Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
Yes, the NoL sets have been withdrawn two months ago, and about four months ago three of the 3C sets - the ones SNCF used domestically - went for scrap.
I hope its ok that I ask train related questions in here, since we dont really have serious train forums here in Denmark
It really strikes me that Japan has scrapped all 69 sets of the 300 series Shinkansen build from 1990 - 1998 - not exactly an old train. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_Series_Shinkansen
They are also in the process of scrapping 26 sets of their E4 bi-level series build between 1997 - 2003. What a Waste! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E4_Series_Shinkansen
They do this only to save rather few minutes with newer trains on the main routes.
Does anybody know what the scrap price is per train set?
If another country could buy them for the scrap price and use them in service, then that might be quite a bargain. :razz:
What about our aircraft carriers that were built with a 20 year hull and have now been withdrawn with no replacement in sight!
You're right Wolfie - I've just gone by some examples such as Los Angeles Class of submarines some of which were retired early.
(Source Wikipedia)
And Shinkansen units are worked especially hard compared to the luxurious life enjoyed by a European high speed train. They get better preventative maintenance than a TGV or ICE does, but that only improves day to day reliability (of which the bar is set much higher in Japan) and does nothing about the wear and tear on the structure.SNCF has recently withdrawn three TGV-A sets ( 318, 338 and 371 ) which are only 20 years old - and that's on top of the total so far of over 40 TGV-SE withdrawals ( those being roughly 30 years old ).
High speed stock does tend to have a shorter working life than ordinary stock - a point that a few people have made on this forum in recent months.
None of the vehicles of those earlier classes actually accrued more than 21 years of service without a mid-life rebuild (and none longer than 27 years with a rebuild) which is actually a very respectable service life when the harder working of Shinkansen trains is considered.The first generations of Shinkansen trains (0 and 100 and 200 series) lasted for around 30 - 40 years without serious tecnical problems. I expect that the scrapped 200, 300, and E4 series is build in the same long lasting quality.
I reckon that the reason for scrapping the TGVs, is to replace them with double deckers for higher seating capacity, rather than them being scrap ready?SNCF has recently withdrawn three TGV-A sets ( 318, 338 and 371 ) which are only 20 years old - and that's on top of the total so far of over 40 TGV-SE withdrawals ( those being roughly 30 years old ).
High speed stock does tend to have a shorter working life than ordinary stock - a point that a few people have made on this forum in recent months.
I reckon that the reason for scrapping the TGVs, is to replace them with double deckers for higher seating capacity, rather than them being scrap ready?
What about our aircraft carriers that were built with a 20 year hull and have now been withdrawn with no replacement in sight!
15 years is pretty good going for a car! If you'd had the same car for that long I doubt you'd be that opposed to buying a new one if something caught your eye
Note that I didn't say anything about build quality, I'm sure current units are of the same high quality as previous generations. My point was indicating that their designed life and expected life may be considerably shorter that previous generations. That doesn't mean they're a poor quality product.
Our HSTs were supposed to be a stop gap lasting fifteen maybe twenty years. Currently their well into their thirties and some will probably make it to well beyond forty!
So as I said previously if the withdrawn units were expected and planned to last thirty years then it does seem a waste. If their planned lives were only fifteen years or so then I don't see the issue.