in reality the bigger issue if the monarcy was abolished would be the backlash from people who dont expect how little would change
no confiscation of palaces or land as they are private property of the royal family nor would it lead to a reduction of goverment costs as the vast majority of what they do is from private wealth from said private land holdings
and the replacement would have the same lack of power but with a loss of reverence that the queen has now
you would just end up with the royals becomeing just another super rich family but without the public obligations they have now
From the 1960s the monarchy was fading away in the public consciousness, just receiving a little jolt like when some Welsh nationalists showed their objections to Charles becoming Prince of Wales, and really just being reeled out for the ceremonial things. Then a decision was made (by whom exactly?) to create a FIRM with all the trappings, publicity and, crucially, more staff to help spread the propaganda of the whole FAMILY, which meant even obscure cousins whose activities up to then had escaped public scrutiny were brought more into the limelight, which may have displeased some who had things to hide. The death of Diana (and events preceding it) certainly put a powerful brake on the rise and rise of the Firm, with half the population thinking Camilla should not be allowed official recognition if/when Charles became King. This thinking seemed particularly prevalent among some arch-monarchists!
I'd love the monarchy to be pared back, to save public money as much as anything, but with the 'media' and their Royal Correspondents, etc, I can't see it happening in my lifetime. Too much is invested in it, and them.