• 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!

Rail Charter Services to operate loco hauled trains between Skipton & Appleby.

Status
Not open for further replies.

DB

Guest
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
5,036
Because 90s have buckeyes, 47s don't perhaps and I think the outer end of the TSOE is buckeye only, not a drophead

Most of the 90s don't have buckeyes fitted any more, as I recall (think it was only the GA ones which still had them). As regards Mk4 sets, there are standard buffers and coupling hooks on the outer ends of the set - i.e. the TSOE loco end and the DVT nose end. Internally, they use fixed-head buckeyes (so if internal vehicles from the set are moved on their own, barriers are needed as with HST trailers). So for a set which could be coupled to non-buckeye locos at both ends, it would need either a TSOE or DVT at each end. A DVT would be dead space, but without it there would be no brake vehicle or guard's accommodation. The physical wiring between vehicles on Mk4s and earlier coaches is different, so it wouldn't be possible to mix and match - e.g. mk4s with a mk2 brake. Not sure how the door control circuits work either - i.e. whether they would work without a DVT.

But perhaps more to the point, LSL owns the mk3s as part of their charter fleet. They are hardly going to rent something else! I'm also not sure whether mk4s are cleared north of Skipton.

Not entirely sure what the PRM rules are for charter fleets, but I'm sure they are less restrictive as these are not ordinary public service trains. Clearly slam doors are fine, given that all charter operators have only slam door stock, and LSL are expanding their fleet at the moment (mk3s, HST).

Incidentally, anyone seen any mention of whether they are going to be insisting on masks, like service trains? I'm local to the area so might well have a trip out, but if masks are insisted on then forget it!
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

37424

Member
Joined
10 Apr 2020
Messages
1,064
Location
Leeds
Most of the 90s don't have buckeyes fitted any more, as I recall (think it was only the GA ones which still had them). As regards Mk4 sets, there are standard buffers and coupling hooks on the outer ends of the set - i.e. the TSOE loco end and the DVT nose end. Internally, they use fixed-head buckeyes (so if internal vehicles from the set are moved on their own, barriers are needed as with HST trailers). So for a set which could be coupled to non-buckeye locos at both ends, it would need either a TSOE or DVT at each end. A DVT would be dead space, but without it there would be no brake vehicle or guard's accommodation. The physical wiring between vehicles on Mk4s and earlier coaches is different, so it wouldn't be possible to mix and match - e.g. mk4s with a mk3 brake. Not sure how the door control circuits work either - i.e. whether they would work without a DVT.

But perhaps more to the point, LSL owns the mk3s as part of their charter fleet. They are hardly going to rent something else! I'm also not sure whether mk4s are cleared north of Skipton.

Not entirely sure what the PRM rules are for charter fleets, but I'm sure they are less restrictive as these are not ordinary public service trains. Clearly slam doors are fine, given that all charter operators have only slam door stock, and LSL are expanding their fleet at the moment (mk3s, HST).

Incidentally, anyone seen any mention of whether they are going to be insisting on masks, like service trains? I'm local to the area so might well have a trip out, but if masks are insisted on then forget it!

I cannot really see how masks would not apply.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,663
Location
Redcar
As long as you've got one of the below combinations:
  • A TSOE on both ends
  • A DVT on both ends
  • A TSOE and DVT at either end
Then a Mk4 is just another carriage in the same way as Mk1s to Mk3s were and are.
 

DB

Guest
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
5,036
As long as you've got one of the below combinations:
  • A TSOE on both ends
  • A DVT on both ends
  • A TSOE and DVT at either end
Then a Mk4 is just another carriage in the same way as Mk1s to Mk3s were and are.

Mk4s have not got the same level of route clearance though.

Not sure of the practicality of a TSOE both ends - i.e. no brake or guard's acommodation.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,287
Because 90s have buckeyes, 47s don't perhaps and I think the outer end of the TSOE is buckeye only, not a drophead
DB Cargo 90s don't have buckeyes. TOE is therefore drop head buckeye.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,785
Location
Glasgow
Most of the 90s don't have buckeyes fitted any more, as I recall (think it was only the GA ones which still had them). As regards Mk4 sets, there are standard buffers and coupling hooks on the outer ends of the set - i.e. the TSOE loco end and the DVT nose end. Internally, they use fixed-head buckeyes (so if internal vehicles from the set are moved on their own, barriers are needed as with HST trailers). So for a set which could be coupled to non-buckeye locos at both ends, it would need either a TSOE or DVT at each end. A DVT would be dead space, but without it there would be no brake vehicle or guard's accommodation. The physical wiring between vehicles on Mk4s and earlier coaches is different, so it wouldn't be possible to mix and match - e.g. mk4s with a mk2 brake. Not sure how the door control circuits work either - i.e. whether they would work without a DVT.

But perhaps more to the point, LSL owns the mk3s as part of their charter fleet. They are hardly going to rent something else! I'm also not sure whether mk4s are cleared north of Skipton.

Not entirely sure what the PRM rules are for charter fleets, but I'm sure they are less restrictive as these are not ordinary public service trains. Clearly slam doors are fine, given that all charter operators have only slam door stock, and LSL are expanding their fleet at the moment (mk3s, HST).

Incidentally, anyone seen any mention of whether they are going to be insisting on masks, like service trains? I'm local to the area so might well have a trip out, but if masks are insisted on then forget it!

Wasn't aware of that about 90s other than the original Freightliner batch.

Masks could put a lot of people off I think but it may well be required
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,287
Most of the 90s don't have buckeyes fitted any more, as I recall (think it was only the GA ones which still had them). As regards Mk4 sets, there are standard buffers and coupling hooks on the outer ends of the set - i.e. the TSOE loco end and the DVT nose end. Internally, they use fixed-head buckeyes (so if internal vehicles from the set are moved on their own, barriers are needed as with HST trailers). So for a set which could be coupled to non-buckeye locos at both ends, it would need either a TSOE or DVT at each end. A DVT would be dead space, but without it there would be no brake vehicle or guard's accommodation. The physical wiring between vehicles on Mk4s and earlier coaches is different, so it wouldn't be possible to mix and match - e.g. mk4s with a mk2 brake. Not sure how the door control circuits work either - i.e. whether they would work without a DVT.
Not quite - Mark 4 sets have Tightlock couplers internally in the set, not fixed buckeyes. "Fixed buckeyes" are essentially what an Alliance coupler is (as used on the HST fleet) and Alliance couplers and a buckeye will happily couple together. Mark 4 sets have standard buffers and drawhooks on the DVT and drop-head buckeyes and retractable buffers on the TOE outer end. Normally they run with buffers retracted and buckeyes in use, to couple to a Class 91.

As for the Class 90s with drop-head buckeyes, once Freightliner have finished modifying 90003-015, it will be just 90001/2 left with buckeyes.
 

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,085
A very interesting development, but if they want to maximise patronage then having something other than a 47 on one end would be advantageous.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,783
A very interesting development, but if they want to maximise patronage then having something other than a 47 on one end would be advantageous.

Depends on the market - if they want to attract 'normal' passengers and put off enthusiasts a 47 is the correct traction. This is not a train for 'cranks'.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
Hmmm. Would seem to imply end of "essential travel only" on or before July 12th then....
 

DB

Guest
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
5,036
Depends on the market - if they want to attract 'normal' passengers and put off enthusiasts a 47 is the correct traction. This is not a train for 'cranks'.

Not really. A kettle is a much bigger draw if wanting to attract the general public. Also a lot more expensive to operate, of course, and I'm not sure where the nearest servicing facilities are - probably Carnforth although there might be some basic facilites at Hellifield.
 

43 302

Established Member
Joined
25 Oct 2019
Messages
1,624
Location
London
Hmmm. Would seem to imply end of "essential travel only" on or before July 12th then....
You can travel now non-essentially, although most TOCs don't seem to admit it yet. Check the government website. Only GWR I have seen on twitter say you can travel for leisure but to make sure you socially distance and wear a mask etc.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
You can travel now non-essentially, although most TOCs don't seem to admit it yet. Check the government website. Only GWR I have seen on twitter say you can travel for leisure but to make sure you socially distance and wear a mask etc.

I know. But it would be indefensible for any TOC to continue to claim this with these trains running. Would suggest there would be a full dropping of this message by that point (hopefully!)
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,783
Not really. A kettle is a much bigger draw if wanting to attract the general public. Also a lot more expensive to operate, of course, and I'm not sure where the nearest servicing facilities are - probably Carnforth although there might be some basic facilites at Hellifield.
Right, so a group of 47s and some coaches that can be parked up at Appleby is a good compromise.
 

Swimbar

Member
Joined
31 Jan 2018
Messages
377
Location
Wetherby
Not really. A kettle is a much bigger draw if wanting to attract the general public. Also a lot more expensive to operate, of course, and I'm not sure where the nearest servicing facilities are - probably Carnforth although there might be some basic facilites at Hellifield.
Certainly Tornado drew the passengers when Northern tried it - Keighley WVR probably the nearest servicing facilities
 

CW2

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2020
Messages
1,922
Location
Crewe
Sorry, I read as far as "Class 47" and my eyes glazed over.
Nice idea for normals, but won't appeal much to the enthusiast market - apart from that weird sub-group of Duff bashers.
 

37424

Member
Joined
10 Apr 2020
Messages
1,064
Location
Leeds
Sorry, I read as far as "Class 47" and my eyes glazed over.
Nice idea for normals, but won't appeal much to the enthusiast market - apart from that weird sub-group of Duff bashers.
From what I gather elsewhere they don't want enthusiasts hence the dull traction although I doubt it will totally devoid of enthusiasts.
 

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,085
From what I gather elsewhere they don't want enthusiasts hence the dull traction although I doubt it will totally devoid of enthusiasts.
They've got two potential markets. Day trippers and cranks. It would seem odd not to make the appeal as broad as possible by dropping a 37 on one end.

WCRC tap in to both markets on the Scarborough Spa Express. It's good business.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,785
Location
Glasgow
Better window spacing I would think.

Well only in the sense that the seating bays all line up with the windows, but one could always reseat a Mk3 to give 64 seats in a 2+2 configuration with an all table bays arrangement like that of a Mk2 standard open
 

37424

Member
Joined
10 Apr 2020
Messages
1,064
Location
Leeds
Well only in the sense that the seating bays all line up with the windows, but one could always reseat a Mk3 to give 64 seats in a 2+2 configuration with an all table bays arrangement like that of a Mk2 standard open
Well you could but in the current social distance setting where they are only selling window seats not really much point. just use the 1st class carriages
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top