APT Passengers

Springs Branch · 18 Apr 2019

WesternLancer said:
..... When did Mk3 hauled stock start on the WCML? I assume that had a supply of Mk3 hauled catering vehicles.....

I believe Mk3 coaches appeared on the WCML around 1976.

I remember buying an impromptu Manchester to Macclesfield day return back then, just so I could sample a brand-new example when they first appeared at Piccadilly on the Euston services. It was the middle of the day mid-week and I just about had the coach to myself - those were the days!

When introduced, the Mk3s went onto the "premium" WCML routes first - Euston to Manchester / Liverpool / Glasgow. Second tier workings like Euston to Blackpool / Carlisle semi-fasts, Birmingham to Glasgow/Edinburgh and the Clansman continued with Mk2 stock and Mk1 catering vehicles for quite a few years (although benefiting from newer a/c Mk2 coaches being cascaded). Not sure where the Euston to Birmingham / Wolverhamptons fitted into this sequence.

I also recall when the very first loco-hauled Mk3s were introduced, there was not always enough of the new type to make up a complete train. You could have most of the Second Class as Mk3 (maybe with a Mk2 BSO tacked on the end), Mk 1 Buffet and Mk2 First Class. This apparently caused some adverse comments from regular punters who had paid big money* to sit at the London end of the train.

Another memory was the evening InterCity service from Glasgow Central to Manchester Victoria. For a time in the late 1970s this was worked by stock off an Electric Scot arrival from Euston and resulted in rather modern rolling stock appearing at "old" Manchester Victoria. After unloading, the empty stock was dragged back to Ordsall Lane Junction by the Victoria station pilot, then proceeded via Castlefield and Oxford Rd to Longsight, ready for Euston/Manchester duties the next morning.

Anyhow, my apologies, this is all a bit OT for the APT!

* [clarification] ....their company had paid big money for them to sit at the London end....

RailUK Forums

Andy873 · 18 Apr 2019

Never got to travel on one, but in the early 1980s at school I wrote to BR aged 16 asking them what happened to the APT? Didn't have an address for them so it was simply addressed to BR, London.

Posted it, and never thought I would get a reply.

A few days later coming home from school my mother handed me a package, it was too big for the letter box so the postman had to knock on the door.

It was from BR, when I opened it, it was packed with booklets, diagrams, technical drawings and specifications regarding the APT, together with a very nice letter.

They were very interesting to read, and I'm sure some of you would have loved to have seen them, but sadly with time, I no longer have them.

It could be brought back, but don't think the will is there to do it.

Will Mitchell · 18 Apr 2019

It will probably never happen but I for one would love to see a next generation APT capable of 400 km/h on HS2 but with tilting capability for use north of Preston on the WCML. Supposedly this is impossible due to the weight penalty incurred as a result of the tilting equipment. I’d like to see someone prove that wrong.

hexagon789 · 18 Apr 2019

WesternLancer said:
When did Mk3 hauled stock start on the WCML? I assume that had a supply of Mk3 hauled catering vehicles.

First two sets started out on the WCML in 1976 on Euston-Liverpool/Manchester diagrams. Both used Mk1 catering vehicles.

Bletchleyite · 18 Apr 2019

Will Mitchell said:
It will probably never happen but I for one would love to see a next generation APT capable of 400 km/h on HS2 but with tilting capability for use north of Preston on the WCML. Supposedly this is impossible due to the weight penalty incurred as a result of the tilting equipment. I’d like to see someone prove that wrong.

Ignoring Birmingham which isn't really that important in all this, what would be the difference in journey times from London to Manchester, and to Glasgow, with each of the following, assuming Phase 1 is the only thing built as I think is not at all unlikely:-

1. HS2 only 140mph but using Pendolinos or similar so tilt is available on the classic line
2. HS2 400km/h, but classic compatible sets only able to run at 110mph on the classic line due to no tilt

I do wonder...

hexagon789 · 18 Apr 2019

Bletchleyite said:
Ignoring Birmingham which isn't really that important in all this, what would be the difference in journey times from London to Manchester, and to Glasgow, with each of the following, assuming Phase 1 is the only thing built as I think is not at all unlikely:-

1. HS2 only 140mph but using Pendolinos or similar so tilt is available on the classic line
2. HS2 400km/h, but classic compatible sets only able to run at 110mph on the classic line due to no tilt

I do wonder...

3. - Network Rail finally review non-EPS speeds on the WCML allowing higher than 110mph running?

WesternLancer · 18 Apr 2019

hexagon789 said:
First two sets started out on the WCML in 1976 on Euston-Liverpool/Manchester diagrams. Both used Mk1 catering vehicles.

That must have been a contrast!

hexagon789 · 18 Apr 2019

WesternLancer said:
That must have been a contrast!

Extremely common. Right up until the switch to fixed-formation push-pull sets of Mk2f or Mk3 vehicles, WCML trains could be quite mixed.

nlogax · 18 Apr 2019

Never went on the APT but distinctly recall watching the BBC Horizon episode about it during 1981 when I was..six, maybe seven, and being completely jealous of anyone who managed to experience an APT journey.

From all the photos and footage I've seen of the interior, to me the APT resembles a Mk 1 Golf GTi. Sporty*, 'cosy' quarters, thin pillars and *ahem* interesting tartan seats. And just like a Mk 1 Golf GTi, there's zero financial gain to anyone in restoring the APT. Just a massive cost burden. I can't see it happening in my lifetime.

Out of interest..for those of you who experienced it, how did APT performance feel like from a standing start? Did it feel brisk? Two power cars each of ~4000HP propelling a train that looked a lot lighter than present day Pendos...would love to know what that was like.

hexagon789 · 18 Apr 2019

nlogax said:
Never went on the APT but distinctly recall watching the BBC Horizon episode about it during 1981 when I was..six, maybe seven, and being completely jealous of anyone who managed to experience an APT journey.

From all the photos and footage I've seen of the interior, to me the APT resembles a Mk 1 Golf GTi. Sporty*, 'cosy' quarters, thin pillars and *ahem* interesting tartan seats. And just like a Mk 1 Golf GTi, there's zero financial gain to anyone in restoring the APT. Just a massive cost burden. I can't see it happening in my lifetime.

Out of interest..for those of you who experienced it, how did APT performance feel like from a standing start? Did it feel brisk? Two power cars each of ~4000HP propelling a train that looked a lot lighter than present day Pendos...would love to know what that was like.

Reports from travellers on the APT pages website suggest it was very brisk in acceleration and deceleration. It was built for 155mph and had enough power installed for a balancing speed of 162.75mph.

Helvellyn · 19 Apr 2019

hexagon789 said:
First two sets started out on the WCML in 1976 on Euston-Liverpool/Manchester diagrams. Both used Mk1 catering vehicles.

Because the Mark 2F vehicles had the same IC70 interiors as the Mark 3s the vehicles were used interchangeably. As you mention Mark 1 catering vehicles were common though. For example, the two trains involved in the Colwich accident were made up of Mark 2F and Mark 3A vehicles except for the Mark 1 catering vehicles (RBRs) and luggage vans (BGs).

A not untypical West Coast formation of the late 1970s was BG-FO-FO-FO-RBR-TSO-TSO-TSO-TSO-TSO. With the Mark 3As 60 FOs and 165 TSOs were ordered - effectively enough for 30 and 33 sets respectively reflecting surplus First Class capacity. But when the Mark 3A catering vehicles were ordered only 28 came! Then add in the transfer of 7 x FOs and 28 TSOs to ScotRail for the ScotRail Express services and I think it just underlines how the Mark 2F/3A fleet was common user.

What initially drove more (nearly) full Mark 3A formations in the mid 1980s was the IC175 scheme that saw some services accelerated for 110mph operation. This required use of modified Class 87s (Bracknell Willis high speed pantographs), the disc brake fitted Mark 3As and B4 bogied Mark 1 BGs permitted to run at 110mph with a special maintenance regime (and classified NHA as a result).

hexagon789 · 19 Apr 2019

Helvellyn said:
Because the Mark 2F vehicles had the same IC70 interiors as the Mark 3s the vehicles were used interchangeably. As you mention Mark 1 catering vehicles were common though. For example, the two trains involved in the Colwich accident were made up of Mark 2F and Mark 3A vehicles except for the Mark 1 catering vehicles (RBRs) and luggage vans (BGs).

A not untypical West Coast formation of the late 1970s was BG-FO-FO-FO-RBR-TSO-TSO-TSO-TSO-TSO. With the Mark 3As 60 FOs and 165 TSOs were ordered - effectively enough for 30 and 33 sets respectively reflecting surplus First Class capacity. But when the Mark 3A catering vehicles were ordered only 28 came! Then add in the transfer of 7 x FOs and 28 TSOs to ScotRail for the ScotRail Express services and I think it just underlines how the Mark 2F/3A fleet was common user.

What initially drove more (nearly) full Mark 3A formations in the mid 1980s was the IC175 scheme that saw some services accelerated for 110mph operation. This required use of modified Class 87s (Bracknell Willis high speed pantographs), the disc brake fitted Mark 3As and B4 bogied Mark 1 BGs permitted to run at 110mph with a special maintenance regime (and classified NHA as a result).

I hadn't realised BR considered the Mk2f and Mk3 as a common fleet. That actually makes a lot of sense considering the formations of the time.

I don't suppose you know when the WCML went to 110?

Andy873 · 20 Apr 2019

I had several days out to London with my father from Preston.

They were between 1976 and 1982.

I remember my father telling me one one of the earlier trips we were doing 110 if that helps.

hexagon789 · 20 Apr 2019

Andy873 said:
I had several days out to London with my father from Preston.

They were between 1976 and 1982.

I remember my father telling me one one of the earlier trips we were doing 110 if that helps.

They were allowed 125 in passenger service. However in their last years, working a relief service, they always got caught behind the preceding service.

The first 15 mins would involve rapid acceleration to 125, then braking to about 100-110 as the ordinary service was caught up.

dmncf · 20 Apr 2019

Is the nautious, hungover journalists thing true? I thought that I heard, perhaps on a TV or radio programme, that it was an urban myth and that there was no event/hospitality on the evening before the APT press trip.

hexagon789 · 20 Apr 2019

dmncf said:
Is the nautious, hungover journalists thing true? I thought that I heard, perhaps on a TV or radio programme, that it was an urban myth and that there was no event/hospitality on the evening before the APT press trip.

I've no idea about that but originally the APT-P tilt did induce nausea in some people. Originally the tilt was up to 9 degrees and each car did not predict it's tilt off he one in front instead it woukd suddenly be at the point where it needed to tilt and would rapidly incline to match the level of tilt required these had the effect of cancelling out the sensation of going round the curve, the only sign of this being actually seeing the horizon going up and down.

In some people being able to see but not feel this make them the train equivalent of sea sick. The solution was to reduce the tilt to 8 degrees and have each subsequent vehicle predict when to tilt off the carriage in front.

By reducing the degree of tilt by this small amount it was sufficient to allow people to just feel the sensation and cancel out the ameffects of nausea in most people.

There is a ore thorough explanation on a website somewhere - possibly the apt-p pages.

Helvellyn · 20 Apr 2019

hexagon789 said:
They were allowed 125 in passenger service. However in their last years, working a relief service, they always got caught behind the preceding service.

I don't think any WCML loco-hauled sets were ever scheduled to operate at 125mph. That only came after the route modernisation with the Pendolinos and Voyagers.

The coaches could have been cleared for 125 mph but none of the locomotives were. Only the Class 90s, 87/0s, 86/1s and four 86/2s fitted with the Bracknell Willis high speed pantograph were permitted to run at 110mph.

Unless you are meaning the APT-P?

hexagon789 · 20 Apr 2019

Helvellyn said:
I don't think any WCML loco-hauled sets were ever scheduled to operate at 125mph. That only came after the route modernisation with the Pendolinos and Voyagers.

The coaches could have been cleared for 125 mph but none of the locomotives were. Only the Class 90s, 87/0s, 86/1s and four 86/2s fitted with the Bracknell Willis high speed pantograph were permitted to run at 110mph.

Unless you are meaning the APT-P?

I do mean the APT-P, it was allowed 125mph in passenger service provided the C-APT system was working.

The loco-hauled trains would be either 100 or 110; I don't know when the normal linespeed was raised to 110 on the WCML.

Mag_seven · 20 Apr 2019

hexagon789 said:
I don't know when the normal linespeed was raised to 110 on the WCML.

I think it was about 1984/85 but only certain services were timed for 110mph and those had to be double manned.

Helvellyn said:
Only the Class 90s, 87/0s, 86/1s and four 86/2s fitted with the Bracknell Willis high speed pantograph were permitted to run at 110mph.

Also the rake of coaches had to be entirely Mark 3 and have a Mark 1 brake van that was specially cleared for 110mph running. This was prior to the Mark 3 DVTs and Class 90s coming on stream.

hexagon789 · 20 Apr 2019

Mag_seven said:
I think it was about 1984/85 but only certain services were timed for 110mph and those had to be double manned.

Wasn't sure if the year. I believe the 110mph timed services were those to Preston and Glasgow. I assumed that they must've raised linespeed to 110mph by 1986, as the Platform 5 book lists many (though by no means all) 87s as 110mph by that point.

Peter Mugridge · 20 Apr 2019

Helvellyn said:
The coaches could have been cleared for 125 mph but none of the locomotives were.

The WCML Mk3 carriages were cleared for 125 mph - they were all marked as such on their ends under the "C3" gauging mark and the other dimensional details.

However, as you say, none of the locomotives were passed for that speed so they could not actually run at that speed.

I asked Steve Knight at Virgin about that once, and the answer that came back was that the maintenance regime for 125 mph clearance was a higher standard than for 110 mph clearance and this gave a smoother ride, which was the reason why they did it.

hexagon789 · 20 Apr 2019

Peter Mugridge said:
The WCML Mk3 carriages were cleared for 125 mph - they were all marked as such on their ends under the "C3" gauging mark and the other dimensional details.

However, as you say, none of the locomotives were passed for that speed so they could not actually run at that speed.

I asked Steve Knight at Virgin about that once, and the answer that came back was that the maintenance regime for 125 mph clearance was a higher standard than for 110 mph clearance and this gave a smoother ride, which was the reason why they did it.

I believe Mk3b DVTs are marked 110mph.

You would also need E70 brake units to speed up application of the brake to actually be able to stop from 125mph in existing signalling spacing as well.

Peter Mugridge · 20 Apr 2019

hexagon789 said:
I believe Mk3b DVTs are marked 110mph.

I never looked at the markings on those, only on the trailers.

There probably would have been little point paying for the extra maintenance costs for the DVTs as well. In any case, as soon as the stock left the Wext Coast it will have reverted to the 110mph regime.

hexagon789 · 20 Apr 2019

Peter Mugridge said:
I never looked at the markings on those, only on the trailers.

There probably would have been little point paying for the extra maintenance costs for the DVTs as well. In any case, as soon as the stock left the Wext Coast it will have reverted to the 110mph regime.

Not much point in maintaining stock for 125 if it's it's only going to run at 100, so it was sensible from a financial as well as operational point of view I would say.

Peter Mugridge · 20 Apr 2019

hexagon789 said:
Not much point in maintaining stock for 125 if it's it's only going to run at 100, so it was sensible from a financial as well as operational point of view I would say.

As Virgin Trains explained, it was done deliberately to ensure a smoother ride for the passengers.

Highlandspring · 20 Apr 2019

I don't believe that for a second.

hexagon789 · 21 Apr 2019

Peter Mugridge said:
As Virgin Trains explained, it was done deliberately to ensure a smoother ride for the passengers.

I meant when the Mk3s were transferred away, sorry.

hexagon789 · 21 Apr 2019

Highlandspring said:
I don't believe that for a second.

Not sure I see the point in it myself either, do you really get a significantly better ride maintaining a 125mph vehicle for 125mph but only running at 110mph?

I can't imagine the difference would be all that significant.

Peter Mugridge · 21 Apr 2019

hexagon789 said:
Not sure I see the point in it myself either, do you really get a significantly better ride maintaining a 125mph vehicle for 125mph but only running at 110mph?

I can't imagine the difference would be all that significant.

That's what Virgin Trains said when I asked them why all their Mk3s had "125 mph" painted on them when they were only running at 110 mph.

hexagon789 · 21 Apr 2019

Peter Mugridge said:
That's what Virgin Trains said when I asked them why all their Mk3s had "125 mph" painted on them when they were only running at 110 mph.

But all Mk3s are 125mph vehicles, I don't think there is a regression to 110mph.

APT Passengers

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member