http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38450117

Meanwhile profits rise as general service gets ever worse...

"nice" to see mine are the 4th oldest

As most railway trains are designed for a service life of about 40 years, why is this a surprise to anyone?

The HSTs used by GWR are well into their forties in some cases, but like Trigger's Broom they've been rebuilt and refurbished several times over that period. This is a non-story, frankly.

It's a surprise to the poor fools who believe the rhetoric about using the money to develop and maintain the service every time they put the price up I suppose.


How about the pacers that are still in use in the North West? A lot of the trains operating in the rest of country were hand me downs from the south east in the first place, and some of them have been operating for a LOT longer than 20 years.

Operating, yes. They have, mostly, been upgraded, refurbished and re-engined at least once, though.

I'm not arguing that everything is rosy. There's a lot of rolling stock that's getting on a bit too much. Secondary and feeder lines always tend to be neglected by operating companies in favour of the glamorous mainline stuff. The last time I had to travel by rail (South Eastern), it was comfy, warm and reasonably clean.

Fair enough. I'd argue though there's a world of difference between the experience of the occasional traveller and the regular commuter. You want an exercise in misery, try any commuter line anywhere in the country between say 4pm and 5.30pm.

New trains won't help capacity obviously (in general), but anyone who has ever had to stand on a pacer while it bumps and bangs it's way along the track will definitely be of the opinion that newer trains with proper suspension would be an improvement even if they don't get a seat.

That was my initial reaction as well. 20 year average age seems about right, to me.

It is the same in Germany. They refurbished a bunch of the S-Bahn trains in Munich. Outside, they looked much the same, but the had new running gear, new engines and the passenger area was completely redesigned and refurbished, with more modern seating and a layout that, although it still offered the same amount of seating, felt more open and brighter.

Note that in the joys of rail terminology they will in many cases have been "refreshed" and not refurbished. The main difference if that is they are Refurbished then they have to put full disabled facilities in (Seating area & toilets) and ensure the stations are properly manned for Disabled passengers . If Refreshed then they don't

Words like 'refresh' can hide a multitude of sins. If that means adding capacity or comfort, fine. If it just means changing the colour of the upholstery and giving the carriages a paint job, it's not really much use to anyone. Also, it kind of doesn't matter how nice the seats are if the train is so packed by the time it gets to your station that you never get one.

The age of the trains is merely an indication of resources and priorities. The issues on British trains are, IMO, systemic.

Jon

Old doesn't always mean bad. A few years back GNER reengined and refitted their Intercity 125's to fairly modern standards (not the doors though). They're very nice.

The [LIFTED] old Pacers on commuter routes should have been scrapped decades ago. They seem to give the [LIFTED] to the North.

These days I seem to spend more time on the class 220/221/222's. Nice but noisey. The 125's maybe old, but at least having locomotives rather than DMU's means better noise levels inside. I'm looking forward to the Midland Mainline to be electrified so we can get quieter trains.

Do you still hang out of windows on 125's to open doors or have they invented electric locking?

They're locked and unlocked remotely, but you still have to lean out of the window to turn the handle when they're unlocked

Does this mean you're a bit of a train spotter as you know the model numbers?

You mean you don't

[quote="hifidelity2"
You mean you don't [/quote]

Of course not