Not as of yet. We will be setting this up as part of the membership scheme. For now updates will continue to be made on the website, here and on other forums.Do you have a mailing list set up so people can subscribe to updates?
I believe that the set in question was actually formed from the earlier flat-front 1935 Stock DMs and a Standard Stock trailer, the other set being Standard Stock throughout. Although 1935 and 1938 stock look very similar they are not identical.The EOR would be a suitable home for your 483 because as far as I know a three car set of 1938 stock operated together with pre-1938 stock on the line following the replacement of steam in 1957 up to 1960. Good luck with the project.
I have definitely read that following the replacement of steam in 1957 the line was run by two four car 1935 sets and a three car set of 1938 stock. I don't know why the line needed three trains as it could never accommodate more than two. One under maintenance I suppose. As well as that the electricity supply was from a sole sub-station at Epping and the juice could only power either one eight car train or two four car sets. In any case, only at Epping could an eight car train be managed as the platforms at the other stations were not long enough. This was one of the reasons why through trains from London were never run in LT days.I believe that the set in question was actually formed from the earlier flat-front 1935 Stock DMs and a Standard Stock trailer, the other set being Standard Stock throughout. Although 1935 and 1938 stock look very similar they are not identical.
South Western Railway is looking for new homes for the trains as soon as possible, to make room for the arrival of the first Class 484s for testing this year. SWR has already received several expressions of interest from preservation groups, including the neighbouring Isle of Wight Steam Railway.
Organisations interested in adopting a soon to be former Island Line train will need to demonstrate the capacity and financial security to remove and look after the train, as well as a suitable long-term physical location for the train. They may also need to prepare a plan to manage potentially hazardous substances where these remain on the units, which will need to meet the satisfaction of the Office of Rail & Road and other statutory bodies.
The trains are also subject to a statutory Designation Notice following the decision of the Board of Trustees’ of the Science Museum on 4 March 2020. Prior to ownership transferring, SWR would need to ensure the future plans for some or all of the vehicles were acceptable to the Board of Trustees.
Sadly this is likely to be affected by the legislation that prevents even Network Rail expanding third-rail electrification.Almost certainly just a pipedream, but if there was to be a section of electrified track somewhere to run a class 483 (EOR would be great) then presumably in theory there would be nothing to prevent the 2-BIL, 4-SUB, 4-VEP or any other preserved EMUs taking power from the same source.
We are well aware of this and have been preparing a detailed plan for submission via the email address provided.SWR making it clear that only credible bids will be welcome: https://www.southwesternrailway.com...f-service-island-lines-trains-ready-to-retire
Almost certainly just a pipedream, but if there was to be a section of electrified track somewhere to run a class 483 (EOR would be great) then presumably in theory there would be nothing to prevent the 2-BIL, 4-SUB, 4-VEP or any other preserved EMUs taking power from the same source.
The likelihood of there being any chance of electrifying a suitable preserved line, and there are only very few which would be suitable, is very slim, certainly in the foreseeable future, so as we see it the only practical way of running an EMU in preservation is via an on-board power source.Sadly this is likely to be affected by the legislation that prevents even Network Rail expanding third-rail electrification.
I think the best chance of running EMUs in preservation is development of battery technology.
Indeed, but sadly aside from MLVs there are few (any?) EMUs in preservation that have an on-board power source either - presumably due to the cost and the absence of sustainable, regular use to justify it.The likelihood of there being any chance of electrifying a suitable preserved line, and there are only very few which would be suitable, is very slim, certainly in the foreseeable future, so as we see it the only practical way of running an EMU in preservation is via an on-board power source.
Sounds like you're describing the Innorail APS system, as demonstrated in Bordeaux Trams. Commercially, its role has largely been done away with by using battery operation in areas where OHLE is unsuitable/undesirable. However, the system still exists, if rather expensive.<dreamy-eyed> Could there be the possibility of 'third rail' that only switches on in sections where the train is, rather like the old 'stud contact' system for trams of yore? Thus, an infrastructure solution rather than a physical train solution? </>
Quite possibly, alas it's hard to look at EMU preservation and see how a 483 would attract the funding and interest that conventional units with mainland and mainline pedigree struggle with so badly.Regular use might be the key thing here, but I think that looking to the future self-powered EMUs (preferably battery, but possibly with a modern diesel generator) might provide a more environmentally friendly alternative to current low season DMMU and DEMU services. Potentially a cheaper alternative too.
You're very welcome. Hopefully in years to come we'll see a 483 bouncing around the country at galas and whatnot!Thank you for your kind wishes - When I started the group back in May it was with a degree of tentativeness and an attitude of "well it's worth trying". Now we've got to where we are, I am rather more confident that we at least stand a chance of success. I've long wanted to see an EMU running 'properly' in preservation, and I've always loved the '38 stock, so if we can start something of a trend by doing this then that would be all the better!
If you want any assistance with the 483 kit, please do get in touch as it can be a touch fiddly. There have been a few built, however, so it's not impossible! And feel free to use the 483 TS reskin in scenarios too, although the model itself is a bit knackered and is showing its age badly.
Sounds good!At some point we may be able to offer a better kit, more suitable for those who want a running model, but that wouldn't be free (it would, however, be cheaper than the alternative options).
Hopefully any 483 we get wouldn't be bouncing quite as much as they do at the moment!!
It was one of several journeys I put on the list of places I want to go, but just never got round to it before lockdown. Hopefully I can get down there before they leaveI'd certainly recommend a trip on them in service, if only as a one-off experience to see just how rough that trackwork is.
The tram museum in Dortmund (https://www.bahnhof-mooskamp.de/) does this to run tramcars on a non-electrified former industrial line. They put a standard diesel generator (as found on building sites etc.) on wheels and can hook that up to their trams. Something like that would have the benefit of making it possible to use any DC 3rd rail units with it (e.g. you could hook it up to a "standard" slam door EMU as well) without having to modify things.How practical would it be for an EMU to draw DC current using a diesel-electric loco as the source? I'm guessing that there is a very practical reason why this hasn't been mentioned anywhere.
Isn't the issue in part due to the trains? I remember an account being added to the "Future of the Island line" on this forum regarding lateral movement of the bogies, and the need to damp them. The train is running fine, then suddenly a graunching noise, and the carriage sways.I'd certainly recommend a trip on them in service, if only as a one-off experience to see just how rough that trackwork is.