Services which could realistically return to Loco Haulage

[alexl92]

Following on from a suggestion in another thread that TPE's Manchester-Scotland Services could be switched to Loco+DVT, it got me wondering which other services currently operated by a multiple unit could practically be better served being returned to loco haulage (assuming with a DBSO or DVT) if it were cost effective and the stock & funding was available?

Leeds is the nearest large terminus to me; as far as I can think realistically maybe the Leeds - Harrogate - York and Leeds - Carlisle might benefit from it.

 

[jopsuk]

without using the words "engine noise" and "vibrations", what benefits would loco hauled have over an MU? What practical advantage could it bring? Bear in mind that generally loco hauled services did use fixed (or semi-fixed) formations- the Southern especially had semi-permanent rakes of coaches- and that adding the odd extra carriage to a busy service was a practice that almost never happened.

 

[Blindtraveler]

The abilitty to add extra vehicles would for me be a major plus point. An Intercity or Long Distance style interior suited to length of journey would be another. Some of the things I would till lately have suggested are now being covered by Abellio Scotrails plans for HSTs.↲

 

[yorksrob]

without using the words "engine noise" and "vibrations", what benefits would loco hauled have over an MU? What practical advantage could it bring? Bear in mind that generally loco hauled services did use fixed (or semi-fixed) formations- the Southern especially had semi-permanent rakes of coaches- and that adding the odd extra carriage to a busy service was a practice that almost never happened.

Avoiding the need to build new DMU's would seem to be the key one at the moment.

 

[AM9]

All this is just sentimentalism. LHCS is effectively dead with the privatised railway. Those scheduled LHCS services that are left will eventually be replaced and the occasional relief services that are run such as the GA Bitterne lines in the summer and Christmas shopper trips in the north will only survive as long as there is serviceable rolling stock hanging around.
Boring as they may be to enthusiasts, MUs are not only easier to run in regular service, they also take up less platform space, have more predictable performance characteristics that are more often aligned to the route and they need fewer staff to operate, (how many DO loco hauled trains have there been).

 

[yorksrob]

All this is just sentimentalism. LHCS is effectively dead with the privatised railway. Those scheduled LHCS services that are left will eventually be replaced and the occasional relief services that are run such as the GA Bitterne lines in the summer and Christmas shopper trips in the north will only survive as long as there is serviceable rolling stock hanging around.
Boring as they may be to enthusiasts, MUs are not only easier to run in regular service, they also take up less platform space, have more predictable performance characteristics that are more often aligned to the route and they need fewer staff to operate, (how many DO loco hauled trains have there been).

But DMU's also seem to be expensive to build and unpopular amongst train manufacturers on our privatised railway, so in the right circumstances, loco hauled could be a useful stop gap.

 

[jopsuk]

Avoiding the need to build new DMU's would seem to be the key one at the moment.

Some seem to be suggesting building new coaches though

 

[bigdelboy]

But DMU's also seem to be expensive to build and unpopular amongst train manufacturers on our privatised railway, so in the right circumstances, loco hauled could be a useful stop gap.

As I understand it we currently have a shortfall in non-electrified route passenger capacity. We have no DMU capacity to gill the gap. There is a reluctance to build more DMU's as some will be freed up by electrifications shortly .. and then we would have a surplus of DMU's and that would have been a poor investment.

Use of some available loco hauled assets might be an option in these circumstances. In general and with the mk II//III loco hauled stock that is available this would generally typically be more effective on services that:

• Have reasonably long distances between stops
• Are not subject ot overcrowding
• Do not have many gradients; weight restrictions or many speed restrictions significantly below linespeed
• Would not interfere with other services due to different performance characteristics

For example fast/semi-fast services on the north wales coast probably fit the characteristics.

Loco hauled can often be appropriate where a change of traction from diesel to electric is required; we have only limited cases currently where that is the case.

 

[jopsuk]

On the other hand:

there's not a big excess of Mark 3 stock lying around. I asked in a thread a while back if there was sufficient stock to extend the FGW HST fleet to 2+9 (like the EC fleet) and the answer was no.

How much mark 2 stock is realistically available? How much work would be required to bring it up to a decent standard for all-day, every day, use? There's not very many DBSOs- and making more is possible but an even bigger expense. The existing DBSOs if they're to be run using Class 67 or 68 would need full control modification.

 

[yorksrob]

On the other hand:

there's nrailtour.excess of Mark 3 stock lying around. I asked in a thread a while back if there was sufficient stock to extend the FGW HST fleet to 2+9 (like the EC fleet) and the answer was no.

How much mark 2 stock is realistically available? How much work would be required to bring it up to a decent standard for all-day, every day, use? There's not very many DBSOs- and making more is possible but an even bigger expense. The existing DBSOs if they're to be run using Class 67 or 68 would need full control modification.

There are quite a few rakes of Mk 2's and 3's used for rail tours at the moment. Bearing in mind a regional service would most likely be 4-5 rather than the 11 - 12 generally needed for a railtour.

 

[AM9]

But DMU's also seem to be expensive to build and unpopular amongst train manufacturers on our privatised railway, so in the right circumstances, loco hauled could be a useful stop gap.

The OP's words seem to indicate a return to LH trains, but of course I can't read his mind. As I said, loco hauling in mainline service, ie.g. Chiltern (a few commuter/business trains) and GEML to Norwich (probably sustainable as there isn't a suitable regional EMU for inter-city routes at the moment, will eventually be replaced (obviously post-Chiltern Line electrification). Maybe the offerings from Hitachi like the class 800 and the AT200 will lead to something in between the two that will fit the bill. That would suit the medium distance post-HS2 WCML runs as well as GE and MML 100-200 mile trips. There would be a market after CP6 across the network which would probably spur the other three manufacturers to compete.
So back fully on-topic, LH trains are an anathema to a fixed bid franchised TOC. They don't want spare coaches, which would need some DDA conversions anyway, laying around racking up lease and maintenance costs. There just aren't that many suitable sidings on which to park little-used stock anyway, and they would require more staff to manage them both stored or in service.
If profit-seeking TOCs can get through their contracts without taking the blame for most of the crowding, and pass the operational delays onto NR, that is their optimum business model.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

During the Summer HSTs are run to Skegness from Derby despite a low linespeed, that's the only route that it would make sense to replace a MU that I know of. Maybe other services like this exist?
The loco hauled Arriva Trains Wales service from Cardiff to the North Coast is a good example of current runnings.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some seem to be suggesting building new coaches though

It might well be viable to do that as a follow-on order from the new Serco coaches for the Caledonian Sleeper. But if building new an MU is almost certainly more practical.

Neil

 

[Greenback]

Loco haulage has had its day. The fact that some still run is more a result of desperation and a shortage of DMU's than any benefits that they bring. TOC's don't want to run these trains in any numbers, there aren't the facilities to do so as well as being more expensive to run.

 

[ainsworth74]

There are quite a few rakes of Mk 2's and 3's used for rail tours at the moment. Bearing in mind a regional service would most likely be 4-5 rather than the 11 - 12 generally needed for a railtour.

But then what runs the railtours if many of the Mk2s and 3s are brought back into regular service?

 

[Bletchleyite]

(how many DO loco hauled trains have there been).

Funny you should mention that...but almost all local/regional trains in Switzerland are DOO and have been for years, and a great many of them (fewer now, but still some) were loco-hauled.

That said, SBB has far lower standards of H&S than our railway. As one example, their departure procedure[1] (which is borderline DOO even on mainline services) is seriously flawed and I'm amazed it hasn't led to a serious accident, e.g. someone being trapped in doors, falling from a train departing with doors open (I've seen a train depart with doors open on a few occasions) or someone being dragged along by a train.

The main problem with LH DOO is that the driver can't access the train without going on the track, and as there is no guard he may need to do so. All other flaws relate to the provision of DOO equipment which can always be added.

[1] SBB IC departure procedure: guard blows whistle, guard goes to platform box and turns key to give departure signal to driver *while doors are still open*, guard returns to train and closes doors, driver looks in small cab mirror to see if nothing looks untoward and departs. Spot the serious safety flaws in that lot.

Neil

 

[alexl92]

Interesting that Switzerland is mentioned. Part of the thinking behind the original post was the fact that LH is still used on the continent fairly widely.

Another advantage of LH is that if your loco fails, you can simply swap another onto it with no loss of capacity. If a MU fails that's two or three coaches down straight away.

And as for the time period this would cover, I hadn't really thought about that specifically - whether it's a stop-gap or a permanent solution - but I suppose I'm not really talking about a relief service to cover for a few days, more a regular diagram.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Interesting that Switzerland is mentioned. Part of the thinking behind the original post was the fact that LH is still used on the continent fairly widely.

Another advantage of LH is that if your loco fails, you can simply swap another onto it with no loss of capacity. If a MU fails that's two or three coaches down straight away.

And as for the time period this would cover, I hadn't really thought about that specifically - whether it's a stop-gap or a permanent solution - but I suppose I'm not really talking about a relief service to cover for a few days, more a regular diagram.

So it'll make more sense on very long trains then.
Wrexham and Shropshire ran Intercity loco hauled services, what about running a loco on the Corby to London, the Newcastle to Liverpool or on services in the Southeast with 8-12 car trains, especially the older ones?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Interesting that Switzerland is mentioned. Part of the thinking behind the original post was the fact that LH is still used on the continent fairly widely.

It is, though all recent new stock orders by SBB have been for multiple units.

Neil
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So it'll make more sense on very long trains then.
Wrexham and Shropshire ran Intercity loco hauled services, what about running a loco on the Corby to London, the Newcastle to Liverpool or on services in the Southeast with 8-12 car trains, especially the older ones?

Substituting a 350 with hauled stock would play merry hell with the timetable - it's just too slow off the mark.

Neil

 

[physics34]

Would like to see the 442 units be used as loco hauled coaching stock when they retire from GatEx services. Being built in 1988 you'd hope they have another decade of life in them.

 

[harz99]

Would like to see the 442 units be used as loco hauled coaching stock when they retire from GatEx services. Being built in 1988 you'd hope they have another decade of life in them.

As would the 91/mk4 sets, but I can't see a use for them except possibly in a shortened form on TPEs Anglo Scottish services, but they would suffer from longer dwell times and slower acceleration, although that would be offset by the higher top speed on much of the route.

 

[455driver]

But DMU's also seem to be expensive to build and unpopular amongst train manufacturers on our privatised railway, so in the right circumstances, loco hauled could be a useful stop gap.

What about comparing the leasing/ maintenance costs, also what are you going to do with these 'spare' coaches when you are not using them?

How are you going to run the locos around at the terminus stations bearing in mind the platforms, paths and time required to do it!

 

[ainsworth74]

How are you going to run the locos around at the terminus stations bearing in mind the platforms, paths and time required to do it!

To be fair the OP did state we should assume DVT or DBSO in the formation so no running around required.

 

[sprinterguy]

As would the 91/mk4 sets, but I can't see a use for them except possibly in a shortened form on TPEs Anglo Scottish services, but they would suffer from longer dwell times and slower acceleration, although that would be offset by the higher top speed on much of the route.

I don't think there would be much in it at 110mph versus the current 100mph (I don't think that TPEs' 350s operate at 110 already?). Especially not when you consider the swift acceleration of the 350s.

 

[yorksrob]

The OP's words seem to indicate a return to LH trains, but of course I can't read his mind. As I said, loco hauling in mainline service, ie.g. Chiltern (a few commuter/business trains) and GEML to Norwich (probably sustainable as there isn't a suitable regional EMU for inter-city routes at the moment, will eventually be replaced (obviously post-Chiltern Line electrification). Maybe the offerings from Hitachi like the class 800 and the AT200 will lead to something in between the two that will fit the bill. That would suit the medium distance post-HS2 WCML runs as well as GE and MML 100-200 mile trips. There would be a market after CP6 across the network which would probably spur the other three manufacturers to compete.
So back fully on-topic, LH trains are an anathema to a fixed bid franchised TOC. They don't want spare coaches, which would need some DDA conversions anyway, laying around racking up lease and maintenance costs. There just aren't that many suitable sidings on which to park little-used stock anyway, and they would require more staff to manage them both stored or in service.
If profit-seeking TOCs can get through their contracts without taking the blame for most of the crowding, and pass the operational delays onto NR, that is their optimum business model.

Who said anything about little used stock ?

I was envisaging something more along the lines of replacing diagrams on routes such as Settle Carlisle with loco hauled, at least until sufficient DMU stock was available.

However, as you say, that would require the DfT to encourage TOC's to be pro-active in improving/maintaining services, rather than forcing them to make cut backs/fall into line with ROSCO's etc.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But then what runs the railtours if many of the Mk2s and 3s are brought back into regular service?

Well, there are always Mk 1's.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As would the 91/mk4 sets, but I can't see a use for them except possibly in a shortened form on TPEs Anglo Scottish services, but they would suffer from longer dwell times and slower acceleration, although that would be offset by the higher top speed on much of the route.

If they were shunted onto East Anglia as seems to be the suggestion, there would be a lot of Mk3's to play with.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

To be fair the OP did state we should assume DVT or DBSO in the formation so no running around required.

Indeed. Even converting some of the carriages to have cab's might still be cheaper than new build.

 

[Lad Brookes]

But then what runs the railtours if many of the Mk2s and 3s are brought back into regular service?

Pacers.

 

[ainsworth74]

Be interesting seeing someone attempt to provide 'Premier Dining' on a Pacer

 

[jopsuk]

The main problem with LH DOO is that the driver can't access the train without going on the track, and as there is no guard he may need to do so.

I'm not saying it's a good thing, but there's plenty of DOO in the UK with two or three units without inter unit gangways, so essentially this could already be considered a non-issue from a safety assessment point of view.

I'd still rather have a guard.

Given the MU woes it's amazed me it's taking GA so long to get a single DBSO+37 combination in operation.

 

[The Ham]

I was envisaging something more along the lines of replacing diagrams on routes such as Settle Carlisle with loco hauled, at least until sufficient DMU stock was available.

I'm just imaging the numbers of passengers that would turn up in 2020 if it the S&C line was run with HST's in the old IC colours and branding!

Based on comments from on here I wonder if it would be enough to mean that Northern were no longer reliant on subsidies?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm just imaging the numbers of passengers that would turn up in 2020 if it the S&C line was run with HST's in the old IC colours and branding!

I don't know about that - but I certainly do think that scenic lines could be better marketed - and I don't mean by fitting some 158s with a seating layout with more tables like ScotRail will be doing, but by buying proper panoramic rolling stock like the Swiss use, and creating extra income by charging extra for it (mostly, the Swiss panoramic coaches are classed as 1st).

A bit of "Plandampf" (operating the regular timetable using steam locomotives) might also prove a winner financially at certain times of year.

Neil