SWR Class 458 to be retained

[Bigfoot]

Unlike with later third rail EMUs that have been designed for dual voltage and tested under overhead power, no provision was made on the 458s for dual voltage except for the pantograph wells and pan/up down buttons in the cab that were not connected to anything.

This makes me wonder how much is connected to the always off ATP isolation switch. How much provision was put in place for ATP to be used more widely ...

 

[Wolfie]

Which is a bad idea as they won't work as they've been left untouched for years. 769421 is a prime example. Besides, they're getting life expired.

I think 458/5s and if the /4s go off lease, then they'd be perfect!

I'm not sure that a start-up TOC would necessarily want rolling stock with a reputation for unreliability and known to need careful maintenance. Particularly if spares availability might start to become an issue. They will have seen what has happened with the 180s which come from the same builders.
In any event are there even enough 458s currently available to meet the TOC requirements?

 

[swt_passenger]

It was found around 20 years ago when the 458/0s were put into storage that fitting of pantographs for use elsewhere was simply practical - it would have required a complete rewire of the units. Yet another reason why these trains were such a poor design.

Simply not practical? I think Roger Ford mentioned it was totally uneconomical, and that was when they had a theoretically long remaining life.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Aug 2025 ==

Isn't there some open access operator that's planning to run out of Waterloo? To Marchwood, if I'm not mistaken. That could be something...

Marchwood isn’t electrified, so that’s not possible.

 

[Goldfish62]

Simply not practical? I think Roger Ford mentioned it was totally uneconomical, and that was when they had a theoretically long remaining life.

Oops! Yes, that's indeed what I meant. Poor proof reading on my part!

 

[Boalbads]

I've noticed that 529 is paired with 535 again (this time it hasn't failed before it entered service!), makes me wonder if 533 is dead or if it's just got some scheduled maintenance.

 

[Siemens Staines]

I've noticed that 529 is paired with 535 again (this time it hasn't failed before it entered service!), makes me wonder if 533 is dead or if it's just got some scheduled maintenance.

That is interesting because the data feed to RTT has shown 533 paired with 529 for the past two days. I think that this is another allocation error of which there seem to be an increasing number of late, for whatever reason.

 

[Boalbads]

On a negative side - just passed Wimbledon from a 455, it looks like 536 is top and tailed with 37s and barrier cars... I couldn't tell if 530 was off to the side where it usually is, but I'm assuming it probably still was.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Aug 2025 ==

That is interesting because the data feed to RTT has shown 533 paired with 529 for the past two days. I think that this is another allocation error of which there seem to be an increasing number of late, for whatever reason.

I'm also pretty sure that it shows the train through wrong way around (529 at the front), but yeah the allocations being wrong is also a bit annoying.

There is also life in 533! I have just spotted it in Wimbledon depot (it's visible from the district line). It looks on with it's taillights on but maybe it has some catastrophic fault.

 

[43096]

That is interesting because the data feed to RTT has shown 533 paired with 529 for the past two days. I think that this is another allocation error of which there seem to be an increasing number of late, for whatever reason.

529 and 535 are very definitely paired and in service today - viewed with Mark 3 eyeballs!

 

[TrainLifeGB]

On a negative side - just passed Wimbledon from a 455, it looks like 536 is top and tailed with 37s and barrier cars... I couldn't tell if 530 was off to the side where it usually is, but I'm assuming it probably still was.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Aug 2025 ==


I'm also pretty sure that it shows the train through wrong way around (529 at the front), but yeah the allocations being wrong is also a bit annoying.

There is also life in 533! I have just spotted it in Wimbledon depot (it's visible from the district line). It looks on with it's taillights on but maybe it has some catastrophic fault.

530 doesn't have many miles left apparently. Probably pointless to bring back when 701s have been pumping up. 536 is gonna go any day now... any day.

I originally thought 533 was out as 458529/533/535 have all been shown to be working diagrams in the past few days.

 

[Siemens Staines]

I'm also pretty sure that it shows the train through wrong way around (529 at the front), but yeah the allocations being wrong is also a bit annoying.

I notice that the RTT allocation has now been updated to show 529 paired with 535, but it still has the set back to front. At the same time, some allocations that were correct have now been updated to be incorrect. The 1409 Reading - Waterloo was actually 701046 and was shown as 701046 at the time, but it now shows as 701012. 701012 was actually 1439 Reading - Waterloo and shown as such, but it now shows as 701046. If you take at face value what is currently shown on RTT, then 701012 passed itself going the other way at Reading Spur Jn

 

[Boalbads]

I notice that the RTT allocation has now been updated to show 529 paired with 535, but it still has the set back to front. At the same time, some allocations that were correct have now been updated to be incorrect. The 1409 Reading - Waterloo was actually 701046 and was shown as 701046 at the time, but it now shows as 701012. 701012 was actually 1439 Reading - Waterloo and shown as such, but it now shows as 701046. If you take at face value what is currently shown on RTT, then 701012 passed itself going the other way at Reading Spur Jn

Yeah I think RTT say the allocations are provided by the operator, so maybe something on SWRs end?

 

[TrainLifeGB]

I wonder if 458530 is any closer to coming back. Not that the 458/5s really do much apart from wasting their miles until eventual storage and then scrap after a month or 2 like the 456s or something.

 

[swr444]

I wonder if 458530 is any closer to coming back. Not that the 458/5s really do much apart from wasting their miles until eventual storage and then scrap after a month or 2 like the 456s or something.

Wasting their miles? The ones they can use are carrying passengers which isn’t wasting miles

 

[TrainLifeGB]

Wasting their miles? The ones they can use are carrying passengers which isn’t wasting miles

3 458/5s isn't very helpful right now. Well, just 458529/535 at the moment.

"Wasting their miles" as in until they go for scrap i meant.

 

[brad465]

I've heard talk of this on here (but only here), having heard/seen nothing official or unofficial even from old former colleagues, some of whom have a far greater interest in such matters than I. That's not to say there isn't a quiet, behind the scene, initial project group working on same of course, that's how future plans come to the fore in due course, but it would be very early days if that is the case. But even if so, I would wager a conversion of a % of 450's would only be one of a number of scenarios being looked at for the eventual displacement of 158/9 on that route. Nothing will be set in stone at this point in time.
This is a watch this space with interest me thinks!

It appeared in multiple RAIL magazines, including one that interviewed someone at SWR looking into the proposal. However, as pointed out, if the DfT are definitely trying to get a combined fleet order for SWR diesel replacement, in combination with GWR and Chiltern, then a 450 conversion won't be necessary.

I've not been fully in tune with this, so apologies if this question has been asked in some form before: is their an official plan to withdraw the 458/4s once SWR hopefully have all their 701s in operation?

 

[Boalbads]

It appeared in multiple RAIL magazines, including one that interviewed someone at SWR looking into the proposal. However, as pointed out, if the DfT are definitely trying to get a combined fleet order for SWR diesel replacement, in combination with GWR and Chiltern, then a 450 conversion won't be necessary.

I've not been fully in tune with this, so apologies if this question has been asked in some form before: is their an official plan to withdraw the 458/4s once SWR hopefully have all their 701s in operation?

Afaik the current plan is still to put them on Portsmouth runs after the 701s are introduced? That might have changed, haven't really read the last 130 pages and only joined in a few pages ago.

 

[Goldfish62]

Afaik the current plan is still to put them on Portsmouth runs after the 701s are introduced? That might have changed, haven't really read the last 130 pages and only joined in a few pages ago.

In a nutshell on this thread it's contended that due to signalling sighting issues they won't be able to. A 458/4 is around 2m longer than a 450 and in a 12 car it appears that this causes signal sighting issues at Waterloo and Portsmouth and that the signals cannot be relocated within the constraints of the existing infrastructure.

SWR have certainly gone very quiet about their deployment in the last year or so, but that may just as likely be that they don't want to highlight to Portsmouth passengers that their promised trains are currently being used on inner suburban services!

 

[Islineclear3_1]

In a nutshell on this thread it's contended that due to signalling sighting issues they won't be able to. A 458/4 is around 2m longer than a 450 and in a 12 car it appears that this causes signal sighting issues at Waterloo and Portsmouth and that the signals cannot be relocated within the constraints of the existing infrastructure.

SWR have certainly gone very quiet about their deployment in the last year or so, but that may just as likely be that they don't want to highlight to Portsmouth passengers that their promised trains are currently being used on inner suburban services!

I haven't really travelled on a 458/5 but am perfectly happy with 444s to Portsmouth thanks :

 

[Goldfish62]

I haven't really travelled on a 458/5 but am perfectly happy with 444s to Portsmouth thanks :

The 458/4s are superior to the 458/5s, but not up there with the 444s.

 

[Siemens Staines]

If the data passed down to RTT is not another red herring, then 458530 should be returning to passenger service this evening for the first time in four months;

Realtime Trains | 2R49 1715 London Waterloo to London Waterloo | 07/08/2025

Real-time train running information for 2R49 1715 departure from London Waterloo to London Waterloo on 07/08/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[swr444]

If the data passed down to RTT is not another red herring, then 458530 should be returning to passenger service this evening for the first time in four months;

Realtime Trains | 2R49 1715 London Waterloo to London Waterloo | 07/08/2025

Real-time train running information for 2R49 1715 departure from London Waterloo to London Waterloo on 07/08/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

It is correct. That’s all available 4 458/5s in service today

 

[Boalbads]

It is correct. That’s all available 4 458/5s in service today

Just went past Wimbledon, I can see 533+530 are coupled so RTT appears to be tracking it right!

 

[Big Jumby 74]

Afaik the current plan is still to put them on Portsmouth runs after the 701s are introduced?

With reference to Goldfish62's comments of 0813 today, post 4337, also refer to my post 3972 of 20 Feb (page 133 of this thread). My initial comments therein were in reply to a-another's comments about using the International platforms at Waterloo for (principly) DOWN direction main fast line train departures. The subject of your question (12 car 458) but also train movements and risk to the/any timetable in general, does require a degree of understanding of the track formation and signalling at Waterloo as a whole, this being the one single location that drives any complex timetable plan on the SW.
Always happy to try to answer any questions where I can, although I won't know all the answers!

 

[TrainLifeGB]

It is correct. That’s all available 4 458/5s in service today

I heard 530 only has a few months before it needs a C6, which of course, SWR won't pay for, leaving us more of a shortage unless more 701s move into action.

 

[Boalbads]

It lives!

 

[swr444]

I heard 530 only has a few months before it needs a C6, which of course, SWR won't pay for, leaving us more of a shortage unless more 701s move into action.

Hardly a shortage with or without it since it’s been out of use for months anyway

 

[moley]

https://www.southwesternrailway.com/travelling-with-us/our-trains/class-458-juniper

In 2021 we began a programme to refurbish 28 trains of the Class 458 fleet, removing the former Gatwick Express carriage, for use on the Portsmouth Direct Line following the withdrawal of the Class 442 fleet. The four-carriage 458s then became Class 458/4 trains, while the remaining five-carriage units became Class 458/5 trains.

Following the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting changes in customer travel patterns and demand, the Class 458/4 trains will instead be used on our suburban network as we work to introduce our fleet of Arterio trains, which will eventually replace the Class 458 fleet.

This suggests that the Portsmouth plan is over and they will be phased out post the 701 introduction.

Whilst a significant amount was spent by DfT on refurbishing the trains, they had really low leasing costs. The net impact is likely that they have still been cheaper than paying the full lease cost of the class 701s.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CO00I812gqn-uh9sj3bN2LrWaRC6QwDW/view
is the presentation given by Neil Drury, SWR Engineering & Infrastructure Director, at the 2024 Salisbury to Exeter Rail Users Group AGM. It describes the plan to replace the class 159 units with a fleet of hybrid third rail and battery units.

 

[Goldfish62]

I heard 530 only has a few months before it needs a C6, which of course, SWR won't pay for, leaving us more of a shortage unless more 701s move into action.

More 701s are entering service regularly. Two new diagrams next week, bringing the total so far to 17.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

More 701s are entering service regularly. Two new diagrams next week, bringing the total so far to 17.

No doubt the priority is to bin off the 455s before the 458/5's unless the leasing costs for the former are cheaper....

 

[adc82140]

No doubt the priority is to bin off the 455s before the 458/5's unless the leasing costs for the former are cheaper....

I guess that whatever runs out of miles or fails with an uneconomical to repair fault first will be binned off, rather than targeting a particular class.