Does anyone know if any NT sprinters are or might be preserved?

[Crant90045]

Once NTs new train order finally arrives all or most the sprinted will exit server with NT, Im hoping that atleast one of each class that they have will be preserved if anyone knows please let me know

 

[JonathanH]

Once NTs new train order finally arrives all or most the sprinted will exit server with NT, Im hoping that atleast one of each class that they have will be preserved if anyone knows please let me know

It is too early to say. It all depends on whether someone is prepared to pay the hard cost of keeping a unit preserved and the owners of the units making them available.

A fair number of pacers made it into preservation, and some have been restored to a good standard. There is a bit of a question as to whether there is sufficient nostalgia about class 15x units to see them preserved.

One of the obvious issues with the sentiment of preservation is that a lot of people expect someone else to pick up the cost of it (and obviously not everyone has the means to enact it).

 

[Crant90045]

most the sprinters like the 158 do bring a bit of nostalgia due to all the regions and liveries, and how successful it was in the first place but thank you for the information

 

[birchesgreen]

I would say a good chance as many preserved railways use DMUs.

 

[NER1621]

A class 158 (specific unit yet to be decided IIRC) has been designated by the Railway Heritage Committee probably to become part of the National Collection in “as-withdrawn” condition as a conserved museum object.

“One of each class” will be “preserved” (by which I suspect you mean “running in passenger service on a tourist railway with eventually all original parts replaced or repaired”) if any private railways see any value in them for off-peak services.

 

[JonathanH]

I would say a good chance as many preserved railways use DMUs.

Yes, a good chance, but if they have a heritage DMU, and a pacer, then bring in a sprinter variant, there is a question of how they use all of them, and whether there is enough siding space.

The question of corrosion and metal fatigue is also an issue, particularly for assets that can't be kept inside, as the operational railway has seen some quite comprehensive rebuilds of 150s and 156s to keep them fit for service.

 

[vidal]

Realistically how will the general public view a ride on a preserved 15x? I can't see many families being happy spending the thick end of £100 for a trip on a preserved Sprinter. Yes keep one for the national collection, but I'm not sure how many will make money for preserved railways.

James

 

[The exile]

Realistically how will the general public view a ride on a preserved 15x? I can't see many families being happy spending the thick end of £100 for a trip on a preserved Sprinter. Yes keep one for the national collection, but I'm not sure how many will make money for preserved railways.

James

Thirty or so years ago, people would have said the same about "heritage dmus". Nowadays, where they are operating in conjunction with steam, it seems to make little difference (though obviously it's difficult to tell who has decided not to come to the railway because not everything is steam!)

 

[duffield]

Realistically how will the general public view a ride on a preserved 15x? I can't see many families being happy spending the thick end of £100 for a trip on a preserved Sprinter. Yes keep one for the national collection, but I'm not sure how many will make money for preserved railways.

James

As a main option for most "serious" heritage railways, it's true they are not suitable. But for preserved railways which don't have a working heritage DMU, they could provide a backup option and/or a supplementary service, in the same way that heritage DMUs do at present for some lines. After a one way ride behind a steam loco, some families might be happy enough to ride back on Sprinter early (if the kids were getting bored, say), or they might be happy to take a shuttle service to the station with the main cafe and/or car park after their steam experience** rather than hang around for a steam service, and if you've only got one steam loco which breaks down inconveniently you've also got a rescue option.

Also there are some very small railways which are trying to develop and expand but don't have the money for a loco or decent condition heritage DMU, so a Sprinter might be a suitable option just to give some sort of ride up and down their half-mile track, if they were obtainable at a very low price or even free in working condtion.

I think there might be a demand for a handful of these units for operational use.

** E.g. The GCR runs some DMU services alongside the steam service; you could ride a steam service from Loughborough to Leicester North and back, then get a DMU to Quorn & Woodhouse, where the main cafe is and other varying attractions appear throughout the year. That's a heritage DMU in their case of course, but a Sprinter could perform the same utility function (although not as attractively to most people!).

 

[43096]

Realistically how will the general public view a ride on a preserved 15x? I can't see many families being happy spending the thick end of £100 for a trip on a preserved Sprinter. Yes keep one for the national collection, but I'm not sure how many will make money for preserved railways.

James

Presumably the same way they view a Pacer? Sprinters are a rather better train - I'd suggest the 156s might be particularly attractive to heritage railways, with their end doors and lacking the issues of maintaining the aircon that 158s and 159s have.

 

[D365]

As somebody who takes an interest in ’special’ trains, e.g. the Serco Test carriages and 313121, I’m holding out hope that 950001 will be similarly preserved.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Mar 2025 ==

** E.g. The GCR runs some DMU services alongside the steam service; you could ride a steam service from Loughborough to Leicester North and back, then get a DMU to Quorn & Woodhouse, where the main cafe is and other varying attractions appear throughout the year. That's a heritage DMU in their case of course, but a Sprinter could perform the same utility function (although not as attractively to most people!).

As it happens, GCR has already operated the first ever Sprinters in preservation, in the form of their two 153s. These were operated at the 2024 Spring Diesel Gala.

 

[duffield]

As somebody who takes an interest in ’special’ trains, e.g. the Serco Test carriages and 313121, I’m holding out hope that 950001 will be similarly preserved.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Mar 2025 ==


As it happens, GCR has already operated the first ever Sprinters in preservation, in the form of their two 153s. These were operated at the 2024 Spring Diesel Gala.

Oh yes, I'd forgotten that I'd seen them briefly (though I didn't get to ride on them) at the Autumn Diesel Gala.

I was actually using the GCR as a (very expensive) form of public transport on that day, to get myself and my visiting sister to Bradgate Park from Nottingham via Loughborough and Rothley.

So I didn't have time to appreciate the gala properly.

 

[WAB]

Yes, a good chance, but if they have a heritage DMU, and a pacer, then bring in a sprinter variant, there is a question of how they use all of them, and whether there is enough siding space.

The question of corrosion and metal fatigue is also an issue, particularly for assets that can't be kept inside, as the operational railway has seen some quite comprehensive rebuilds of 150s and 156s to keep them fit for service.

I suspect one of the most recently rebuilt Sprinters would be a likely candidate for preservation.

 

[Towers]

Is one of the prototype pair of 150s (001/002) not designated for the National Collection? I’m sure I read that somewhere?!

 

[Mat17]

I'd love to see a 150 preserved.

 

[65477]

One issue about more modern traction is the electronics. With 1st gen' DMU's most electrical issues could be solved with a screwdriver. you cannot do that with traction with integrated circuits etc.. I recall reading an article sayingbow hard it will to keep current cars going as classics in the future.

 

[D365]

One issue about more modern traction is the electronics. With 1st gen' DMU's most electrical issues could be solved with a screwdriver. you cannot do that with traction with integrated circuits etc.. I recall reading an article sayingbow hard it will to keep current cars going as classics in the future.

Most 70s and 80s era control electronics are not exceedingly complicated. For example, Brush produced very comprehensive documentation of their control cards for the Class 43, 56, 58 locomotives. It’s only where you get to the Class 60, 92 and MUs from 319 onwards that a significant level of specialist knowledge is required to undertake troubleshooting and repairs.

 

[Highview]

If we are serious about carbon reduction this has to apply to the preservation sector as well, additional dmu preservation is fine as long as it remains non operational. We have to draw a line somewhere, keep using what has been already saved but not add to it.

 

[D365]

If we are serious about carbon reduction this has to apply to the preservation sector as well, additional dmu preservation is fine as long as it remains non operational. We have to draw a line somewhere, keep using what has been already saved but not add to it.

I would suggest that this merits a separate thread; it’s not a discussion that is specific to Class 15x units.

 

[Iskra]

If we are serious about carbon reduction this has to apply to the preservation sector as well, additional dmu preservation is fine as long as it remains non operational. We have to draw a line somewhere, keep using what has been already saved but not add to it.

Surely they are less polluting than steam trains, so better (or possibly less worse) for the environment!

 

[duffield]

If we are serious about carbon reduction this has to apply to the preservation sector as well, additional dmu preservation is fine as long as it remains non operational. We have to draw a line somewhere, keep using what has been already saved but not add to it.

We're talking about literally a handful of units, being used for an average of a few hours a week (and possibly instead of something more polluting). Not even a drop in the ocean, more like a single molecule.

 

[43096]

If we are serious about carbon reduction this has to apply to the preservation sector as well, additional dmu preservation is fine as long as it remains non operational. We have to draw a line somewhere, keep using what has been already saved but not add to it.

Suggest you go and have a read about where the big carbon emitters actually are. Because it isn't the railway preservation sector, which is the square root of bugger all in terms of the scale of the problem.

 

[m79900]

If we are serious about carbon reduction this has to apply to the preservation sector as well, additional dmu preservation is fine as long as it remains non operational. We have to draw a line somewhere, keep using what has been already saved but not add to it.

That really won't make a blind bit of difference. The amount of impact that heritage diesels have will be truly negligible, and besides, down the line there'll only be Sprinters/Turbos (and in the distant future, Turbostars and Civities) to save a couple of and that'll be it. No more diesels. This shouldn't be a major consideration.

I can imagine sprinters (the 150/153/156 at least) doing well in preservation. The amount of Pacers preserved was immense, but a good number of them were just for spares and others have sat idle, meaning that in the end we'll end up with a sensible number of units in good condition, which is what we need really. This could allow room for Sprinters, which I find every bit as nostalgic. I can imagine some railways binning off the worse of the 142s in favour of a 150. Survival of the fittest.

Throughout preservation history, we've reliably seen several examples of all major classes preserved, and I see no reason the Sprinters should be different. We're talking 5-10 years down the line after all.

 

[778]

One issue about more modern traction is the electronics. With 1st gen' DMU's most electrical issues could be solved with a screwdriver. you cannot do that with traction with integrated circuits etc.

Will this be an issue for the Pacers that are running on preserved lines?

I'd love to see a 150 preserved.

I think a 150 should be designated as part of the national collection as well as the 158s. Not so sure about a 156. I don't like the 150s at all but they are a very important part of railway history. I don't think a 150 would be suitable for a preserved railway because the seats don't allign with the windows very well.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Mar 2025 ==

Thirty or so years ago, people would have said the same about "heritage dmus". Nowadays, where they are operating in conjunction with steam, it seems to make little difference (though obviously it's difficult to tell who has decided not to come to the railway because not everything is steam!)

The main reason "heritage dmus" are successful on preserved lines is because of the drivers eye view, that you would not get on a Pacer or Sprinter.

 

[Towers]

If we are serious about carbon reduction this has to apply to the preservation sector as well, additional dmu preservation is fine as long as it remains non operational. We have to draw a line somewhere, keep using what has been already saved but not add to it.

Yikes.

 

[43096]

The main reason "heritage dmus" are successful on preserved lines is because of the drivers eye view, that you would not get on a Pacer or Sprinter.

No, the main reason they are successful is because they cost a lot less to run than a kettle or diesel loco.

 

[duffield]

One issue about more modern traction is the electronics. With 1st gen' DMU's most electrical issues could be solved with a screwdriver. you cannot do that with traction with integrated circuits etc.. I recall reading an article sayingbow hard it will to keep current cars going as classics in the future.

In a lot of cases a keen hobbyist type could probably replace an early generation IC based controller with a sub £50 SBC (single board computer) in a few weeks. Or if that's too difficult because it would need safety approval (depends exactly what it's controlling, I guess), it might be possible to bypass or dispense with the controller and put in a few manual switches or similar, particularly as you're limited to 25mph running. Of course that's for early generation (1980's-ish) stuff, each subsequent generation gets more reliant on more complex controllers and the chances of keeping them going get lower and lower. But I wouldn't think the Sprinter generation would be too much of a challenge if you got the right people interested.

 

[Mat17]

I think a 150 should be designated as part of the national collection as well as the 158s. Not so sure about a 156. I don't like the 150s at all but they are a very important part of railway history. I don't think a 150 would be suitable for a preserved railway because the seats don't allign with the windows very well.

Sums up my feelings about 150s to be fair. They are certainly a massive part of DMU history, not the most exciting thing to ride on though, certainly less quirky than the pacers, and woeful compared to the delights of a first gen DMU. What they do have in their favour though is that they are shorter than a 156/8 and comparative to the 158, much simpler to maintain and run, probably more akin to a pacer.

I wouldn't want to see a whole fleet of the things on every preservation railway though that's for sure. I've never really like Sprinters.

 

[D365]

In a lot of cases a keen hobbyist type could probably replace an early generation IC based controller with a sub £50 SBC (single board computer) in a few weeks. Or if that's too difficult because it would need safety approval (depends exactly what it's controlling, I guess), it might be possible to bypass or dispense with the controller and put in a few manual switches or similar, particularly as you're limited to 25mph running.

I’ve had a flick through the Class 150 schematics. The only significant electronic devices are TPWS, OTMR, GSM-R, WSP, vigilance, door control, toilet modules, and the track circuit actuator unit. Other than the door control, I would expect that all of these can be isolated for low speed heritage use.

Heritage organisations are not keen to implement electrical modifications as, even if it is judged that safety assessment is not required, the making of engineering judgement requires a level of expertise beyond what most volunteers can provide.

 

[Mat17]

I’ve had a flick through the Class 150 schematics. The only significant electronic devices are TPWS, OTMR, GSM-R, WSP, vigilance, door control, toilet modules, and the track circuit actuator unit. Other than the door control, I would expect that all of these can be isolated for low speed heritage use.

All/most of which the pacers have.