were first disliked at entry into service, people don't like new stuff as it replaces what they have already lived with for a while. But after a while the new stuff is met with fondness as it grows on people

Similar thoughts are mentioned in the BTF modernisation films of the 50's and 60's by drivers. And also there have been comments from signallers when it moved from frames to panels and then panels to VDUs.

Other generational divides are visible beyond the railway.

 

[GWVillager]

I’ll have to join the ranks of people saying 158s. They’re just so incredibly good at what they do, and I don’t think I can recall a bad journey on one. How they still manage to be infinitely more pleasant to travel on than many newer stock at over 30 years old I don’t know, they just seem to be immune to ageing (at least from the passenger’s perspective!).

But I’d also have to say 170s. They’re really under-appreciated I think, and are spectacular to travel on with their near perfect ride quality and excellent sound insulation, as well as decent engine noise on the outside too! The issue with them I find is they seem to be victims of their own success and often end up with far more passengers than they were ever intended to cope with.

 

[delt1c]

The way it's going the single coach in the 455/7's will be the last of the BREL/PEP.

318's are not PEP family

 

[Jamesrob637]

The original Eurostar sets.

 

[Trainguy34]

The original Eurostar sets.

373s?

 

[Jamesrob637]

373s?

Maybe. I know them as E300

 

[12LDA28C]

It's interesting to note how attitudes and opinions change over time. Whilst I've never been a lover or a hater of the 390s myself, I'm surprised by the number of people expressing a fondness for them in their thread, given the general disdain for them amongst this type of audience 20 years ago

Indeed, it is rather surprising but I suppose it represents the demographic of some people active on this forum who don't have an appreciation of what has gone before.

 

[yorksrob]

It's struck me recently how good the 444's are.

They've certainly crammed in plenty of seats, but they've managed to make them comfortable and the interior nice and light.

 

[12LDA28C]

That certainly was a long time ago, in the time since, I've grown up where 390s have been the main high speed trains near me. To me, loco hauled passenger trains were almost a myth (And I've still barely seen any).

20 years ago is really not a long time on the railway. Ironic too, that the city you give as your location was a veritable epicentre of loco-haulage right up until the end of AC LHCS on the WCML and 47s on XC services.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

20 years ago is really not a long time on the railway

For me it is, being longer than I have been alive. I've grown up alongside 390s.
I quite rarely saw locomotives, with the 47s quoted leaving in 2002, once again before my time.

Thinking on it again the Civities will have a lot of time to grow on me, being the first new trains I ever "hunted" (quite an exaggeration but still slightly true), and whatever Northern use to replace their Sprinters will probably become one of my favourites.

 

[Statto]

Merseyrail being my local operator i'm going to miss the 507s & 508s, bit to young to remember the introduction of the 507s, but i remember the 508s being introduced after a spell on the Southern network.

I'm going to miss the 158s too, i remember them being introduced too, much prefer the 158s more to the 185s

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Indeed, it is rather surprising but I suppose it represents the demographic of some people active on this forum who don't have an appreciation of what has gone before.

I knew what was before the 390s - what I believe to be very unpleasant 90+MK3 sets as I went on many times with GA, and 87s pulling the same sort of carriages, only the seat moquette back then was a faded green. Horrible.

 

[Bletchleyite]

350s because they are good - a proper reliable workhorse EMU and built so well they still look new, while still being comfortable and pleasant.

507/508s because I grew up with them (don't really like them, though the seats beat the 777s)

 

[bramling]

It's struck me recently how good the 444's are.

They've certainly crammed in plenty of seats, but they've managed to make them comfortable and the interior nice and light.

Yet I’m not really a fan. I prefer a 350/1 type layout.

 

[HOOVER29]

The 158/159s, naturally.

Seconded