Potential future uses for class 68 & Mk5 sets?

[class 9]

How about the proposed XC Leeds - Glasgow service??

 

[D6130]

Who'd have thunk it eh, you choose to live in a property close to the railway and you can hear trains !

IIRC from my driving days at Aylesbury, most - if not all - of the flats overlooking the station throat at Marylebone are social housing, so the majority of tenants probably have little choice as to where they live. Back in the day, they had to suffer the noise and fumes from first generation DMUs idling in the former depot all day.

The Settle-Carlisle was a 90mph railway in steam days especially during electrification north of Preston. Diverted double headed class 50s regularly maintained this speed north of Kirkby Stephen and even exceeded this on straighter parts of the route.
Apart from installation of intermediate block signals to accommodate the increase in coal traffic, signal braking distances have not not been reduced since steam finished. Hot axle box detectors are few and far between on this route as shown by the seized axle box on the cement train from Clitheroe derailed at Petterill Bridge Junction in Carlisle having travelled 80 miles from Clitheroe with the handbrake partly on.
I was told by a NR track worker that linespeed could easily be raised to 75 or even 80mph without difficulty as it is a paper exercise but the request would have to come from Northern and pay for the paperwork. He didn't say if it was DMU speed limit or overall.

Not quite. According to my 1960 Sectional Appendix, it was 65 mph from Skipton to Hellifield, 80 mph from Hellifield to Newbiggin and 75 mph from there to Pettrill Bridge Junction.

 

[The Planner]

How about the proposed XC Leeds - Glasgow service??

What proposed service, they can't run what they have!

I was told by a NR track worker that linespeed could easily be raised to 75 or even 80mph without difficulty as it is a paper exercise but the request would have to come from Northern and pay for the paperwork. He didn't say if it was DMU speed limit or overall.

Its much more than that. I will have to dig out the report on what needs doing. NR are still actively looking at it.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Yes, I would like to see 195s on the Harrogate Loop too for their superior acceleration but are wasted on a 60mph railway.
I would like to see the Loop electrified to eliminate a diesel island as both ends at York and Leeds are already wired. There would be a big enough pool of EMUs if all 26 323s are cascaded from Birmingham to Northern to move 9 more 3-car 331s over to Leeds. Unfortunately DfT has said a definite no or a gobbledy gook reply to that effect.

The network is awash with spare EMUs - really is a shame no suburban electrification is being done while they are available.

It's something approaching 100km single track kilometres, which is unfortunately about £400m worth of electrification at current 25kV prices.

Dang. But compared to HS2 its cheap. Surely something good can come out of the demise of HS2 !.

 

[MML]

There have been many comments that 68 plus Mk5 sets are expensive to operate, but is this simply a consequence of operating them in 5-car formations?
Would it be possible to find a route where this stock could operate in longer formations?
The cost per seat would surely reduce if operated as a 7 or 8-car formation.
Marylebone to Birmingham or Oxford for example using fewer but longer formations.

 

[Neptune]

Yes, I would like to see 195s on the Harrogate Loop too for their superior acceleration but are wasted on a 60mph railway.

Not at all. They are more than happy wherever they run due to their ZF gearboxes giving high acceleration. See how well the similarly powered 172’s work on the Snow Hill lines.

How about the proposed XC Leeds - Glasgow service??

Once mentioned in a magazine with no real basis and disappeared just as quick. It isn’t happening.

 

[A S Leib]

Could giving them to EMR for Liverpool – Norwich and Peterborough – Lincoln – Doncaster work?

 

[12LDA28C]

There have been many comments that 68 plus Mk5 sets are expensive to operate, but is this simply a consequence of operating them in 5-car formations?
Would it be possible to find a route where this stock could operate in longer formations?
The cost per seat would surely reduce if operated as a 7 or 8-car formation.
Marylebone to Birmingham or Oxford for example using fewer but longer formations.

A 7 or 8-coach formation would cause problems at some stations on the Chilterns, being too long for the platform given current stopping patterns for some services, especially to/from Oxford.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A 7 or 8-coach formation would cause problems at some stations on the Chilterns, being too long for the platform given current stopping patterns for some services, especially to/from Oxford.

The Mk3s have a low density layout with the first class coach still as such. If they had the layout changed to a mostly airline-seated one you could get probably two more rows in each vehicle (and not make the already bad window alignment any worse), plus convert the First Class coach to Standard. With this you'd be getting very similar in capacity terms. If willing to sacrifice a bit of seating for a standing area in each vehicle for when it gets closer to Marylebone on the more local runs the LHCS does you'd get even more. The Sophia seat is still on sale so this could be done without looking ridiculous (unlike the extra end rows in the Greater Anglia Mk3s).

On the general point I do recall it being generally considered that 5-car was the "break even point" between underfloor DMU and loco hauled operation, i.e. the cost was similar for 5-car, but DMU favoured under that and LHCS/power cars above. But I think the world has changed a bit there with things like the 80x which are a bit of a hybrid, having larger engines in only some vehicles.

 

[D365]

Could giving them to EMR for Liverpool – Norwich and Peterborough – Lincoln – Doncaster work?

wouldn’t be suitable for MU diffs Peterborough-Ely.

 

[A S Leib]

MU diffs?

 

[Trainbike46]

MU diffs?

This is referring to the Sprinter differentials in East Anglia, which are so much higher than the other speed limits that a service would be nowhere near able to keep to the current timetable if it couldn't use them

In practice, it means that any unit that can't use sprinter differentials is useless for the regional routes in East Anglia, including Peterborough-Ely

 

[TheBigD]

wouldn’t be suitable for MU diffs Peterborough-Ely.

There isn't a great deal of differentials between Peterborough and Ely. Welney Bridges being 60/SP75 the main one.

It's the Ely to Norwich route that has the big differences. Ely North Jn to Lakenheath being 40/SP75 that has a big impact.

 

[A S Leib]

There isn't a great deal of differentials between Peterborough and Ely. Welney Bridges being 60/SP75 the main one.

It's the Ely to Norwich route that has the big differences. Ely North Jn to Lakenheath being 40/SP75 that has a big impact.

I doubt Cambridge would be massively happy about losing its direct Leicester and Birmingham service (although I suspect that, at least for the latter, via London's often quicker if not necessarily cheaper already), but could they be suitable for Ely – Stansted?

 

[D6130]

wouldn’t be suitable for MU diffs Peterborough-Ely.

Err....they weren't suitable for the Sprinter diffs from York to Scarborough either....70 instead of 80 or 90.

 

[ChristopherJ]

Give the 68s and Mk5s to GWR for Bristol - Penzance, replacing Castles/158s/IETs.

At night, use them on the Night Riveria replacing the 57s.

Then GWR has a business case to order some Caledonian Mk5s to replace the Sleeper Mk3s.

I'm a genius, right?

 

[Vanmanyo]

I still think Chiltern have the best reasoning for wanting them; old mk3 stock that desparately needs replacing (or refurbishing for quite a substantial amount one would assume), already operate a class 68 fleet so training drivers would be a little bit faster (although I know most things are quite different) and do very much need the added capacity they would give, seeing as they currently have the oldest average fleet in the UK and are running all their available units day in day out (as a regular user I would say each BMO - MYB service should at least be 4 or 5 carriages, so the 3 and someties 2 car services they run are a joke! Also the fact 165s still get used on these services isn't the best!).

I can definitely see the usefulness of moving these to GWR, XC, TFW, EMR etc but surely Chiltern would benefit from them the most?

 

[Nick Ashwell]

Give the 68s and Mk5s to GWR for Bristol - Penzance, replacing Castles/158s/IETs.

At night, use them on the Night Riveria replacing the 57s.

Then GWR has a business case to order some Caledonian Mk5s to replace the Sleeper Mk3s.

I'm a genius, right?

The Mk5 and Mk5a of the Caledonian may not be compatible. It may be better to order Mk5s in sleeper config if possible, but someone better placed with me can confirm

 

[172007]

Mk5 is slightly wider than a Mk5a. Ignore Wikipedia it's inaccurate. The slightly extra width helps passengers get through the corridor so a Mk5A as a sleeper conversion is a non starter as you can't have beds lengthways due to risks to the spine and neck in an accident.

 

[RobShipway]

The only use for the MK5A coaches could be "https://www.railwaygazette.com/uk/plan-to-welcome-open-access-back-to-wrexham/65533.article"

However, if class 68 are still used and trains are still going into London Marylebone, then you are still going to have the noise issue.

Quote from post: Plans have been drawn up to revive open access services between London, Shrewsbury and Wrexham under the WSMR brand, 13 years after a previous initiative ended.

 

[43096]

The only use for the MK5A coaches could be "https://www.railwaygazette.com/uk/plan-to-welcome-open-access-back-to-wrexham/65533.article"

However, if class 68 are still used and trains are still going into London Marylebone, then you are still going to have the noise issue.

Quote from post: Plans have been drawn up to revive open access services between London, Shrewsbury and Wrexham under the WSMR brand, 13 years after a previous initiative ended.

And if you do any research on it - like the thread on here - you’d see that the application proposes using Class 22x stock.

 

[12LDA28C]

The only use for the MK5A coaches could be "https://www.railwaygazette.com/uk/plan-to-welcome-open-access-back-to-wrexham/65533.article"

However, if class 68 are still used and trains are still going into London Marylebone, then you are still going to have the noise issue.

As reported several times on this forum and in the wider railway press, a modification is being developed to reduce the noise produced by the 68s.

 

[Vanmanyo]

As reported several times on this forum and in the wider railway press, a modification is being developed to reduce the noise produced by the 68s.

The fact people complain about noise in the first place is beyond me! Why live by a railway if you expect it to be quiet! (And also who wouldn't want to hear a 68??????)

 

[Bletchleyite]

The fact people complain about noise in the first place is beyond me! Why live by a railway if you expect it to be quiet!

68s are incredibly noisy compared to the diet of DMUs that has run out of Marylebone for the last 40 odd years. They're the noisiest British locomotive I can recall, ever - setting off they are a bit like the "jet engine" scream of the original HST engines but the idle is also very noisy and they shake the ground.

I can totally understand the issues with these specifically.

(And also who wouldn't want to hear a 68??????)

Me when I want to go to sleep.

 

[Vanmanyo]

Sure they are noisy and I live a mile from the CML in Warks, so I get the 68s passing quite late on at night compared to the measely 7pm at Marylebone, but surely people should take into account living by a railway? Especially at Marylebone - one of the busiest cities in the world and you expect it to be quiet!!?? It just sometimes seems a bit OTT especially as the 68s don't run past 7:30pm out of MYB. If anything, the people of Birmingham have more of a claim to the noise as the 68s can run as late as 10pm at Birmingham. The rich, as always, seem to be the priortiy...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sure they are noisy and I live a mile from the CML in Warks, so I get the 68s passing quite late on at night compared to the measely 7pm at Marylebone, but surely people should take into account living by a railway? Especially at Marylebone - one of the busiest cities in the world and you expect it to be quiet!!??

They are noisier than anything else on the railway, and it's a deep bass that shakes everything. It is not a normal sound even in a busy city like London, but round the back of MYB isn't actually that busy with traffic, it's fairly quiet.

They are a blight.

 

[Vanmanyo]

They are noisier than anything else on the railway, and it's a deep bass that shakes everything. It is not a normal sound even in a busy city like London, but round the back of MYB isn't actually that busy with traffic, it's fairly quiet.

Yes they are loud - as I said I live a mile and a bit from the railway and I still hear them, especially in a quiet village with not much other noise, but they stop running quite early in the daytime at MYB so in that sense they aren't that noisy. The sound reducing modifications should obviously help with this, and hopefully allow them to run more frequently and/or more late at night

 

[Killingworth]

They are noisier than anything else on the railway, and it's a deep bass that shakes everything. It is not a normal sound even in a busy city like London, but round the back of MYB isn't actually that busy with traffic, it's fairly quiet.

They are a blight.

Nose in to the train shed at either Lime Street or Piccadilly the ear shattering noise is/was unpleasant for much of the station! At least when in motion the noise quickly passes.

 

[Vanmanyo]

Nose in to the train shed at either Lime Street or Piccadilly the ear shattering noise is/was unpleasant for much of the station! At least when in motion the noise quickly passes.

Yeah, running 68s in a shed doesn't seem too clever! Chiltern always make sure the 68s are not in the shed when running at MYB (Although the shed is pretty small anyway!)

 

[Killingworth]

Yeah, running 68s in a shed doesn't seem too clever! Chiltern always make sure the 68s are not in the shed when running at MYB (Although the shed is pretty small anyway!)

That would have been the plan for 68s too but added an extra operational issue to enure it always happened.