Class 465 and 466 set for storage/scrap: possible uses for them in future?

[gmaguire]

Not simple not meaning impossible doesn't make it reasonable. There is a very good reason why trains aren't modernised forever; often something is so beyond being modernised it just cannot be done. The 465s reached that point 20 years ago after the neglect they received under Connex, but to be honest they may well have passed the point of no return before they were even put into service. The nickname 'Notworker' has a reason for being; the Networkers have been so horrible in every conceivable way since they were introduced that anything other than a full fleet replacement is a sick joke to those who have to travel on them. They are not good metro trains due to their low capacity. They are not good regional trains due to their uncomfortable interiors. They are terrible in summer as they are not air conditioned. Going through the massive effort to retraction them again will achieve nothing and just waste taxpayer money.

They're not that bad. I commute on them 5 days a week. The seats are decently comfortable for metro trains, and the backs are high enough that you feel like you have some privacy. They're relatively quiet, reasonably quick, they ride smoothly, and the interior is generally pleasant, even if they are a bit tatty by this point. I feel like I'm more likely to get a seat, because there are more of them. Overall I much prefer a Networker to a 376. Air conditioning would be nice during a heatwave, but during the other 51 weeks of the year they're fine.

 

[D365]

Granted nothing is simple doesn't mean its impossible. Just a suggesting as a cost effective way to modernise the old kit on these trains if they are being kept for a foreseeable period of time

Alas, I feel that modernising any Networker units at this state would be anything but cost effective. In this instance, it’s the engineering costs that would be prohibitively expensive. Not the cost of the actual parts.

 

[Doomotron]

They seat more passengers than a 2+3 format 455 did. I know this forum doesn't like the 165 / 166 / 465 / 466 layout but it does its job and isn't out of place on metro or regional trains. Is a 465/9 really worse than something like a VEP or a 319 as a regional train?

Judging by modern standards, something better could be put in service. However, the 465 interior was very much an improvement on what went before.

Seating capacity =/= overall capacity. The standing capacity of Networks is laughable, as is the case for 3+2 interiors in general. The Class 700s have 2+2 to increase standing capacity and therefore overall capacity.

 

[RobShipway]

Since the class 365 where built 1994-1995, the class 466 built 1993-1994 and class 465 1991-1994 then I cannot see the class 465 & 466 being used by another TOC. You also have to remember that the class 465 units where built by more than one manufacturer. The class 465/0, 465/1 and 465/3 units by ABB with the 465/2 and 465/9 by Metro-Cammell.

Yes, at various times between 2005 - 2016 the class 465 have had various refreshes through this time, whereas the class 466 units have very little refresh, so unless being attached to a class 465 unit do not comply to the accessibility standards since 1st January 2021, which is then not surprising that some of these units are being replaced by class 707 units.

It will be interesting to see how SouthEastern replace the 147 class 465 units and the 43 class 466 units. However, I can see the class 466 units being scrapped either before the end of this year or next year with SouthEastern taking on the class 707 units once they have got the complete fleet.

 

[bramling]

Seating capacity =/= overall capacity. The standing capacity of Networks is laughable, as is the case for 3+2 interiors in general. The Class 700s have 2+2 to increase standing capacity and therefore overall capacity.

If it was that much of an issue, the third seats would have been removed by now. Presumably the fact that is hasn't happened suggests the extra seating is considered worthwhile.

 

[Doomotron]

If it was that much of an issue, the third seats would have been removed by now. Presumably the fact that is hasn't happened suggests the extra seating is considered worthwhile.

Nope. It's also an issue in the Networker Turbos as far as I know, the seating layout cannot be altered due to underfloor equipment. And even if it isn't, it being 'that much of an issue' doesn't really mean anything because the trains have barely been changed otherwise.

 

[JonathanH]

However, I can see the class 466 units being scrapped either before the end of this year or next year with SouthEastern taking on the class 707 units once they have got the complete fleet.

Is the withdrawal of 466s you envisage combined with a reduction in formations of Networker formed trains from 10 car to 8 car and 6 car to 4 car? 466s are a bit more useful than 465/2s in that respect.

Are you effectively saying that once all the 707s are with Southeastern, there will be enough 376s and 707s to run all the trains which need to be 10-car and anything worked by a Networker only needs to be 8-car?

To some extent, it might be desirable to withdraw the 465/2, 465/9 and 466 fleet because they didn't get the traction work that the 465/0s and 465/1s got. It would kind of be consistent with what happened to the 456s on SWR and 455/8s on Southern

I suspect that if such a fleet reduction plan was viable it would happen but it isn't clear from other posters that Southeastern could cope without these units.

 

[brad465]

It will be interesting to see how SouthEastern replace the 147 class 465 units and the 43 class 466 units. However, I can see the class 466 units being scrapped either before the end of this year or next year with SouthEastern taking on the class 707 units once they have got the complete fleet.

I can't see the whole fleet being replaced without a brand new fleet being introduced for at least part of the replacement plan. There are no other existing third rail fleets large enough to replace on a cascade, other than ones that are also old and/or the dominant makeup of another franchise to the point a cascade is not possible. Given the state of DfT finances combined with the size of the whole fleet, this is looking like a long wait.

 

[RobShipway]

Is the withdrawal of 466s you envisage combined with a reduction in formations of Networker formed trains from 10 car to 8 car and 6 car to 4 car? 466s are a bit more useful than 465/2s in that respect.

Are you effectively saying that once all the 707s are with Southeastern, there will be enough 376s and 707s to run all the trains which need to be 10-car and anything worked by a Networker only needs to be 8-car?

To some extent, it might be desirable to withdraw the 465/2, 465/9 and 466 fleet because they didn't get the traction work that the 465/0s and 465/1s got. It would kind of be consistent with what happened to the 456s on SWR and 455/8s on Southern

I suspect that if such a fleet reduction plan was viable it would happen but it isn't clear from other posters that Southeastern could cope without these units.

The class 466 are non compliant units, so should have been withdrawn back on 1st January 2021. SouthEastern with having the class 707 units, could cope without having the class 466 units.

I can't see the whole fleet being replaced without a brand new fleet being introduced for at least part of the replacement plan. There are no other existing third rail fleets large enough to replace on a cascade, other than ones that are also old and/or the dominant makeup of another franchise to the point a cascade is not possible. Given the state of DfT finances combined with the size of the whole fleet, this is looking like a long wait.

I cannot see the whole class 465 fleet being replaced either and even then I think it would be a gradual replacement with the 465/2 and 465/9 units being replaced first.

However, since all the class 365 units have been pretty much scrapped, I cannot see a long term future even for the class 465/0 or class 465/1 units as the class 365 units where younger. I think though that the class 465 units should be replaced with trains that can operate on AC/DC/Battery power. Something like Stadler Class 756 or a similar CAF Class 331 version or possibly something like class 701 I think would be appropriate. You would not need the same number as in the class 465 fleet as most trains that they operate are 8 car trains anyway, so I would have two versions. The majority being 8 - 9 car trains, with a smaller amount being four or five car trains. But that is long into the future.

 

[JonathanH]

I think though that the class 465 units should be replaced with trains that can operate on AC/DC/Battery power.

Where are they going to run on batteries on a fully electric network?

I can't see the whole fleet being replaced without a brand new fleet being introduced for at least part of the replacement plan.

If SWR ever get the 701s in service, the surplus ones not needed in the cut back SWR timetable might be available to make inroads into the 465 / 466 fleet.

 

[RobShipway]

Where are they going to run on batteries on a fully electric network?

I include batteries on the basis, that the trains could have batteries added to them later if needed should they later in life be transferred to a TOC where not all the lines are either currently electrified or will ever be electrified in the future. Good examples of this would be the Uckfield line to Hurst Green and Ore to Ashford. Not that these lines are part of Southeastern, but if the trains did get moved to the Southern Region, then being able to run on batteries for a fair amount of miles would be good.

 

[bramling]

Where are they going to run on batteries on a fully electric network?


If SWR ever get the 701s in service, the surplus ones not needed in the cut back SWR timetable might be available to make inroads into the 465 / 466 fleet.

Would it not be more obvious to shuffle things on SWT in order to eliminate the 458s? Four separate metro fleets on SE wouldn’t be ideal.

 

[brad465]

Would it not be more obvious to shuffle things on SWT in order to eliminate the 458s? Four separate metro fleets on SE wouldn’t be ideal.

Not to mention SE need 8 and 12 car diagrams (or at least could do with more 12 car diagrams) on key routes, which 701s won't be able to provide.

 

[swt_passenger]

Would it not be more obvious to shuffle things on SWT in order to eliminate the 458s? Four separate metro fleets on SE wouldn’t be ideal.

I think there’s an unwritten rule that forum generated cascades have to be as complicated as technically possible. I’m surprised no one has ever mentioned the possibility of lengthening or shortening individual carriages…

 

[bramling]

I think there’s an unwritten rule that forum generated cascades have to be as complicated as technically possible. I’m surprised no one has ever mentioned the possibility of lengthening or shortening individual carriages…

There does also seem to be a view (which the DFT seems to share!) that SE is there to be treated like a piece of dirt on the shoe. Granted some specific parts of the franchise got investment in the form of the high-speed services, but the metro area has stood very still indeed since the 1990s.

 

[Chiltern006]

Not to mention SE need 8 and 12 car diagrams (or at least could do with more 12 car diagrams) on key routes, which 701s won't be able to provide.

SE is a ten car metro railway. Mainline is 8/12. Most metro services are 10 car nowadays, with the exception of the Victoria metro services, with them being 8

 

[dodecahedron67]

SE is a ten car metro railway. Mainline is 8/12. Most metro services are 10 car nowadays, with the exception of the Victoria metro services, with them being 8

SE is most definitely not a ten car metro, it's just forced to be because of lack of rolling stock/stabling space. Victoria is the hard limiter because of Herne Hill and Brixton, where more than 8 cars foul junctions so will always be 8, sans remodellings. SE also has the weird thing where metro and mainline are very interlinked (Sevenoaks, Gravesend, Herne Hill/Catford Loop lines) because of 2-track mainlines, which no other commuter rail out of London suffers from (except C2C/Chiltern, but they're special cases as neither are particularly "short" commuter-y - they have tube lines to do that for them)

 

[D365]

I think there’s an unwritten rule that forum generated cascades have to be as complicated as technically possible. I’m surprised no one has ever mentioned the possibility of lengthening or shortening individual carriages…

Be careful to not mention that this is commonplace with freight wagons... oops.

 

[The_Train]

UK Rail Log has updated the 3x units that have moved between Ely and Doncaster today, but looking back through the log there are some 465/9s and a few 466s that have maintenance messages dating from 2021 or early 2022, that would either imply they've been there for several months, or have not been updated in a while. Can anyone clarify more on this please?

These are proving to be a nightmare to keep up with - I often see the news of them going to Donny and then not when they return and with thousands of records (and just me to manage them) if I don't locate news on something, it is easily forgotten and the end result is outdated news like this. I will try and arrange an update on these fleets in the coming days

 

[Kite159]

These are proving to be a nightmare to keep up with - I often see the news of them going to Donny and then not when they return and with thousands of records (and just me to manage them) if I don't locate news on something, it is easily forgotten and the end result is outdated news like this. I will try and arrange an update on these fleets in the coming days

Agreed there, all to easy to miss a report of one on the move.

(i.e. 466004 which you have got down as stored, but that is back in service as I had it last Friday)

 

[The_Train]

Agreed there, all to easy to miss a report of one on the move.

(i.e. 466004 which you have got down as stored, but that is back in service as I had it last Friday)

It's weird with the Donny moves as even looking on Flickr, it seems the moves to Donny are often caught but nothing coming back. Are the return moves in the middle of the night?

Anyway, thanks for the 004 info - that's now updated along with some of the other outdated news. I'm sure this still won't be 100% perfect so if anyone has any other updates then either reply here or PM me

 

[Class 466]

Monday to Friday from 1st August

All formed 466 + 465/9 (6 car)

5Y06 04+29 Ashford Down Sidings to Swanley
2A06 0606 Swanley to Victoria
2N12 0655 Victoria to Ashford
2A22 0908 Ashford to Victoria
2N28 1055 Victoria to Ashford
5N28 12+27 Ashford to Ashford East Berthing Sidings
5W42 13+50 Ashford East Berthing Sidings to Tonbridge Jubilee Sidings (attaches to 4 car 465/9 to work PM CHX-TBW workings)

5R46 14+11 Tonbridge Jubilee Sidings to Ashford (detaches from 4 car 465/9 off of AM CHX-TBW workings)
2A46 1503 Ashford to Victoria
2N52 1655 Victoria to Ashford
2A62 1855 Ashford to Victoria
2N74 2055 Victoria to Ashford
5N74 22+31 Ashford to Ashford Down Sidings

Saturday:
5A10 05+32 Ashford Down Sidings to Ashford
2A10 0603 Ashford to Victoria
2N16 0755 Victoria to Ashford
2A26 1003 Ashford to Victoria
2N32 1155 Victoria to Ashford
2A42 1403 Ashford to Victoria
2N48 1555 Victoria to Ashford
2A58 1803 Ashford to Victoria
2N70 1955 Victoria to Ashford
2A74 2203 Ashford to Victoria
2N86 2355 Victoria to Ashford
5N86 01+30 Ashford to Ashford Down Sidings

In order to get stock in place for Monday the following is running on Sunday:

5Y10 1602 Slade Green T&R.S.M.D to Ashford Down Sidings

Realtime Trains | 5Y10 1602 Slade Green T&R.S.M.D to Ashford Down Sidings | 31/07/2022

Real-time train running information for 5Y10 1602 departure from Slade Green T&R.S.M.D to Ashford Down Sidings on 31/07/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[brad465]

Monday to Friday from 1st August

All formed 466 + 465/9 (6 car)

5Y06 04+29 Ashford Down Sidings to Swanley
2A06 0606 Swanley to Victoria
2N12 0655 Victoria to Ashford
2A22 0908 Ashford to Victoria
2N28 1055 Victoria to Ashford
5N28 12+27 Ashford to Ashford East Berthing Sidings
5W42 13+50 Ashford East Berthing Sidings to Tonbridge Jubilee Sidings (attaches to 4 car 465/9 to work PM CHX-TBW workings)

5R46 14+11 Tonbridge Jubilee Sidings to Ashford (detaches from 4 car 465/9 off of AM CHX-TBW workings)
2A46 1503 Ashford to Victoria
2N52 1655 Victoria to Ashford
2A62 1855 Ashford to Victoria
2N74 2055 Victoria to Ashford
5N74 22+31 Ashford to Ashford Down Sidings

Saturday:
5A10 05+32 Ashford Down Sidings to Ashford
2A10 0603 Ashford to Victoria
2N16 0755 Victoria to Ashford
2A26 1003 Ashford to Victoria
2N32 1155 Victoria to Ashford
2A42 1403 Ashford to Victoria
2N48 1555 Victoria to Ashford
2A58 1803 Ashford to Victoria
2N70 1955 Victoria to Ashford
2A74 2203 Ashford to Victoria
2N86 2355 Victoria to Ashford
5N86 01+30 Ashford to Ashford Down Sidings

In order to get stock in place for Monday the following is running on Sunday:

5Y10 1602 Slade Green T&R.S.M.D to Ashford Down Sidings

Realtime Trains | 5Y10 1602 Slade Green T&R.S.M.D to Ashford Down Sidings | 31/07/2022

Real-time train running information for 5Y10 1602 departure from Slade Green T&R.S.M.D to Ashford Down Sidings on 31/07/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Thank you for providing this. Do you know what will happen to the 375/377 formation that has been on those diagrams, and/or where the 465 + 466 allocation has come from?

 

[Chiltern006]

377501-512 are supposedly going back to southern in the near future so

 

[Class 466]

Thank you for providing this. Do you know what will happen to the 375/377 formation that has been on those diagrams, and/or where the 465 + 466 allocation has come from?

I know that from September 2K Victoria to Gillingham services go back to being a mixture of 377s & 465s compared to it currently being solid 465 pretty much.

 

[Purple Train]

With a little bit of modification you could turn one into a climbing frame. You could also use one, together with a recording of the motor sound, as a device for scaring birds away.
(Incidentally, the Networker family of units have my two favourite sorts of door button on the entire network. Why do I care about such things?)

 

[Class 466]

Monday to Friday from 1st August

All formed 466 + 465/9 (6 car)

5Y06 04+29 Ashford Down Sidings to Swanley
2A06 0606 Swanley to Victoria
2N12 0655 Victoria to Ashford
2A22 0908 Ashford to Victoria
2N28 1055 Victoria to Ashford
5N28 12+27 Ashford to Ashford East Berthing Sidings
5W42 13+50 Ashford East Berthing Sidings to Tonbridge Jubilee Sidings (attaches to 4 car 465/9 to work PM CHX-TBW workings)

5R46 14+11 Tonbridge Jubilee Sidings to Ashford (detaches from 4 car 465/9 off of AM CHX-TBW workings)
2A46 1503 Ashford to Victoria
2N52 1655 Victoria to Ashford
2A62 1855 Ashford to Victoria
2N74 2055 Victoria to Ashford
5N74 22+31 Ashford to Ashford Down Sidings

Saturday:
5A10 05+32 Ashford Down Sidings to Ashford
2A10 0603 Ashford to Victoria
2N16 0755 Victoria to Ashford
2A26 1003 Ashford to Victoria
2N32 1155 Victoria to Ashford
2A42 1403 Ashford to Victoria
2N48 1555 Victoria to Ashford
2A58 1803 Ashford to Victoria
2N70 1955 Victoria to Ashford
2A74 2203 Ashford to Victoria
2N86 2355 Victoria to Ashford
5N86 01+30 Ashford to Ashford Down Sidings

In order to get stock in place for Monday the following is running on Sunday:

5Y10 1602 Slade Green T&R.S.M.D to Ashford Down Sidings

Realtime Trains | 5Y10 1602 Slade Green T&R.S.M.D to Ashford Down Sidings | 31/07/2022

Real-time train running information for 5Y10 1602 departure from Slade Green T&R.S.M.D to Ashford Down Sidings on 31/07/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

465916 + 466038 on 5Y10 so will be in service tomorrow.

 

[brad465]

465916 + 466038 on 5Y10 so will be in service tomorrow.

Yes seen them in action this morning, seemed to be running fine aside from the overrunning engineering works in Penge Tunnel. Been told the unit swap this afternoon now has 465012 + 466035, giving one of the BREL units the experience.

 

[ScotGG]

They seat more passengers than a 2+3 format 455 did. I know this forum doesn't like the 165 / 166 / 465 / 466 layout but it does its job and isn't out of place on metro or regional trains. Is a 465/9 really worse than something like a VEP or a 319 as a regional train?

Judging by modern standards, something better could be put in service. However, the 465 interior was very much an improvement on what went before.

The 465s main issue is just how run down they are inside given 30 years without any serious work. Given they'll have another decade at this rate at least a few quid could be spent to ensure they're not so rank.

 

[gmaguire]

I think the 465s and 466s have earned a second refurb. Though somehow I also think it’s not very likely to happen.