31X's-bound for West Yorkshire?

[northwichcat]

At least the 313s, 314s and 315s wouldn't need new toilets fitting come 2020.

That's assuming they are put on 'Metro' style services, something that isn't commonplace outside London and the South East.

Fitting those trains with toilets would be cheaper than building and maintaining a lot of new station toilets instead.

I don't see why you couldn't get 47 years out them.

Could get 47 years out of them isn't the same as saying almost certainly will get 47 years out of them. Investing a lot in rolling stock that isn't almost certain to last at least another 8 or so years possibly would be deemed non-economically viable.

The fact that there are many stored 508s is just because, shamefully, they weren't maintained properly.

And in contrast the Merseyrail ones have had a huge amount of investment to keep them in service and apparently they still have to deal with corrosion problems to keep them going and even with that investment there's been a couple of occasions where a lot of units have had to be taken out of service simultaneously leaving a reduced service.

 

[tom1649]

You're entitled to your opinion. It is true that the LUL A Stock at 50 years old has aluminium bodies and could have contributed to their long life. Maybe they've just had a 'huge amount of investment' to keep them going that long.

 

[northwichcat]

You're entitled to your opinion. It is true that the LUL A Stock at 50 years old has aluminium bodies and could have contributed to their long life. Maybe they've just had a 'huge amount of investment' to keep them going that long.

London Underground trains do have longer life expectancy than standard EMUs. I imagine being less exposed to the elements helps.

While a lot of people have negative opinions of old LU stock on the Harrogate line, the fact that old LU stock has even been considered while the Merseyrail 507s and 508s have not been is probably down to the longer life expectancy of LU stock.

 

[tom1649]

In addition, steel built 1938 stock (Class 483) is still happily trundling up and down the Island Line at 74 years old. If that doesn't show the longevity of LT designed rolling stock I don't know what does. Can anyone imagine Central Line 1992 stock running at 74 years old? I doubt it.

 

[ainsworth74]

In addition, steel built 1938 stock (Class 483) is still happily trundling up and down the Island Line at 74 years old. If that doesn't show the longevity of LT designed rolling stock I don't know what does. Can anyone imagine Central Line 1992 stock running at 74 years old? I doubt it.

Trundling being the operative word surely? The Island Line hardly works an intensive service does it at 2tph along an eight mile route with low speeds and with the workload spread between five units I'd be worried if they couldn't manage the service whatever their age was!

 

[tom1649]

They still reach their maximum operating speed of 45mph.

Seems I can't win any argument today!

It's just as well you don't have me running the network.

 

[tbtc]

That's assuming they are put on 'Metro' style services, something that isn't commonplace outside London and the South East

The Cardiff Valleys and suburban routes around Glasgow (Whifflet, East Kilbride, Anniesland, Cumbernauld, Paisley Canal etc) being exceptions (though I broadly agree with you).

 

[John55]

London Underground trains do have longer life expectancy than standard EMUs. I imagine being less exposed to the elements helps.

While a lot of people have negative opinions of old LU stock on the Harrogate line, the fact that old LU stock has even been considered while the Merseyrail 507s and 508s have not been is probably down to the longer life expectancy of LU stock.

This is due to the fact that A stock is going to the scrap man at a rate of knots today whereas the 507/8s are not and will not for several years.

 

[LE Greys]

Surely all this proves is that we need loads more 378s (and possibly 478s/510s) to take over from all the PEP and MkIII-based EMUs. They've had their day. A temporary home might be found in Yorkshre, something like what happened with the 308s, but not for very long until the new units replace them. I think that's what BR would have done if they could. I also hope the 365s stay where they are for as long as possible, purely because I like them.

 

[Class377/5]

Surely all this proves is that we need loads more 378s (and possibly 478s/510s) to take over from all the PEP and MkIII-based EMUs. They've had their day. A temporary home might be found in Yorkshre, something like what happened with the 308s, but not for very long until the new units replace them. I think that's what BR would have done if they could. I also hope the 365s stay where they are for as long as possible, purely because I like them.

Why 376/378? Its a 90's design. By the time you'd be going for building all these, the design would be 20 years old.

Why not use the new design in the Adventra or Desiro City? No backwards compatablility issues and you get trains that are upto the latest standards.

The 365 will likely live out their lives on the GN. No point displacing them for a simlar size fleet of new units when they are not needed any time soon.

 

[transmanche]

London Underground trains do have longer life expectancy than standard EMUs. I imagine being less exposed to the elements helps.

Most of the LU network is actually above ground.

The A stock in particular spends most of its time above ground on the Met, with some tunnel sections closer to the city centre - and TBH that's not dissimilar to the 508s average working pattern.

 

[northwichcat]

The A stock in particular spends most of its time above ground on the Met, with some tunnel sections closer to the city centre - and TBH that's not dissimilar to the 508s average working pattern.

While there is little difference between the 507s and the 508s, the 508s seem to be more concentrated on Southport-Hunts Cross services than Wirral services. There is a huge difference between the amount of time spent underground on a Chester-Liverpool-Chester run and a West Kirby-Liverpool-West Kirby run.

This is due to the fact that A stock is going to the scrap man at a rate of knots today whereas the 507/8s are not and will not for several years.

If the 508s could do 45+ years in service it would be worth investing in work on the 508s that are currently stored. However, considering that's unlikely with the ones that have already had a lot of life extension work done on them it's not economically viable to do the work on the stored 508s and is something Merseyrail looked at but decided in using their current stock more intensively instead.

Merseyrail have issued an invitation to tender for replacement EMUs but are looking at the option of delaying the procurement of new units.

 

[transmanche]

Most of the LU network is actually above ground.

The A stock in particular spends most of its time above ground on the Met, with some tunnel sections closer to the city centre - and TBH that's not dissimilar to the 508s average working pattern.

While there is little difference between the 507s and the 508s, the 508s seem to be more concentrated on Southport-Hunts Cross services than Wirral services. There is a huge difference between the amount of time spent underground on a Chester-Liverpool-Chester run and a West Kirby-Liverpool-West Kirby run.

Jolly good. Doesn't negate my point though.

 

[LE Greys]

Why 376/378? Its a 90's design. By the time you'd be going for building all these, the design would be 20 years old.

Why not use the new design in the Adventra or Desiro City? No backwards compatablility issues and you get trains that are upto the latest standards.

The 365 will likely live out their lives on the GN. No point displacing them for a simlar size fleet of new units when they are not needed any time soon.

Chiefly because they are good units of a proven design that work well where they are and I reckon they're a lot better than any Siemens design (so it's partly a personal view). I'm not sure we need yet another generation of stock just yet. We haven't really had a single standard design since the MkI-based units fifty years ago, so now would be a time to do something similar.

 

[Class377/5]

Chiefly because they are good units of a proven design that work well where they are and I reckon they're a lot better than any Siemens design (so it's partly a personal view). I'm not sure we need yet another generation of stock just yet. We haven't really had a single standard design since the MkI-based units fifty years ago, so now would be a time to do something similar.

What you reckon isn't always right. Look at the figures from Jan's Modern Railways and you'll see your view isn't share by actual facts.

As for not needing another generation of units, none of the current train builders agree with you. (Look at Bombardier offering a 379 like design over a 377 for Southern). Whether its for the greater good or not we're getting another generation. Passenger expect more and more (wifi, plugs etc), keeping with current designs simply puts people off travelling compared to other means.

 

[northwichcat]

Jolly good. Doesn't negate my point though.

The LU doesn't have any train running any service. A train running West Kirby-Liverpool may be underground as much as the average LU train but there isn't specific stock allocated to that service.

Also you've not mentioned that not all LU services go to the end of the line, with Merseyrail you don't get a train terminating at Hooton and then the next one continuing to Chester except during disruption.

 

[transmanche]

The LU doesn't have any train running any service. A train running West Kirby-Liverpool may be underground as much as the average LU train but there isn't specific stock allocated to that service.

Also you've not mentioned that not all LU services go to the end of the line, with Merseyrail you don't get a train terminating at Hooton and then the next one continuing to Chester except during disruption.

Again, jolly good. But it still doesn't negate my point though.