59CosG95
Established Member
If the IC125's are going to be phased out sooner or later, maybe West Country services can be improved by Chilternising the Mk3's or reusing the Mk4's, hauled by a Class 67-does it seem like a good idea?
Hitachi will offer a deal to supply more expensive and nasty IEP bi-modes, the government of the time will see it as a bargain and will snap their hands off and scrap all the remaining HSTs as quickly as they can, a few years down the line when the true costs have been realised (and the government has changed again) passengers will be complaining even more about how expensive the railways are as they get fleeced to try and pay for these monstrosities.
Passengers will be complaining even more about how expensive the railways are as they get fleeced to try and pay for these monstrosities.
How would this be better than just performing Chiltern-style mods on the HST trailers? There are a lot more HST trailers than loco-hauled Mk3s and the HST powercars perform better than a 67 (and AFAIK are cheaper to run post-MTUing).If the IC125's are going to be phased out sooner or later, maybe West Country services can be improved by Chilternising the Mk3's or reusing the Mk4's, hauled by a Class 67-does it seem like a good idea?
Didn't we have another similar thread a few weeks back?
I think electrification to Plymouth with loco drags to Penzance is a possible solution. I was thinking earlier today to do this "mini-pendo" order and order some 8 car sets for West of England services with a possibility of upgrading for tilt to reduce journey times?
67s on Mk4s? No thank you. Can you imagine the acceleration? It would be horrific and i am sure they are not yet registered for 125 in use?
Is there another type of diesel locomotive they could work with?
Is there another type of diesel locomotive they could work with?
I think they will carry on with the best of the HSTs for as long as they can to be honest. IEP or other replacement may wait a long time.
Hitachi will offer a deal to supply more expensive and nasty IEP bi-modes, the government of the time will see it as a bargain and will snap their hands off and scrap all the remaining HSTs as quickly as they can, a few years down the line when the true costs have been realised (and the government has changed again) passengers will be complaining even more about how expensive the railways are as they get fleeced to try and pay for these monstrosities.
Which is what most people want but if DaFT force the extra IEPs on them?
I fear that you are correct, with one exception. The second batch of nasty IEP bi-modes will be at least as bad as the first lot as regards internal layout and passenger comfort, but will contain a number of subtle technical "improvements" and "upgrades" that will prevent reliable operation in multiple with the existing ones. A 10 year multi million pound programe will then be announced to upgrade the first batch to operate with the second lot.
Taking units out of service for this work will result in long distance services being routinely operated by single 5 car units, and ongoing crush loading.
After a few false starts, teething problems and 138 software upgrades, the whole fleet will operate in multiple by about 2025.
It will then be found that the no longer new IEPs wont be compliant with DDA rules that came into force in 2015, a 15 year derogation having been granted.
Gross overcrowding continues as units are rotated through the works to render them DDA compliant by the cut off date of 2030.
Any remaing table seats and catering facilities will of course have been long since withdrawn in order to "provide much needed extra capacity" and "thousands of extra seats"
By 2035, end of life will be in sight, and a commitee will be drawing up a specification for replacements, with promises being made that the new trains will be longer, have "no compromise" on leg room, and so on.
Here is hoping that an upgrade to the HST mark 3s see them in service for at least another decade.
Every coach will have the doors modified and 3 coaches per set will have 2 retention toilets fitted (the other coaches wont have any toilets), saving several million on the upgrade which makes it cost effective even in the shadow of the Hitachi offer. As the Country is still skint the government will go for the cheapest (HST upgrade) option and Hitachi will throw their teddy out after being rejected.
Oh and the power cars will finally be fitted with sanding equipment (even though it is 30 years later than when it should have been fitted) meaning that 2+9s to the South West are a viable prospect!
Fingers crossed!
The TSOE of a Mk4 set is compatible with just about any locomotive. However if you want to use the DVT then you'll need to use locomotives that have TDM or modify them to use TDM (that would include the 67s which currently use AAR).
Would refurbishing Mark 3's be the cheaper option though? especially when there will be other stock becoming available for WoE services e.g. 222's* which could be used as a stop gap measure until cross country electrification is completed by the end of CP6. Depending on the scale of electrification then bi-modes could be displaced from other routes e.g. if Swindon to Standish Junction is done as an add on to the core cross country scheme, then Bi-modes could be freed from Weston and Cheltenham/Gloucester services to run into the southwest.
*Yes I am aware that there have been comments from local stakeholders that they don't want stock with underfloor diesel engines but will the government take any notice?