Future for HST on MML

[highspeed990]

Is there any plan to replace them here?

 

[Simon11]

I believe that it will be a question for bidders for the next franchise to resolve?

 

[matt]

Not in the short term as they are being supplemented with some more HSTs from Grand Central.

 

[sprinterguy]

It's an interesting one, as not even bi-mode stock, let alone full blown electrification, seems to be mooted for the Midland Mainline before late 2023 at the earliest now. So unless East Midlands Trains can push their HSTs through a power door fitment programme to be completed before 2020 when they're already last in the queue behind Crosscountry's five sets (the first of which is still yet to emerge from works), Scotrail's 26/27 and GWRs' twelve "pocket rockets"; or find an alternative supplier who can do the work from scratch on nine HST sets within the same time frame; then they're going to have to seek a derogation to operate slam door mark 3 stock beyond the cut off date.

At this rate, the Midland Mainline may become a final enthusiasts haven for "proper" HST activity for a few years, with the power cars Paxman VP185 engines (Not Valenta, but a much closer relation than the MTUs) and the carriages slam doors.

 

[Hairy Bear]

In an internal memo they stated they were to be life extended beyond 2020, but since then ,nothing. Time is seriously running out for us.

 

[highspeed990]

I love HSTs or more specifically loco hauled carriages as they are quieter. I've said myself they should make new high speed bi mode locos to haul carriages instead of noisy MUs.

 

[edwin_m]

As a taxpayer I sincerely hope they don't have the full power door mods just for three years service, with little prospect of anyone else using them after that. This also chimes with my desire to see a HST set preserved in something like original condition. I would guess they will fit tanks to the toilets (apparently only one per coach can be fitted so they lock the others out of use), do the easier accessibility mods and go for derogation for the costly stuff.

 

[Qwerty133]

Surely the answer is for the 9 car EC 800s to be diverted to EMT with extra 91s and mark 4s staying at East coast to make up for it. Yes it will be reductions in capacity in the extremities of the ECML and the end of some of the infrequent extras but it would save the cost of modifying the HSTs.

 

[47802]

Surely the answer is for the 9 car EC 800s to be diverted to EMT with extra 91s and mark 4s staying at East coast to make up for it. Yes it will be reductions in capacity in the extremities of the ECML and the end of some of the infrequent extras but it would save the cost of modifying the HSTs.

Well given the 800's to replace the 225 sets are electric only you would still have additional coasts in making those Bi-mode, then there is the issue of poorer performance of the 91's less capacity fitment of ERTMS etc.

 

[sprinterguy]

I love HSTs or more specifically loco hauled carriages as they are quieter. I've said myself they should make new high speed bi mode locos to haul carriages instead of noisy MUs.

I don't believe there is a UK gauge bi-mode loco design that could provide adequate performance on diesel power for high speed passenger operations. Plus the mark 3 stock is old, requires a suite of modifications to operate beyond the immediate future, and in the case of HST stock requires a non standard three phase supply to provide power to the train. There comes a point when buying new is more straightforward and offers more benefits.

 

[D365]

I love HSTs or more specifically loco hauled carriages as they are quieter. I've said myself they should make new high speed bi mode locos to haul carriages instead of noisy MUs.

Why would the diesel need to be high speed? The whole point of the Class 800 bi-modes is that the diesel is, in essence, a "last mile" capability, for operating off the electrified mainline.

 

[sprinterguy]

Why would the diesel need to be high speed? The whole point of the Class 800 bi-modes is that the diesel is, in essence, a "last mile" capability, for operating off the electrified mainline.

At speeds of 100mph - I'd consider that to be fairly high speed. The GWR sets will be expected to achieve more than that at least initially given the lag in GWML electrification, as would any sets deployed to the Midland Mainline if electrification only reaches as far as Kettering. There's also far more than a "last mile" from Bristol Parkway to Cardiff or Swansea, or even Newbury to Penzance for the class 802 sets, and this would also be the case from Bedford, or Kettering, to Derby, Sheffield and Leeds.

 

[D365]

At speeds of 100mph - I'd consider that to be fairly high speed. The GWR sets will be expected to achieve more than that at least initially given the lag in GWML electrification, as would any sets deployed to the Midland Mainline if electrification only reaches as far as Kettering. There's also far more than a "last mile" from Bristol Parkway to Cardiff or Swansea, or even Newbury to Penzance for the class 802 sets, and this would also be the case from Bedford, or Kettering, to Derby, Sheffield and Leeds.

The Class 800s weren't designed to be doing those long distances under diesel power. That's an entire issue in itself.

 

[sprinterguy]

The Class 800s weren't designed to be doing those long distances under diesel power. That's an entire issue in itself.

The Great Western sets are certainly being stretched beyond their specification, but the East Coast sets were designed and are expected to operate from Edinburgh to Aberdeen and Inverness on diesel power (and similarly, Oxford to Worcester and Hereford has always been part of the specification for the Great Western sets I believe). Certainly at slower speeds than they'll be operating on the ECML under electric power, but I still doubt that a bi-mode diesel loco could be produced that met those requirements, or those of the Midland Mainline.

 

[JamesT]

The Class 800s weren't designed to be doing those long distances under diesel power. That's an entire issue in itself.

Are you mixing up the 800/802s which very much are designed for long distances on diesel, with the 801s which only have enough engines for limp home?

 

[D365]

Apologies, I did mean to specify long distance at high speeds. Below 100mph is well within their capacity, but the diesel mode was in no way intended to replicate the capability of the HSTs.

Think of it this way, the HSTs should always have been replaced by electrification.

 

[sprinterguy]

Think of it this way, the HSTs should always have been replaced by electrification.

I agree wholeheartedly. Bi-mode capability is useful, but the current piecemeal approach to electrification and seeming inability or disinclination to wire a single main line and its' primary branches in their entirety is disappointing.

 

[47802]

Apologies, I did mean to specify long distance at high speeds. Below 100mph is well within their capacity, but the diesel mode was in no way intended to replicate the capability of the HSTs.

Think of it this way, the HSTs should always have been replaced by electrification.

However the 802 version will be working long diesel sections to the South West, and I was under the impression that performance is much closer to a HST on Diesel, so I would think Kettering to Sheffield would be feasible for these units.

 

[XCTurbostar]

I think the best and most efficient way to deal with is to get a derogation to keep the existing HSTs in service until new stock arrives. Doing the mods just to be taken out of service a few years later is rather pointless. The Dft obviously see the XC sets as being in service for many more years.

Is there enough sets of meridians to replace the HSTs? Although I know some peak services are pairs of units, but, if worst come later to worst could they withdraw all HSTs and run a ‘bare minimum’ service?

 

[Qwerty133]

I think the best and most efficient way to deal with is to get a derogation to keep the existing HSTs in service until new stock arrives. Doing the mods just to be taken out of service a few years later is rather pointless. The Dft obviously see the XC sets as being in service for many more years.

Is there enough sets of meridians to replace the HSTs? Although I know some peak services are pairs of units, but, if worst come later to worst could they withdraw all HSTs and run a ‘bare minimum’ service?

No there is no where near enough Meridians unless they want to start leaving behind hundreds of passengers. If the worst happened the Corby service could probably be suspended without too much inconvenience but the 4 services to Leicester and North are often full and standing at various points throughout the day so cannot lose any capacity.
I fail to see how it makes any sense to be introducing capacity enhancing bi-modes on some lines when it is looking like, without stock long overdue overhaul or scrapping, other lines won't have enough stock to run even the core service in 2020. If this requires new build bi-modes to be diverted from the planned operators I am of the opinion that this should happen unless it causes bigger issues with cascades.
I also fail to see any case for modifying the HSTs to keep them in service past 2020, even if it was possible for this to be done in time, as it is unlikely they would stay in service for any reasonable length of time as due to their slow acceleration have to be kept away from the services in most need of the longest trains meaning they are not really suitable for the route in the long term.

 

[MCR247]

I think the best and most efficient way to deal with is to get a derogation to keep the existing HSTs in service until new stock arrives. Doing the mods just to be taken out of service a few years later is rather pointless. The Dft obviously see the XC sets as being in service for many more years.

Is there enough sets of meridians to replace the HSTs? Although I know some peak services are pairs of units, but, if worst come later to worst could they withdraw all HSTs and run a ‘bare minimum’ service?

If there were enough meridians to replace the HSTs why would EMT still have the HSTs and actually be procuring more? Great question

 

[Qwerty133]

If there were enough meridians to replace the HSTs why would EMT still have the HSTs and actually be procuring more? Great question

Because certain members of this forum who have an irrational dislike for anything built since their parents were born were keeping the secret that the directors of EMT were using child slavery on the condition the Meridians were replaced by HSTs...
(clearly not meant seriously, but is about the only conceivable reason for preferring more HSTs)

 

[XCTurbostar]

Because certain members of this forum who have an irrational dislike for anything built since their parents were born were keeping the secret that the directors of EMT were using child slavery on the condition the Meridians were replaced by HSTs...
(clearly not meant seriously, but is about the only conceivable reason for preferring more HSTs)

Wow, that would explain alot

 

[sprinterguy]

I think the best and most efficient way to deal with is to get a derogation to keep the existing HSTs in service until new stock arrives. Doing the mods just to be taken out of service a few years later is rather pointless.

I'm inclined to agree. If a derogation can be granted, perhaps with some "quick fixes" to address some of the failings, it would save a lot of of upheaval and cost compared to putting the trains through the compliance programme if they're only going to be around for a short span of years anyway.

 

[cj_1985]

so what would you term as "quick fixes"...?

 

[XCTurbostar]

The best scenario is to do nothing.

 

[sprinterguy]

so what would you term as "quick fixes"...?

Quite frankly, I'm not sure: I was hoping that greater minds than mine might have a handle on it, but this being the railway I recognise that might be optimistic. Door handles on the inside, and drop a standard design disabled toilet module into one coach of each class? And even class 153 units can have PIS units fitted these days, presumably it's not beyond the wit of man to shanghai one into the fixtures and fittings of, say, the mid vehicle position of a mark 3 coach.

The best scenario is to do nothing.

Isn't that the thinking within the industry that's got us into this mess? "If in doubt, do nowt"

 

[philthetube]

I am sure there will be plenty of reasons why not but would it be possible to adapt Mk 4 coaches to run behind HST locos

 

[bnsf734]

I am sure there will be plenty of reasons why not but would it be possible to adapt Mk 4 coaches to run behind HST locos

The electrical systems are incompatible between HSTs (415 volts 3 phase electric). Mark 4 and all other coaches are supplied with DC (100 volts I think) from the loco. They have different multiple working systems as well.

Almost anything is possible given time and money - Mark 3 loco hauled coaches have been rebuilt into HST trailers in the past, but whether it is economic is another matter. Personally I like Roger Fords idea in Modern Railways of using existing HST power cars with new CAF Mark 5 coaches which would have compatibility built in from the start.

This conundrum is one for the new franchise bidder to solve, or they will have a shiny new franchise and half the fleet doomed a short way into the franchise.

 

[ashworth]

This conundrum is one for the new franchise bidder to solve, or they will have a shiny new franchise and half the fleet doomed a short way into the franchise.

In the latest edition of RAIL it says that the DfT has extended the franchise for EMT until March 2019 and indicated it’s intention to negotiate with Stagecoach to operate it until August 2019 with an option to extend the contract by a further year.