Potential future uses for class 68 & Mk5 sets?

[Iskra]

Should TP offload their class 68 sets as has been speculated on these fora, where do you think they will end up?

Replacing Scotrail HST’s would seem a reasonable fit in terms of having First Class, 5 carriages and no under floor engines as was originally specified when Scotrail chose HST’s.

Alternatively, perhaps Chiltern with the drivers there already signing class 68’s?

(Although personally I hope they do stay with TP)

 

[JohnMcL7]

Whenever they're mentioned in relation to replacing Scotrail HSTs, it's highlighted that there's nowhere near enough TPE 68's to replace the Scotrail HST fleet.

 

[Iskra]

Whenever they're mentioned in relation to replacing Scotrail HSTs, it's highlighted that there's nowhere near enough TPE 68's to replace the Scotrail HST fleet.

Fair point

13 sets of Mk5a’s is quite an awkward number in terms of replacing anything really.

Where do you think they will end up?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Whenever they're mentioned in relation to replacing Scotrail HSTs, it's highlighted that there's nowhere near enough TPE 68's to replace the Scotrail HST fleet.

Unless you sent both those and spare TfW 158s up north, of course.

 

[m79900]

How about EMR for Liverpool to Norwich to replace 158s?

 

[Iskra]

How about EMR for Liverpool to Norwich to replace 158s?

I could well see them doing Nottingham to Liverpool, but I’m not sure they’d be much use East of Nottingham and especially in East Anglia where they wouldn’t be able to make use of the Sprinter speed differentials so would be slower than current stock.

 

[JonathanH]

How about EMR for Liverpool to Norwich to replace 158s?

No, if they can do that route they could equally do Liverpool to Cleethorpes.

The basic point is that they are non standard and inappropriate whereever they go.

If they can't find a use on TPE they shouldn't be used anywhere. I don't see why they would be any easier to accommodate, get staff trained, and run reliably elsewhere. They clearly need to be binned off at TPE, but that doesn't mean that another use has to be made up for them.

The 68s could go for freight use, and the coaches can sit in sidings while someone works out if they could be adapted for something else in the long term. Ultimately they are the leasing company's problem, and shouldn't be the railway's problem, particularly if some money can be saved with them going off lease.

 

[greyman42]

The basic point is that they are non standard and inappropriate whereever they go.

Why not Chiltern?

 

[HSTEd]

The 68s could go for freight use, and the coaches can sit in sidings while someone works out if they could be adapted for something else in the long term. Ultimately they are the leasing company's problem, and shouldn't be the railway's problem, particularly if some money can be saved with them going off lease.

Unfortunately the leasing company's problem is the railway's problem - because the example of the 68s and Mark 5s going off lease will cause an increase in leasing costs for other stock given the oligarchic nature of the leasing market.

 

[JonathanH]

Why not Chiltern?

The class 68s aren't popular at the London end of the route with the railway's neighbours.

 

[greyman42]

The class 68s aren't popular at the London end of the route with the railway's neighbours.

I had forgotten about that but i would of thought that you would not really notice living near Marylebone Road.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The class 68s aren't popular at the London end of the route with the railway's neighbours.

Ah yes... that's why they want them replaced with Turbos, which although quieter are more polluting.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Chiltern Railways - they desperately need more newer stock I understand. Only the Mark 5's need training on. Plus it allows 168's to move to EWR and increase capacity elsewhere!

 

[The Planner]

Chiltern Railways - they desperately need more newer stock I understand. Only the Mark 5's need training on. Plus it allows 168's to move to EWR and increase capacity elsewhere!

168s will only be on EWR as a contingency.

 

[GoneSouth]

The class 68s aren't popular at the London end of the route with the railway's neighbours.

So what, the railway has probably been there longer than any of its neighbours.

If I moved next door to a railway what do you think I would expect to hear? Train noise!

 

[Bletchleyite]

So what, the railway has probably been there longer than any of its neighbours.

If I moved next door to a railway what do you think I would expect to hear? Train noise!

68s are incredibly noisy. If it were me I would be complaining too. It's a bit like replacing a small industrial unit with a huge 24/7 logistics park in noise terms. They're like HST power cars with the old style turbos, like a plane taking off.

To be honest I'm amazed the railway ordered a locomotive with such a serious noise pollution issue.

Of course being LHCS a suitable, non-noise-polluting locomotive could be procured...

 

[D365]

To be honest I'm amazed the railway ordered a locomotive with such a serious noise pollution issue.

Of course being LHCS a suitable, non-noise-polluting locomotive could be procured...

It wasn’t ”the railway” that ordered them. DRS commissioned the Class 68 (and 88) to meet their specific requirements at the time.

That’s if there is a business case for 13 independently powered locomotives that would be doing exactly the same job as the Class 68.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

What a waste. Sad.

 

[HSTEd]

To be honest I'm amazed the railway ordered a locomotive with such a serious noise pollution issue

Well the railway doesn't care about such things since it can hide behind its statutory rights to avoid criticism.

But its hardly a good neighbour advertisement for the railway.

 

[Russel]

Do TPE actually want rid of the 68 fleet, or is this purely speculation?

 

[Speed43125]

It wasn’t ”the railway” that ordered them. DRS commissioned the Class 68 (and 88) to meet their specific requirements at the time.

That’s if there is a business case for 13 independently powered locomotives that would be doing exactly the same job as the Class 68.

The stock was ordered on the proviso that they could operate with an electric engine as electrification (was expected to) expand, and I don't see any particular issue paring them up with a 92/93/whatever else we might get in future

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Do TPE actually want rid of the 68 fleet, or is this purely speculation?

As far as I know it's just speculation, indeed use has gone up since the timetable change- the issues at TPE haven't helped, both from a crewing point of view or indecision about shifting them to the South TPE route.

It's one of the oddities of this forum though. Almost everyone was thrilled at the prospect of loco haulage when it was announced, but now it seems some can't wait to find a reason to replace everything with 800-series monotony!

 

[Ashley Hill]

To be honest I'm amazed the railway ordered a locomotive with such a serious noise pollution issue.

Great for bashers!
Replacing IETs Castles on GWR?

 

[Iskra]

Do TPE actually want rid of the 68 fleet, or is this purely speculation?

There has been speculation on the various TP threads, that TP may wish to simplify their fleet due to training backlogs and being unable to utilise all the stock they have and that the lease is up for renewal on Mk5’s next year, therefore they are most likely to go. (or comments similar to that effect. I would have linked the posts in my OP but I’m on my phone only for the foreseeable so keeping it simple)

 

[GoneSouth]

I I

There has been speculation on the various TP threads, that TP may wish to simplify their fleet due to training backlogs and being unable to utilise all the stock they have and that the lease is up for renewal on Mk5’s next year, therefore they are most likely to go. (or comments similar to that effect. I would have linked the posts in my OP but I’m on my phone only for the foreseeable so keeping it simple)

Given the big fanfare about launching all the new Nova train varieties, that’s a lot of egg on the face of TPE. Surely if they do lose them there’ll be cuts to services, or are they just going to have rammed 3 coach trains running around everywhere?

Poor old Scarborough shafted again, this time becoming a permanent branch line with only a shuttle to York I guess.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As far as I know it's just speculation, indeed use has gone up since the timetable change- the issues at TPE haven't helped, both from a crewing point of view or indecision about shifting them to the South TPE route.

It's one of the oddities of this forum though. Almost everyone was thrilled at the prospect of loco haulage when it was announced, but now it seems some can't wait to find a reason to replace everything with 800-series monotony!

There's a "self flagellation" element on this Forum at times, see also the massive support for closure programmes in several circles.

As for Mk5s I don't like them because they're rubbish in Standard, bad seats and no window alignment, and a poor ride. 1st is nice though. And 68s are unacceptably noisy; if I lived near where they run I'd be complaining too.

I have heard nothing to say TPE want rid that has come from them.

 

[Iskra]

As far as I know it's just speculation, indeed use has gone up since the timetable change- the issues at TPE haven't helped, both from a crewing point of view or indecision about shifting them to the South TPE route.

It's one of the oddities of this forum though. Almost everyone was thrilled at the prospect of loco haulage when it was announced, but now it seems some can't wait to find a reason to replace everything with 800-series monotony!

There's a "self flagellation" element on this Forum at times, see also the massive support for closure programmes in several circles.

As for Mk5s I don't like them because they're rubbish in Standard, bad seats and no window alignment, and a poor ride. 1st is nice though. And 68s are unacceptably noisy; if I lived near where they run I'd be complaining too.

I have heard nothing to say TPE want rid that has come from them.

It’s just operational pragmatism and financial reality vs enthusiasm. Which results in confliction. We’ve seen it with many fleets and routes over the years and I’m sure all but the most coldly rational of us are guilty of it at somepoint.

As per my OP, I like 68’s and I’d like them to stay, but as a passenger on TP most of all I’d just like trains that actually run and if losing 68’s improves service reliability then it’s difficult to argue against that.

I I

Given the big fanfare about launching all the new Nova train varieties, that’s a lot of egg on the face of TPE. Surely if they do lose them there’ll be cuts to services, or are they just going to have rammed 3 coach trains running around everywhere?

Poor old Scarborough shafted again, this time becoming a permanent branch line with only a shuttle to York I guess.

TP has gained other additional stock meaning that even without 68’s, more 185’s could be paired which could theoretically be adequate considering the contraction in travel on TP since the good old days of 2019.

I am not personally advocating the withdrawal of 68’s just asking where they could potentially go if they were removed.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

68s are unacceptably noisy; if I lived near where they run I'd be complaining too.

I live within earshot of the North TPE route, a passing 68 really isn't all that intrusive compared to plenty of other everyday noises. Probably different for those around the Scarborough depot, or where the trains actually call so need to accelerate from a stop, but in the latter case the railway was there first and it's not as if 185s are particularly quiet themselves. Not doing a proper consultation over Scarborough TMD was utterly daft though.

 

[AF91]

Fair point

13 sets of Mk5a’s is quite an awkward number in terms of replacing anything really.

Where do you think they will end up?

The 13 sets as they are wouldn't be high enough capacity for Chiltern but could be a potential option for them if the mk5a sets were reformed into fewer but longer sets. The snag would be the end coaches which don't have the corridor connection.

 

[stevieinselby]

Do TPE actually want rid of the 68 fleet, or is this purely speculation?

Given how little they are using them, it seems pretty likely.

Some Scarborough services but not all – and none on Sunday, when presumably there enough 185s that they don't need the 68s.
No services at all to Teesside.
Today one set ran into Cleethorpes and the return working was cancelled "due to an issue with the train crew", but that's one more than most days.

If they're only using the 68s as a last resort and benching them at every opportunity they get (which is what appears to be happening), that does kinda suggest that they would drop them like hot lead if they had any alternative.