New build rolling stock for charters - is it feasible? What would it look like?

[AngusH]

Something will have to replace the mk1 eventually.
And mk2 and mk3 aren't that much newer in the scheme of things.

It occurs to me that the design and manufacturing could perhaps be separated.

Interested parties could work together to create a new standard reference design
for a suitable passenger coach, that met all of the various legal and
technical requirements for the basic vehicle.

Maybe with different options for various parts like internal seating and layout.
(Or even low speed preserved vs main line options)

Then it could be built in small numbers by existing preserved railway workshops in much the same
way as steam locomotives and existing coaches get built or maintained.

Each group could raise money, as they go, for one extra coach at a time,
rather easier than a single big order (which looks next to impossible)


Have I just proposed an equivalent of the IET for preserved railways?

 

[43096]

Of all the unfeasible ideas there have been in "Speculative ideas" - and there have been a few - then new build stock for charters is one of the most spectacularly unachievable of the lot.

If you're lucky they work 40 days per year. The cost of a new vehicle is a 7 digit number. Then there's the cost of clearance and acceptance.

Don't bother going to a leasing company to ask for finance, they'll laugh themselves silly!

 

[FQTV]

Something will have to replace the mk1 eventually.
And mk2 and mk3 aren't that much newer in the scheme of things.

It occurs to me that the design and manufacturing could perhaps be separated.

Interested parties could work together to create a new standard reference design
for a suitable passenger coach, that met all of the various legal and
technical requirements for the basic vehicle.

Maybe with different options for various parts like internal seating and layout.
(Or even low speed preserved vs main line options)

Then it could be built in small numbers by existing preserved railway workshops in much the same
way as steam locomotives and existing coaches get built or maintained.

Each group could raise money, as they go, for one extra coach at a time,
rather easier than a single big order (which looks next to impossible)


Have I just proposed an equivalent of the IET for preserved railways?

I think that you’ve proposed (as alluded to in your post) effectively a Tornado project for coaching stock.

 

[yorksrob]

I think that you’ve proposed (as alluded to in your post) effectively a Tornado project for coaching stock.

Wouldn't that be building a new mk1 ?

 

[AngusH]

If the new mk1 met modern standards, I suppose?

I think the preserved railways will probably have to do something eventually,
I don't think they want mk3 coaches or whatever on their steam services
and the mk1 will eventually get too old to be routinely usable
(or be entirely replaced parts without any historic components at all)

Does a coach where only the makers plate is original still count as historic?

My hope is that the solution might be useful for the charter market too.

 

[FQTV]

Wouldn't that be building a new mk1 ?

Other rolling stock designs are available! It’s more the funding mechanism and the type of investor and the end use that has parallels.

 

[JonathanH]

I think the preserved railways will probably have to do something eventually,
I don't think they want mk3 coaches or whatever on their steam services
and the mk1 will eventually get too old to be routinely usable
(or be entirely replaced parts without any historic components at all)

Preserved railways can rebuild mark 1s - there are plenty of examples of this work being done - as noted in this thread, the attraction of Mark 1s is exactly that they can be rebuilt - and for running around at 25mph, it is perfectly feasible for this to continue.

The issue is mainline operation which isn't so straightforward. Any new build stock has to explicitly meet the same standards as stock being built for train operating companies to operate.

 

[Journeyman]

Make a few phone calls to New Zealand and buy the rebuilt MkII's when they've finished with them. Refit standard gauge bogies. Generator cars for ETH.

A lot of them have already been scrapped.

 

[DB]

Make a few phone calls to New Zealand and buy the rebuilt MkII's when they've finished with them. Refit standard gauge bogies. Generator cars for ETH.

They've already finished with a lot of them - many were stored, and some had been sold off.

 

[adamedwards]

Could you take a MK3 MK4 and stick a vinyl cover along the side to look like a MK1? Complete with fake sliding windows and manual doors. I'm sure someone can Photoshop this. Blood and Custard over the exGrand Central Mk4s? Cheaper than new build!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not sure I'd fancy paying Mk5 fares though (going by the sleeper fares)

Wouldn't comparing TPE fares be more valid? The Sleeper is expensive because you only accommodate about 10 people per coach. The seated fares on the Sleeper, which are in what is essentially a First Class coach, are very, very cheap.

 

[JonathanH]

The seated fares on the Sleeper, which are in what is essentially a First Class coach, are very, very cheap.

Not sure about the "very, very" bit of that. They clearly aren't the economic cost but £98 single (which they can be) is not "very, very" cheap.

Charter fares, of course, aren't cheap either. Neither do they reflect the economic cost of replacement of the rolling stock with new build.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not sure about the "very, very" bit of that. They clearly aren't the economic cost but £98 single (which they can be) is not "very, very" cheap.

They can normally be had for far less than £98 single.

 

[Journeyman]

They can normally be had for far less than £98 single.

...but are massively subsidised, however much they cost!

 

[AngusH]

Could you take a MK3 MK4 and stick a vinyl cover along the side to look like a MK1? Complete with fake sliding windows and manual doors. I'm sure someone can Photoshop this. Blood and Custard over the exGrand Central Mk4s? Cheaper than new build!

The new Blue Midland Pullman seems to be doing almost exactly that (except blue, not red)

Rather clever I thought and the pictures look great.

 

[adamedwards]

My suburban vinyl project would be to disguise a 442 as a 4SUB. You can then play guess the real door!

 

[Philip Phlopp]

...but are massively subsidised, however much they cost!

A timely point.

Subsidy on the Caledonian Sleeper is the largest source of revenue, being marginally greater than their fares income (and that's for a normal year).

 

[edwin_m]

Could you take a MK3 MK4 and stick a vinyl cover along the side to look like a MK1? Complete with fake sliding windows and manual doors. I'm sure someone can Photoshop this. Blood and Custard over the exGrand Central Mk4s? Cheaper than new build!

The new Blue Midland Pullman seems to be doing almost exactly that (except blue, not red)

Rather clever I thought and the pictures look great.

The original Blue Pullman cars were superficially similar to the Mk3, notably with no opening windows as it was air-conditioned. So I think all they've done is paint up the Mk3s in the appropriate livery, and upgrade the headlights on the power cars so they don't need a yellow end. Someone did some Mk2s in the same livery a few years back, one of which was in the National Railway Museum last time I was there.

Even the Mk2 set that's painted up in the classic Pullman umber and cream livery retains the air conditioning and lacks either opening saloon windows or the simulation of same.

 

[Irascible]

A vinyl'd Mk3 would look like a badly photoshopped Mk3, pretty much. Look at the Mk3 based EMUs if you want some idea of window appearance with opening segments, entirely the wrong shape. The nearest thing I can think of right now would be a GWR Super Saloon, which at least has one piece windows. Mk3s have a very distinctive shape though, not much you can do to make them look like something else.

Can I point out again that the design is half a century old?

 

[DB]

Could you take a MK3 MK4 and stick a vinyl cover along the side to look like a MK1? Complete with fake sliding windows and manual doors. I'm sure someone can Photoshop this. Blood and Custard over the exGrand Central Mk4s? Cheaper than new build!

There are mk3 sleepers in the Royal Scotsman and Northern Belke sets, painted in maroon and Pullman Livery respectively.

And a mk3 buffet In chocolate and cream at Battlefield line,one in blood and custard at Hawsker and one in Southern green at Midsomer Norton.

 

[Snow1964]

I always wondered about adapting the class 442s as a basis for charter fleet, remove the motors (and this was before anyone started upgrading them), add a few Irish mk3s to lengthen set (using bogies on slam door mk 3s). From memory they were designed to be loco hauled (before Solent electrification, when Laverstock route was common)

But for a new build, would take a 20m suburban emu shell (no point redesigning that, as would be uneconomic). Seats in facing bays, old school style, sensibly spaced where windows are. But only fit one set of doors (fit window in other doorway). Actually I would have opening inward window with punched metal sheet on outside for the like to hear the loco brigade. For other windows I would put hoppers at top

Mount the standard emu bodyshell on modern bogies, don’t think inside frame would work, as I would be looking at dual braked, but do you really need new bogies if plenty of bogies from vehicles like class 317s are spare. Reuse them Southern Railway style as need to keep costs down otherwise this will remain an unaffordable fantasy thread

I would also have some coaches for the outer ends of sets with small generators, more for providing power if behind a steam loco, for practicality these should also have a guards compartment. Part of me thinks it would be good to have observation saloons (like the old Devon Bell) at outer ends, perhaps a premium seating position.

The observation saloon gave me another idea, perhaps a build with tall observation windows (think glacier express), if double deck coaches in Europe can have curved windows at top, then designs must exist, so why not fit these. There will be a market for scenic routes.

All formed up into sets for push pull working if required, might ending up looking like a cross between set of mk 2b and a long emu set, (but with big windows) all painted in heritage livery, but fitted inside more like 1950s boat train stock. But that might be the best solution

I will leave it to others to suggest locos

 

[43096]

I always wondered about adapting the class 442s as a basis for charter fleet, remove the motors (and this was before anyone started upgrading them), add a few Irish mk3s to lengthen set (using bogies on slam door mk 3s). From memory they were designed to be loco hauled (before Solent electrification, when Laverstock route was common)

But for a new build, would take a 20m suburban emu shell (no point redesigning that, as would be uneconomic). Seats in facing bays, old school style, sensibly spaced where windows are. But only fit one set of doors (fit window in other doorway). Actually I would have opening inward window with punched metal sheet on outside for the like to hear the loco brigade. For other windows I would put hoppers at top

Mount the standard emu bodyshell on modern bogies, don’t think inside frame would work, as I would be looking at dual braked, but do you really need new bogies if plenty of bogies from vehicles like class 317s are spare. Reuse them Southern Railway style as need to keep costs down otherwise this will remain an unaffordable fantasy thread

I would also have some coaches for the outer ends of sets with small generators, more for providing power if behind a steam loco, for practicality these should also have a guards compartment. Part of me thinks it would be good to have observation saloons (like the old Devon Bell) at outer ends, perhaps a premium seating position.

The observation saloon gave me another idea, perhaps a build with tall observation windows (think glacier express), if double deck coaches in Europe can have curved windows at top, then designs must exist, so why not fit these. There will be a market for scenic routes.

All formed up into sets for push pull working if required, might ending up looking like a cross between set of mk 2b and a long emu set, (but with big windows) all painted in heritage livery, but fitted inside more like 1950s boat train stock. But that might be the best solution

I will leave it to others to suggest locos

Why bother with dual brakes - it's high time vacuum was binned, on the main line at least. Besides, if you're fitting modern bogies with air suspension you need a compressor anyway: it's a lot easier (and cheaper) taking it off the main res than having a compressor for every vehicle.

In any case, would new vacuum braked stock even be legal?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

In any case, would new vacuum braked stock even be legal?

I dunno, but it could be found out when the consultants are writing the entirely new and enormously expensive safety case for bodging a Class 442 into something devoid of electrics, with reworked suspension and bogies...

 

[Non Multi]

A giant CKD kit of prefabricated parts that a preservation group could assemble: Refurbished mk1 underframe and bogies, coach body assembly is all new (like the Adtranz Classic), but styled to look like a mk1 and has accessibility modifications.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

A giant CKD kit of prefabricated parts that a preservation group could assemble: Refurbished mk1 underframe and bogies, coach body assembly is all new (like the Adtranz Classic), but styled to look like a mk1 and has accessibility modifications.

Again, for the hard of hearing. Safety case ? Type approval ?

And are these the same preservation groups and charter companies that have almost killed a child by allowing them to fall through a missing toilet floor, who have killed a shunter or who have been banned from the national network for tampering with critical safety equipment ?

 

[CBlue]

Again, for the hard of hearing. Safety case ? Type approval ?

And are these the same preservation groups and charter companies that have almost killed a child by allowing them to fall through a missing toilet floor, who have killed a shunter or who have been banned from the national network for tampering with critical safety equipment ?

The "health-and-safety-gone-mad-it's-my-right-to-decapitate-myself-by-leaning-out-a-window/" brigade would probably argue that safety cases and type approvals are a waste of money because the Victorians didn't need them. Or something.

I wouldn't trust those particular preservation groups or charter companies to safely construst a CKD kit, given their past performance and attitude to safety.

 

[randyrippley]

Surely there's a bus body which could be adapted to fit existing mk1 chassis?
Did anyone keep the machine tools and jigs from the 155 build? Don't forget there was one mk1 (at least) with a replacement Leyland body

 

[Bletchleyite]

Surely there's a bus body which could be adapted to fit existing mk1 chassis?
Did anyone keep the machine tools and jigs from the 155 build? Don't forget there was one mk1 (at least) with a replacement Leyland body

What makes you think people would want to pay to travel on a charter in a Leyland National on a (bogied) flat wagon?

 

[yorksrob]

Ooh, I'm hearing a lot of sweeping generalisations about preservation groups on this thread.

There are some very professional main line groups who are very competent at keeping their passengers safe, and I'm sure would be very capable of assembling a flatpack mk 1 safely.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ooh, I'm hearing a lot of sweeping generalisations about preservation groups on this thread.

I did have the impression it was aimed at a certain specific operator of heritage traction and coaches on the mainline who don't exactly have a superb reputation.

There are certainly very competent preserved railways - not least the Ffestiniog Railway which build their own kit from scratch!