Could Grand Union use HSTs for their proposed service to Cardiff?

[800002]

Moderator note: split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-london-to-cardiff.180669/page-5#post-4105560

It will cost them to sort it, simple as.

Just sounds a bit silly to me to pay for All that. Especially when the HST's are still close to hand.

 

[pt_mad]

Just sounds a bit silly to me to pay for All that. Especially when the HST's are still close to hand.

How could they use HSTs without PRM modifications though? Fair enough existing franchised operators might end up with derogations for a limited period to bridge a gap so as to be able to keep the train service running. But a new operator?

 

[cactustwirly]

How could they use HSTs without PRM modifications though? Fair enough existing franchised operators might end up with derogations for a limited period to bridge a gap so as to be able to keep the train service running. But a new operator?

They can't!

 

[800002]

How could they use HSTs without PRM modifications though? Fair enough existing franchised operators might end up with derogations for a limited period to bridge a gap so as to be able to keep the train service running. But a new operator?

I was thinking, as planned intro in May 2021, that eighteen months would be long enough to make the mods required. Given that 2020 is the red line for the overhauls to be completed for current stock - wouldn't that open up sufficient space for the additional stock?

 

[pt_mad]

I was thinking, as planned intro in May 2021, that eighteen months would be long enough to make the mods required. Given that 2020 is the red line for the overhauls to be completed for current stock - wouldn't that open up sufficient space for the additional stock?

But aren't derogations sort of like a last resort as there's no other options just to keep an existing service running?
I believe the current deadline is 1st January 2020. Couldn't imagine a derogation would be given to an application for a new service which isn't part of a franchised operation. Purely my opinion though.

 

[221129]

But aren't derogations sort of like a last resort as there's no other options just to keep an existing service running?
I believe the current deadline is 1st January 2020. Couldn't imagine a derogation would be given to an application for a new service which isn't part of a franchised operation. Purely my opinion though.

You wouldn't need a derogaration...

 

[cactustwirly]

You wouldn't need a derogaration...

Yes you would, unmodified HST sets don't currently comply with the PRM-TSI specification, set out in the Equality Act 2010, for trains operating after 1/1/2020.
ScotRail, GWR and XC aren't modifying their HST sets just for fun...

 

[221129]

Yes you would, unmodified HST sets don't currently comply with the PRM-TSI specification, set out in the Equality Act 2010, for trains operating after 1/1/2020

But you would get a set and get it modified. If it isn't to be in service until 2021 at the earliest then there is plenty of time to get the work done.

 

[Esker-pades]

But you would get a set and get it modified. If it isn't to be in service until 2021 at the earliest then there is plenty of time to get the work done.

Judging by the experience of ScotRail, it isn't.

 

[cactustwirly]

But you would get a set and get it modified. If it isn't to be in service until 2021 at the earliest then there is plenty of time to get the work done.

Well XC, ScotRail and GWR thought they had plenty of time, but they don't....
But tbh, it's probably just as quick to order 802s from Pistoia, especially as HSTs are a short term solution.

That said, there's a document on the Government website that indicates slam doors are ok for post 2020, they just need sounders for CDL release, and droplights that are easier to open

 

[Clarence Yard]

But the ORR are now making it virtually impossible to introduce slam door stock on scheduled services where it is either a new service or re-introducing them on a former route.

The reason Yeowart has gone for a cl.91/mk.IV combo is to keep up with the IET timetable - an HST won’t get him the paths he needs.

 

[Journeyman]

Cue another desperate attempt to try and find a use for redundant HSTs...they're turning into the new 442s.

 

[800002]

Cue another desperate attempt to try and find a use for redundant HSTs...they're turning into the new 442s.

They're clearly not redundant, as continued use in scotland shows. Oh, and on the unelectrified extremity of the western.

 

[Non Multi]

Why wouldn't the OA operator do what BR did and use a HST as a surrogate DVT, with 91+Mk4 rake? Combined 7000hp+ thanks very much. Discontinuous electrification, not a problem.

 

[Journeyman]

They're clearly not redundant, as continued use in scotland shows. Oh, and on the unelectrified extremity of the western.

But a very large proportion of the fleet is redundant. Rebuilding them for further use is difficult and expensive, and they're old and knackered. Enthusiasts are allowing themselves to be blinkered here. They're increasingly unreliable, non-PRM compliant without extremely extensive mods, and the bodywork of your average Mk 3 looks like a Swiss cheese.