Talk:British Rail Class 460

Trains: in UK / Passenger trains Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Passenger trains task force.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of British Rail Class 458 was copied or moved into British Rail Class 460 with this edit on 13:44, 09 February 2022. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Possible change to the title of this article

This article is currently named in accordance the Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways naming conventions for British rolling stock allocated a TOPS number. A proposal to change this convention and/or its scope is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Naming convention, where your comments would be welcome.

Reasons for Withdrawal from Service on London-Gatwick Route

These units were withdrawn from the London Victoria to Gatwick route after only about 10 years of service, a fraction of the expected commercial lifespan of an EMU. Presumably the reasons for this withdrawal are known, and therefore should be in this Wikipedia article. Barney Bruchstein (talk) 14:35, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was not because of any fault with the units themselves. It was part of a scheme concocted by the DfT to increase capacity on the saturated Brighton Main Line. This involved replacing Gatwick Express trains with refurbished class 442 units which are signficantly longer (five coaches per set instead of four, making 10-coach trains instead of 8-coach) and running some of these through to and from Brighton in the peak rather than terminating them at Gatwick. This also involved merging the Gatwick Express franchise into the Southern franchise. All this has been well documented in the railway press but I do not have the sources to hand just now. -- Alarics (talk) 18:10, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on British Rail Class 460. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120219223928/http://www.porterbrook.co.uk/pages/corp2012.html to http://www.porterbrook.co.uk/pages/corp2012.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:42, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retirement reasons?

Why were these multiple units retired? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clrichey (talk • contribs) 03:21, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]