LNER Class 91 - What are the retirement plans?

[D365]

350/2 anyone, plenty will be available

… for what purpose? Porterbrook is financing the Class 897s anyway.

 

[Bikeman78]

… for what purpose? Porterbrook is financing the Class 897s anyway.

As a temporary stopgap if the 91s go before the 897s arrive?

 

[trainswitheddy]

They have eight which are either demic or have no seats, or both.

What sort of service would you run with that lot?!

Sounds comfy to me

 

[GoneSouth]

Sounds comfy to me

Sounds like more standing room than XC have

 

[charlier]

The IC225/91s or the 180s? Either way there’s nothing to replace them this year so there’ll be a lot of angry passengers stuck on platforms without a train to catch if you get your wish.

Literally WHO . . . was talking about a 180, what even is that.. Obviously I'm talking about the intercity 225. They need a replacement THIS YEAR, ASAP.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Oct 2025 ==

In ref to the 91s? Even if they are awful replaced with what?

if a train's genuinely uncomfortable, outdated, or unreliable, the argument shouldn’t be “what replaces it?” but rather “why is it still running?” even if a full replacement isn’t available this second, i don’t think that means we should just settle for sub-par trains. that mindset is how things stay outdated . .

 

[D365]

Literally WHO . . . was talking about a 180, what even is that.. Obviously I'm talking about the intercity 225. They need a replacement THIS YEAR, ASAP.

The December 2025 timetable is designed around the retention of IC225 sets. So no, that’s not happening.

 

[Class15]

Literally WHO . . . was talking about a 180, what even is that.. Obviously I'm talking about the intercity 225. They need a replacement THIS YEAR, ASAP.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Oct 2025 ==

The choice right now is a 225 or no train at all.

I don’t think you can claim to be an expert on ECML trains if you don’t know what a 180 is. They operate almost all of the Grand Central services.

if a train's genuinely uncomfortable, outdated, or unreliable, the argument shouldn’t be “what replaces it?” but rather “why is it still running?” even if a full replacement isn’t available this second, i don’t think that means we should just settle for sub-par trains. that mindset is how things stay outdated . .

Is anyone else using these words about the 225 or do you have a personal hatred of them?

 

[FrontSideBus]

Does anybody really think the Azumas are better than the 225's, passenger wise? Really?

 

[YorksLad12]

Does anybody really think the Azumas are better than the 225's, passenger wise? Really?

More legroom in Standard - so yes.
Claustrophobia in First - so no.

 

[73Stock]

Well I enjoyed the trip to York and back on one last week...

 

[bramling]

Literally WHO . . . was talking about a 180, what even is that.. Obviously I'm talking about the intercity 225. They need a replacement THIS YEAR, ASAP.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Oct 2025 ==


if a train's genuinely uncomfortable, outdated, or unreliable, the argument shouldn’t be “what replaces it?” but rather “why is it still running?” even if a full replacement isn’t available this second, i don’t think that means we should just settle for sub-par trains. that mindset is how things stay outdated . .

I’m not sure the IC225s meet any of those three conditions, though personal preference might say some people find them uncomfortable I don’t think it’s fair to say that this applies to them any more than any other type of train (in fact quite possibly the opposite applies).

But the genuine choice for the time being is an IC225 or a white space in the timetable, which isn’t to anyone’s benefit.

 

[rattyben]

I wasn't saying the class 801's diesel engine couldn't physically move the train. It's just that, if the train is unable to get power from the OHLE while running on an electrified route, I'd have thought at least one of the following would be true in the vast majority of cases:

• a power outage in the OHLE is stopping an EMU (without self-rescue capability) ahead from moving, meaning the following signal is at danger and following trains (with diesel backup generators) can't proceed beyond that signal
• a power outage is impacting not just the OHLE but signalling as well, so no signals are lit - in such a situation isn't the driver supposed to assume the signal is at danger?
• the OHLE has come down and is blocking the line and/or is tangled around a train, preventing that train (and following trains) from moving beyond the next signal

Not just other countries; I don't think (m)any of the suburban and regional electric units on the GB network share the class 801's peculiar ability to move themselves if the external power supply fails, but not fast enough to run normal services on unelectrified routes. Electrostars, for example, can't do that as far as I know.


I think I read somewhere that they can divert via the Newcastle-Carlisle route with a 10-car formed of an 800/2 in multiple with an 801/1 if the ECML is shut north of Newcastle.


Agreed; I did imply that. What's more, I did so intentionally; because in some respects, the inclusion of diesel generator on the class 801s is a backwards step compared to the IC225s. The diesel generator certainly brings some benefits, but it also has its drawbacks.


In my earlier post, my sentence began with the words "An electric railway is a better railway," a phrase which (followed by "however you define better") was often used in Modern Railways campaign for more electrification. The class 801 is (in terms of technical complexity and maintenance requirements) actually a bi-mode, not an EMU. You still have the weight of a diesel engine and fuel to consider as well, so it is not as weight-efficient as a pure-electric train. You make a good point that pure-electric trains do have one drawback, that of a loss of 'hotel power' in certain categories of disruption, but the 'solution' to this comes at the cost of some of the benefits of electrification. Both approaches have their pros and cons.


CAF certainly were advertising at least bi-mode on their website, with an Australian Civity bi-mode order having been placed some years ago. What I didn't know, until LNER ordered the 897s, was whether CAF offered multi-mode units in the Civity UK platform to fit our loading guage (if they can, as I've been saying since at least 2018 probably, the class 195s, 196s, and 197s should have been at least bi-mode).

LNER had many diversions on the 11th/12th Oct running up and down the Durham Coastline in various formations.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

LNER had many diversions on the 11th/12th Oct running up and down the Durham Coastline in various formations.

Do they have to tie the pantographs down on the 80x like they used to with the 91s (due to running under the metro wiring)?

 

[47434]

Literally WHO . . . was talking about a 180, what even is that.. Obviously I'm talking about the intercity 225. They need a replacement THIS YEAR, ASAP.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Oct 2025 ==


if a train's genuinely uncomfortable, outdated, or unreliable, the argument shouldn’t be “what replaces it?” but rather “why is it still running?” even if a full replacement isn’t available this second, i don’t think that means we should just settle for sub-par trains. that mindset is how things stay outdated . .

225's likely to be here for a couple of years at least given the build programme of the new CAF units.

 

[rattyben]

Do they have to tie the pantographs down on the 80x like they used to with the 91s (due to running under the metro wiring)?

I’m not sure tbh, I guess that would have to happen at Northallerton if they do, I’ve only ever seen them run non stop through Teesside.

There was a lot of them running through a few weeks ago and you do get them running empty late at night, which I’m guessing is up to Heaton.

Video of them here, don’t know if you can tell from that..

 

[Rhydgaled]

Literally WHO . . . was talking about a 180

FrontSideBus for one, in Post #100 on this topic.

Obviously I'm talking about the intercity 225. They need a replacement THIS YEAR, ASAP.

Why? What's wrong with them?

Does anybody really think the Azumas are better than the 225's, passenger wise? Really?

More legroom in Standard - so yes.
Claustrophobia in First - so no.

Any extra legroom on the Azumas is presumably down to thinner (and therefore harder) seats though isn't it? If so, then just as many people are going to find the Azumas less-comfortable than a mark 4 (and vice-versa). However, all this is details of interior fit-out, rip the interior out and put a higher-spec one in and either design could probably be made comfortable for whoever chooses the new seats etc. If you ask me, I would say that:

• I don't have scale drawings handy for either the IC225 or the Azumas (so am unable to confirm window dimensions) - but it wouldn't surprise me if it was not possible to acheive soft (ie. with thick padding) seats, adequate legroom and window alignment without larger windows than either of these bodyshells offer
• the IC225 is a higher-quality product, due to having plug-doors (it's a shame the DfT didn't make plug-doors mandatory in the IEP competition)
• the IC225 is, perhaps, very slightly outdated, due to having a DVT with no passenger space instead of a driving trailer containing some passenger accomodation (but if you think that's bad, see the next one)
• the 5-car class 8xx units are boardline insane (note that this doesn't necessarily apply to the 9-car class 800 and 9-car class 802 units), due to:
  • having effectively an entire coach of wasted space when running in multiple as a 10-car train (2x5-car class 800 (ie. 10 coaches) has around 630 seats, a 9-car about 627 (just 3 seats less, in a train that's roughly 26 metres shorter),
  • risking passengers expecting a through service (ie. with no changes) from the timetable but boarding the wrong portion of a 10-car and having to 'change trains' into the other portion (or potentially missing it altogether)
  • any line busy enough to justify the cost of maintaining a 125mph linespeed is going to be busy enough that a 5-car set is going to be inadequate capacity for much of the service day, meaning multiple working is likely to be a frequent occourance

if a train's genuinely uncomfortable, outdated, or unreliable, the argument shouldn’t be “what replaces it?” but rather “why is it still running?” even if a full replacement isn’t available this second, i don’t think that means we should just settle for sub-par trains. that mindset is how things stay outdated . .

I’m not sure the IC225s meet any of those three conditions, though personal preference might say some people find them uncomfortable I don’t think it’s fair to say that this applies to them any more than any other type of train (in fact quite possibly the opposite applies).

I'm with bramling here; other than perhaps the 'wasted space' in the DVT I cannot see why anyone would consider the IC225s sub-par compared to newer trains. If anything, the trend here in GB seems to be that newer trains are more-likely to be sub-par than older ones. Indeed, unless you're happy with a throw-away culture that scraps equipment which required a significant amount of energy to make at the first sign of trouble rather than keeping it going as long as reasonably practical, I'd suggest that having some older stock around can be a useful asset, as it gives you something which is closer to life-expiry and therefore can be replaced sooner with new stock that can take advantage of any new innovation.

 

[tfw756rider]

225's likely to be here for a couple of years at least given the build programme of the new CAF units.

Until at least 2029, so at least 4 years.

 

[800001]

Do they have to tie the pantographs down on the 80x like they used to with the 91s (due to running under the metro wiring)?

No, they do not have to tie the pantographs down.

 

[FrontSideBus]

Even if they had to withdraw the 91's before the Mk4's, realistically there is no locomotive in the UK that could replace them? 90's can't match the top speed and 67's, apart from being diesel, are too slow accelerating?

 

[xotGD]

Even if they had to withdraw the 91's before the Mk4's, realistically there is no locomotive in the UK that could replace them? 90's can't match the top speed and 67's, apart from being diesel, are too slow accelerating?

89001 could do the job.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

89001 could do the job.

One loco wouldn't be a lot of use!

 

[BillStampy]

Even if they had to withdraw the 91's before the Mk4's, realistically there is no locomotive in the UK that could replace them? 90's can't match the top speed and 67's, apart from being diesel, are too slow accelerating?

As demonstrated by Transport for Wales also, the Class 67s require modifications to actually work with the MK4 coaches alone instead of the 91 and haven't proved to be the most reliable of the lot either. For example, 67016 ran into trouble today.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

As demonstrated by Transport for Wales also, the Class 67s require modifications to actually work with the MK4 coaches alone instead of the 91 and haven't proved to be the most reliable of the lot either. For example, 67016 ran into trouble today.

Even leaving aside the issue of reliability, the 67s accelerate far too slowly to be able to keep to a timetable intended for the performance level of 91s.

 

[xotGD]

One loco wouldn't be a lot of use!

It proved to be very useful in the past to cover for unavailable 91s.

Just a pity there aren't ten of them.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

It proved to be very useful in the past to cover for unavailable 91s.

That was when the 91 fleet was very intensively used. The remaining ones really aren't now - there's loads of slack.

 

[FrontSideBus]

It would be great if they could acquire a rake of Mk4's for Avocet to do railtours with.

IMO, the fact that we have nothing else that can match the performance of a 91, except EMU's just shows how good they were (and still are). Too bad they couldn't be refit with modern components but I suppose all good things must come to and end.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

IMO, the fact that we have nothing else that can match the performance of a 91, except EMU's just shows how good they were (and still are).

They are geared for high speed running. All more recent AC electrics are intended for freight or mixed traffic so have lower gearing. A modern AC loco which could match or exceed the 91s' performance would be perfectly possible but there has never been a need for it.

 

[Rhydgaled]

It would be great if they could acquire a rake of Mk4's for Avocet to do railtours with.

IMO, the fact that we have nothing else that can match the performance of a 91, except EMU's just shows how good they were (and still are). Too bad they couldn't be refit with modern components but I suppose all good things must come to and end.

I hope the 225 Group will obtain a full IC225 set (including 91 and DVT) for railtour use once LNER have fully withdrawn the fleet - together with the class 89 and LSL's 86(s), 87(s) and 90s that would give a nice range of traction options for both the mark 4 set and LSL's mark 3 set(s). Further details of what I'd like to see happen probably not allowed in this topic since it's not in the 'speculation' section.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Oct 2025 ==

As demonstrated by Transport for Wales also, the Class 67s require modifications to actually work with the MK4 coaches alone instead of the 91 and haven't proved to be the most reliable of the lot either. For example, 67016 ran into trouble today.

The class 67's fuel range isn't too good either - partially illustrated by the very limited offering of TfW Mk4 services to/from Swansea.

 

[BillStampy]

The class 67's fuel range isn't too good either - partially illustrated by the very limited offering of TfW Mk4 services to/from Swansea.

Absolutely, I checked 67020's fuel gauge at Cardiff Central on Saturday after it had down Swansea to Manchester, Manchester to Cardiff and it was already on about half a tank. Not great and wouldn't be a very suitable locomotive to run the ECML with those circumstances!

 

[43096]

I hope the 225 Group will obtain a full IC225 set (including 91 and DVT) for railtour use once LNER have fully withdrawn the fleet - together with the class 89 and LSL's 86(s), 87(s) and 90s that would give a nice range of traction options for both the mark 4 set and LSL's mark 3 set(s). Further details of what I'd like to see happen probably not allowed in this topic since it's not in the 'speculation' section.

The problem is that the Mark 4 has a very limited route clearance, unlike the Mark 3s, where large portions of the network are cleared (more than you might think).