Rolling stock now oldest since 2001 ... GWR oldest diesels of the lot!

[whole diary]

[grahame]

From the Press Association ...

Rail campaigners have called for investment in trains that are "fit for this century" after new figures showed Britain's rolling stock is at its oldest age in 14 years.

The average age of trains is 20.2 years across the country as a whole and is even older outside of the South East, according to data from the Office of Rail and Road (ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about)).

The Rail Delivery Group (RDG^‡(resolve)), which represents train operators and Network Rail, said thousands of new carriages will be introduced in the next few years.

ORR statistics show that rolling stock in London and the South East is 18.1 years old. The figure for the rest of the country is 22.6 years, which is the highest since current records began in April 2000. Merseyrail has the oldest trains of any operator, averaging 36.3 years.

Ed Cox, director at think-tank IPPR (Institute for Public Policy Research) North, said: "Some of the north's outdated train rolling stock could be considered more of a laughing stock, with carriages and overcrowding not fit for purpose for a burgeoning northern economy. "Decades of chronic underinvestment in the north's transport infrastructure has held back the region, with commuters and business frustrated by the poor service on offer."

Passenger groups called for a new strategy to improve trains across the country.

Martin Abrams of the Campaign for Better Transport said: "These figures are not particularly surprising as we know thousands of passengers are travelling on trains simply not fit for purpose. "In the north of England for instance passengers are still having to endure the decrepit old Pacer trains. The problem is there's no national rolling stock strategy from the Government and that's what needs to change. The Government needs to come up with a plan to replace outdated rolling stock and ensure passengers have trains fit for the 21st Century."

A spokesman for independent watchdog Transport Focus said modern trains were "urgently needed" in some areas.

Bruce Williamson, of campaign group Rail Future, said: "We need a very long-term, steady stream of investment, without the stop-start, feast or famine we've seen in the past decades which isn't good for the rail industry." He added: "We have a desperate shortage of rail stock across the network so we can't afford to get rid of any of it."

Trade unions urged the Government to "get a grip" on reducing the age of rolling stock.

Mick Cash, general secretary of the Rail, Maritime and Transport union, said: "The lack of planning on Britain's fragmented and privatised railways has left growing numbers of passengers travelling in clapped out, overcrowded trains while the rip-off rail companies are laughing all the way to the bank."

Transport Salaried Staffs Association leader Manuel Cortes said: "Passengers deserve so much better from the rail companies than to be shunted around in old, outdated and uncomfortable carriages. This Government should get a grip and start investing in a railway and rolling stock fit for this century not the last one."

Mick Whelan, general secretary of Aslef, the train drivers' union, claimed "the failure to introduce enough modern trains that treat the travelling public better than cattle" was one of the major failings of privatisation of the network. He added: "Those passengers in the regions will always be disadvantaged by the cascading system of newer trains for the South East and intercity services, and hand-me-downs for everyone else."

The RDG insisted the private sector has invested billions of pounds in new trains over the past 20 years. The organisation added that trains which have already been ordered will reduce the average age of the national fleet. A spokesman said: "Train companies work closely with the Department for Transport to buy new rolling stock. In the next few years, thousands of new carriages will be introduced with more seats, giving passengers faster and more comfortable journeys."

The figures released by the ORR show the average age of rolling stock between January and March. They are at the oldest level since the same period in 2001, when the average was 20.3 years.

Long distance stock is an average of 23.7 years old.
 
1. Merseyrail: 36.3 years
2. First Great Western: 32.4 years
3. Virgin Trains East Coast: 29.3 years
4. Govia Thameslink Railway: 28.9 years
5. Greater Anglia: 27.6 years
6. Northern Rail: 26.3 years
7. Arriva Trains Wales: 24.4 years
8. East Midlands Trains: 23.3 years
9. ScotRail: 20.5 years
10. Chiltern: 19.1 years
11. South West Trains: 18.9 years
12. CrossCountry: 16.6 years
13. Southeastern: 15.4 years
14. c2c: 14.0 years
15. Southern: 13.9 years
16. London Midland: 11.0 years
17. Virgin Trains West Coast: 10.4 years
18. First TransPennine Express: 7.7 years
19. London Overground: 4.7 years

Released at midnight (3 hours ago) and staring to make some of the papers.  Also expected to be covered on BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) Radio Wiltshire's breakfast show in a few hours.

[grahame]

Years of introduction (I've done my best - some classes are spread over a number of years)

Sleeper locos 1964 / rebuilt 2002
125 1975
Sleeper carriages 1983
150/0 1984
143 1985
150/1 1986
150/2 1987
153 1987 / rebuilt 1991
158 1989
165 1990
166 1992
180 2002
360 2004

Next arrivals in the South West include:
D Train 1978 / rebuilt 2015

[PhilWakely]

Merseyrail has the oldest trains of any operator, averaging 36.3 years.

Unless it is treated as a 'special case', isn't the SWT^▸ (South West Trains)'s Island Line stock 77 years old - which would almost certainly drag the SWT average much older than 18 years?

[ellendune]

Unless it is treated as a 'special case', isn't the SWT^▸ (South West Trains)'s Island Line stock 77 years old - which would almost certainly drag the SWT average much older than 18 years?

That's averages for you. Given the large amount of stock that SWT operates and the few trains required to run the island line it will hardly have much effect.

[grahame]

To a degree, the age discussion is a bit of a red herring - as Dan Panes (for GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)) said on radio Wiltshire a few minutes ago, virtually everything in the High Speed Trains has been replaced and they're not exactly broken.  Much more important is the need for more capacity - which IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) and AT300 will provide on the long distance / main lines - and enough capacity for growth at the actual levels that happen (latest - 5.7% compound) rather than the lower predictions against which long term plans are made (3% compound).

[paul7575]

With EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) fleets having an expected in-service life of around 40 years plus, and DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) fleets around 30 years, in a completely steady state (without peaks and troughs in ordering) wouldn't the expected average age be around 20 or 15 years respectively anyway?   And the 'national average of all stock is 20.2 years as per the press release?   

So how different from a 'historic norm' is this figure, and is this a real story?

The forced replacement of Mk 1 EMU stock put SN and SWT^▸ (South West Trains) particularly into a position where huge quantities of stock are relatively new (458,444,450, and numerous 377 versions) - or it would probably be even worse now.

Paul


 

[ChrisB]

You beat me to this - it rather is a non-story - except maybe for the Pacers....

I agree with Dan Paines - Capacity is more the issue, surely?

[JayMac]

You've got to love the duplicity from the unions, particularly the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers). Moaning about the age of rolling stock while at the same time striking over the introduction of new stock. 

[Tim]

Agree.  GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) has old HST^▸ (High Speed Train) which from a passenger perspective are the finest stock ever built.

XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) has a fleet half the age, but for whatever reason their trains are smelly, with faulty air con, inadequate luggage space, lack of space, no buffet, a poorly implemented reservation system, resistors on the roof that cant cope with sea spray, underfloor noise and too few coaches.  And the stupid thing is that I bet the 220/221s cost more to lease/run/maintain than the HSTs do.

[Tim]

You've got to love the duplicity from the unions, particularly the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers). Moaning about the age of rolling stock while at the same time striking over the introduction of new stock. 

It is not the stock per se they object to it is the placement of the door controls within reach of the driver.  I am sure that the dispute would end if GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) plated over them

[ChrisB]

But hav e East Coast done the same /agreed to this on their forthcoming stock? I've not heard that they are doing so - and in which case, why aren't RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) in disagreement with them too?

[broadgage]

Agree.  GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) has old HST^▸ (High Speed Train) which from a passenger perspective are the finest stock ever built.

XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) has a fleet half the age, but for whatever reason their trains are smelly, with faulty air con, inadequate luggage space, lack of space, no buffet, a poorly implemented reservation system, resistors on the roof that cant cope with sea spray, underfloor noise and too few coaches.  And the stupid thing is that I bet the 220/221s cost more to lease/run/maintain than the HSTs do.

Agree, it is  not age that is of concern but capacity and passenger comfort/on board facilities.
Elsewhere on these forums I have been very critical of the new IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.), my objections could be summarised by saying that I expect them to be too similar to voyagers.

From the passengers point of view, voyagers were one of biggest downgrades ever. A popular newspaper at the time stated that the then Virgin cross country "had been given a record subsidy to halve the length of the trains"
Prior to the voyager fiasco, a few doubters expressed doubts about half length trains without sufficient luggage space or a proper buffet, such doubts were drowned out by the "shorter DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) are wonderful" brigade. Though of course "shorter" is not a term that should be applied to new trains ! "flexible" sounds so much better.

It is now fairly widely accepted that voyagers are not as wonderful as was promised, but no one is going to scrap relatively new trains so we are stuck with the wretched things for years.

[JayMac]

I'm now a regular user of CrossCountry Voyagers thanks to same day Advances undercutting the walk up tickets, and CrossCountry's 10 Minute Reservation system if I'm using a Rover or walk up ticket.

I used to be on the 'Voyagers are crap' bandwagon, but with regular use of them I've changed my opinion. I'm now more than happy to use them.

[bobm]

My particular bugbear with voyagers is the communal blinds which cover two or sometimes three windows.  Someone sitting behind you suddenly decides they want the blind all the way down and without warning your view is gone.  Suggesting a compromise of halfway down doesn't always work, and in any case for some reason leaves me with motion sickness.

[Rhydgaled]

A common theme from the comments above seems to be that capacity is more important than age. I would agree, but I would say 'suitablility' for the services the stock is used on, rather than than 'capacity' (capacity is a component of suitablity, but not the only one).

I used to be on the 'Voyagers are crap' bandwagon, but with regular use of them I've changed my opinion. I'm now more than happy to use them.

I'm also shifting my opinion of Voyagers slightly, thanks to one coach on the Virgin West Coast examples. I still think they are a stupid train (if a line is important enough to justify 125mph Intercity trains you need most of your stock to be long trains, not short units) but that one coach actually has seats aligned with the windows which makes the view far superior to a Pendolino where, even if you have a window-aligned seat, the windows are too small.

My particular bugbear with voyagers is the communal blinds which cover two or sometimes three windows.  Someone sitting behind you suddenly decides they want the blind all the way down and without warning your view is gone.  Suggesting a compromise of halfway down doesn't always work, and in any case for some reason leaves me with motion sickness.

Yes, if somebody closes the blind your view is gone... assuming you had one in the first place due to seats not always lining up with the windows. The window blinds seem to be a Virign thing since the Pendolinos also have them.