Former Grand Central HSTs now with EMT

[edwin_m]

I think there's some confusion here between short platforms and platforms that may foul the gauge of a Mk4.

Loughborough used to be a short platform but is now full length, and Market Harborough will be full length when re-modelling is complete. That only leaves Beeston and Long Eaton on the "core" MML, served only by 222s which have SDO. HSTs have grandfather rights for the short platform at Langley Mill but this route will probably lose its London service when the HSTs are replaced by something that doesn't have to get back to a depot in Leeds.

As to clearances I would guess the problem is more likely to be with curved platforms so Wellingborough and Kettering could be candidates.

 

[LowLevel]

I think that Low Level works for a TOC - the piece of software in question (clearview) is a Network Rail / Infrastructure side thing, but I'm sure that someone will have access. Whether or not they have the time to look up these things and share them is another matter of course.

While I'm flattered, I'm afraid I am but a humble train guard and structural envelopes of trains and stations are somewhat beyond my knowledge and expertise

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I think there's some confusion here between short platforms and platforms that may foul the gauge of a Mk4.

Loughborough used to be a short platform but is now full length, and Market Harborough will be full length when re-modelling is complete. That only leaves Beeston and Long Eaton on the "core" MML, served only by 222s which have SDO. HSTs have grandfather rights for the short platform at Langley Mill but this route will probably lose its London service when the HSTs are replaced by something that doesn't have to get back to a depot in Leeds.

As to clearances I would guess the problem is more likely to be with curved platforms so Wellingborough and Kettering could be candidates.

Langley Mill is also served by 222s to and from Sheffield, surely they'll be unaffected by the HSTs going if and when they do?

 

[InTheEastMids]

I think there's some confusion here between short platforms and platforms that may foul the gauge of a Mk4.

Loughborough used to be a short platform but is now full length, and Market Harborough will be full length when re-modelling is complete. That only leaves Beeston and Long Eaton on the "core" MML, served only by 222s which have SDO. HSTs have grandfather rights for the short platform at Langley Mill but this route will probably lose its London service when the HSTs are replaced by something that doesn't have to get back to a depot in Leeds.

As to clearances I would guess the problem is more likely to be with curved platforms so Wellingborough and Kettering could be candidates.

Market Harborough is also likely to have any clearance issues resolved, since the platforms will largely be new, and despite it being re-announced as a sparkly new project for the CP6 business plan, work is in full swing.

Whilst the Mk4 idea has merit, I see a few issues that I'm sure people in the right places are talking about all this:

1- It's another mid-life re-engineering project on BR-era rolling stock. Similar projects that spring to mind do not seem to have a great track record of on-time, on-budget delivery (230, 769, 321 Renatus, XC/GWR HST mods etc...). OK, this looks less complex, but if all these projects have unforeseen problems that impact delivery, I'd expect this one to be no different. So to plan for this, I guess you need a test set out and about in Q1 2019 to be debugged, and so VTEC needs to release a set of Mk4 probably no later than the end of Q3 2018. Also need EMT to cough up a couple of power cars at a moment when they've just taken additional sets because they didn't have enough to run the 2018-2020 timetable.

2- You're adding another point of failure to a set of trains that are going to be rather elderly by the mid-2020s, and may be getting to the wrong end of the bathtub curve of reliability. Or when you start doing these upgrades you find other stuff that needs fixing (a reason why point 1 can be expected to happen)

3- Even though I expect the clearance work talked about above will need to be done eventually, are NR capable of delivering this by 01.01.2020?
This is not costed in Ian Walmsley's £24M figure.

4- This approach locks in extensive LDHS diesel running from Kettering southwards for several more years - 4/6 EMT services assuming EMUs for Corby. Given the current environment, we can't expect Nottingham & Sheffield to be wired this side of 2030, so you're kicking a lot of the benefits of the current schemes into the long grass. Apply a discount ratio to those benefits... it becomes yet another electrification project that has failed to deliver against its business case.

I guess I'm saying it doesn't feel like a good option, even though it might in fact be the least-worst one.

 

[bunnahabhain]

I think there's some confusion here between short platforms and platforms that may foul the gauge of a Mk4.

Loughborough used to be a short platform but is now full length, and Market Harborough will be full length when re-modelling is complete. That only leaves Beeston and Long Eaton on the "core" MML, served only by 222s which have SDO. HSTs have grandfather rights for the short platform at Langley Mill but this route will probably lose its London service when the HSTs are replaced by something that doesn't have to get back to a depot in Leeds.

As to clearances I would guess the problem is more likely to be with curved platforms so Wellingborough and Kettering could be candidates.

I assure you having called at both Beeston and Long Eaton with a HST in both directions that HSTs can and do call there.

 

[bunnahabhain]

Langley Mill is also served by 222s to and from Sheffield, surely they'll be unaffected by the HSTs going if and when they do?

No 222s are booked in passenger service along the Erewash Valley.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

No 222s are booked in passenger service along the Erewash Valley.

But it happens. The last two times I've travelled South from Sheffield I've been on 222s that called at Langley Mill bound for the capital. Announcements were made about short platforms and which carriages the doors would open in. Though the last time was New Year's Day so may have been more an exception than a rule.

 

[SPADTrap]

I keep seeing 'EMUs for Corby', but where will they be maintained?

 

[43096]

I keep seeing 'EMUs for Corby', but where will they be maintained?

Bedford Cauldwell would seem a sensible option.

 

[SPADTrap]

Bedford Cauldwell would seem a sensible option.

Has that not been wound down now? Or at capacity with stabling?

 

[mushroomchow]

I'll also throw another spanner in the works and note that 222s are increasingly being drafted in on stopping services with short platforms e.g. Nottingham - Leicester during peak times and to replace failed units.

 

[cactustwirly]

Has that not been wound down now? Or at capacity with stabling?

Or Cricklewood

 

[edwin_m]

I assure you having called at both Beeston and Long Eaton with a HST in both directions that HSTs can and do call there.

They have grandfather rights and there may be a few calls at odd times of day or after substitutions, but the regular service is 222s. Mk4 replacements, unless fitted with SDO, wouldn't be able to make these calls.

But it happens. The last two times I've travelled South from Sheffield I've been on 222s that called at Langley Mill bound for the capital. Announcements were made about short platforms and which carriages the doors would open in. Though the last time was New Year's Day so may have been more an exception than a rule.

The 222s have SDO so this isn't a problem, but again Mk4s would't be able to call unless also SDO fitted.

I'll also throw another spanner in the works and note that 222s are increasingly being drafted in on stopping services with short platforms e.g. Nottingham - Leicester during peak times and to replace failed units.

I think that's more an issue of shortage of EMT's 15x units and not really a reason to keep 222s on. Mk4s wouldn't be able to substitute but apart from Lincoln and Skegness seasonal workings HSTs don't work these routes either.

 

[SPADTrap]

Or Cricklewood

Cricklewood? Where? Just out in the open? I'm talking maintenance not stabling which is limited as it is. A microfleet probably won't work.

 

[Domh245]

Cricklewood? Where? Just out in the open? I'm talking maintenance not stabling which is limited as it is. A microfleet probably won't work.

As I understand it, Cauldwell has been wound down for now, and long term isn't going to be used by Thameslink for stabling, so it's 'free' space - you just have to refit any missing equipment such as lifting jacks and hire in a new group of technicians and it should then be OK to go - I seem to remember it being discussed on an East-West Railway thread.

 

[SPADTrap]

As I understand it, Cauldwell has been wound down for now, and long term isn't going to be used by Thameslink for stabling, so it's 'free' space - you just have to refit any missing equipment such as lifting jacks and hire in a new group of technicians and it should then be OK to go - I seem to remember it being discussed on an East-West Railway thread.

That makes some sense. Thanks for that information. Would make for interesting diagrams to collect units. Can't help but feel the electrification will just complicate things.

 

[Domh245]

Can't help but feel the electrification will just complicate things.

The half arsed electrification complicates things

 

[InTheEastMids]

The half arsed electrification complicates things

The industry approach to the MML appears to have been half-arsed since at least the 1960s, whether it be electrification, infrastructure rationalisation/renewal or rolling stock.

Even the attempt to close it was half-arsed compared to the GCR.

Industry pundits should have known that the whole-arsed approach outlined at the start of CP5 was doomed to fail.

 

[LowLevel]

They have grandfather rights and there may be a few calls at odd times of day or after substitutions, but the regular service is 222s. Mk4 replacements, unless fitted with SDO, wouldn't be able to make these calls.


The 222s have SDO so this isn't a problem, but again Mk4s would't be able to call unless also SDO fitted.


I think that's more an issue of shortage of EMT's 15x units and not really a reason to keep 222s on. Mk4s wouldn't be able to substitute but apart from Lincoln and Skegness seasonal workings HSTs don't work these routes either.

Fit the Mk4 sets with SDO then. It's been done retrospectively to GW and the ex GC HST sets, the SWR 158s and 159s and the XC 170s - if you want to achieve it it can be done.

 

[edwin_m]

Or just rearrange the timetable so the few services calling at the remaining short platforms are diagrammed for 222s.

 

[Mugby]

It's largely forgotten now but Class 158s were out of gauge when they were built. Lots of platforms had to be rapidly altered to accommodate them.

 

[MG11]

It's largely forgotten now but Class 158s were out of gauge when they were built. Lots of platforms had to be rapidly altered to accommodate them.

Really? Length or width wise?

 

[Mugby]

Really? Length or width wise?

Width wise. Perhaps 'accommodate' was the wrong word. Something was fouling the platform edges or coping stones, probably the driver's steps. I remember thinking at the time, the units should have been altered, not the platforms but perhaps BR didn't want the bad publicity of new trains having to be sent back before they entered service. It may have been just curved platforms which needed a bit shaving off.

 

[Hairy Bear]

It was the late addition of a yaw damper to the body to bogie not in the original spec.
Spent a couple of days doing gauging around the Birmingham area with 704 which was equippd with cameras and polystyrene blocks. We scraped quite a few platforms !. Thank God we have progressed in gauging.

 

[43055]

43423, 43467 and one other power car is now painted into the revised livery with 2 power cars around 3 mk3s at derby today down the side of the north shed. Also noted a white mk3 with red doors over at the r.t.c. today so it looks like the coaches are now started to be repainted into EMT livery.

 

[LowLevel]

The latest update is the coaching stock will be kept as separate sets with train guards requiring their own competence on them as opposed to the standard sets.

The MTU and VP185 powercars will however be used as a common fleet interchangeably so either type could appear on any set.

 

[cactustwirly]

The latest update is the coaching stock will be kept as separate sets with train guards requiring their own competence on them as opposed to the standard sets.

The MTU and VP185 powercars will however be used as a common fleet interchangeably so either type could appear on any set.

Why do you need separate competentces? Surely the ex GC mk3s are indentical to the standard sets except for the length.

 

[Kneedown]

Why do you need separate competentces? Surely the ex GC mk3s are indentical to the standard sets except for the length.

Train Manager operated SDO is fitted to the ex GC Mk3's, so a completely different system than that fitted to the current EMT Mk3 coaches.

 

[43096]

The latest update is the coaching stock will be kept as separate sets with train guards requiring their own competence on them as opposed to the standard sets.

The MTU and VP185 powercars will however be used as a common fleet interchangeably so either type could appear on any set.

Ah, so an outbreak of common sense that using the expertise of a depot that has 40 years of HST knowledge might actually be a good idea?

 

[LowLevel]

Train Manager operated SDO is fitted to the ex GC Mk3's, so a completely different system than that fitted to the current EMT Mk3 coaches.

To expand for the benefit of other members who might not be aware of the detail - it's a key operated system whereby if you don't use it regularly I would imagine it's quite easy to make an error which would be treated as an operational incident - thus for these sets guards will need to work on them at least every 6 weeks to maintain their competence rather than the usual 6 months (although for a passenger TOC it's quite unusual to avoid rostered traction for that long!). There's also various other differences to standard HST sets.

Consequently I believe only certain train managers at Derby and Nottingham will be signing them at the moment and they won't be featuring on work undertaken by Nottingham senior conductors (usually Skegness services, football specials and the odd charter).

Ah, so an outbreak of common sense that using the expertise of a depot that has 40 years of HST knowledge might actually be a good idea?

I think the sets will still be allocated to Etches Park, not heard any different - how powercar swaps may be achieved I'm not sure (but they might make their way north for heavier maintenance perhaps - I don't believe they're going to be diagrammed for weekend work?) but the memo definitely says the powercars will be used as a common fleet with all drivers being issued a brief on the differences between the two types.

Standard sets do stable on Etches Park anyway so I suppose it's quite feasible for them to swap cars about if required.