The Great HST Cascade?

[Aictos]

...but then you are replacing EMUs with diesel trains.

Yes but the fact still remains that HSTs are cleared across a awful lot of the UK, would be faster and would help as a stop gap before purpose built high speed rolling stock is available.

This would prove attractive to the mail and parcels industry.

If and when more and more of the UK is wired up then something similar to the 395s would be better - I'm only suggesting a potential use of HSTs as they could face a worse fate such as being scrapped.

 

[starrymarkb]

Which they will be. All good things must come to an end :P

 

[ainsworth74]

II'm not sure, but I think only the TSOE on the mark 4 sets can couple to the 91s (other than the 91 being able to couple to the outer end of the DVT)?

As it's been explained to me that is the case. Only the DVT and TSOE can couple up to locomotives (it should be noted that Mk4s can be hauled by just about anything as they have standard couplings at each end and standard ETS).

Yes but the fact still remains that HSTs are cleared across a awful lot of the UK, would be faster and would help as a stop gap before purpose built high speed rolling stock is available.

This would prove attractive to the mail and parcels industry.

It's not that simple though is it. You'd also need to convert the Mk3s for parcel usage which would mean gutting the interiors and then cutting bloody great holes in the side of them to accommodate the doors needed to allow the pallets that are currently used to get on and off the train. Added expense and complications to bear in mind.

 

[AndyLandy]

If and when more and more of the UK is wired up then something similar to the 395s would be better - I'm only suggesting a potential use of HSTs as they could face a worse fate such as being scrapped.

That's going to happen sooner or later. They've been fantastic trains, but eventually some (many) of them are going to get cut up. Sad as that may be, it's the harsh reality of the matter.

Post 2030, I still see a use for a few HST sets. Spot hire for FootEx and similar services is a likely place to hang on to a few sets. Maybe some Open Access operators might want some to run infrequent services on unusual routes with some. I daresay Network Rail could use a few to do maintenance duties, much like the NMT. I'd also hope that some enter preservation. I'd love nothing more than to see an HST refurbished into original BR blue/grey with Paxman Valenta engines, slam doors and IC70 seating.

Thing is, this'll account for maybe 20 HST sets at the absolute most (probably not even that). Maybe we can sell some for use in other countries, but whatever way you look at it, some are destined for the scrap heap.

 

[LE Greys]

As it's been explained to me that is the case. Only the DVT and TSOE can couple up to locomotives (it should be noted that Mk4s can be hauled by just about anything as they have standard couplings at each end and standard ETS).

Similarly I've seen pictures of 91s hauling MkIs on tours in Intercity days, and they were intended to be used on sleeper and mail trains overnight, so they might have some future beyond the ECML.

It's not that simple though is it. You'd also need to convert the Mk3s for parcel usage which would mean gutting the interiors and then cutting bloody great holes in the side of them to accommodate the doors needed to allow the pallets that are currently used to get on and off the train. Added expense and complications to bear in mind.

I think that was the main reason why large numbers of sleeping cars were not turned into parcels vans to run with the 67s. Rakes of seven or eight plus a DVT would have been very useful parcels stock, but the holes in the sides would have ruined the structural integrity.

 

[D6975]

I remember the discussion on what to do with HSTs from the proposed cascade of many years ago.
One option mentioned was 'short' HSTs.

One (regeared, 100mph-ish) power car
4 or 5 Mk3s
One new build DVT.

Given that there are a few Mk3 DVTs that could be refurbished/modified for such use this remains a possible use for a few PCs at least. Where they could be profitably utilised is another matter.

 

[LE Greys]

I remember the discussion on what to do with HSTs from the proposed cascade of many years ago.
One option mentioned was 'short' HSTs.

One (regeared, 100mph-ish) power car
4 or 5 Mk3s
One new build DVT.

Given that there are a few Mk3 DVTs that could be refurbished/modified for such use this remains a possible use for a few PCs at least. Where they could be profitably utilised is another matter.

That goes back to 1983, IIRC. We got the low-cost solution of 47s with 5 coaches instead, later extended to 7 because of braking concerns. It's still a good idea, and whatever happened to all the DVTs that used to run with the MkII sets on the WCML?

 

[Nym]

I think they used to run around or use DBSOs with Mk2 vehicles.

Although if I'm thinking right, the DBSOs were only used on the Edinbrugh - Glasgow Push Pull sets...

 

[sprinterguy]

I think they used to run around or use DBSOs with Mk2 vehicles.

Although if I'm thinking right, the DBSOs were only used on the Edinbrugh - Glasgow Push Pull sets...

Many of the West Coast mark 2 rakes also made use of the mark 3 DVTs: With fifty two DVTs built, they covered far more rakes than just the West Coast mark 3s. In fact, although my recollections might be a little hazy, I think that it might have only been the Crosscountry mark 2 sets that still regularly performed run-rounds right up until their withdrawal in 2002, whilst the vast majority of the West Coast mark 2 rakes ran with DVTs.

The DBSOs were originally converted for use on the Edinburgh - Glasgow push-pull trains in 1979/80, but later went on to have a long and fruitful career on the Anglian Main line when that was electrified in the late eighties until the 86s, mark 2s and DBSOs were replaced on the Liverpool Street to Norwich services by former West Coast 90s, mark 3s and DVTs in around late 2004.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That goes back to 1983, IIRC. We got the low-cost solution of 47s with 5 coaches instead, later extended to 7 because of braking concerns. It's still a good idea, and whatever happened to all the DVTs that used to run with the MkII sets on the WCML?

This post here provides some pretty detailed information on the current fortunes of the mark 3 DVTs: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1110579&postcount=275

Many of the ones that remain in store have been purchased by DB.

 

[starrymarkb]

I think they used to run around or use DBSOs with Mk2 vehicles.

Although if I'm thinking right, the DBSOs were only used on the Edinbrugh - Glasgow Push Pull sets...

They then went onto London to Norwich with 86s shoving until they were replaced a few years ago by ex-WCML Mk3s and DVTs

 

[LE Greys]

Many of the West Coast mark 2 rakes also made use of the mark 3 DVTs: With fifty two DVTs built, they covered far more rakes than just the West Coast mark 3s. In fact, although my recollections might be a little hazy, I think that it might have only been the Crosscountry mark 2 sets that still regularly performed run-rounds right up until their withdrawal in 2002, whilst the vast majority of the West Coast mark 2 rakes ran with DVTs.

The DBSOs were originally converted for use on the Edinburgh - Glasgow push-pull trains in 1979/80, but later went on to have a long and fruitful career on the Anglian Main line when that was electrified in the late eighties until the 86s, mark 2s and DBSOs were replaced on the Liverpool Street to Norwich services by former West Coast 90s, mark 3s and DVTs in around late 2004.

That's my recollection as well, ICWC (later VWC) was exclusively DVTs, VXC was hauled sets and HSTs only. I have some film of a run-round operation at Reading in 2001.

This post here provides some pretty detailed information on the current fortunes of the mark 3 DVTs: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1110579&postcount=275

Many of the ones that remain in store have been purchased by DB.

Twenty of them! That's remarkable! How many are actually used for anything?

 

[Intercity]

apart from the door issue, why do people just assume that the HST's only have 5-10-15 years left in them?

have any mk3 coaches been withdrawn because of corrosion or other wear problems?

i'd imagine if they were getting old and clapped out in the not too distant future then these problems would already be evident on a few members of the class.

The aircraft analogy made earlier is a good one, the mk3's are akin to a long range passenger aircraft that flies at stright and level with little stress on it, they can last a lot longer than a pacer/DMU wihich is constantly stopping/bouncing up and down on rural lines which is more akin to a combat aircraft which are lifed for a lot less flying hours than a passenger aircraft.

similar to your car as well, which do you think would be in a better state?

a car that only did motorway journeys and had 100000 miles on the clock, or a car that only did 5 mile journeys on rural roads and had 25000 miles on the clock?

the HST's could easily replace all 220/1/2's even if some are slightly short formed, which could then replace 158's/185's on regional express routes which could then replace pacers.

 

[pemma]

apart from the door issue, why do people just assume that the HST's only have 5-10-15 years left in them?

have any mk3 coaches been withdrawn because of corrosion or other wear problems?

I think that's a good point. I imagine it's the locos that will be more in need of replacement and replacements could be in the form of diesel, electric or bi-mode, as required.

 

[starrymarkb]

Would a 185 be a good Pacer replacement, given their power, weight and fuel consumption?

 

[pemma]

Would a 185 be a good Pacer replacement, given their power, weight and fuel consumption?

Generally speaking no. However, note that Pacers get used on Manchester Victoria to Leeds/Selby, Leeds to Morecambe and Manchester to Sheffield services (plus other hill climbing services that will switch to EMU operation.) Refit the 185s with a higher density seating arrangement and the 185s would be suitable Pacer replacements on selected routes.

They'd also be ideal for replacing Sprinters on the Buxton line (with the same change in seating arrangement) then the cascaded Sprinters could be used to replace more Pacers.

 

[HSTEd]

The fact that there is a new order for mixed traffic locomotives that has gone out to tender challenges one of the assumptions I made when I came up with this concept....

It would appear ordering new equipment to work with the Mark 3s is not out of the question.

 

[John55]

apart from the door issue, why do people just assume that the HST's only have 5-10-15 years left in them?

have any mk3 coaches been withdrawn because of corrosion or other wear problems?

i'd imagine if they were getting old and clapped out in the not too distant future then these problems would already be evident on a few members of the class.

The aircraft analogy made earlier is a good one, the mk3's are akin to a long range passenger aircraft that flies at stright and level with little stress on it, they can last a lot longer than a pacer/DMU wihich is constantly stopping/bouncing up and down on rural lines which is more akin to a combat aircraft which are lifed for a lot less flying hours than a passenger aircraft.

similar to your car as well, which do you think would be in a better state?

a car that only did motorway journeys and had 100000 miles on the clock, or a car that only did 5 mile journeys on rural roads and had 25000 miles on the clock?

the HST's could easily replace all 220/1/2's even if some are slightly short formed, which could then replace 158's/185's on regional express routes which could then replace pacers.

This is the same as your post no 30 earlier with no additional information to reinforce the point.

I will repeat one of my earlier posts. HSTs are essentially being replaced by electric trains not because of age.

When a Jumbo is replaced by a more modern aircraft it is not cascaded to run the Isle of Man to Belfast shuttle for exactly the same reason HSTs will not be extensively cascaded - they are too expensive to operate.

 

[Zoe]

The fact that there is a new order for mixed traffic locomotives that has gone out to tender

I've not read anything about this, any more details of this tender?

 

[HSTEd]

I've not read about this, any more details of this tender?

This post from the Power Door thread seems to indicate that Ariva/DB has put out a tender for several 100mph capable locomotives.

Link to what appears to be details of the tender.

 

[jopsuk]

...which could possibly just be a tender to meet various requirements that will almost certainly result in them taking on all the spare DBS 67s

 

[HSTEd]

...which could possibly just be a tender to meet various requirements that will almost certainly result in them taking on all the spare DBS 67s

Then why would the tender specify 100mph rather than 125mph?

That is not a very well tailored specification if this is a single entrant box-ticking exercise.

 

[AndyLandy]

Then why would the tender specify 100mph rather than 125mph?

That is not a very well tailored specification if this is a single entrant box-ticking exercise.

Conceivably because these new 100mph locomotives would be better-suited to some of the work currently being undertaken by 67s? Just a guess...

 

[jopsuk]

Then why would the tender specify 100mph rather than 125mph?

That is not a very well tailored specification if this is a single entrant box-ticking exercise.

Because they need to make it appear to be open, and only need 100mph capability for the route they will operate?

 

[tbtc]

The initial 7 locomotives will be required to be ready for fleet service by 31st December 2014

Does anyone know of anything that comes off lease then?

 

[jopsuk]

There's seven "spare" 67s (ie ones available for charter, freight work, replacement on other duties)

 

[ryan125hst]

It is definitely a good idea to cascade the HST's. After all, aren't the Mark 3's often regarded as the most comfortable rolling stock on the network?

I thought that cascading the class 170's and the 158's to Northern would be a good idea. I have just tried to work out how it would work. The Pacers and the 150/1's would be scrapped, the other Sprinters would work the shorter routes, the 170's, supplemented by new class 172's would work the medium distance routes and the 158's would continue to work the express routes.

Unfortunately, I got my numbers a bit wrong and ended up with nearly 100 more trains than they currently have! I'll have another go later and post it on here if I can sort it.

Do you think that this would be a good idea, given the fact that the Pacers are almost 30 years old and the new DDA means that they won't be able to be used soon?

Sorry for the delay, but I have finally got it worked out! I'll leave it to someone else to work out what to do with the HST trailer vehicles, but with regard to the 170's and 158's, here is what I would do:

According to Wikipedia (which may not be 100% accurate, but I will use the figures from there), Northern rail have:

79 x Class 142
23 x Class 144
30 x Class 150/1
30 x Class 150/2
18 x Class 153
7 x Class 155
42 x Class 156
46 x Class 158

I'm not going to include the electric trains as they won't be affected by my cascade.

I would, firstly, scrap the Pacers (both the 142's and the 144's) unless someone can work out what else to do with them (although this is unlikely due to the DDA legislation). I would do the same to the Class 150/1's as they are the oldest of the Sprinters and don't have end gangways.

This would mean that Northern would loose 132 trains. To cover for this, the Class 150/2's, 153's, 155's and 156's would be used. The Class 150/2's would be used on short commuter routes, the class 155's and 156's would be used on slightly longer routes, and the Class 153's would be used to strengthen services. However, this would mean that 132 trains are being replaced by 97 trains, so I would order 45 new Class 172 trains, geared for 75mph, to supplement them.

To replace those 97 trains, the 36 x 3-coach Turbostars, 13 x 2-coach Turbostars, 18 x 2-coach Express Sprinters would be used. These trains would be used on medium distance journeys with many stops. Again, this leaves us short of trains, as we would have 67 trains replacing 97 trains. To overcome this, 30 of Northern rail's current Class 158's would be used as well as a further 10 new 75mph Class 172 trains.

This would leave just 16 Class 158's to be used on the long distance, express journeys. Therefore, 40 new Class 175 trains would be ordered (if it is still possible to do this), bringing the total number of long distance trains to 56.

Summary:
Overall, Northern would have:
- 142 trains for short distance commuter work (Lots of stops and a journey time of an hour or less).
- 107 trains for medium distance work. (A maximum journey time of two hours).
- 56 trains for long distance work. (A journey time of over two hours).

This is a total of 305 trains, compared to the 275 trains that they have now. This is 30 more trains that they currently have, meaning that they can operate longer trains where necessary. In addition to this, the oldest 132 members of their fleet would have been disposed of, and they would be in possession of 95 brand new trains, and 67 trains that are new to them (of which 49 of them will be less than 15 years old). They would retain 143 trains, which could be replaced by either new Class 170 or 175 trains, or a new design, as the Sprinter fleet becomes life expired.

What do you think?

 

[RobShipway]

I don't think Alstom can build the Class 175 anymore, as these where built at the old Metro Cammell site in Birmingham which has long since closed down after they finished building the original Pendolino's. I think you would be better with having 100mph capable three car version of the Class 172's instead of the class 175's.

 

[ainsworth74]

I don't think Alstom can build the Class 175 anymore, as these where built at the old Metro Cammell site in Birmingham which has long since closed down after they finished building the original Pendolino's.

If the order was big enough they'd build them (though I'd guess they'd need to modernize the design to meet modern requirements). There was nothing particularly special about that particular plant.

 

[RobShipway]

If the order was big enough they'd build them (though I'd guess they'd need to modernize the design to meet modern requirements). There was nothing particularly special about that particular plant.

I don't believe that Alstom have the plates anymore for the moulds of the Class 175 and I think the order would be too small for them. Hence, why I suggest 100mph version of Class 172 as these along with the 75mph version trains would be a large enough order for any train manufacturer to take an interest.

 

[ainsworth74]

I don't believe that Alstom have the plates anymore for the moulds of the Class 175 and I think the order would be too small for them.

That doesn't matter. If the order was big enough then they would happily build it. People need to stop thinking that destroyed jigs is a show stopper. It only is if you're looking at adding a few dozen vehicles to a fleet where the jigs have been destroyed. If you wanted to add several hundred there would be no issue.

Now as it happens I agree with you even if we assume 3-car 175s the likelihood is that 120 vehicles is not going to be a big enough order to make it cost effective to restart the 175 production line when the 172 line is open and available. Though of course this all academic as you have to put orders out to competitive tender and it's up to the bidders what they supply to meet the tender so there would be nothing stopping Alstom from offering a refreshed 175 if they wanted to.