At risk fleets

[Trainbike46]

The thread on removal of Castle HSTs made me think about what other fleets are at risk in the near future due to cost cutting.

My guesses are:

LNER 225s - Is there sufficient post pandamic demand to justify more than 80X fleet?

LNER is carrying more passengers than pre-covid already, and there is opportunity for further growth, so while they may be replaced, it would be really bad if they were withdrawn without replacement - the demand is definitely there to justify them

XC HSTs - on day hire therefore cheap to run but a long lease on ex Avanti Voyagers at the right price might appeal.

There's also the possible challenge for maintenance with GWR HSTs being withdrawn (as they are maintained by GWR), so a likely contender for removal. It would also lead to a more uniform fleet.

Chiltern loco hauled - expensive to run

these will probably go I suspect, the question is whether they will be replaced or withdrawn without replacement

807s - how keen are DfT on introducing a second Liverpool service? Maybe the fleet could be split 50:50 with LNER to partially replace 225s. They are not at risk but if they are transferred they would put other units at risk.

This seems unlikely tbh. And the 807s aren't just for the second liverpool service - they are also to replace the voyager diagrams that are entirely under the wires, even if not directly.

I wonder if the 807s could work in multiple as and 805+807 in service, and then split towards different destinations further up the WCML

175s - popular but going off lease in a couple of years

They may be used at chiltern or potentially other operators - there is still a shortage of DMUs that is unlikely to disappear with the amount of sprinters reaching end of life over the next decade, but buying new DMUs now would be foolish

155s and 156s - approximately 36 x 158s going off lease in next 2 and a bit years which could replace all 155s and many 158s giving a better impression to passengers.

All the sprinters (150/153/155/156) except 158/159s are nearing their end of life so replacement will have to be considered this decade.

319s - younger, better EMUs going off lease

They are unlikely to be replaced unless there is potential for significant cost savings by replacement I'd say

769s - unreliable and won't be needed by TfW.

GWR and northern still seem committed to them though - and without the castles GWR won't have the slack in their fleet to miss them.

230s - collaspe of Vivarail causing maintenance issues

I suspect the maintenance issues will be resolved. Remember that TfW was buying theirs outright

 

[12LDA28C]

It's already been announced some time ago that Chiltern have secured agreement to continue using 68s until May 2024. If no suitable replacement is found in the next 18 months I expect another extension may be granted.

 

[Trainbike46]

The remaining 321s on Greater Anglia?

They are due for replacement with 720s - tbh I'm surprised they haven't all been withdrawn yet

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Dec 2022 ==

ScotRail HSTs are at risk given that ASLEF have stated ther members won’t touch them post August 2023

The scottish government has guaranteed them a lease until sometime around 2030, so I doubt they'll be replaced before then - and when they are, it will be by the new electric units

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Dec 2022 ==

If TPE were to remove their Mk5s, could they be adapted to sleeper services at caledonian sleeper?

 

[geoffk]

A big reason for unreliability on UK railways compared to the continent is the lack of slack in our fleets compared to Germany and France, which run their railways with more spares so when more trains than expected are out for repair the railways can run without cancellations.

But if the DfT/Treasury have their way, there could be even less slack from next May!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed; the only question is whether the coaches outlive their “sister” fleet at Caledonian Sleeper, since the long term prospects there look to be on a “shoogly peg”

I don't think the CS is likely to be wholly withdrawn, because it would be quite political to do so - same as the Scottish rural lines (even Girvan-Stranraer). The Scottish Government will continue to fund it (no doubt with a massive blaze of publicity should any English funding be removed). Though post HS2 I could see the Lowlander going.

It's the Night Riviera I now suspect is very much on borrowed time, withdrawing it would be an easy cost saving and Westminster won't be as interested. Potentially it could be part-replaced by a later 80x departure from Paddington in the evening, and perhaps running the present 0503 from Penzance at say 0430 to allow an 0925 arrival in time to at least be in an office by 10. Present last train from Paddington is 1804 arriving 2259 which is a bit early, something like a 1930-2000 arriving 0030-0100 would suit most peoples' needs. Sure, you couldn't take in a show first then take the Sleeper, but how many actually do that?

As for the TPE Mk5s they would seem to be a shoe-in for replacing Scottish HSTs long term, hauled initially by diesel locomotives but replaced by bi-mode or electric ones as electrification is completed. They are the right length and have that flexibility, plus they comply with ScotGov's dislike of underfloor engines. They are a nuisance for TPE, who would be better off extending the 802s to 7 or 8 car with ASDO and running fewer, longer trains. Also that'd put all Mk5s within the remit of Scotland which would ease maintenance etc.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Dec 2022 ==

175s are definitely at risk as they aren't really standard or can work in multiple with anything other than within class. I agree they are popular so hopefully they will find a home.

Chiltern and East West Rail I think is likely for these, with Chiltern operating EWR and the Marston Vale stopping service instead of WMT using either those or 168s, whatever suits best. This could allow scrapping of some or all older 165s (depending what you do with the Chiltern service level), or a cascade of them to replace 150s elsewhere (i.e. GWR), said 150s up to Northern, and all the 769s to go in the bin where they belong.

 

[Grumpy]

As for the TPE Mk5s they would seem to be a shoe-in for replacing Scottish HSTs long term, They are a nuisance for TPE, who would be better off extending the 802s to 7 or 8 car with ASDO and running fewer, longer trains.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Dec 2022 ==

Absolutely spot on. The provision of extra capacity on the Trans Pennine route upgrade is largely a waste of money, as well as delaying the electrification element

 

[12LDA28C]

Chiltern and East West Rail I think is likely for these, with Chiltern operating EWR and the Marston Vale stopping service instead of WMT using either those or 168s, whatever suits best. This could allow scrapping of some or all older 165s (depending what you do with the Chiltern service level), or a cascade of them to replace 150s elsewhere (i.e. GWR), said 150s up to Northern, and all the 769s to go in the bin where they belong.

It's already been mentioned that 196s will be used on EWR initially

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's already been mentioned that 196s will be used on EWR initially

There are also significant rumours that that may now not be the case, though I can't corroborate them. Part of the reason for this doubt is that EWR is now "lights on sticks" rather than the originally planned ETCS.

 

[Energy]

GWR and northern still seem committed to them though - and without the castles GWR won't have the slack in their fleet to miss them.

GWR aren't, their latest National Rail Contract has their lease end April 2023 and not be extended, the 165/166s are extended to 2028.

Northern are committed to them because of the lease and nothing else being available.

They are unlikely to be replaced unless there is potential for significant cost savings by replacement I'd say

Well they are. The Northern 319s are being replaced by 323s and LNWR units by 730s.

 

[12LDA28C]

There are also significant rumours that that may now not be the case, though I can't corroborate them. Part of the reason for this doubt is that EWR is now "lights on sticks" rather than the originally planned ETCS.

Was it originally planned to be ECTS? Seems strange as I know people that have been involved in the EWR signal sighting committee for several years now.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Was it originally planned to be ECTS?

Yes. That's why the main fleets under discussion were the ex-TfW 158s or the 196s (the latter aren't fitted with it but I believe they have passive provision for it to be added relatively cheaply).

 

[Chester1]

Yes. That's why the main fleets under discussion were the ex-TfW 158s or the 196s (the latter aren't fitted with it but I believe they have passive provision for it to be added relatively cheaply).

A lot of TfWs 197s will have it fitted immediately, I doubt adding it to 196s will cost much at all.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A lot of TfWs 197s will have it fitted immediately, I doubt adding it to 196s will cost much at all.

No need though, as EWR is lights on sticks and not ETCS in the end

 

[Chester1]

LNER is carrying more passengers than pre-covid already, and there is opportunity for further growth, so while they may be replaced, it would be really bad if they were withdrawn without replacement - the demand is definitely there to justify them

There's also the possible challenge for maintenance with GWR HSTs being withdrawn (as they are maintained by GWR), so a likely contender for removal. It would also lead to a more uniform fleet.

these will probably go I suspect, the question is whether they will be replaced or withdrawn without replacement

This seems unlikely tbh. And the 807s aren't just for the second liverpool service - they are also to replace the voyager diagrams that are entirely under the wires, even if not directly.

I wonder if the 807s could work in multiple as and 805+807 in service, and then split towards different destinations further up the WCML

They may be used at chiltern or potentially other operators - there is still a shortage of DMUs that is unlikely to disappear with the amount of sprinters reaching end of life over the next decade, but buying new DMUs now would be foolish

All the sprinters (150/153/155/156) except 158/159s are nearing their end of life so replacement will have to be considered this decade.

They are unlikely to be replaced unless there is potential for significant cost savings by replacement I'd say

GWR and northern still seem committed to them though - and without the castles GWR won't have the slack in their fleet to miss them.

I suspect the maintenance issues will be resolved. Remember that TfW was buying theirs outright

I hadn't considered the maintenance issue for XC HSTs. There are already two off lease Voyagers. At a minimum five could be transferred during course of next year to replace HSTs.

I am aware that 807s are due to run other services but I do question whether those services need the same frequency or capacity. The TPE 397s had barely been in service when the pandemic started and passenger numbers have dropped. I would be tempted to introduce a second Chester-Crewe TfW shuttle and do what they can for North Wales and Chester services with three 805s rostered each day. Ten 805s would be needed to run the hourly Birmingham to Scotland service. More 805s would be need to be ordered for spares. Some Voyagers could stay longer to cover the leed time and the Pendolino refurbishment. The hourly Chester service is likely to be made redundant by HS2 by the end of the decade and cutting it now and blaming the pandemic might be a better option.

I don't know about the technical side of running 805s and 807s together but it isn't feasible simply because 807s have seven coaches therefore the sets would be about 300m long.

It's already been announced some time ago that Chiltern have secured agreement to continue using 68s until May 2024. If no suitable replacement is found in the next 18 months I expect another extension may be granted.

When I started the the thread I was thinking of the next 18-30 months. Unless DfT decides to cut back Chiltern services it sounds like they might just about survive longer.

 

[43096]

I hadn't considered the maintenance issue for XC HSTs. There are already two off lease Voyagers. At a minimum five could be transferred during course of next year to replace HSTs.

Given the cuts being demanded by DfT, I'd say it is more likely that the HSTs will go with no replacement and XC will just have to make do with their existing Voyager fleet.

 

[Chester1]

Given the cuts being demanded by DfT, I'd say it is more likely that the HSTs will go with no replacement and XC will just have to make do with their existing Voyager fleet.

I think that depends on what cuts are being made to ToCs that XC share tracks with. The cuts don't need to be uniform. The Voyagers owner will be facing prospect of sending them for scrap so are likely to offer a very good lease price. The 20 Avanti Voyagers are definitely at risk.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Present last train from Paddington is 1804 arriving 2259 which is a bit early, something like a 1930-2000 arriving 0030-0100 would suit most peoples' needs. Sure, you couldn't take in a show first then take the Sleeper, but how many actually do that?

Last service from Paddington to Penzance is 19.04, on Fridays this is a through train, on other days a change of train is required in Plymouth.

 

[Sonik]

I think that depends on what cuts are being made to ToCs that XC share tracks with. The cuts don't need to be uniform. The Voyagers owner will be facing prospect of sending them for scrap so are likely to offer a very good lease price. The 20 Avanti Voyagers are definitely at risk.

It would be an 'interesting' situation politically, if a bunch of voyagers (or indeed meridians) got sent for scrap, with HSTs still operating.

Especially since Stonehaven (compared to e.g. Grayrigg).

The press will have a field day.

 

[jackot]

The press will have a field day.

I daren't think of the news headlines, especially from certain newspapers: "Newer Trains Sent To SCRAP, Whilst LETHAL and UNSAFE Trains Continue To Put Passenger at RISK After Proven FATAL"

It would make logical sense for the Voyagers or Meridians to directly replace the HSTs on a lot of their operations, but with how cheap the HSTs leases appear to be they may well stick around longer than some of their Bombardier counterparts. A lot of the HSTs will likely go without any direct replacement, as being seen at GWR.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

If TPE were to remove their Mk5s, could they be adapted to sleeper services at caledonian sleeper?

I don't think CS have any need for so much extra stock, though in theory the driving trailers could be used to simplify shunting... but I'm not saying that with any knowledge of how it could be implemented.
Assuming for the sake of argument that converting them into sleeping cars could be done with satisfactory results, the Night Riviera would be a more likely home for them. Being a simpler operation (no shunting mid-journey) it would also be better suited to using the driving trailers in some way.

 

[Trainbike46]

I don't think CS have any need for so much extra stock, though in theory the driving trailers could be used to simplify shunting... but I'm not saying that with any knowledge of how it could be implemented.

A while ago there was a thread based on some article that CS was looking at increasing capacity to Inverness, and possibly running trains to Oban as well - both of which would require a third train a day, and therefore more stock. Hence my question, as reusing TPE stock would likely, but not certainly, be cheaper than buying new

 

[43096]

Assuming for the sake of argument that converting them into sleeping cars could be done with satisfactory results, the Night Riviera would be a more likely home for them. Being a simpler operation (no shunting mid-journey) it would also be better suited to using the driving trailers in some way.

If you saddled the Night Riviera with the extra costs of almost-new stock, you'd probably kill the service off as DfT would deem it too expensive.

 

[RobShipway]

I don't think CS have any need for so much extra stock, though in theory the driving trailers could be used to simplify shunting... but I'm not saying that with any knowledge of how it could be implemented.
Assuming for the sake of argument that converting them into sleeping cars could be done with satisfactory results, the Night Riviera would be a more likely home for them. Being a simpler operation (no shunting mid-journey) it would also be better suited to using the driving trailers in some way.

Could the TPE MK5 carriages be converted into sleepers to replace the Mk3 sleepers with GWR?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

If you saddled the Night Riviera with the extra costs of almost-new stock, you'd probably kill the service off as DfT would deem it too expensive.

Probably. Though I wasn't advocating such a change, just addressing a post that suggested a (speculative) possible new use for the stock in the event that TPE no longer required it. The stock on the Night Riviera can't last forever, so if (and that's a very big if) it was feasible to convert the mk5a sets to sleepers, the Riviera would a possible (though admittedly highly unlikely) use for them. The post that initially suggested such a conversion was discussing the idea of Caledonian Sleeper expansion rather than the Cornish service though.

Could the TPE MK5 carriages be converted into sleepers to replace the Mk3 sleepers with GWR?

In theory anything is possible if you throw enough money at it, but in the real world probably not. But again, it wasn't me that suggested handing them to a sleeper operation. I was just discussing the suggestion in good faith, and in the spirit of this being the speculative section of the forums.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

350's ! Not what you may be thinking, I refer to class 08's.. They are a fleet (type), although I have no idea how many remain on the National network, and all too often taken for granted by some of us back in the day