Theoretical Question: Can a HST powercar rescue a failed HST?

[Tom B]

I'm fairly sure I've heard of a HST power car substituting for a failed 91 on the east coast in Intercity days. Is thst true or am I mistaken?

 

[daikilo]

I'm fairly sure I've heard of a HST power car substituting for a failed 91 on the east coast in Intercity days. Is thst true or am I mistaken?

I don't recall that, but right at the begining some HST power cars were modified to replace the undelivered DVTs but not (normally) to provide motive power.

 

[hexagon789]

I don't recall that, but right at the begining some HST power cars were modified to replace the undelivered DVTs but not (normally) to provide motive power.

The surrogate DVT HST power cars did supply traction power. Initially they on y supplied ETS to the Mk3 trailers but running constantly at 1,000 rpm was causing a build up of unburnt fuel in the exhaust and silencers which led to a fire in believe. So all were then modified to supply traction power as normal when running with 91s.

The 7,860 hp output resulted in some spectacular acceleration.

 

[randyrippley]

I'm fairly sure I've heard of a HST power car substituting for a failed 91 on the east coast in Intercity days. Is thst true or am I mistaken?

You're mistaken: an HST power car could not provide hotel power to the Mk4 coaches.
What DID happen was that some class 91s were "run in" by being attached to an HST set, replacing one power car. The remaining power car provided hotel power - and later (as already explained) tractive power as well

 

[alexl92]

HSTs do not have Tightlocks. Production power cars have Alliance couplers - these are basically fixed buckeyes. 41001 has a standard drop-head buckeye. An Alliance coupler can (and has) coupled to a buckeye.

The adapter to fit the swing coupler on a 67 is not a VTEC innovation, either - it was developed back in GNER days when the 67s replaced the 47s as Thunderbirds.

So what do Mk3 sets have? How can you to put 41001 at one end of a Mk3 set and a production car at the other if they have different couplers?

 

[Domh245]

The RSSB coupling standards document says that Mk3 HST set intermediate ends are fitted with Alliance couplers as well. However, it is worth noting what the Alliance coupler is:

This document uses the term Alliance couplers to refer to solid shank buckeye couplers (it is known that some have been also produced by Blair).

...

The system allows automatic connection of vehicles and in principle is similar to the drophead buckeye automatic coupler system without the facility for conversion to allow connection to locomotives fitted with a Screw
coupler

And if you look at the compatibility chart you can see that there is (conditional) compatibility between the Alliance, Tightlock, and Buckeye couplers

 

[AnonymousUser1]

I'm fairly sure I've heard of a HST power car substituting for a failed 91 on the east coast in Intercity days. Is thst true or am I mistaken?

Nah ...

91s substititing for one class 43 yes - but to retain ETS for the stock you need a functioning class 43 on the other end of the mk 3 rake as HSTmk 3s use 415 v 3 ph ETS not standard ETS ...

the class91s were delivered and c missioned before the mk4s and DVTs were ready hence the use of hst mk3 rakes with 'surrogate dvt' (buffer and TDM equpped) class43s for a period

 

[43096]

So what do Mk3 sets have? How can you to put 41001 at one end of a Mk3 set and a production car at the other if they have different couplers?

HST Mark 3s have Alliance couplers. LHCS Mark 3s have drop-head buckeyes with retractable buffers.

As stated above the Alliance coupler is effectively a “fixed” buckeye, so a buckeye fitted loco or stock will couple to an Alliance coupler vehicle using the buckeye.

 

[edwin_m]

I remember one day around 1990 waiting for my train home from Derby and watching as a HST came into platform 1 from Birmingham direction being propelled by another full set, both with passengers. Cut much shouting and banging with various hammers until the emergency coupling bar was eventually disconnected! Then the assisting set (not in the platform of course) could back out and return to a different platform to allow passengers off, after which the queue of trains behind came through one by one, eventually including mine. I was rather late home that night.

 

[Matt_pool]

Was going through some old photos and found these that I took at Bristol Temple Meads in May 2013.

47810 is taking 43079, 43042, 43138 and 43122 to an unknown location.

 

[43096]

Was going through some old photos and found these that I took at Bristol Temple Meads in May 2013.

47810 is taking 43079, 43042, 43138 and 43122 to an unknown location.

View attachment 46356 View attachment 46357 View attachment 46358 View attachment 46359

That is clearly not May 2013. Without checking I would say it was 2007.

 

[Domh245]

That is clearly not May 2013. Without checking I would say it was 2007.

Agreed, by May 2013 47810 had been repainted into DRS livery, and there wouldn't have been any barbie liveried powercars left. It'll have either been late 2007 or very early 2008 based on a bit more Flickr searching of the powercars in that consist and when they were last photographed in the old barbie livery. I would think that they'd have been off for fitting with MTUs at Brush Loughborough (and repainting)

 

[Matt_pool]

Yes, you are right!

I've found the correct date: Taken at 16.35 on 31st May 2007.

Don't know where I got 2013 from!