Class 222 withdrawal from EMR and future use (non-speculative)

[Potteries 323]

Judging the state of the IEP at Neville Hill after a low speed collision with an HST,Im not so sure that an IEP or indeed a Meridian would have fared any better at Carmont.Hopefully we will never have to find out,but why the sudden anti HST brigade? How many people have been killed on an HST in the near 50 years that they have been in service.At Ladbroke Grove most of the casulties were in the Class 165 where the front coach was completely destroyed but there is no witch hunt on these.I dread to think what would have happened with a Class 165 at Carmont.

 

[dosxuk]

The difference between an IEP / 22x and the HST is that there is actually an attempt at providing a survival space for the driver. The HST has a bit of fibreglass and the drivers desk between them and the outside world.

The IEP/HST incident looks on first sight like the HST won, but the HST's driver protection was compromised, while it wasn't on the IEP, despite the amount of bits of plastic falling off it.

 

[Rab Smith]

222's for Scotrail Ic7 services look inevitable as there is no other units even remotely suitable without dragging the service back to full turbo/sprinter days. That's not to say that 222's are a perfect replacement for HST's as we will be going back to underfloor engines. Its been quite nice to have the 'serenity' of the Mk3's heading over the gradients on the HML!

 

[Killingworth]

222's for Scotrail Ic7 services look inevitable as there is no other units even remotely suitable without dragging the service back to full turbo/sprinter days. That's not to say that 222's are a perfect replacement for HST's as we will be going back to underfloor engines. Its been quite nice to have the 'serenity' of the Mk3's heading over the gradients on the HML!

Delay in confirming release of 222s for Scotrail probably suits both current parties.

EMR keep them as long as needed.

Scotrail keep options open as long as possible and avoid paying leasing costs for two fleets.

Leasing companies may have biggest issues. Scotrail's experiences of refubished HSTs must make them very wary when taking on another cast off fleet. Surely they'll want to delay financial responsibility until every unit taken on is fully refurbished to the highest standard both mechanically and internally.

 

[InTheEastMids]

fully refurbished to the highest standard both mechanically and internally

we will be going back to underfloor engines

Is there a definitive statement on whether there will be any emissions reductions - particularly non-CO2 pollutants like particulates and NOx.

The smell of exhaust is often really noticeable and is something that makes them seem very old-fashioned.

 

[QSK19]

Delay in confirming release of 222s for Scotrail probably suits both current parties.

EMR keep them as long as needed.

Very good decision. Whilst some people do quite rightly argue that ScotRail’s plans shouldn’t be held up by problems with a TOC’s new fleet (EMR itself knows that only too well following the 196 and 720 introductions delaying cascades of the 170s and 360s respectively, leading to chaos with many of its non-IC operations), there is a major difference between leaving EMR with limited services and no services. Quite simply, without the 222s, there would be no IC service.

So, delaying the 222s going north of the border is a necessity as opposed to merely inconvenient. And as you say, there is the aspect of the delay working for both EMR and SR.

 

[Snow1964]

Very good decision. Whilst some people do quite rightly argue that ScotRail’s plans shouldn’t be held up by problems with a TOC’s new fleet (EMR itself knows that only too well following the 196 and 720 introductions delaying cascades of the 170s and 360s respectively, leading to chaos with many of its non-IC operations), there is a major difference between leaving EMR with limited services and no services. Quite simply, without the 222s, there would be no IC service.

So, delaying the 222s going north of the border is a necessity as opposed to merely inconvenient. And as you say, there is the aspect of the delay working for both EMR and SR.

It might be a good pragmatic decision, but who is paying for it.

We know from Rock Rail East Midlands accounts that they are receiving £millions from Hitachi for late delivery of 810s, but they appear to be taking it as profit, not passing some on to EMR. So are EMR having to lease some new trains and keep paying for 222s.

Presumably ScotRail are only happy if the lease cost plus overhaul cost to keep the HSTs in extended service is less than what they would pay for secondhand 222s

Makes me wonder how much extra cost EMR are incurring for this.

 

[XCTurbostar]

The purpose of the HST replacement Tender was to find expressions and suitable options, I've also never seen anything explicit that mentions ASLEF wont accept HSTs into 2030..

I'm inclined to agree with @hexagon789 but it could also be true that no formal decisions have been made.

 

[QSK19]

It might be a good pragmatic decision, but who is paying for it.

We know from Rock Rail East Midlands accounts that they are receiving £millions from Hitachi for late delivery of 810s, but they appear to be taking it as profit, not passing some on to EMR. So are EMR having to lease some new trains and keep paying for 222s.

Presumably ScotRail are only happy if the lease cost plus overhaul cost to keep the HSTs in extended service is less than what they would pay for secondhand 222s

Makes me wonder how much extra cost EMR are incurring for this.

I was under the impression that EMR/DfT doesn’t take on lease costs until trains have been accepted? If so, they won’t have had to pay for anything until 008 and 009 were accepted a few weeks ago. As always, I defer to those with expertise.

Nevertheless, regardless of the financial implications and who pays for what, the EMR IC operation cannot be left destitute given that 80%* of its revenue comes from the MML.

( * though I do note that includes Connect revenue too).

 

[778]

The difference between an IEP / 22x and the HST is that there is actually an attempt at providing a survival space for the driver. The HST has a bit of fibreglass and the drivers desk between them and the outside world.

The IEP/HST incident looks on first sight like the HST won, but the HST's driver protection was compromised, while it wasn't on the IEP, despite the amount of bits of plastic falling off it.

With better driver protection would the HST driver have been more likely to have survived the collision at Ladbrooke Grove?

 

[bramling]

With better driver protection would the HST driver have been more likely to have survived the collision at Ladbrooke Grove?

Very very doubtful, and probably the case for Carmont as well due to the sheer force of the impact and the decelerations involved. There is some possibility the driver at Ufton could have survived however.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable for unions to be saying that something better is now desirable, especially when there are fleets now going spare which would fulfil this aspiration.

 

[RiverDon]

I work at one of the depots that runs HSTs at the moment and this is what we've been told unofficially through ASLEF:

1. Transport Scotland hasn't signed a final binding lease for the class 222 trains yet but they are having a meeting with the firm that owns the trains next month (November) to agree things.
2. A group of ASLEF reps and company managers went down to Derby last month to look round a unit and there were a few things that they want changed before the company and union will accept them but these are apparently quite minor.
3. Because there is a change of responsibility between the guard opening the doors on the HST and the driver doing it on the class 222 trains, the company needs ASLEF and RMT to agree to the new method of operation and if either says no then we are stuck with HSTs.
4. Because of how long it will take to refit the class 222s and train staff on them the HSTs will definitely still be with us until 2027 at the earliest and if they can't agree the lease for class 222s then they'll be around until at least 2030.

That is all I know!

 

[scotraildriver]

I work at one of the depots that runs HSTs at the moment and this is what we've been told unofficially through ASLEF:

1. Transport Scotland hasn't signed a final binding lease for the class 222 trains yet but they are having a meeting with the firm that owns the trains next month (November) to agree things.
2. A group of ASLEF reps and company managers went down to Derby last month to look round a unit and there were a few things that they want changed before the company and union will accept them but these are apparently quite minor.
3. Because there is a change of responsibility between the guard opening the doors on the HST and the driver doing it on the class 222 trains, the company needs ASLEF and RMT to agree to the new method of operation and if either says no then we are stuck with HSTs.
4. Because of how long it will take to refit the class 222s and train staff on them the HSTs will definitely still be with us until 2027 at the earliest and if they can't agree the lease for class 222s then they'll be around until at least 2030.

That is all I know!

They won't sign the lease until the RMT in particular agree to DOCCO door operation as the costs of retrofitting local door open panels in the coaches makes the lease cost prohibitive. If they don't agree it's keep the HSTs. However there are serious concerns on whether the MK3 coaches will even reach 2030 as significant corrosion issues plague the fleet. Repairs are costing a fortune and keeping 2 sets out of use at a time.

 

[43096]

With better driver protection would the HST driver have been more likely to have survived the collision at Ladbrooke Grove?

No. A driver won’t survive a 140mph near head-on collision regardless of collision protection.

 

[380101]

They won't sign the lease until the RMT in particular agree to DOCCO door operation as the costs of retrofitting door open panels in the coaches makes the lease cost prohibitive. If they don't agree it's keep the HSTs. However there are serious concerns on whether the MK3 coaches will even reach 2030 as significant corrosion issues plague the fleet. Repairs are costing a fortune and keeping 2 sets out of use at a time.

There are door open buttons at all the panels on a 222. Driver has to press a handover button to allow the Guard to open the doors. This is how EMR operate now. The problem is there is no option for the Guard to open a local door first before releasing the rest of the doors.

Given RMT have already signed an agreement for DOCCO on ScotRail, it's very likely they'll agree to it on the 222s.

Aslef are happy enough with DOCCO, I believe and there should be no issues from them.

 

[Bikeman78]

Judging the state of the IEP at Neville Hill after a low speed collision with an HST,Im not so sure that an IEP or indeed a Meridian would have fared any better at Carmont.Hopefully we will never have to find out,but why the sudden anti HST brigade? How many people have been killed on an HST in the near 50 years that they have been in service.At Ladbroke Grove most of the casulties were in the Class 165 where the front coach was completely destroyed but there is no witch hunt on these.I dread to think what would have happened with a Class 165 at Carmont.

I would expect an IET to be much better but whose to say that 158s or 170s would be any better than an HST? The unit in the recent German derailment collided with a tree. It is of similar age to a class 170. There was nothing left of the front third of the leading vehicle above the floor.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

The difference between an IEP / 22x and the HST is that there is actually an attempt at providing a survival space for the driver. The HST has a bit of fibreglass and the drivers desk between them and the outside world.

From the accident report it appears that the unfortunate driver at Carmont was killed by being thrown at speed against the windscreen. The outcome would likely therefore have been the same whatever type of train it was.

The IEP/HST incident looks on first sight like the HST won, but the HST's driver protection was compromised, while it wasn't on the IEP, despite the amount of bits of plastic falling off it.

I have seen photos of the inside of the cab of 43300 after that collision and so far as I could see the driver's space wasn't compromised.

 

[Mag_seven]

Just a gentle reminder that discussion in this thread should be confined to actual developments concerning the Class 222 withdrawal from EMR and their redeployments elsewhere.

 

[Bobby Lampman]

Class 222 move planned to Polmadie next week.
5Q10PC - Traveling From: Barton Under Needwood RSMD to: Polmadie Car M.D. on: MO

 

[Potteries 323]

Class 222 move planned to Polmadie next week.
5Q10PC - Traveling From: Barton Under Needwood RSMD to: Polmadie Car M.D. on: MO

Any idea if it is going via Crewe?

 

[170UTD]

Any idea if it is going via Crewe?

Looks like it is, at least according to RTT

 

[eastwestdivide]

Looks like it is, at least according to RTT

Here's the link

Realtime Trains | 5Q10 0946 Barton Under Needwood Rsmd to Polmadie Car M.D. | 20/10/2025

Real-time train running information for 5Q10 0946 departure from Barton Under Needwood Rsmd to Polmadie Car M.D. on 20/10/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[Potteries 323]

Here's the link

Realtime Trains | 5Q10 0946 Barton Under Needwood Rsmd to Polmadie Car M.D. | 20/10/2025

Real-time train running information for 5Q10 0946 departure from Barton Under Needwood Rsmd to Polmadie Car M.D. on 20/10/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Thanks for that .It was not on RTT when I looked yesterday but is now showing.

 

[Russel]

Class 222 move planned to Polmadie next week.
5Q10PC - Traveling From: Barton Under Needwood RSMD to: Polmadie Car M.D. on: MO

Is this the unit for Lumo?

 

[GoneSouth]

It's pretty much certain they will. The training school are currently finalising the training package for them. Expect an announcement end of November, beginning of December.

This seems surprisingly well organised and forward thinking for the railway.

I’d be genuinely interested to know if GWR were as forward thinking with their introduction of 175s (which are confirmed and they even have one down in test runs).

I’m absolutely amazed at the 222s being released before any sign of replacements in service. Shows a complete contempt for passengers and is absolutely disgraceful. Couldn’t anybody be bothered to negotiate a short term extension? Or, more likely Have we surrendered all control of national infrastructure to financial institutions who want to bleed it (and us) dry.

Depressing!

 

[Mag_seven]

Just a gentle reminder that discussion in this thread should be confined to actual developments concerning the Class 222 withdrawal from EMR and their redeployments elsewhere.

Further to the above there is a speculative thread about the Class 222s which can be found here:

What's going to happen to the Class 222's after the Class 810's replace them?

If needed, Please move Will XC take them over? I know that GC are taking the Avanti 221's so not to GC. Or will scotrail take them for the inter7city trains or will it be scrap?

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Potteries 323]

This seems surprisingly well organised and forward thinking for the railway.

I’d be genuinely interested to know if GWR were as forward thinking with their introduction of 175s (which are confirmed and they even have one down in test runs).

I’m absolutely amazed at the 222s being released before any sign of replacements in service. Shows a complete contempt for passengers and is absolutely disgraceful. Couldn’t anybody be bothered to negotiate a short term extension? Or, more likely Have we surrendered all control of national infrastructure to financial institutions who want to bleed it (and us) dry.

Depressing!

The leasing company is obviously looking lease the 222s to new operators as EMR will just discard them once the 810s enter service and will not be bothered what happens to them.EMR should be chasing Hitachi for the delays with the 810s.This shambles is the product of the failed privitasation era.Under British Rail all stock was owned by them and was cascaded down when new stock arrived.This is the reason there is no spare stock on the railways thesedays.Northern are paying £200,000 a year to rent 40 year old Sprinters that would have been nil value under BR.Nobody is going to pay that much money to keep trains parked up in sidings as spares.Its cheaper to cancel services!

 

[GoneSouth]

The leasing company is obviously looking lease the 222s to new operators as EMR will just discard them once the 810s enter service and will not be bothered what happens to them.EMR should be chasing Hitachi for the delays with the 810s.This shambles is the product of the failed privitasation era.Under British Rail all stock was owned by them and was cascaded down when new stock arrived.This is the reason there is no spare stock on the railways thesedays.Northern are paying £200,000 a year to rent 40 year old Sprinters that would have been nil value under BR.Nobody is going to pay that much money to keep trains parked up in sidings as spares.Its cheaper to cancel services!

Completely agree, cancellations are easy and cheap compared to actually doing the job the infrastructure was built for.

 

[cj_1985]

I’m absolutely amazed at the 222s being released before any sign of replacements in service. Shows a complete contempt for passengers and is absolutely disgraceful. Couldn’t anybody be bothered to negotiate a short term extension? Or, more likely Have we surrendered all control of national infrastructure to financial institutions who want to bleed it (and us) dry.

Depressing!

Blame the DfT... they pull all the strings, despite what the public may see. The DfT chose not to request any short lease extensions... so the ROSCO did the fair thing, and leased it/them to another interested party.

 

[Potteries 323]

Blame the DfT... they pull all the strings, despite what the public may see. The DfT chose not to request any short lease extensions... so the ROSCO did the fair thing, and leased it/them to another interested party.

A short term lease extension would be no good for the leasing company if they can get longer new leases with other operators.They are leasing the six Meridians to Lumo until the track access agreement ends in 2030.Any extensions with EMR will only be short term until the 810s enter service and then they have no work.The DFT would be better off purchasing any new stock for the Nationalised train operators then we would never have this problem again in the future.