Making Mk3s 2020-proof on the cheap

[DasLunatic]

As frequently stated on threads, the usage of MkIII coaching stock will not be permitted post-2020. Chilternising stock is also very expensive, and can only be done at one or two depots in the country.

Therefore, could powered hinges be installed which only open when the accessible buttons are pressed? This means the locking mechanisms will not need to be replaced, and doors can be closed simultaneously from the guard's compartment or the DVT. The hinges can be installed in any depot and there is no need to completely replace the door structure.

Powered hinge doors can be seen on rolling stock in Germany, where it is used in their fleet of N-Wagens.

Am I spouting complete shash, or is this a viable solution to making MkIIIs accessible?

 

[najaB]

Am I spouting complete shash, or is this a viable solution to making MkIIIs accessible?

If it was just about the doors then yes, that would be a solution. But you still need to do something about the toilets.

 

[cjmillsnun]

If it was just about the doors then yes, that would be a solution. But you still need to do something about the toilets.

The toilets can be dealt with. Accessible toilets are modular, there is only one required in the train, so lock out one door, replace the droplight with a stuck in piece of obscure glass, You then have one less exit, but space for an accessible toilet using the existing toilet space and one side of a vestibule.

 

[Townsend Hook]

The toilets can be dealt with. Accessible toilets are modular, there is only one required in the train, so lock out one door, replace the droplight with a stuck in piece of obscure glass, You then have one less exit, but space for an accessible toilet using the existing toilet space and one side of a vestibule.

Would a carriage with doors at one end only be permitted though? Thinking in terms of emergency evacuation.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Would a carriage with doors at one end only be permitted though? Thinking in terms of emergency evacuation.

Yes. Look at the class 373.

 

[najaB]

Yes. Look at the class 373.

Which for the most part run from terminus to terminus and don't have issues of dwell time at intermediate stations.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Which for the most part run from terminus to terminus and don't have issues of dwell time at intermediate stations.

We're talking one coach in the whole rake.

The other option is to remove one vestibule and have an extended vestibule the other side.

 

[najaB]

We're talking one coach in the whole rake.

The other option is to remove one vestibule and have an extended vestibule the other side.

All the other toilets still need converting to CET.

 

[jopsuk]

But why? Scotrail presumably have the contracts in place. Rumours seem to suggest XC do too. The GE fleet is going. GC are replacing their HSTs with 180s. EMT on the MML seems to be a bit unsure for now but probably don't want a forum's half-baked back of fag packet solutions?

 

[Townsend Hook]

Seeing as the EMT HSTs will no doubt be displaced in the early 2020s by electrification I imagine they will be able to secure a derogation for them to carry on without significant modification.

 

[cjmillsnun]

All the other toilets still need converting to CET.

It's already been done before. Look at the forum's favourite Mk3 based DC EMU and Chiltern's Mk3s.

 

[43096]

It's already been done before. Look at the forum's favourite Mk3 based DC EMU and Chiltern's Mk3s.

Anglia fleet is also CET fitted. CET can only be fitted at one end on a mark 3 due to lack of space for the tanks on the underframe at one end, so one end has toilet removed and space is now an equipment cupboard.

 

[najaB]

It's already been done before. Look at the forum's favourite Mk3 based DC EMU and Chiltern's Mk3s.

I know that. But it wasn't cheap which was the point of this thread.

 

[randyrippley]

however you look at it, the cheapest way to extend the life of the MkIII for another 10-15 years would be to keep the bogies and seats (and maybe the windows), throw the bodyshells away and replace them with a cheap sectional body akin to that on the class 153/155.
I seem to remember a MkI was modified in a similar was as an experiment - maybe now is the time to do it for real

 

[43096]

As frequently stated on threads, the usage of MkIII coaching stock will not be permitted post-2020. Chilternising stock is also very expensive, and can only be done at one or two depots in the country.



Therefore, could powered hinges be installed which only open when the accessible buttons are pressed? This means the locking mechanisms will not need to be replaced, and doors can be closed simultaneously from the guard's compartment or the DVT. The hinges can be installed in any depot and there is no need to completely replace the door structure.



Powered hinge doors can be seen on rolling stock in Germany, where it is used in their fleet of N-Wagens.



Am I spouting complete shash, or is this a viable solution to making MkIIIs accessible?

You are spouting complete shash. Next.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

Would a carriage with doors at one end only be permitted though? Thinking in terms of emergency evacuation.

On HSTs, the coach with the Guard's compartment only has one set of passenger doors.

 

[cjmillsnun]

On HSTs, the coach with the Guard's compartment only has one set of passenger doors.

As has the catering coach.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

As has the catering coach.

Both that door and the guard's doors in the TGS are available for use in an emergency evacuation though.

 

[cjmillsnun]

I know that. But it wasn't cheap which was the point of this thread.

What was the big expense with the Chiltern fleet? The doors or the CET. I think the CET in the grand scheme of things wasn't that much.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Both that door and the guard's doors in the TGS are available for use in an emergency evacuation though.

Agreed, but 373s have one door each side per car and none on the catering car.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Agreed, but 373s have one door each side per car and none on the catering car.

I suspect that because the 373s have shorter carriages and are limited to their seating capacity plus they cannot be reformed in a way that would risk two non-door ends being placed next to each other might have counted for something there?


PS For Chiltern, I think the biggest expense was modifying the structure in order to allow the new doors to be fitted.

 

[CosherB]

Just snap up some Mk4 carriages for LHCS duties. Job done.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Powered hinge doors can be seen on rolling stock in Germany, where it is used in their fleet of N-Wagens.

We nearly had the standard UIC folding slamdoor here with the XP64 stock - the experimental version had neither 5km/h door blocking nor autoclose, but no doubt those would have been added. It'd have saved countless lives and delay minutes. The European style doors can be seen here:

It wouldn't, however, be possible to fit an autocloser to a large Mk3 wraparound door, because it could knock someone on the track if it closed with the kind of force that the UIC doors do.

That said, I don't believe slamdoors are the actual issue in DDA terms so long as they are wide enough. FWIW, I think there is an alternative design that involves fitting a Class 442 style (see, we had to get them in somewhere ) swing-plug door to the existing aperture. We may well see some of those.

Interestingly, talking of UIC folding slamdoors, the Swiss have removed the manual handles from theirs and fitted electric open/close mechanisms operated by UK style illuminated buttons. But again the Mk3 door is just too big for those to be safe.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Just snap up some Mk4 carriages for LHCS duties. Job done.

It would appear that that would be the cheap and unexpected solution to the Mk3 issue, given that the East Anglia bid did not take them as expected.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The toilets can be dealt with. Accessible toilets are modular, there is only one required in the train, so lock out one door, replace the droplight with a stuck in piece of obscure glass, You then have one less exit, but space for an accessible toilet using the existing toilet space and one side of a vestibule.

Or just fit one in the saloon. WCML Mk3s had disabled bogs for years, albeit only one per set.

 

[HSTEd]

The cheapest solution to the CET issue is just to lock out all the toilets.

 

[BR60062]

I would have thought that the HST's could be fitted with power doors like the Chiltern Mk3's have. The Mk3 coaches in Ireland had power doors fitted from new which are very similar to the Class 442 type.

Not my photo, but here is a link to one of the Irish Mk3 carriages.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/44377923@N04/5076262480

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Is there any difference in size of door between class 442s, HST Mk3s and locohauld HSTs?

 

[jopsuk]

Someone with insider knowledge on here claimed in another thread on this issue recently that the Scotrail- and possibly XC- HSTs will be fitted with doors rather more like a 156. Or indeed a Class 800/801/802

 

[talltim]

I would have thought that the HST's could be fitted with power doors like the Chiltern Mk3's have. The Mk3 coaches in Ireland had power doors fitted from new which are very similar to the Class 442 type.

Not my photo, but here is a link to one of the Irish Mk3 carriages.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/44377923@N04/5076262480

As already mentioned (twice?) in this thread, the Chiltern type doors cost a fortune

 

[coppercapped]

however you look at it, the cheapest way to extend the life of the MkIII for another 10-15 years would be to keep the bogies and seats (and maybe the windows), throw the bodyshells away and replace them with a cheap sectional body akin to that on the class 153/155.
I seem to remember a MkI was modified in a similar was as an experiment - maybe now is the time to do it for real

I don't know whether you are joking - but the Mk 3 is a monocoque. What underframe would you use?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Someone with insider knowledge on here claimed in another thread on this issue recently that the Scotrail- and possibly XC- HSTs will be fitted with doors rather more like a 156. Or indeed a Class 800/801/802

Yes, I believe talk is indeed of sliding rather than plug doors, these are said to be cheaper. The Mk3 design has the advantage of having blank space next to the doors (luggage rack/bog space) into which they can retract without blocking windows.

 

[CosherB]

Is there any difference in size of door between class 442s, HST Mk3s and locohauld HSTs?

A rudimentary online search would tell you the answer to that question.

And what are 'locohauled HSTs'?