• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Mk3 Creaky Gangways

Status
Not open for further replies.

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
Not a complaint about these, it's a well known feature of travel on HSTs and other mk3 stock.

It's just that I was on a Scotrail HST last night and I wondered to myself if mk3 gangways creaked this much when the stock was in its heyday in the 1970s and 1980s, or if it's something that's come on with age?

Does anyone remember, I find it hard to believe that they designed them to produce this racket?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Speed43125

Member
Joined
20 Jul 2019
Messages
1,131
Location
Dunblane
Not a complaint about these, it's a well known feature of travel on HSTs and other mk3 stock.

It's just that I was on a Scotrail HST last night and I wondered to myself if mk3 gangways creaked this much when the stock was in its heyday in the 1970s and 1980s, or if it's something that's come on with age?

Does anyone remember, I find it hard to believe that they designed them to produce this racket?
I find when they are a bit full,passengers like to stand in the vestibules and lean on where the sliding doors are and effectively hold them open for entire journeys at a time which I find rather annoying, as the noise can be heard throughout the carriage. The scotrail ones seem to creek more than the VTEC stuff I've tried, so I would say, yes, they probably have gotten worse with age, but if that were the case surely new rubber gangways would help mitigate it?
 
Last edited:

Shaw S Hunter

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2016
Messages
2,912
Location
Sunny South Lancs
Not a complaint about these, it's a well known feature of travel on HSTs and other mk3 stock.

It's just that I was on a Scotrail HST last night and I wondered to myself if mk3 gangways creaked this much when the stock was in its heyday in the 1970s and 1980s, or if it's something that's come on with age?

Does anyone remember, I find it hard to believe that they designed them to produce this racket?

My recollection of them when new is that the gangways most definitely did creek and groan even then. Obviously they weren't specifically designed to make such noises; I suspect it was just a limitation of the materials available at the time.
 

irish_rail

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2013
Messages
3,812
Location
Plymouth
Happened noticeably less on the great western stuff, yet the cross-country sets creak like hell. I assumed it was a maintenance thing with the Scottish depots perhaps paying less attention to the problem. And sure enough since the xc HSTs have moved to Laira I can't say I remember noticing the problem.
 

The_Train

Established Member
Joined
2 Jun 2018
Messages
4,313
I definitely remember the creaking noise when I travelled on Mk3s as a kid. They wouldn't be the same without it :D
 

delt1c

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2008
Messages
2,125
Hauled stock always creaked. Modern units are tight coupled so less noticeable. Also the gangway connections between coaches on hauled stock are 2 part
 

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,063
The gangways creaked, the brakes stank, and the power cars sounded terrible.

And as for the seats...
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
My first trip on a Mark 3 was in October 1976 between Reading and Slough, and they creaked then like they do now.
 

The_Train

Established Member
Joined
2 Jun 2018
Messages
4,313
The gangways creaked, the brakes stank, and the power cars sounded terrible.

And as for the seats...

And are a million times better than anything we've seen or will ever see on our railways again :D
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
Isn't the creaking because of the way they work compared to fixed unit gangways on modern DMUs/EMUs?
 

dubscottie

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2010
Messages
910
They always creaked on HSTs and on loco hauled stock when they were being pushed. The gangways are in effect buffers between coaches. They also act as dampers to limit sideways sway (on Mk1-3).
 

Mitchell Hurd

On Moderation
Joined
28 Oct 2017
Messages
1,648
I like this sort of thread - thank you :).

The loudest creak and squeak of a Mark 3 was when I was on the 14:30 from Bristol Temple Meads to Birmingham New Street on the 27/11/17 (XC HST of course) and just after Five Ways coming round that corner, wow!

I had similar on a then EMT HST on the 02/05/18 - caught the 17:32 from Nottingham to London St. Pancras (went First Class) I alighted from either the Coach H end of Coach G or the buffet end of Coach G.

I think me and a few passengers were like 'Oh dear :|(slightly raised eyebrows with a not sure look).
I said 'Dont worry, all part of the fun of these trains :)'.

It's strange isn't it - normally the creak and squeak of a Mark 3 would be enough to drive you crazy. But in this case, it is entirely a different thing.

Not often I say but should I arrive into Edinburgh (first arrival into Scotland) by HST on the 16/04/20, either on the 15:03 or 16:03 from Birmingham New Street after a Voyager from Oxford, I hope I'll be hearing even a small squeak and creak when stood in the vestibule in Coach G (Quiet Coach) when approaching the scottish capital city!
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
They always creaked on HSTs and on loco hauled stock when they were being pushed. The gangways are in effect buffers between coaches. They also act as dampers to limit sideways sway (on Mk1-3).

Which is exactly what I had understood, that the creaks were a product of the two gangway sections bearing on each other

I like this sort of thread - thank you

It's definitely one of the more unusual threads! :lol:
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
The noise of mark 3 gangways sets my teeth on edge and it's certainly something I won't miss.
 

Mag_seven

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
1 Sep 2014
Messages
9,993
Location
here to eternity
They always creaked on HSTs and on loco hauled stock when they were being pushed.

What about on hauled stock when being hauled rather than pushed - I honestly can't remember as I would usually would have been in the seat next to the loco anyway!
 

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
Have they managed to replicate it on new Mk5 hauled stock?
I don't know about the TPE mk5s, but the sleepers are very quiet indeed. The mk3 sleeper was every bit as bad as HSTs for wheezing and groaning connections, I speak from many years of experience of that, so I'm not sure if the noise is necessarily worse when the stock is being pushed.
 

coppercapped

Established Member
Joined
13 Sep 2015
Messages
3,093
Location
Reading
The Mark 3s are fitted with 'Pullman' gangways, as were the BR Mk 1 and Mk 2 coaches and Gresley's and Bulleid's coaches before that. These were wider than the concertina type gangway bellows used by the GWR and LMS; the latter type was clipped together and the outer edge was supported from the top by springs. With this design there was no relative motion between the mating faces of the gangway, so no noises from this source.

The 'Pullman' design was an improvement in that it was wider and did not need a shunter's attention when the coaches were separated. The mating faces were spring loaded outwards by a linkage at the top and a set of springs pushed out a plate at the base which also carried the walking surface. To damp the relative motion between the mating faces as the train moved the 'Pullman' gangway had a smooth steel surface on one side (when looked at end on to the coach) which pushed against a brake-like friction material on the opposing face of the other gangway. This arrangement was reversed on the other side so there was always a steel/friction material mating combination around the gangway opening.

The groans come from the various linkages (if not kept lubricated) and rubbing surfaces. All Pullman gangways exhibit this characteristic.

The early prototype Mk 3 coaches in the prototype HST used an expanded foam gangway 'tunnel' in an attempt to reduce noise levels and draughts. This still used, if I recall correctly, the Pullman concept for the mating faces but they might have been slightly different. The expanded foam did not stand up to the rigours of day to day operation and was soon replace by standard Pullman components.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
The early prototype Mk 3 coaches in the prototype HST used an expanded foam gangway 'tunnel' in an attempt to reduce noise levels and draughts. This still used, if I recall correctly, the Pullman concept for the mating faces but they might have been slightly different. The expanded foam did not stand up to the rigours of day to day operation and was soon replace by standard Pullman components.

Some production vehicles got the foam gangways, it greatly contributed to a fire on a Scottish Mk3 push-pull set in 1983:
event400.jpg
 

Kurolus Rex

Member
Joined
1 Mar 2019
Messages
169
They are fully sealed, but I'm not sure if there is a specific name for them.

Thanks. They don't seem to creak like Mk3s yet sometimes you get a bit of an audible jolt as the carriage starts to move away from a stand. They don't always seem to do this though.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,160
There seems to be more noise on here about this than the gangways make! Anyone would think the noise is being constantly broadcast over the PA system at maximum volume.
 

irish_rail

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2013
Messages
3,812
Location
Plymouth
There seems to be more noise on here about this than the gangways make! Anyone would think the noise is being constantly broadcast over the PA system at maximum volume.
This is a big bugbear of mine why oh why do GWRs automated announcement have to be at such a ridiculous high volume. They are simply awful and totally ruin any remaining ambience left. I do wonder if GWR managers actually travel on the train and realise quite how bad the on-board experience has become.
 

delt1c

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2008
Messages
2,125
The Mark 3s are fitted with 'Pullman' gangways, as were the BR Mk 1 and Mk 2 coaches and Gresley's and Bulleid's coaches before that. These were wider than the concertina type gangway bellows used by the GWR and LMS; the latter type was clipped together and the outer edge was supported from the top by springs. With this design there was no relative motion between the mating faces of the gangway, so no noises from this source.

The 'Pullman' design was an improvement in that it was wider and did not need a shunter's attention when the coaches were separated. The mating faces were spring loaded outwards by a linkage at the top and a set of springs pushed out a plate at the base which also carried the walking surface. To damp the relative motion between the mating faces as the train moved the 'Pullman' gangway had a smooth steel surface on one side (when looked at end on to the coach) which pushed against a brake-like friction material on the opposing face of the other gangway. This arrangement was reversed on the other side so there was always a steel/friction material mating combination around the gangway opening.

The groans come from the various linkages (if not kept lubricated) and rubbing surfaces. All Pullman gangways exhibit this characteristic.

The early prototype Mk 3 coaches in the prototype HST used an expanded foam gangway 'tunnel' in an attempt to reduce noise levels and draughts. This still used, if I recall correctly, the Pullman concept for the mating faces but they might have been slightly different. The expanded foam did not stand up to the rigours of day to day operation and was soon replace by standard Pullman components.
Most 1st gen DMU's used the LMS type gangways, but strangley southern EMU's used the standard Pullman design, cant remember what the Hastings units used
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,160
Most 1st gen DMU's used the LMS type gangways, but strangley southern EMU's used the standard Pullman design, cant remember what the Hastings units used
Not strange at all: the fact you don’t need a shunter to unclip gangways would have been a big advantage with the number of splitting/joining operations in the Southern.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
Most 1st gen DMU's used the LMS type gangways, but strangley southern EMU's used the standard Pullman design, cant remember what the Hastings units used

Pullman gangways for the Hastings units, presumably to standardise with the rest of the MU fleet, something the SR was quite good at.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top