Potential future uses for class 68 & Mk5 sets?

[BPN2022]

Can’t find any TPE 68 threads but I have mentioned on the Mark 5 one too. Rumours circulating that these are getting scrapped in December.

The managed decline continues. What a waste of money if this is the case for brand new stock. Shambolic.

 

[Energy]

Can’t find any TPE 68 threads but I have mentioned on the Mark 5 one too. Rumours circulating that these are getting scrapped in December.

The managed decline continues. What a waste of money if this is the case for brand new stock. Shambolic.

Scrapped or lease expired? Big difference.

A few months ago Modern Railways was talking about extending them to 7 cars.

 

[Mzzzs]

I can see the mk5s following the 180s with them having a similar life.
If TPE does offload them, I can see them taken up by an open-access operator.

 

[liamf656]

Can’t find any TPE 68 threads but I have mentioned on the Mark 5 one too. Rumours circulating that these are getting scrapped in December.

I'm pretty certain this was an unproven rumour taken too far on Twitter

 

[warwickshire]

If and when as expected on another thread the Transpennie class 68 and mk5 do go what future do they have?
Chiltern Railways replacement for mk3s, plug door replacement Gwr or Scotrai,l or possibly anything else? Hopefully, surely not the scrap yard.

 

[D6130]

Moderator note: split from

TPE Nova 3 (Class 68 + Mk5s) Diagrams (no images please)

Dear all I am a new member and possibly missed previous postings I have been into railways since 1974 my query is has anyone got a current TPE 68 service diagrams the ones published in a rail magazine may have changed thank you once again Paul

www.railforums.co.uk

When demand has declined the micro fleets will be the expendable things.

Yes, I suspect that the 68s will be returned to DRS....and maybe offered to TfW as replacements for the 67s.

I can't see anyone wanting the Mark 5 stock....they'll be no use to TfW without kitchen/buffet facilities and their riding is far too jiggly for serving meals anyway.

I expect they'll be put into store and then quietly despatched to Newport after a few years. Maybe Caledonian Sleepers may want to buy some of them at scrap price for spares?

Now, on the other hand, if a new open access operator were to appear on the scene....

 

[Peter Sarf]

I can see the TPE Mk5s being less attractive than 379s except for the fact they do not kneed AC electrification.

The TPE Mk5s could be a quick fix for an operator needing stock now while waiting for deliveries from Hitachi (ironically). In the long run IF there is any growth then operators will be hanging on for 80Xs.

I wonder how much use these Mk5s will have from time of announcement to the official planned end of service.

Of course all the last few posts could be speculation !.

 

[xotGD]

Well hopefully in time common sense will prevail and a portion of the 185 fleet is offloaded in favour of the loco-hauled sets, or else the service level brought back to where it should be.

The MArk 5s, as has been noted, can be converted from diesel to bi-mode operation simply by attaching a different loco on the front. Ideal for Scarbados and Teesside services.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Well hopefully in time common sense will prevail and a portion of the 185 fleet is offloaded in favour of the loco-hauled sets

Why would that be that common sense replacing something which is reliable and doesn’t have a single point of failure and is core traction for drivers with an fleet that has proven challenging?

 

[Iskra]

Yes, I suspect that the 68s will be returned to DRS....and maybe offered to TfW as replacements for the 67s. I can't see anyone wanting the Mark 5 stock....they'll be no use to TfW without kitchen/buffet facilities and their riding is far too jiggly for serving meals anyway. I expect they'll be put into store and then quietly despatched to Newport after a few years. Maybe Caledonian Sleepers may want to buy some of them at scrap price for spares? Now, on the other hand, if a new open access operator were to appear on the scene....

You'd think Scotrail might want them instead of 222's, to replace HST's...

 

[JonathanH]

Storage would seem most likely.

They will become the fleet that lots of people on this forum will try to find another use for, despite the fact they aren't really suited for anything.

 

[CAF397]

I would think export is now likely.

It's a young fleet (4-5 years old) and their owner is an international leasing company. If its a choice between rusting in the UK or making money in Europe, then they'd choose that.

 

[Energy]

I would think export is now likely.

I could see Flixtrain taking them, the higher door entrances don't seem to be a big concern on their existing stock.

 

[DanNCL]

Flixtrain or Regiojet could be contenders for the Mark 5s. Steps can be added to address the platform height issue. And we already know that a Vectron can haul Mark 5A sets as one was used during testing at Velim.

 

[AndrewE]

How about using them on an inter-regional express service which (mostly) won't be wired for many years yet?
Something like Liverpool-Manchester - Derby or Nottingham-Leicester-Peterboro-Cambridge-Stanstead could give much-needed extra capacity and significantly improve connectivity across another cross-country (non-London) focussed corridor.
I daren't suggest Liverpool to Newcastle, which fits those criteria...! Maybe even Bristol to Newcastle?

 

[JonathanH]

How about using them on an inter-regional express service which (mostly) won't be wired for many years yet?

Er, like Scarborough to Liverpool?

They have failed (or I guess been failed by circumstances) on that route. The last thing that needs to happen is making up obscure routes simply to find work for them.

 

[Energy]

How about using them on an inter-regional express service which (mostly) won't be wired for many years yet?

The service dictates the stock, not the stock dictating the service.

Nottingham-Leicester-Peterboro-Cambridge-Stanstead

The 170s work well on these routes. I have a feeling there are SP speeds as well.

 

[py_megapixel]

They will become the fleet that lots of people on this forum will try to find another use for, despite the fact they aren't really suited for anything.

Yes - some sort of a spiritual successor to the 442s, at least from the perspective of this forum.

In more ways than one, too, given it's often suggested that the bit of the TPE franchise agreement that originally led to the Mk5 order was written with 442s in mind.

 

[Energy]

In more ways than one, too, given it's often suggested that the bit of the TPE franchise agreement that originally led to the Mk5 order was written with 442s in mind.

It didn't specify loco hauled stock, 442s were mentioned as being available but bidders could still use other new build stock.

 

[xotGD]

Why would that be that common sense replacing something which is reliable and doesn’t have a single point of failure and is core traction for drivers with an fleet that has proven challenging?

Well if you hadn't truncated my post, the second paragraph provides an answer.

 

[David Goddard]

Lots of suggestions will come up here, some credible, some far less so. Fleet size and train length could make them attractive to the Welsh Marches, or some of the Inter7City services in Scotland, but as others have said this could easily turn into a solution looking for a problem.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thailand perhaps?

 

[SuperNova]

It didn't specify loco hauled stock, 442s were mentioned as being available but bidders could still use other new build stock.

The DfT wanted 442s as a push pull unit loco hauled. It’s well known.

First Group ideally wanted all 802s but Hitachi couldn’t deliver by 2019. They then went with brand new Mk5a stock.

 

[BoroAndy]

What a fiasco for a company that basically runs just 6 routes. Simplify the timetable, hence the diagrams too. Should be no need for much ECS movements. Make the Nova3s work, as an old boss of mine once said.... No excuses, JFDI methodology.

 

[RobShipway]

I would suspect that the MK5a coaches would be better doing a route like Norwich to Liverpool Lime Street, however the MK5A's maybe too long for some platforms and I doubt that you would need that size of capacity on the Norwich - Liverpool Lime Street though.

The only other suggestion, which may seem a bit silly is to convert class 43 loco's to work with the MK5A coaches in push/pull mode. Then have these replace the Mk3 coaches on the Scotrail Inter7City routes. Although, I don't believe there is enough MK5A coaches to do that replacement.

 

[skyhigh]

The only other suggestion, which may seem a bit silly is to convert class 43 loco's to work with the MK5A coaches

Very silly.

Why not just use the 68s as they currently do?

 

[RobShipway]

Very silly.

Why not just use the 68s as they currently do?

I did say it is a silly idea. With using the class 43 though instead of the class 68, there would not be any delays due to driver training Scotrail drivers on the 68.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I did say it is a silly idea. With using the class 43 though instead of the class 68, there would not be any delays due to driver training Scotrail drivers on the 68.

Plus, isn't it the 43s that are the main bone of contention with the unions?

 

[RobShipway]

Plus, isn't it the 43s that are the main bone of contention with the unions?

True, but I believe that it was also to do with the Mk3 coaches as well? But otherwise, then yes you would be using the class 68 with the potential of using class 93 in the future, once electrification works are completed?

 

[skyhigh]

I did say it is a silly idea. With using the class 43 though instead of the class 68, there would not be any delays due to driver training Scotrail drivers on the 68.

But there would be massive delays while you convert the 43s, and the level of changes (you'd have to install the CAF TMS that was fitted to the 68s) means you'd still have to train crew on the modified locos.

Plus the fact that the unions are unhappy with the HSTs and spending millions adapting them to keep the problematic bit in service indefinitely will not go down well.