BBC article - Average age of UK trains

[Kris]

If it works, is safe, can maintain parity with more modern stock and is efficient does it matter how old it is?

[russ p]

The public don't know why they want new trains,it's just the word new that gets them fired up.

Apparently a lot of them thought the refurbished mk3s were new! I wonder how they will react when the find the real new trains are glorified trams!

The mk3s have plenty of life left yet and are proper Inter-city vehicles

Once they ,the HSTs and the mk4s have gone we won't have any proper domestic Inter-city stock on the network, just imported commuter EMU designs with a pointy noses.

None will have the capability to do proper catering.

Remember when the HST first entered service the buffet was similar in range and price to a wimpy bar. Not the greatest but sausage and chips for a decent price every one was at the buffet.

I do wonder whether the TOCs have been told to do scale down catering so all the rubbish food outlets on stations make more money

[royaloak]

If you want to see a battle over a new vehicle go on a few oldie coach trips where there are 2 or more vehicles involved, they will almost come to blows if they dont get on the new coach!

[PenrithBeacon]

If it works, is safe, can maintain parity with more modern stock and is efficient does it matter how old it is?

Yes exactly!

 

Modern rolling stock design is such that they lend themselves to refurbishing and rebuilding. Stock is refurbished everytime a franchise changes hands and there is no reason why engines and transmission equipment shouldn't be changed either, as per the HST of course.

 

The origins of the HST lie in the late 60s but essentially the trains are of the present day.

 

Regards

[ejstubbs]

I don't know what the Guardian has to do with it - very similar reports are being carried across several news sources including the Daily Mail.

 

The original research has been carried out by think tank IPPR North and any 'journalism' associated with what amounts to a press release seems to come directly from IPPR.

 

To be fair, average age is a statistic the government and the railway press have used since the 1980s. I'm sure a methodology for its calculation could be found if one was sufficiently interested.

 

The "original research" - at least, the source of all the numbers - is actually an ORR report, as noted in the article on the BBC News web site, and in the Guardian article.  I can't find a press release on the IPPR web site on the subject.  The BBC credits the "investigation" to the Press Association, which is a multimedia news agency whose major shareholders include Daily Mail & General Holdings Group, and News UK.  Between them those shareholders represent the Wail (so not surprising that they seem to have run with the 'story' first), The Times, The Sunday Times and The Sun.  The Guardian piece seems to be a verbatim regurgitation of the PA article, the "investigation" for which seems to have consisted of reading the ORR report and going to IPPR North and a few others (including the semi-ubiquitous Christian Wolmar, of course) for a soundbite or two.

 

It does look like this got the exposure it did because of the lack of real news (perhaps not enough celebrities had died that day?) and newsrooms running with skeleton staffing over the holiday period.

The Guardian has a fairly typical misrepresentation of this. MerseyRail and Caledonian Sleepers are apparently using stock up to 37 and 41 years old, respectively, although as both are scheduled for replacement in the near future

 

From the piece in The Guardian (which I believe to be the PA report pretty much verbatim):

 

"Passengers on the Caledonian Sleeper service between London and Scotland travel on Britain’s oldest trains, introduced 41 years ago on average.

 

Merseyrail has the second-oldest fleet at 37 years. Both operators plan to bring in new rolling stock in the coming years."

 

Struggling to see how that is significantly different from what you wrote, TBH.

as an isolated number, if it is about half a train-life, it is unexiting, but if it were to steadily increase, year after year, that would actually be significant, in an "its worth looking further into what isn't going on here" kind of way.

 

The ORR report does actually say something pretty much exactly like that, on page 9: "If the fleet remains unchanged, we expect the average age to increase by one year each year."  When I first read that my first reaction was: "duh! - oh well, at least someone in the ORR seems to understand the basic concept of an average."  Reading it again I think they might have been trying to say what you said, but not expressing it very clearly.  On page 10 they do note that: "The average age of rolling stock nationally at the end of 2015-16 was 21.0 years, a 0.8 year increase over the past year. Nationally this is the first time the average age of rolling stock is higher than the start of time series in 2000-01 Q2 (by 0.3 years)."  So it looks like they have called out data from the last reporting period that indicates an uptick - though whether it is real or a just a blip can only be confirmed by looking at subsequent periods.  And, as we know, rolling stock plans currently in the public domain indicate that the situation should improve quite soon, especially when outliers like the Caledonian Sleeper and Merseyrail are dealt with.

[Steadfast]

The bit that's got me scratching my head, which the ORR link doesn't clear up, is how it has averaged 41 years for the Caledonian Sleeper stock.

41 years ago was 1975. The bulk of the fleet are Mk3 sleepers which date from the early 1980s. So you'd need a load of pre 1975 stock to outweigh the balance of the mk3s. So there's the handful of Mk2s and the three or four 86s and 87s. The 92s are 1990s and the 73/9s are mid 2010s.

Unless I'm missing something (and I admit this is just "back of the envelope" maths) then the fleet is a lot younger than 41 years old and as such, do we trust any of their other numbers?

 

Jo

[Glorious NSE]

The bit that's got me scratching my head, which the ORR link doesn't clear up, is how it has averaged 41 years for the Caledonian Sleeper stock.

41 years ago was 1975. The bulk of the fleet are Mk3 sleepers which date from the early 1980s. So you'd need a load of pre 1975 stock to outweigh the balance of the mk3s. So there's the handful of Mk2s and the three or four 86s and 87s. The 92s are 1990s and the 73/9s are mid 2010s.

Unless I'm missing something (and I admit this is just "back of the envelope" maths) then the fleet is a lot younger than 41 years old and as such, do we trust any of their other numbers?

 

Jo

There's 20+ Mk2's from memory, so more than a handful (though still far fewer than the Mk3s)

[jjb1970]

I expect the re-engineered Class 73's are also dated from original delivery date, not from when re-engineered. Might be wrong though.

[pete_mcfarlane]

There's 20+ Mk2's from memory, so more than a handful (though still far fewer than the Mk3s)

I was bored, so I did some maths..........

 

Wikipedia says they have 22 Mk2e/f and 53 Mk3. The Mk3 sleepers date from between 1982 and 1984 and the aircon Mk2s are from 1972 to 1975. This gives an average age of about 35/36ish. 

 

However, the first production Mk3 stock came out in 1975, as has been pointed out above. 

 

If you assume all the Mk2s date from 1972 (44 years old) and all of the Mk3s from 1975 (41 years old), the average age is 41. 

 

((44 * 22) + (41 * 53)) / (22 + 53) = 41.88

 

(if you include the locos listed on the wikipedia page, the figure is 41.43)

 

So the figures (at least for the Caledonian Sleeper) would appear to be based on the assumption that all the vehicles of a given type date from the year the first vehicle of that type was built. And this doesn't work with the Mk3s, which were produced over 13 years. 

[Zomboid]

That doesn't work though. Surely if they're fiddling the numbers make a point like that they wouldn't discriminate on the mk2 aircons, they'd just use the XP64 date for that. (Or if that's too much like research, the first mk2a).

And rounding down? Doubtful...

More likely that they just looked at the mk3 date and subtracted it from 2016.

[jjb1970]

This whole debate stems from political spin to make the governing party look bad by equating old with bad. There is an inherent contradiction in much political discourse in that certain politicians will use average age of certain things as a stick to beat the government whilst simultaneously getting all preachy about the importance of not throwing away good stuff and replacing stuff when it is necessary and not just for consumerist keeping up with the neighbours reasons so we all do our bit to save the planet.

[jim.snowdon]

This whole debate stems from political spin to make the governing party look bad by equating old with bad. There is an inherent contradiction in much political discourse in that certain politicians will use average age of certain things as a stick to beat the government whilst simultaneously getting all preachy about the importance of not throwing away good stuff and replacing stuff when it is necessary and not just for consumerist keeping up with the neighbours reasons so we all do our bit to save the planet.

First rule of political statistics - what do you want the answer to be?

 

Jim

['CHARD]

It'll certainly be interesting to see what happens to more modern "electronics-heavy" trains when they start getting long in the tooth. Whether a mid-life overhaul becomes as much about ripping out and replacing obsolete tech as much as new seats and mechanicals!

 

I'm a couple of pages behind, so my following point may have already been made, but...

 

The exact situation that has caused withdrawal and scrapping of the original Eurostars.

[jamesg]

Rail use has been increasing over the last couple of decades, off the top of my head there's been something like an 80% increase in passenger journeys since privatisation (the figure may be slightly higher).  More new trains should have been built in that time to deal with the steady increase in passenger numbers, pulling the average age down.  Although a lot of older stock is still at least as good as the new, the lack of enough new capacity is a problem.

[phil-b259]

I do wonder whether the TOCs have been told to do scale down catering so all the rubbish food outlets on stations make more money

 

No, they haven't - but on the other hand various passenger campaign groups have been very vocal about 'wasted' on board space that could be used for more standard class seating (even if said seats are uncomfortable and you are looking at a plastic panel rather than out of a window. As such the DfT has looked favourably on proposals that remove catering facilities and fit more seats.

 

More generally on train catering has declined as society has changed.

 

On board restaurant facilities do tend to do well, particularly for those travelling in 1st class - but then again that is also the most buoyant end of the charter train spectrum, i.e. the opportunity to make an occasion of a day out rather than simply obtaining sustenance while en-route to somewhere. They do however take up space and with record levels of overcrowding on many services, including InterCity ones, having a restaurant car is seen as something of a luxury that todays railways cannot afford when the most pressing concern is more seats.

 

On board Buffet facilities have faced a pincer movement from the grater variety of food available at stations which can be taken on board plus the increasing reluctance of passengers to leave their seats - either due to fears over theft from / of their belongings or someone snaffling the seat should they take their belongings with them. At seat service (as with airlines) via a trolley has been shown to perform well in this scenario - but due to the overcrowding present on many services, actually getting the trolley through the train has become such a nightmare that many TOCs have given up on it.

 

Meanwhile, NR are under pressure to maximise their income at major stations so as to try and keep taxpayer support down and as such have been continuing BRs programme which makes many stations take on the appearance of shopping malls - fully equipped with places to eat or places to buy sustance for travellers to take on board. This will obviously mean less custom for on train refreshments, though in isolation it is unlikely to explain the removal of refreshment provision from trains.

[jjb1970]

On catering, I may be the odd one out here but personally I much prefer buying any food and drink I might want at a shop like M&S Food or Sainsburys Local before boarding. I think on-board restaurant services are great, but if you just want to have something in case you get hungry or thirsty then buying before boarding offers vastly more choice, lower prices and generally much better products than on-board buffet services in my view.

[russ p]

It doesn't have to be this way though,like I said in my earlier post if the buffet car sold decent food that the passengers actually wanted then there is money to be made.

The last time I bought something on a train was on an Anglia service about five years ago, some sort of pannini it was awful soggy microwaved and expensive. Hence the lack of custom at the buffet these days

[phil-b259]

It doesn't have to be this way though,like I said in my earlier post if the buffet car sold decent food that the passengers actually wanted then there is money to be made.

The last time I bought something on a train was on an Anglia service about five years ago, some sort of pannini it was awful soggy microwaved and expensive. Hence the lack of custom at the buffet these days

 

It doesn't matter how wonderful the food is if you get back to your seat to find some of your belongings missing or the seat taken by someone else. Given the levels of overcrowding and the amount of high tech stuff people tend to carry about with them these days I'm afraid that simply taking a stroll to the buffet is not something most travellers are inclined to do - however inviting the food.

 

Of course the other factor is with entertainment from films to games all available right there in front of you the urge to 'take a stroll' along the train to break up the journey as it were is not so strong as travellers can become cocooned in their own world in ways that would have amazed 1980s travellers.

 

Yes if you serve decent food then people can make the effort - as seen on a couple of GWR services, but as I highlighted above that is more about people making dining an 'occasion' rather than simply because they feel hungrey.

 

Thus buffet services - much like sleeper services across Europe - are becoming increasingly irrelevant to the majority of travellers, with those catering or sleeper services remaining having to adapt to become 'niche' products rather than mainstream ones

['CHARD]

That last post is a belter - I promise to attribute my sources, Phil, if I find myself using that text in some future blurb!

[phil-b259]

It doesn't matter how wonderful the food is if you get back to your seat to find some of your belongings missing or the seat taken by someone else. Given the levels of overcrowding and the amount of high tech stuff people tend to carry about with them these days I'm afraid that simply taking a stroll to the buffet is not something most travellers are inclined to do - however inviting the food.

 

Of course the other factor is with entertainment from films to games all available right there in front of you the urge to 'take a stroll' along the train to break up the journey as it were is not so strong as travellers can become cocooned in their own world in ways that would have amazed 1980s travellers.

 

Yes if you serve decent food then people can make the effort - as seen on a couple of GWR services, but as I highlighted above that is more about people making dining an 'occasion' rather than simply because they feel hungrey.

 

Thus buffet services - much like sleeper services across Europe - are becoming increasingly irrelevant to the majority of travellers, with those catering or sleeper services remaining having to adapt to become 'niche' products rather than mainstream ones

 

I should just say that you don't have to like this state of affairs by the way - but that seems to be the way the world works these days.

[RANGERS]

I can't see what all the fuss is about, average age is inevitably going to rise as the number of trains on the network increases when the supply of new is finite. The Mk2/ 3 stock had a design life of 25-30 years and thanks to the superior standards of the day has proved able to considerably exceed that. The more modern alternative (assuming if there were enough available) would invariably offer lower standards of comfort and arguably no improvement in reliability.

[caradoc]

Regarding food provision on trains, I don't think I would class M&S, Sainsburys and Boots as 'rubbish food outlets'. Given the far greater variety available at such shops, I'm with jjb1970 and prefer to buy food there rather than on the train. Last time I went from Glasgow to Carlisle on the train I bought a Boots £3.29 Meal Deal (sandwich, cake and soft drink) along with a Starbucks large latte, all of which were delicious ! In my opinion no buffet car/catering trolley, past or present, can match what is available nowadays at large stations.

[The Stationmaster]

Regarding food provision on trains, I don't think I would class M&S, Sainsburys and Boots as 'rubbish food outlets'. Given the far greater variety available at such shops, I'm with jjb1970 and prefer to buy food there rather than on the train. Last time I went from Glasgow to Carlisle on the train I bought a Boots £3.29 Meal Deal (sandwich, cake and soft drink) along with a Starbucks large latte, all of which were delicious ! In my opinion no buffet car/catering trolley, past or present, can match what is available nowadays at large stations.

 

I beg to disagree.  When HSTs first appeared the burger offer, together with the rellshes they had available, beat just about everything you could get anywhere on 'the High Street' with the exception of Bretts (an independent concern) in Oxford.  But things went downhill from there.

 

One thing I really do like is GWR's 'Pullman' service which is good quality catering  albeit at a premium price.  The 'Travelling Chef' idea - where you ate at your seat - was also very good but clearly FGW decided to go one better and make more money by offering a restaurant service and on fewer trains;  agreat shame really as in my experience of them the breakfasts served up by the Travelling Chef arrangement beat anything you could get anywhere on 'the High Street' while not being much more expensive.

[royaloak]

 The 'Travelling Chef' idea - where you ate at your seat - was also very good but clearly FGW decided to go one better and make more money by offering a restaurant service and on fewer trains;  agreat shame really as in my experience of them the breakfasts served up by the Travelling Chef arrangement beat anything you could get anywhere on 'the High Street' while not being much more expensive.

The Travelling Chef idea was a brilliant one and made plenty of profit despite what the figures said, unfortunately the new IETs wouldnt have a food prep area for Standard class passengers so the decision was taken to withdraw the Travelling Chef a couple of years before the IETs were due into service so nobody would associate the introduction of the IETs with the withdrawal of the Travelling Chefs.

 

Some services had the Travelling Chef replaced by full Pullman dining but going from a hot sandwich for £5 to a full Pullman Breakfast for £20 was never going to work.

[jjb1970]

I think the prevalence of good food shops at major stations (and even in those without shops on site, most stations of any size will have similar shops nearby) will make it quite difficult to re-establish comprehensive on-board catering provision. On-board services have to compete against the wider retail offering and even if people do not have a preference for taking something onto the train with them an on-board service will not match the variety of food available in a food shop and I'm guessing it'll be all but impossible to offer refreshments for anything like the price of a shop like Sainsburys and still make it a viable proposition for the train company. Where on-board catering probably has a better prospect on longer distance trains is restaurant services and hot food sales, provided the quality is good. The old BR restaurant services were excellent in my experience and in fairness those privatised TOCs that offered a restaurant service did it pretty well but it is only viable on longer distance trains.