Unprecedented numbers of modern traction in storage?

[387star]

So far we have 379s 175s and TPE mk5s either in or soon to enter storage. This is shocking

A new record?

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

So far we have 379s 175s and TPE mk5s either in or soon to enter storage. This is shocking

A new record?

Not yet a record. When new the whole 317 class was stored until the DOO dispute was resolved.

 

[Towers]

Not yet a record. When new the whole 317 class was stored until the DOO dispute was resolved.

We can pretty much equal that with the 701s though can’t we? Admittedly stored ‘unserviceable’, but still very much ‘modern traction in storage’!

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

We can pretty much equal that with the 701s though can’t we? Admittedly stored ‘unserviceable’, but still very much ‘modern traction in storage’!

On reflection the total number of vehicles involved probably is higher now.

The BedPan situation was due to parties within the industry failing to reach an agreement: this was always going to be resolved sooner rather than later. The problem today is due to financial chicanery arising from the way the industry has been structured by politicians in order to achieve (quasi-)privatisation and it's difficult to see how it can be resolved short of a major change in government policy which itself will surely need a change in government.

In the case of the former passengers were forced to continue travelling in tired DMUs. I'm not sure the latter is really bothering anyone outside the industry apart from keen observers.

 

[Towers]

As well as 317s was there not a similar situation with the 456s, all of which were stored for a time at Fratton depot I believe?

 

[DelW]

In the case of the former passengers were forced to continue travelling in tired DMUs. I'm not sure the latter is really bothering anyone outside the industry apart from keen observers.

I doubt that passengers on overcrowded and short-formed SWR 455s would agree with that. Fortunately this summer we haven't had much in the way of heatwaves to highlight their lack of air conditioning.

 

[Ianigsy]

One of the issues is that stop-start electrification means serviceable electric units with a good 10 years in them are going for scrap (in some cases part of the way under their own power) while there’s a shortage of DMUs.

Another is the inflexibility of the leasing system - there ought to be a mechanism for serviceable stock to be leased quickly for a short period of time, say a rolling 28 days.

 

[dk1]

Shocking, maybe but just one of those things. Nobody had a crystal ball.

 

[JonathanH]

Another is the inflexibility of the leasing system - there ought to be a mechanism for serviceable stock to be leased quickly for a short period of time, say a rolling 28 days.

I'm sure there have been fleets in the past where the lease has been extended on a rolling short term basis to allow for the fact that their replacements aren't ready yet.

 

[Taunton]

The problem today is due to financial chicanery arising from the way the industry has been structured by politicians in order to achieve (quasi-)privatisation and it's difficult to see how it can be resolved short of a major change in government policy which itself will surely need a change in government.

That's not correct at all, the politicians had a fine initial idea that the Rolling Stock Companies would lease out standard, interchangeable stock to any TOC, after the style of airport car rental, where any driver can rent any car. It was described as such.

It was the rail industry's OWN twisting of this which led to every little build of new stock having different characteristics, incompatible couplers, controls which require training of university course duration, every engineer doing their own thing, etc.

 

[Dan G]

Why were the 745/1s ordered to replace the 379s? Did Stadler offer a twofer on FLIRTS?!

 

[dk1]

Why were the 745/1s ordered to replace the 379s? Did Stadler offer a twofer on FLIRTS?!

Not far off. There had to be a worthwhile order to gain the bimodal 755 contract.

 

[Snow1964]

I think just prior to a phase of Kent coast electrification going live there was large number of 4 CEPs stored. I understand they were stored on one track of the electrified Ardingly -Horsted Keynes line. Unit would go off for test run, and a driver sent to move each stored unit 4 coaches forward in turn. Would have been about 1959 or 1961

The Glasgow blue trains (later class 303) were stored for months when nearly new whilst awaiting stronger transformers after initial design kept blowing up. Not sure of dates but around 1960 or 1961

The Eastern region 1500v dc units (later classes 306 and 307) were stored when voltage was changed to 6.25kv. Although a few were modified with transformers and rectifiers in advance. I think the AM2 (later class 302) for Fenchurch St lines were used in meantime. The 302s might then have been stored until LT&S line was electrified.

I don't know if any almost new steam locos or diesel locos were also stored around 1961, but possibly there were more stored newish trains then for few months than now.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

So far we have 379s 175s and TPE mk5s either in or soon to enter storage. This is shocking

A new record?

175s are hardly “modern traction” they are 23 years old. Plenty of BR stock never made it to 23 years in traffic (I don’t mean accident damaged vehicles)

 

[mrmartin]

One of the issues is that stop-start electrification means serviceable electric units with a good 10 years in them are going for scrap (in some cases part of the way under their own power) while there’s a shortage of DMUs.

Another is the inflexibility of the leasing system - there ought to be a mechanism for serviceable stock to be leased quickly for a short period of time, say a rolling 28 days.

Has there ever been a surplus of DMUs on the network? In the 15 or so years I've been closely following the railways there has always been too many EMUs and not enough DMUs.

 

[DerekC]

That's not correct at all, the politicians had a fine initial idea that the Rolling Stock Companies would lease out standard, interchangeable stock to any TOC, after the style of airport car rental, where any driver can rent any car. It was described as such.

It was the rail industry's OWN twisting of this which led to every little build of new stock having different characteristics, incompatible couplers, controls which require training of university course duration, every engineer doing their own thing, etc.

The politicians (as is usual) didn't understand the problem properly. In their fine initial idea for the privatised industry, they didn't give anybody the job of ensuring compatibility between fleets or of creating any sort of rolling stock strategy with a standardised set of specifications. Competition between TOCs was allowed free rein, so each specified what it thought would be a winning formula in terms of cost and efficiency, but only within its own franchise bid. The "controls which require training of university course duration" (forgiving the hyperbole) are a different issue. They result from the increasing complexity of rolling stock and of the track to train interface.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

That's not correct at all, the politicians had a fine initial idea that the Rolling Stock Companies would lease out standard, interchangeable stock to any TOC, after the style of airport car rental, where any driver can rent any car. It was described as such.

It was the rail industry's OWN twisting of this which led to every little build of new stock having different characteristics, incompatible couplers, controls which require training of university course duration, every engineer doing their own thing, etc.

Yet it was the DfT which signed off multiple franchise awards on the basis of new rolling stock being part of the deal with little or no thought as to what would happen to the previously used stock. Ministers repeatedly stood idly by while this happened. Except of course when it came to Pacer replacement! The ideal of go-anywhere stock was all well and good but little effort has been made to ensure this happens. British Rail had many faults but by its end it had a good grasp of national fleet management with properly planned cascades as new stock came on stream. If we must persist with balkanised railway operations there should at least be a large degree of centralised rolling stock procurement given that new trains will inevitably outlive the franchisee/contractor which first orders them.

 

[Taunton]

The politicians (as is usual) didn't understand the problem properly. In their fine initial idea for the privatised industry, they didn't give anybody the job of ensuring compatibility between fleets or of creating any sort of rolling stock strategy with a standardised set of specifications. Competition between TOCs was allowed free rein

Well there wasn't really a problem to understand, was there? Modernisation plan dmus of the era from various manufacturers were all compatible with one another and drivers of one type could handle all. This could be expected to continue, especially as the rolling stock companies were aimed at supplying to everyone. The engineering side of the ROSCOs, like the technical side of the TOCs, has always been run by long-serving railway professionals, not politicians.

Regarding technical advances, in the USA the AAR loco multiple-unit standard has been around for decades, progressively updated as advances come along, and you can multiple the latest microprocessor-controlled loco with a traditional old one from past times, and the combination can be readily driven from either. Multiple builders, large number of separate railroads. No politicians involved in that at all. Any Vice-President of Locomotives who proposed buying something incompatible would be turned down flat.

 

[dk1]

Has there ever been a surplus of DMUs on the network? In the 15 or so years I've been closely following the railways there has always been too many EMUs and not enough DMUs.

Yes during the 60s/70s as lines closed and services were withdrawn many first generation DMUs became surplus.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Why were the 745/1s ordered to replace the 379s? Did Stadler offer a twofer on FLIRTS?!

Part of that is the leasing cost.
379s were ordered in the "expensive" era, along with all the Siemens Desiro types, and early Electrostars.
After the financial crash in 2008, interest rates plummetted to near zero, so new trains (Flirts, Civitys, Aventras etc) could be leased cheaper than keeping the older trains.
So once the leases* on the older trains expired, they were replaced.
The financial worm is about to turn again as interest rates are now sky-high, so prepare for fewer new trains to be bought while older stock soldiers on or is cascaded.

* some fleets had a guaranteed period of usage from the DfT ("section 54" agreement), which guaranteed the lease beyond the end of the initial TOC franchise.
That's why 350/1 (with a section 54) were retained while 350/2 (without a section 54) were (or will be) released, replaced by cheaper Aventras.

 

[Dan G]

Part of that is the leasing cost.
379s were ordered in the "expensive" era, along with all the Siemens Desiro types, and early Electrostars.
After the financial crash in 2008, interest rates plummetted to near zero, so new trains (Flirts, Civitys, Aventras etc) could be leased cheaper than keeping the older trains.
So once the leases* on the older trains expired, they were replaced.
The financial worm is about to turn again as interest rates are now sky-high, so prepare for fewer new trains to be bought while older stock soldiers on or is cascaded.

* some fleets had a guaranteed period of usage from the DfT ("section 54" agreement), which guaranteed the lease beyond the end of the initial TOC franchise.
That's why 350/1 (with a section 54) were retained while 350/2 (without a section 54) were (or will be) released, replaced by cheaper Aventras.

Very interesting! Thank you.

(I also understand there was a desire for fleet standardisation, on FLIRTs and Aventras. So likely multiple things added up to it being financially advantageous to drop the 379s.)

 

[GM078]

In Ireland some at least one of the Alstom 82/8400 class EMUs has spent 2/3 of its life in storage away from the wires (8204+8404), with the remainder of the class only seeing about 8 years in traffic. One has recently been cut in half for use as a training facility.

 

[ac6000cw]

(I also understand there was a desire for fleet standardisation, on FLIRTs and Aventras. So likely multiple things added up to it being financially advantageous to drop the 379s.)

Yes, and promising newer/better rolling stock was a plus point when franchise bids were assessed, especially as East Anglia had a somewhat mixed bag of stock (some quite old e.g. 317s and Mk3s) before the Flirts and Aventras arrived.

 

[QSK19]

The 379s are a prime example of how frustrating it is that perfectly usable, mid-life stock is sat there doing nothing when it is much better than older/worse stock currently in service - yet the reasons for that scenario are fully understandable.

Take the example of the 360s. They are older and, I would argue, a worse choice for Connect services than the 379s. The latter are ~7 years younger, are gangwayed, have a better interior and there are 9 more units within the class. However, the lease charges are higher than the 360s; and, admittedly, 30 units is too many for the Connect service (unless it gets extended to Leicester in the future).

Whilst I have grievances about how poor EMR’s non-IC stock situation has been (360s & 156/9s arriving in poor condition, still no refurbishments after over 4 years of the franchise, etc), at least it goes to show that not every single stock change has to result in brand new stock whilst decent mid-life stock continues to sit gathering dust. So long as cascaded stock is in a condition befitting to and respecting its passengers who pay good money to use the railway, new stock isn’t the answer every time - perfectly serviceable mid-life stock (receiving a little TLC in the case of those units in bad condition) is there to be had.

 

[dk1]

The 379s are a prime example of how frustrating it is that perfectly usable, mid-life stock is sat there doing nothing when it is much better than older/worse stock currently in service - yet the reasons for that scenario are fully understandable.

Take the example of the 360s. They are older and, I would argue, a worse choice for Connect services than the 379s. The latter are ~7 years younger, are gangwayed, have a better interior and there are 9 more units within the class. However, the lease charges are higher than the 360s; and, admittedly, 30 units is too many for the Connect service (unless it gets extended to Leicester in the future).

Whilst I have grievances about how poor EMR’s non-IC stock situation has been (360s & 156/9s arriving in poor condition, still no refurbishments after over 4 years of the franchise, etc), at least it goes to show that not every single stock change has to result in brand new stock whilst decent mid-life stock continues to sit gathering dust. So long as cascaded stock is in a condition befitting to and respecting its passengers who pay good money to use the railway, new stock isn’t the answer every time - perfectly serviceable mid-life stock (receiving a little TLC in the case of those units in bad condition) is there to be had.

But aren’t the 360s Siemens that fitted better with being maintained at sort of nearby Northampton?

 

[Vectron383]

Surely some of the stock could be used up here in Scotland? Anyone who’s following the current HST saga knows it’s a bad situation stock-wise and we could really use some more DMUs for capacity’s sake. Maybe the 175s as an interim to just add some extra seats?

 

[dk1]

Surely some of the stock could be used up here in Scotland? Anyone who’s following the current HST saga knows it’s a bad situation stock-wise and we could really use some more DMUs for capacity’s sake. Maybe the 175s as an interim to just add some extra seats?

Just need to wait for 221/222s to become available.

 

[Vectron383]

222s would be nice once available. No idea how the 175s would get on in Scotland but 3-car 175s to augment the 2-car 156s and 158s would be nice.

 

[Sam 76]

It’s a shame that Northern can’t take on the 379s. Would do well if you kept them together as a fleet. You could replace the 332 fleet in Leeds or even bolster capacity on the Liverpool to Wigan and Blackpool routes. Alas we can only dream

The 379s are a prime example of how frustrating it is that perfectly usable, mid-life stock is sat there doing nothing when it is much better than older/worse stock currently in service - yet the reasons for that scenario are fully understandable.

Take the example of the 360s. They are older and, I would argue, a worse choice for Connect services than the 379s. The latter are ~7 years younger, are gangwayed, have a better interior and there are 9 more units within the class. However, the lease charges are higher than the 360s; and, admittedly, 30 units is too many for the Connect service (unless it gets extended to Leicester in the future).

Whilst I have grievances about how poor EMR’s non-IC stock situation has been (360s & 156/9s arriving in poor condition, still no refurbishments after over 4 years of the franchise, etc), at least it goes to show that not every single stock change has to result in brand new stock whilst decent mid-life stock continues to sit gathering dust. So long as cascaded stock is in a condition befitting to and respecting its passengers who pay good money to use the railway, new stock isn’t the answer every time - perfectly serviceable mid-life stock (receiving a little TLC in the case of those units in bad condition) is there to be had.

 

[dk1]

It’s a shame that Northern can’t take on the 379s. Would do well if you kept them together as a fleet. You could replace the 332 fleet in Leeds or even bolster capacity on the Liverpool to Wigan and Blackpool routes. Alas we can only dream

Did you mean class 333? 332 was the HX fleet.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Aug 2023 ==

I’m sure they would greatly increase leasing costs however and cause maintenance issues if spread across both sides of the Pennines.