(21 May 2022, 1:07 pm)peter wrote There's no chance any of those B5's are gonna get withdrawn at 10 years old, they're nowhere near the age of being 'uneconomical to repair.'But given the very high high spec of 6356-61, would you say the 47 or the X21 is more deserving?
Hasn't it already been established that the reliability of the B5's on the X21 isn't as bad as has been made out...6332/33 being allocated to Chester-le-Street so there are decent spares would be sufficient I'm sure.
I think it could go either way at Consett. I think 6362/3 will go to Washington for the X1 like you say. As for 6356-6361, the paint is still fresh on those 47/47A B9's, doesn't mean it won't happen tho. Part of me does wonder if the new 24 could be a contender with a PVR of 5. Alternatively if 6356-61 stay for the X45, some of the MMC's could be released to Riverside for something like the 58.
RE: Deliberately downgrading a flagship route