Debate about HST classification

[BestWestern]

I'd be interested in seeing this coupling equipment. The standard bars carried in the guards van on HST power cars ( or certainly GWR's) are for either power car to power car or a standard draw hook and they can only be used to rescue a failure.

GWR's sets also carry an emergency coupling adaptor in the TGS. You can, of course, couple anything to anything with the appropriate equipment. The relevant part is that a class 43 will then pull whatever it is coupled to, being a locomotive!

 

[rebmcr]

you CAN hook up HSTs to other units for drags

a standard draw hook and they can only be used to rescue a failure.

Those two statements say exactly the same thing...

 

[James James]

GWR's sets also carry an emergency coupling adaptor in the TGS. You can, of course, couple anything to anything with the appropriate equipment. The relevant part is that a class 43 will then pull whatever it is coupled to, being a locomotive!

Same as a bubble car.

(Or a pacer)

 

[AndrewE]

Same as a bubble car.

(Or a pacer)

Not. A bubble car or a pacer can work in multiple with other compatible units, all under power and controlled from the front cab, i.e. in multiple. the 2 HST power cars in 1 train control each other - and the whole HST can be dragged by any other powered vehicle with the appropriate drawbar if the brakes can be made to work. If 2 units can't couple and all be driven from the front cab then it's not a multiple unit, by definition.

 

[daikilo]

Not. A bubble car or a pacer can work in multiple with other compatible units, all under power and controlled from the front cab, i.e. in multiple. the 2 HST power cars in 1 train control each other - and the whole HST can be dragged by any other powered vehicle with the appropriate drawbar if the brakes can be made to work. If 2 units can't couple and all be driven from the front cab then it's not a multiple unit, by definition.

This riases another problem! Certain DMUs can multiple with others such as any 14x or 15x DMU can multiple with any other. However they cannot multiple with many more recent classes although the latter can often multiple amongst themselves. This is caused by the type of control system they use (and more recently the software). Nevertheless, thay are all DMUs.

There are 2 classes which have always amused me, the 121 and 153 which, being single units, logically should not be DMUs; I guess they are called that because they can/could be multipled with others of their or similar classes. This suggests that the term DMU actually means "which can work in multiple" (with other similar units).

 

[BestWestern]

Same as a bubble car.

(Or a pacer)

Neither a Pacer nor a class 122 are locomotives, both consist of self-powered passenger coaches, which of course is a fundamental part of the definition of a multiple unit. A class 43 is a locomotive, a non-passenger carrying power unit intended solely to haul something else.

 

[43096]

There are 2 classes which have always amused me, the 121 and 153 which, being single units, logically should not be DMUs; I guess they are called that because they can/could be multipled with others of their or similar classes. This suggests that the term DMU actually means "which can work in multiple" (with other similar units).

So the Class 139 Parry People Movers on the Stourbridge shuttle aren't DMUs either, then, as they cannot operate in multiple. Diesel railcars, perhaps?

 

[AndrewE]

There are 2 classes which have always amused me, the 121 and 153 which, being single units, logically should not be DMUs; I guess they are called that because they can/could be multipled with others of their or similar classes. This suggests that the term DMU actually means "which can work in multiple" (with other similar units).

That is exactly what it does mean (and always has): Diesel units that can be worked in multiple. Not necessarily with every other DMU, as there have always been "coupling codes" to show which ones work with which. Blue square was/is the commonest, I think there were also red triangle etc, also stars and diamonds, some were applied to locos too.

 

[cjmillsnun]

I'd be interested in seeing this coupling equipment. The standard bars carried in the guards van on HST power cars ( or certainly GWR's) are for either power car to power car or a standard draw hook and they can only be used to rescue a failure.

I take it by that you mean they can only be used to rescue a failed HST...

And not for example... The sleeper.

[

 

[BestWestern]

I take it by that you mean they can only be used to rescue a failed HST...

And not for example... The sleeper.

There are two bars, long and short. The long bar is used to attach two class 43s nose to nose, the length being required to extend out beyond the nosecones. The short bar is for attaching a 43 to something else. They'll attach to any standard drawhook coupling, so essentially any loco.

A pair of back to back 43s is an established, if rare, means of providing assistance in times of dire need! I believe such an arrangement has indeed rescued the sleeper in the past, so I'm told.

 

[43096]

There are two bars, long and short. The long bar is used to attach two class 43s nose to nose, the length being required to extend out beyond the nosecones. The short bar is for attaching a 43 to something else. They'll attach to any standard drawhook coupling, so essentially any loco.

As I understand it the standard bar coupler will not couple to the drawhook on a swing-coupler fitted loco (locos 66003-250, 67001-030). East Coast power cars carry an adapter that allows them to couple to the swing-coupler (so can be rescued by an East Coast Thunderbird), not sure about other operators.

 

[BestWestern]

As I understand it the standard bar coupler will not couple to the drawhook on a swing-coupler fitted loco (locos 66003-250, 67001-030). East Coast power cars carry an adapter that allows them to couple to the swing-coupler (so can be rescued by an East Coast Thunderbird), not sure about other operators.

That would very possibly explain the extra kit carried on the GWR sets, then.

 

[Non Multi]

Locomotive. Can be used as bi-mode push-pull locos with minor modifications. Evidence at 3:02

 

[cjmillsnun]

There are two bars, long and short. The long bar is used to attach two class 43s nose to nose, the length being required to extend out beyond the nosecones. The short bar is for attaching a 43 to something else. They'll attach to any standard drawhook coupling, so essentially any loco.

A pair of back to back 43s is an established, if rare, means of providing assistance in times of dire need! I believe such an arrangement has indeed rescued the sleeper in the past, so I'm told.

It has. I'm fully aware of the different types of bar, and their intended uses from the BR days. The point being that GWR have used them as locos rather than just pulling HSTs

 

[BestWestern]

It has. I'm fully aware of the different types of bar, and their intended uses from the BR days. The point being that GWR have used them as locos rather than just pulling HSTs

Indeed they have.

 

[James James]

Neither a Pacer nor a class 122 are locomotives, both consist of self-powered passenger coaches, which of course is a fundamental part of the definition of a multiple unit. A class 43 is a locomotive, a non-passenger carrying power unit intended solely to haul something else.

I was merely pointing out that, similar to the point being about the HST, the Pacer can drag anything it's attached to. Like an HST, some adapter wagons might be needed. Unlike the HST, acceleration might be very low.

 

[dubscottie]

Utter hogwash.

43xxx is just a 5 digit number to the computer. Had the North British Warships survived long enough they would have received 43xxx numbers.

If TOPS can't handle a number ending in 000 then how is 41001 registered as a Class 43/9 as 43000?

One other point if they were DMUs, they'd be on DMU maintenance regimes. But they are not and never have been. Right from the start Derby Loco Works was doing Light, Intermediate and General overhauls and today they get E, F and G exams (not C4, C6 etc).

I'd say they are HSTs, not anything else.

Hogwash?

Even if the Warships did become class 43 it would not have mattered. One 43xxx would be a loco and the other a DEMU car.

For example there was 2 50019's running around. One was a Class 50 the other was a Class 114 DMU car.

Why did D400 become 50050 and not 50000? Why did D9000 become 55022 and not 55000? Etc etc.

Because TOPS cannot do LOCO numbers ending in 000.

DEMU numbers did end in 000 however and as has already been pointed out, 41001 was renumbered 43000 as it was part of a class 252 DEMU.

As for maintenance, did the SR 201-207 classes follow the same regime as a class 101? No. So what regime they are on is irrelevant.

I was under the impression that the multiple in DMU/EMU etc was to mean multiple engines/motors in a unit not multiple cars.

 

[GW43125]

MLVs on steroids. Discuss.

 

[randyrippley]

So if we accept the argument that the HST power cars are locomotives because they don't carry passengers, and can be used to haul other vehicles then we have to also regard the class 419 Motor Luggage Vans as locomotives.....which is clearly absurd

 

[dubscottie]

MLVs on steroids. Discuss.

I was thinking about the MLV.

Cab, self propelled, don't carry passengers. Are they locos as well?

Were the Northern Irish class 80 locos? They pulled loco hauled stock in service on occasion.

 

[daikilo]

Locomotive. Can be used as bi-mode push-pull locos with minor modifications. Evidence at 3:02

That is a very interesting video as at about 1:10 the 43 definitely appears to be under power at the front whilst the 91 has its pantograph up at the rear. In those days, the 43 was supposed to be a DVT!

 

[Non Multi]

That is a very interesting video as at about 1:10 the 43 definitely appears to be under power at the front whilst the 91 has its pantograph up at the rear. In those days, the 43 was supposed to be a DVT!

As explained here: www.traintesting.com/ic225_2.htm

As the first ten locos were delivered in 1988 before the Mk4 coaches and associated DVT's, a number of HST power cars were converted to act as 'surrogate' DVT's and equipped with TDM, conventional buffers and drawgear...

... Initially the DVT's power unit was only used to supply ETS for the Mk3 coaches, as they differed from the Mk4's, and hence the engines were only running at approx 1000 rpm, just above idling. However, prolonged use of the power cars in this way lead to an excessive build up of un-burnt fuel in the silencers and this eventually lead to fires. One occurred at Hornsey, just outside Ferme Park, and this brought the OHLE down too. After a repeat performance it was decided that the PC engines should be powered up as normal and this then meant that the test trains had a combined available power of over 7000 HP. A modification to the TDM control arrangements allowed the engine to be controlled from the class 91 and an increase in speed up to the maximum of 125 mile/h was accomplished with ease!

 

[Peter Mugridge]

That is a very interesting video as at about 1:10 the 43 definitely appears to be under power at the front whilst the 91 has its pantograph up at the rear. In those days, the 43 was supposed to be a DVT!

They originally had the 43 idling to provide only the "hotel" power for the train, but problems with the engines from doing this - namely build ups of oil in the exhausts with predictable results - meant they very quickly changed the plan and had the 43 under power as well.

 

[43096]

Hogwash?

Even if the Warships did become class 43 it would not have mattered. One 43xxx would be a loco and the other a DEMU car.

For example there was 2 50019's running around. One was a Class 50 the other was a Class 114 DMU car.

Why did D400 become 50050 and not 50000? Why did D9000 become 55022 and not 55000? Etc etc.

Because TOPS cannot do LOCO numbers ending in 000.

DEMU numbers did end in 000 however and as has already been pointed out, 41001 was renumbered 43000 as it was part of a class 252 DEMU.

As for maintenance, did the SR 201-207 classes follow the same regime as a class 101? No. So what regime they are on is irrelevant.

I was under the impression that the multiple in DMU/EMU etc was to mean multiple engines/motors in a unit not multiple cars.

TOPS can and does do loco numbers ending in 000. 41001 is registered as 43000 - its is registered as a Class 43/9, design code 439AA. As far as TOPS is concerned it is a loco regardless of what anyone may think.

You cannot have two numbers duplicated on the system. The reason why there were two 50019s running at the same time was because the move of vehicles onto the system* was staggered, with locos going on first and units being done later. At that point the Class 114 number 50019 was renumbered 53019 to avoid a clash.

* the "TOPS" loco renumbering was actually originally not for TOPS at all, but was to do with the implementation of RAVERS. (http://www.les-smith.com/software/tops.htm)

 

[dubscottie]

TOPS can and does do loco numbers ending in 000. 41001 is registered as 43000 - its is registered as a Class 43/9, design code 439AA. As far as TOPS is concerned it is a loco regardless of what anyone may think.

You cannot have two numbers duplicated on the system. The reason why there were two 50019s running at the same time was because the move of vehicles onto the system* was staggered, with locos going on first and units being done later. At that point the Class 114 number 50019 was renumbered 53019 to avoid a clash.

* the "TOPS" loco renumbering was actually originally not for TOPS at all, but was to do with the implementation of RAVERS. (http://www.les-smith.com/software/tops.htm)

Right OK then.. That may be the case now. You still have not explained why D400 became 50050 and not 50000.

And why 41001 became 43000 way way back in the 70's. It was not classed as a loco.

It could not and would not be given the number 43000 if it was a loco. Otherwise the first of every class would end in 000. 66000,67000,68000 etc.

It does not happen though for a reason so stop talking rubbish.

I am aware various stock was renumbered to avoid clashes but at the time of the HST introduction, duplication existed.

anyway.. I see no Class 43 here. I see 254 DMB. (Pic is from a power car under conversion to DVT. Not mine)

 

[BestWestern]

So if we accept the argument that the HST power cars are locomotives because they don't carry passengers, and can be used to haul other vehicles then we have to also regard the class 419 Motor Luggage Vans as locomotives.....which is clearly absurd

No. An MLV has a specific function and happens to be self-powered. A class 43 is a locomotive, being that its only purpose is to pull something else.

 

[BestWestern]

Right OK then.. That may be the case now. You still have not explained why D400 became 50050 and not 50000.

And why 41001 became 43000 way way back in the 70's. It was not classed as a loco.

It could not and would not be given the number 43000 if it was a loco. Otherwise the first of every class would end in 000. 66000,67000,68000 etc.

It does not happen though for a reason so stop talking rubbish.

I am aware various stock was renumbered to avoid clashes but at the time of the HST introduction, duplication existed.

anyway.. I see no Class 43 here. I see 254 DMB. (Pic is from a power car under conversion to DVT. Not mine)

Nowadays you'll find that plate replaced with a loco data panel that says Class 43

 

[dubscottie]

No. An MLV has a specific function and happens to be self-powered. A class 43 is a locomotive, being that its only purpose is to pull something else.

A hst power car can not be removed from its train to assist a failed freight like a 66 can.

They are Driving Motor vehicles of a DEMU.

They have a specific function. To push/pull as part of a unit. Same as a MLV.

 

[theblackwatch]

And why 41001 became 43000 way way back in the 70's. It was not classed as a loco.

My bold. And it was initially 41001 as it was not classed as a DMU. The full reasoning behind all this was explained in detail by Clarence Yard.

 

[BestWestern]

A hst power car can not be removed from its train to assist a failed freight like a 66 can.

They are Driving Motor vehicles of a DEMU.

They have a specific function. To push/pull as part of a unit. Same as a MLV.

You can be assured it can, if you wanted it to be.

Again; an HST is not 'fixed formation', they are regularly and routinely split and re-marshalled. It is merely a rake of separate coaches with a pair of separate locomotives on the ends.