Potential cascade options for Voyagers on leaving XC?

[Iskra]

Just to throw a spanner in the works…

It’s all well and good proposing a whole-fleet replacement on Voyager routes, as many have done on these forums and beyond.

However, is there actually anywhere sensible that the XC Voyagers could be realistically re-deployed to?

And if there isn’t, doesn’t that leave the idea of an XC massive new train order dead in the water?

So, what routes could the Voyager fleet sensibly work on, your thoughts please?

 

[Bletchleyite]

They need scrapped. They're badly designed and highly polluting.

There are places they probably COULD be used, but I'd take the view that they shouldn't.

 

[michael8]

Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central (and onwards)? Would be wonderful.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Just to throw a spanner in the works…

It’s all well and good proposing a whole-fleet replacement on Voyager routes, as many have done on these forums and beyond.

However, is there actually anywhere sensible that the XC Voyagers could be realistically re-deployed to?

And if there isn’t, doesn’t that leave the idea of an XC massive new train order dead in the water?

So, what routes could the Voyager fleet sensibly work on, your thoughts please?

The voyager fleet dates from 2001 with a life-expectancy of 30 years. So fleet replacement isn’t about cascading the voyagers but replacing them surely?

 

[Iskra]

They need scrapped. They're badly designed and highly polluting.

There are places they probably COULD be used, but I'd take the view that they shouldn't.

The reality is that the ROSCO would likely want to continue to make money from them until they are life-expired, regardless of any ideological standpoints as valid as they may be.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Feb 2026 ==

The voyager fleet dates from 2001 with a life-expectancy of 30 years. So fleet replacement isn’t about cascading the voyagers but replacing them surely?

30 years isn’t a hard and fast rule, and there are many examples around of trains beyond that lifespan still in service.

For the purpose of this thread, let’s imagine that they are going to be cascaded in order for some suitable deployment to be theorised…

 

[The exile]

The most logical thing to do (but which runs counter to what normally happens here) is a very slow introduction of the new fleet, using the first sets to be released for strengthening and then withdrawal as exams etc fall due.
Actually, to be fair, it did sort of happen with XC in the 80s and 90s - just that what was being replaced k k wasted long enough to be displaced by their replacements’ replacements.

 

[JonathanH]

And if there isn’t, doesn’t that leave the idea of an XC massive new train order dead in the water?

There isn't an idea of an imminent massive XC new trains order, other than on this forum. They have talked about fleet replacement in the mid-2030s, by which time Voyagers can be removed from the network.

Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central (and onwards)? Would be wonderful.

They wouldn't, as they simply don't have the capacity required.

 

[Bletchleyite]

For the purpose of this thread, let’s imagine that they are going to be cascaded in order for some suitable deployment to be theorised…

It's really quite hard to think of one to be honest. About the only one I can imagine is some 5-cars to TfW to replace the rotting Mk4 sets. I can't think of any other deployment where they wouldn't be a major downgrade (operationally or comfort wise) on what went before (e.g they would be too low capacity for the West of England service), aside from a new Open Access operation that's not been thought of yet.

I suppose seeing as ScotRail are taking all the 222s aside from those Lumo want they could take them allowing all Inter7City services to be run using 5 car 22x, thus cascading 170s to replace 158s, 158s to replace 156s and 156s to scrap?

 

[swt_passenger]

Just to throw a spanner in the works…

It’s all well and good proposing a whole-fleet replacement on Voyager routes, as many have done on these forums and beyond.

However, is there actually anywhere sensible that the XC Voyagers could be realistically re-deployed to?

I’d say no, (as people have repeatedly noted in all the previous discussions), because they are relatively low capacity but heavy, 125 mph units that would be a performance overkill on almost every most suggested route.

 

[JonathanH]

I suppose seeing as ScotRail are taking all the 222s aside from those Lumo want they could take them allowing all Inter7City services to be run using 5 car 22x, thus cascading 170s to replace 158s, 158s to replace 156s and 156s to scrap?

Isn't the use of 158s / 170s on those kind of services all about cycling the fleet back to its base, and therefore not easy to remove?

a new Open Access operation that's not been thought of yet

There may well not be any such operations by the time the Voyagers are displaced.

 

[Helvellyn]

If you were to cascade them you'd probably want to rip out the universal toilet from every centre coach, and possibly one of the driving coaches as well if the units were to be Standard Class only. That would allow a smaller toilet and extra luggage space to be fitted. But you start being able to add capacity to the units.

I'd also suggest that the 221s should be reformed as 32 6-car units. Yes, that leaves 12 pairs of spare driving coaches but they could be stripped for spares and 6-car units could then be used on the likes of Cardiff-Portsmouth or to replace TfW's loco-hauled services. If the 220s were reformed as well they could be used on the Liverpool-Norwich services (with SDO), but possibly that might need those curtailed to Liverpool-Nottingham to avoid to much excess capacity East of Nottingham.

Probably regear if doing this to 100 max speed and maybe derate the engines and/or remove an engine (or two).

I know this would leave the leasing company with lots of spare driving cars, but we'd have six car units for regional express type services. Entirely hypothetical of course and would need someone to order XC a standardised fleet of say a Class 810 variant.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you were to cascade them you'd probably want to rip out the universal toilet from every centre coach, and possibly one of the driving coaches as well if the units were to be Standard Class only. That would allow a smaller toilet and extra luggage space to be fitted. But you start being able to add capacity to the units. Probably regear if doing this to 100/110 max speed and maybe derate the engines.

I think if you were replacing the toilets I'd look to add luggage space rather than seats. This is a huge problem on these units and is easier to do as it's just shelves rather than putting a load of unpopular seats against a blank wall.

You could probably get an extra row in each intermediate if you replaced the seats with thin backed ones, but that would probably be unjustifiably expensive given that they're just now being replaced.

 

[Iskra]

It's really quite hard to think of one to be honest. About the only one I can imagine is some 5-cars to TfW to replace the rotting Mk4 sets. I can't think of any other deployment where they wouldn't be a major downgrade (operationally or comfort wise) on what went before (e.g they would be too low capacity for the West of England service), aside from a new Open Access operation that's not been thought of yet.

I suppose seeing as ScotRail are taking all the 222s aside from those Lumo want they could take them allowing all Inter7City services to be run using 5 car 22x, thus cascading 170s to replace 158s, 158s to replace 156s and 156s to scrap?

This is what I thought, which is why I thought I’d put it out there to see what people would come up with.

My personal thoughts for were- Penzance-Cardiff or the Northern semi-fast/express Leeds-Sheffield-(Nottingham) services. However, these would create micro-fleets, which I’m not sure those two TOC’s would be able to use the type on other routes to alleviate that issue.

TfW Cardiff-Manchester/Holyhead is another decent suggestion.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My personal thoughts for were- Penzance-Cardiff or the Northern semi-fast/express Leeds-Sheffield-(Nottingham) services. However, these would create micro-fleets, which I’m not sure those two TOC’s would be able to use the type on other routes to alleviate that issue.

I think the advantage of ScotRail and TfW is that neither would be a micro fleet (i.e. that they could use all of them, or at least as many 5 car sets as could be formed - 4s are too low capacity to be useful, a 3 car 170 would be preferable to a 4 car Voyager) and both would be operated on routes that are mostly or entirely not electrified.

 

[Iskra]

If you were to cascade them you'd probably want to rip out the universal toilet from every centre coach, and possibly one of the driving coaches as well if the units were to be Standard Class only. That would allow a smaller toilet and extra luggage space to be fitted. But you start being able to add capacity to the units.

I'd also suggest that the 221s should be reformed as 32 6-car units. Yes, that leaves 12 pairs of spare driving coaches but they could be stripped for spares and 6-car units could then be used on the likes of Cardiff-Portsmouth or to replace TfW's loco-hauled services. If the 220s were reformed as well they could be used on the Liverpool-Norwich services (with SDO), but possibly that might need those curtailed to Liverpool-Nottingham to avoid to much excess capacity East of Nottingham.

Probably regear if doing this to 100 max speed and maybe derate the engines and/or remove an engine (or two).

I know this would leave the leasing company with lots of spare driving cars, but we'd have six car units for regional express type services. Entirely hypothetical of course and would need someone to order XC a standardised fleet of say a Class 810 variant.

TfW is a sensible deployment.

I think they are too heavy for Cardiff-Portsmouth and the door-arrangement isn’t great. Again, Liverpool-Norwich they are too heavy to use Sprinter speed differentials so would slow the service down, and again the door arrangement isn’t optimal for dwells at Manchester stations in particular.

 

[Snow1964]

They are not fuel efficient by current standards, so there is argument that they should go.

However they exist, and there are a number of seasonal routes that could do with strengthening so using them sensibly on routes to Devon & Cornwall or south west Wales etc in busy months, rather than trying to ration demand, makes sense.

Not as 4car units though, the end cars of these need to go (and be used for spare parts), with the middle cars inserted into other sets to lengthen them to 6 or 7 cars

 

[Bletchleyite]

TfW is a sensible deployment.

They certainly need something to replace the Mk4s. I assume the full set of them would be enough to run all Cardiff-Manchester services and maybe some others such as Manchester-Bangor once the slower Llandudno service becomes a Liverpool?

I think the idea of going 6 car is an interesting one. It would allow downseating to a low density layout with added luggage space while retaining first class and enough of a kitchen to provide something approximating to TfW's restaurant service (though not quite as good as now, it'd have to be foodservice stuff rather than fresh ingredients). Derating the engines (or even removing a couple so you had 4 in a 6 car set as they can crossfeed?) might deal with the efficiency issues, though that service does run on the WCML so presumably could at least reach 110?

 

[EYFanatic]

Would Lumo like them given they are similar to the 222s they are using on the West Coast

 

[Halifaxlad]

A while ago I liked the idea of them on the S&C!

Personally I would like to see a semi fast service from Bradford calling at Halifax, Rochdale &, Manchester.

 

[stevieinselby]

They are not fuel efficient by current standards, so there is argument that they should go.

It's a question of balance.

Building new trains (and scrapping old ones) isn't a zero carbon process, not by a long way – there is an old adage that the most environmentally friendly product is the one you already have. While that won't always be true, there's a lot to be said for the idea that binning trains that have another 10+ years of serviceable life in them and replacing them with brand new trains that are more economical and have lower emissions is not necessarily a clear-cut environmental benefit.

 

[HSTEd]

I suppose you could take one to replace the New Measurement Train! The Even Newer Measurement Train.

 

[Halish Railway]

I can see CrossCountry replacing them with bi-modes on their current routes, but in turn being cascaded onto the planned Birmingham Moor Street to Bristol and Cardiff services once the Bordesley chords open, as well as the Nottingham to Birmingham New Street and Cardiff services.

The only other route I can think of is Cardiff to Plymouth/Penzance, where the operations of this route can be combined with the aforementioned services to Birmingham Moor Street post-GBR.

 

[cle]

They were actually great on Euston-Chester, they made that a thing.

Hmm - best uses would be high speed services without too many stops, preferably not under wires.

The Yorkshire Flyer (Sheffield-Wakefield-Leeds) service is one. Nottingham-Leeds possibly too. Leeds-Carlisle even, but a bit slow. And base them in Leeds.

OR

Base them in Aberdeen and run to Inverness / Glasgow / Edinburgh ?

OR

Bristol - Oxford

OR

Give them to TfW to run Cardiff-Holyhead and Manchester?

 

[Iskra]

I can see CrossCountry replacing them with bi-modes on their current routes, but in turn being cascaded onto the planned Birmingham Moor Street to Bristol and Cardiff services once the Bordesley chords open, as well as the Nottingham to Birmingham New Street and Cardiff services.

The only other route I can think of is Cardiff to Plymouth/Penzance, where the operations of this route can be combined with the aforementioned services to Birmingham Moor Street post-GBR.

They were actually great on Euston-Chester, they made that a thing.

Hmm - best uses would be high speed services without too many stops, preferably not under wires.

The Yorkshire Flyer (Sheffield-Wakefield-Leeds) service is one. Nottingham-Leeds possibly too. Leeds-Carlisle even, but a bit slow. And base them in Leeds.

OR

Base them in Aberdeen and run to Inverness / Glasgow / Edinburgh ?

OR

Bristol - Oxford

OR

Give them to TfW to run Cardiff-Holyhead and Manchester?

These are all pretty reasonable suggestions.

...the bit in bold, is a good reason to reintroduce the Thames-Clyde express (North of Nottingham at least) *sound the forum cliche klaxon*. If they did operate Leeds-Carlisle they'd still be able to stretch their legs on the Airedale line section. The line may be able to cope better with their weight than some other suggestions due to it being engineered to mainline standards, big windows for the views would be a plus too.

 

[sd0733]

They certainly need something to replace the Mk4s.

The people who make the decisions on this think rather differently at the moment!
Theyre certainly going to see service well into the 2030s, potentially through to 2040 dependent on the extent of some of the next stages of overhaul works.

 

[Topological]

The people who make the decisions on this think rather differently at the moment!
Theyre certainly going to see service well into the 2030s, potentially through to 2040 dependent on the extent of some of the next stages of overhaul works.

Those decision makers see something I don't.

Voyagers would be overkill for the Marches, but at least they could run further than Cardiff.

Other diesel routes that might suit double voyagers include Bristol - Cambridge, Cardiff - Penzance (as mentioned), and possibly the additional Bordesley Chord services into Birmingham Moor Street from the South West.

I echo the thoughts of those who think we might see a reduction of driving cabs on the Voyagers. Though we used to have 2 x 175 occasionally so two units coupled together without a gangway is not the end of the world.

My outspoken belief is that trains formed from shorter units that are able to run as a single unit are better than a longer single unit that might fail.

 

[EYFanatic]

What about Nottingham-Carlisle semi fasts trains via the S&C by Northern? The route is already cleared for them - for the most part at least - and all that would be needed surely would be type training

 

[mrcheek]

Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central (and onwards)? Would be wonderful.

that was my first thought.
But, worth remembering that a 4 car Voyager has about the same capacity as a 3 car 158...

 

[43074]

What about Nottingham-Carlisle semi fasts trains via the S&C by Northern? The route is already cleared for them - for the most part at least - and all that would be needed surely would be type training

Why though? What actual demand is there for Nottingham to Carlisle passengers?

 

[Iskra]

Why though? What actual demand is there for Nottingham to Carlisle passengers?

More likely to pick up Aire Valley to Sheffield and Nottingham and vice versa. Not a massively important through service but if it saved units why not. …Or extend it to Glasgow where there could be more of a market