Potential future uses for class 68 & Mk5 sets?

[D365]

How hard would it be to convert a 68 into an 88, aren't they quite similar locomotives.
if you could convert 68's into 88s wouldn't it futureproof these sets and you would only use the diesel of the 88 through the tunnels out of Marylebone and use ohle when the Chiltern lines are electrified

And a more significant problem that the ”engine room” differs significantly between a 68, 88, 93.

 

[Snow1964]

Older, yes: “much older”, hardly (depend on your definition of “much”). Quite a lot of those have at the very least the early stages of tender for replacement under way (only GWR’s 150s don’t, IIRC.

Yes GWR 150s will be 40 years old in couple of years, so unless there is a sudden (currently unannounced) cascade, they will be working in their 5th decade

Chilterns 165s are now 34-35 years old, but some of their mk3s are even older, I think a few are now 45+ years old

How much longer these old fleets can continue whilst indecision on replacements lingers on, is anyone's guess. Personally I can't see GBR or DfT OLR (or whatever it's name is this year) actually placing orders soon, and will probably be new designs (rather than follow on variants) so unlikely to be in service before 2029-30

So does seem rather odd that the virtually new mk5s cannot seem to make a business case that is better than 34+ year old relics

 

[43096]

Chilterns 165s are now 34-35 years old, but some of their mk3s are even older, I think a few are now 45+ years old

The bulk of the Chiltern Mark 3 fleet is from the first batch of LHCS Mark 3s, so they date from 1975/6.

 

[craigybagel]

I know the tunnel just beyond Marylebone does not have enough clearance - amazingly for the last mainline built in the UK before HS1. It would be a candidate for discontinuous electrification.

There's usually a way around that - either by reboring the tunnel or lowering the trackbed. Or as seems to be in vogue, as you say running on batteries. Much more likely than choosing DC though.

But lines using both DC 3rd (and 4th) rail and AC are a complicated affair. Would be better to give the underground dual voltage trains and convert the above ground sections to AC. That is so that Chiltern can be AC (not the other way round because no new DC electrification is likely to be allowed).

LUL would likely never agree to the expense and complication of running part of one line on AC - especially when it's their bit of track! This is getting somewhat off topic however and is probably better as a new thread

I suppose if the Mk5s all went to GWR and then Chiltern get a load of cascaded 165s would that free up enough 168s to work solely to Birmingham ?.

In theory, to maintain the status quo all you need are enough 165s to free up 168s to cover the MKIII run services, to give an all 168 Birmingham service.

Been ruled out before. I think 68s have more power. Certainly there would be conversion costs/issues - iirc the 67s do not have a capability to control the Mk5s as it needs a more involved backwards compatibility conversion. Also would mean crew training.

Although they have a lower top speed (which is moot on the 100mph max Chiltern mainline anyway), 68s have much better acceleration to that speed - and it has certainly been alleged they use less fuel to get there. 67s with ETH switched on are also not all that much quieter than a 68, and have somewhat dubious reliability. It could probably be done, but it would be a lot of money for little gain

How hard would it be to convert a 68 into an 88, aren't they quite similar locomotives.
if you could convert 68's into 88s wouldn't it futureproof these sets and you would only use the diesel of the 88 through the tunnels out of Marylebone and use ohle when the Chiltern lines are electrified

88s are pretty much useless for hauling passenger trains on diesel.

 

[Snow1964]

I know the tunnel just beyond Marylebone does not have enough clearance - amazingly for the last mainline built in the UK before HS1. It would be a candidate for discontinuous electrification.

They might be able to get over that these days with a combination of slab track, new thinner plastic composite sleepers, or fixed bar type conductor.

I am fairly sure that parts of the tunnel were actually built as two tunnels (to allow expansion to 4 tracks) so not sure if can slew into other tunnel where presumably might be more clearance in centre

 

[Peter Sarf]

How hard would it be to convert a 68 into an 88, aren't they quite similar locomotives.
if you could convert 68's into 88s wouldn't it futureproof these sets and you would only use the diesel of the 88 through the tunnels out of Marylebone and use ohle when the Chiltern lines are electrified

Not easy. Plus it would be hopelessly under-powered for passenger work.
Also electrification of any of the Chiltern netowrk is not going to happen any time soon.

Slight problem, which is that the 88s don’t have enough diesel range for the whole chiltern route. You could probably only get 88s once more was electrified.

(Also, I’ve always thought that third rail is the best idea for the tunnels out of Marylebone, particularly for already dual-voltage Aylesbury services)

Really depends if the banning, for safety reasons, of any new 3rd rail electrification is relaxed - not holding my breath.
There is a thread discussing the possibility of new 3rd rail applications so lets not repeat it here.

A 377/7 is just an example, i think if new stock is ordered they should order something tried and tested so it doesn't end up like the 810s which are currently taking years to get working properly and to train on.
A shorter 700 wouldn't be that bad as long as they wouldn't have ironing boards.

No way would Chiltern go for a such a thing as the 700. Too basic for a long distance operation plus they are designed to hoover up passengers nearer to central London. Anyway electrification is ages away.

Where else can the Mk5s + 68s be used ?.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Started a new thread for Aylesbury electrification discussion and reported this one for the mods to move remaining posts - you may want to move over there:

Aylesbury electrification - how would this happen?

(Also, I’ve always thought that third rail is the best idea for the tunnels out of Marylebone, particularly for already dual-voltage Aylesbury services) yeah if new conductor rail was allowed this would be the best option. Would you have changover for Birmingham trains at Harrow on the Hill but...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[LondonerTravel]

Are Chiltern still in discussions with DFT to obtain the mk5 carriages, or has this been shelved?

 

[hexagon789]

Are Chiltern still in discussions with DFT to obtain the mk5 carriages, or has this been shelved?

It was stated on another forum that its been signed off for about 10 sets - driver training to start later this year, the first four sets to be in traffic by March 2026 to replace the Mk3s, the balance by December 2026.

 

[MatthewHutton]

It was stated on another forum that its been signed off for about 10 sets - driver training to start later this year, the first four sets to be in traffic by March 2026 to replace the Mk3s, the balance by December 2026.

oh good

 

[Peter Sarf]

It was stated on another forum that its been signed off for about 10 sets - driver training to start later this year, the first four sets to be in traffic by March 2026 to replace the Mk3s, the balance by December 2026.

There are thirteen sets and one spare driving coach. I wonder what will happen with the three (or more) unused sets ?.
Raking up the old question again but does anyone know how long each set will be ?.

For example nine sets could be lengthened by one coach each if the intermediate coaches from three five car sets were used.
I am latching on to the "about 10 sets" - could equal nine.

 

[Iskra]

There are thirteen sets and one spare driving coach. I wonder what will happen with the three (or more) unused sets ?.
Raking up the old question again but does anyone know how long each set will be ?.

For example nine sets could be lengthened by one coach each if the intermediate coaches from three five car sets were used.
I am latching on to the "about 10 sets" - could equal nine.

Night Riviera conversion? Or GBRF might take them for spot hire with their 57/3's, less likely is that DRS do the same with their 68's?

 

[AJDesiro]

There are thirteen sets and one spare driving coach. I wonder what will happen with the three (or more) unused sets ?.
Raking up the old question again but does anyone know how long each set will be ?.

For example nine sets could be lengthened by one coach each if the intermediate coaches from three five car sets were used.
I am latching on to the "about 10 sets" - could equal nine.

I'm sure I read somewhere that they were being reformed in to rakes of 6 cars, which would fully utilise the fleet bar the spare driving coach.

 

[MatthewHutton]

I'm sure I read somewhere that they were being reformed in to rakes of 6 cars, which would fully utilise the fleet bar the spare driving coach.

Chiltern has 6 car locomotive driven trains at the moment. I expect they would want to maintain that.

 

[JonathanH]

I'm sure I read somewhere that they were being reformed in to rakes of 6 cars, which would fully utilise the fleet bar the spare driving coach.

It is only possible to make up 9 6-car sets as there are only 39 centre cars, and you need four of them in each 6-car set.

That leaves 4 unused first class end vehicles, 5 unused driving vehicles and 3 unused centre vehicles of no practical use, although one 5-car set could exist.

 

[Energy]

It is only possible to make up 9 6-car sets as there are only 39 centre cars, and you need four of them in each 6-car set.

That leaves 4 unused first class end vehicles, 5 unused driving vehicles and 3 unused centre vehicles of no practical use, although one 5-car set could exist.

There are 39 open standard centre cars. There are 13 open first, so 52 centre vehicles total.

If you reseat one first vehicle to standard, you can form 10 6-car rakes (1 first, 4 open standard, 1 driving trailer), leaving:

• 4 unused driving vehicles
  +3 from disbanded sets
  +1 built as a spare
• 2 unused first-class vehicles
  +3 from disbanded sets
  -1 converted to standard

 

[Peter Sarf]

There are 39 open standard centre cars. There are 13 open first, so 52 centre vehicles total.

If you reseat one first vehicle to standard, you can form 10 6-car rakes (1 first, 4 open standard, 1 driving trailer), leaving:

• 4 unused driving vehicles
  +3 from disbanded sets
  +1 built as a spare
• 2 unused first-class vehicles
  +3 from disbanded sets
  -1 converted to standard

I recall is being explained that the problem is the first class coaches do not have a gangway connection at one end so cannot become intermediate vehicles. BUT I do wonder how easy it would be to alter one first class coach to gain a gangway connection that could be donated by another redundant first class coach. It would only be one coach requiring conversion.

 

[Energy]

I recall is being explained that the problem is the first class coaches do not have a gangway connection at one end so cannot become intermediate vehicles. BUT I do wonder how easy it would be to alter one first class coach to gain a gangway connection that could be donated by another redundant first class coach. It would only be one coach requiring conversion.

That’s a good point, I forgot they were missing that. Worst case one of the sets is only 5 cars.

Does make you wonder who at the ROSCO approved an order of loco hauled stock which are so difficult to rearrange…

 

[Peter Sarf]

That’s a good point, I forgot they were missing that. Worst case one of the sets is only 5 cars.

Does make you wonder who at the ROSCO approved an order of loco hauled stock which are so difficult to rearrange…

TPE or the ROSCO will have saved a bit of money on one gangway connection per set. Foresight is not a good trait these days (aka easily distracted etc) !.

 

[Zomboid]

I'm sure a gangway could be fitted to the end if they wanted to, it's unlikely that it's a structural requirement to not have one given that the rest of the train has gangways.
What might be a bigger problem is that the carriages in question have a very different window and interior layout because of the guards compartment and catering area. Once you get to making those changes as well it might just be better to not bother.

 

[Harpo]

Is there anything stopping a set having a driving trailer at each end? I guess they’d probably need some mods such as extra jumpers??

 

[Snow1964]

I'm sure a gangway could be fitted to the end if they wanted to, it's unlikely that it's a structural requirement to not have one given that the rest of the train has gangways.
What might be a bigger problem is that the carriages in question have a very different window and interior layout because of the guards compartment and catering area. Once you get to making those changes as well it might just be better to not bother.

The alternative might be to fabricate a new body shell, then transfer everything (bogies, gangways, ac inverters, lighting, seats from driving trailer etc) from some of the spare vehicles if wanted 10 identical 6car sets.

Of course, just because Chiltern has historically operated 6car push pull sets, doesn't necessarily mean exactly 6cars (+loco) is best fit for next (potentially upto) 30 years.

 

[Zomboid]

Is there anything stopping a set having a driving trailer at each end? I guess they’d probably need some mods such as extra jumpers??

Same issue with the gangways

 

[Harpo]

Same issue with the gangways

So the driving trailer can’t be used as an alternative to the dead-end vehicle that couples to the loco?

 

[Zomboid]

I don't know whether it would be easily possible, but it would have to replace the dead end car if through gangways are still needed.

 

[Harpo]

it would have to replace the dead end car if through gangways are still needed.

Ta. That was where I was going. (Probably badly explained). Plus an assumption that some mods would be needed for push-pull.

 

[Zomboid]

I can't speak with any authority on the subject, but I'm not sure why you'd want to do that, particularly.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Is there anything stopping a set having a driving trailer at each end? I guess they’d probably need some mods such as extra jumpers??

To what end ?.

So the driving trailer can’t be used as an alternative to the dead-end vehicle that couples to the loco?

Not sure but there are enough dead end vehicles.

I don't know whether it would be easily possible, but it would have to replace the dead end car if through gangways are still needed.

I do not think there would be any purpose to substituting a dead end coach for a driving trailer. It is more intermediate coaches that are needed.

 

[MerlinRail 804]

I know I’ve said it before, but it can’t hurt to say it again. A 2tph Marylebone - Birmingham service needs 10 sets plus spares, so I feel like keeping them all as five coaches, if it means you can have 2tph all day (rather than just after 1pm like it is currently) would be a better choice. It would still be an uplift in capacity. If things got even busier they could always order more coaches from CAF. I also feel like they could order some coaches for their current 68s to up the total number of sets to 18/19 to introduce extra peaktime services to Birmingham and extend some, even in off peak, to Kidderminster or Worcester. Just a thought though.

 

[hexagon789]

I know I’ve said it before, but it can’t hurt to say it again. A 2tph Marylebone - Birmingham service needs 10 sets plus spares, so I feel like keeping them all as five coaches, if it means you can have 2tph all day (rather than just after 1pm like it is currently) would be a better choice. It would still be an uplift in capacity. If things got even busier they could always order more coaches from CAF. I also feel like they could order some coaches for their current 68s to up the total number of sets to 18/19 to introduce extra peaktime services to Birmingham and extend some, even in off peak, to Kidderminster or Worcester. Just a thought though.

Plan is not for 100% 68+Mk5A operation on the Birminghams, the two Aylesbury turns are to remain 168s (Aylesbury doesn't have 68 competency) for a start.

I haven't seen any mention of any Banbury, Kidderminster or Oxford runs as there were before with the Mk3s; not to say there wouldn't be of course.