The Mk5s are 125mph, but the 68s are only 100mph. Replacing the locomotive could allow them to use the full speed, but are there many places on their routes where that would make a difference?
-
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!
Potential future uses for class 68 & Mk5 sets?
- Thread starter Iskra
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
jagardner1984
Member
- Joined
- 11 May 2008
- Messages
- 722
Seems like more of a news story than speculation at this point, and also refers to cracking on the carriages.
(Wonders whether industry will learn the real meaning of the CAF acronym before the next order).
But also, when will we stop with all these micro fleets ? It cannot be more efficient to have loads of groups of a dozen sets here and there, all of which have different limitations; and all of which have different training and staffing requirements. Find a good product and make loads of it.
Make it make sense !
Iskra
Established Member
Is there anything to stop the 185's being reformed into 2 and 4 car sets? (obviously the first class section would need removing from the 2-car trains)
mike57
Established Member
I was thinking more if they were transfered to other routes/operators
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Wasn't the cracking thing on the 80x due to an issue with the grade of metal from a particular supplier, which if CAF gets it from the same one makes it unsurprising that they have also had a problem? Or am I remembering wrong?
As for these sets it wouldn't surprise me to see them at TfW. They do seem to like loco hauled operation in a way other TOCs never did, and they have the 197s so already have a CAF maintenance facility. TPE just need to simplify by getting rid of these and the 397s and getting more 5-car 802s in, giving them only two types of unit.
As for these sets it wouldn't surprise me to see them at TfW. They do seem to like loco hauled operation in a way other TOCs never did, and they have the 197s so already have a CAF maintenance facility. TPE just need to simplify by getting rid of these and the 397s and getting more 5-car 802s in, giving them only two types of unit.
Last edited:
Please can someone copy the tweet? Twitter now forces you to sign in.
mike57
Established Member
Would they swap the Mk4s or introduce more loco hauled services?
The other problem is the Mk5s were/are a disappointment. Jiggly ride, poor (as in one of the worst) window alignment, and they just feel cheap, I cant imagine them having a very long life.
I think it was predicted on here in various threads that multiple small fleets would be a disaster, and guess what, its added to TPE woes. The question is where would the money come from to buy more 802s.
A leasing company. The question is where would the money come from to meet the increased lease costs.
JohnMcL7
Member
- Joined
- 18 Apr 2018
- Messages
- 865
Thank you
Can't say I'm suprised, TPE were always meant to loose some 185s. Keeping the 397s confined to WCML and 185/802 on the rest makes more sense too me.
All that would happen is that a single 2 car would turn up, which is worse than now with a single 3 car.
If I was planning the Open Access London - Wales/Stirling service, I'd be eying the carriages...
In theory, I'd reform them into 7 cars, sick a 125mph loco on the front, and send them to XC or even EMR for the interim, if the cracks can be sorted relatively quickly
In theory, I'd reform them into 7 cars, sick a 125mph loco on the front, and send them to XC or even EMR for the interim, if the cracks can be sorted relatively quickly
Iskra
Established Member
In my mind you'd run them as 4-car, 4+2 car, 2+2 car or 2+2+2 car if someone has a sense of humour.
Are you employed by the DfT by any chance?
That is their applied logic which means they would just operate as 2 car set instead of 3 car set! Better to have 3 car or 6 car sets don't you think.
The GU Carmarthen contract specifies IETs from Hitachi, which I imagine is set in stone even with the recent delays in getting it up and running. Even more so when bi-mode is needed and IETs have a proven track record of delivering on this.
For Stirling, GU have binned the Mk4 proposal (don't let the new CGIs on their website allude you), and have been discussions between GU, CAF, and Hitachi about finalising a deal for an off the shelf new build if the ORR grant track access. So in other words, the ease of procurement with something tried and tested and lower cost will be key to what rolling stock is offered for any Stirling service (IETs or Civities most certainly).
I can see why the TPE Mk5as would be attractive in this instance if CAF can sort the issues out with them.
Even more so when negotiations with GU and the ORR, if my knowledge serves me correct, are largely only hinging on Network Rail's unwillingness to grant track access for more than 5 years (as opposed to GU's desire for at least 10 years). Having access to rolling stock that is already funded (with precious tax-payer cash), built, and gauge cleared across the whole network in question, would bolster their value-for-money case in this instance.
I wouldn't rule it out anyway if Network Rail are convinced to budge.
Interesting to note. I'll be watching the Stirling route closely!
In your mind. The reality of the railway is this: If something stupid can happen, it will happen.
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 11,509
Would Beacon Rail not find further use for the Class 68s in Britain if DRS ended their lease?
jagardner1984
Member
- Joined
- 11 May 2008
- Messages
- 722
That is doubtless true - but I suspect those with the credit card were hoping for a bit more than 4 years !
(24th August 2019)
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Standard is indeed rubbish (I've been told off above/on the other thread for saying that, but it really is) but 1st feels really premium - have you tried it?
Yes, the ride is bad, but so is that of 185s - Siemens kit never rode well, we just have good track here on the WCML
I reckon if you ripped Standard out and refitted with new seats aligned to the windows you'd make it quite good for e.g. the North Wales Coast. Done that way you could have loads of behind-seat luggage space too.
Thank you for the information, Class 68 will be removed from the TPE South Route, but will TPE retain all of their current fleet of Class 68, or will they request a break of lease or mothball part of their 68 fleet?
mike57
Established Member
No, we use first class when travelling for leisure but avoid TPE because of unreliability. We were booked on it once, from Seamer to York, to connect to Peterborough which is a semi regular journey to visit family, got to Seamer and first two were cancelled, and we opted to cancel and refund our tickets as it wrecked our plans. Since then we go via Doncaster from home, takes a bit longer, but no driving/parking, and more reliable. For work we are allowed first class if the journey exceeds 3 hours, which of course TPE to Manchester should be under. Question is, will TPE reliability increase to a point where we can use its 1st class before Mk5s are redeployed/turned into razor blades?
Which of course defies logic, as the Scarboroughs now pick up the small stops west of Huddersfield, so you have an Inter City train with end doors and vestibules trying to do the job of a local service resulting in extended station stops. There are still 185s on the Scarborough route as well, last visit to the NW produced a 3 car 185 out of Manchester home, which needless to say was rammed.
68s+Mk5s really look like a problem at the moment.
Is a 125mph bi-mode similar to class 93 possible? (defining possible as not pushing the technology boundary too far). GC might be tempted then. Looking at GC routes off the wires there doesn't seem to be any running in excess of 70mph. What sort of power on diesel would you need to to haul 5 Mk5s with adequate but not stellar accelaration up to say 75mph, and manage the climb out of Bradford Exchange at a rate that doesn't get in the way of other services. My guess is around 1200hp might be enough. It would eliminate diesel under the wires for services into Kings Cross, but GC as OA operator will go for the most cost effective solution.
RHolmes
Member
- Joined
- 19 Jul 2019
- Messages
- 568
Nothing (AFAIK) is currently finalised regarding the future of the Nova 3 (68/MK5a) fleet, I would imagine all of them will be retained until at least Dec 2023 timetable change
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Looks like ScotRail is going to need something that isn't HSTs by August...
12LDA28C
Established Member
That won't happen. Drivers threatening to boycott HSTs won't bring about a national cascade of stock, things don't really work like that.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
If TPE want rid...
RHolmes
Member
- Joined
- 19 Jul 2019
- Messages
- 568
Ain’t happening by August
...no one else will want the bother of trying to get them introduced on their network either.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The thread on the ASLEF boycott suggests ScotRail will have to take any diesel stock they can get - or diesel buses.
I had not noticed poor ride on the Mk5A stock, but will assess for myself on my next trips.Standard is indeed rubbish (I've been told off above/on the other thread for saying that, but it really is) but 1st feels really premium - have you tried it?
Yes, the ride is bad, but so is that of 185s - Siemens kit never rode well, we just have good track here on the WCML
I reckon if you ripped Standard out and refitted with new seats aligned to the windows you'd make it quite good for e.g. the North Wales Coast. Done that way you could have loads of behind-seat luggage space too.
Ride shortcomings of the Mk5A may be fixable, recall the Class 91 Mk 4 stock on the ECML, new into service, so over-damped in the vertical plane, passengers being bounced out of their seats (not exaggerating) the engineers fixed the problem