Will there ever be any slam-door EMU rail tours?

[Class 33]

I just found this from last year:

Classic Slam Door Electric Train To Return to the Mainline

16th June 2008

Bruce Knights, Managing Director of Knights Rail Services Ltd has today announced his agreement to purchase the remaining 63 stock EMU vehicles in store at MOD Shoeburyness, with the express intention of returning a Southern Region slam door electric train to the mainline.

The ex Fratton Depot 4 car CIG unit 1881 is considered to be in excellent condition and will be reinstated for occasional mainline use by the technical teams at Eastleigh Works, where the slam door trains were overhauled and maintained throughout their lives. The former Southern Railway Works at Eastleigh, shut by Alstom in 2006, was reopened by Knights Rail last year and has a healthy and growing rail business once again. The site retains its electrified third rail system in active use and has the heavy engineering workshops necessary to maintain the trains.

The vehicles will be renovated as a commercial venture designed to showcase the capabilities and expertise of KRS and Eastleigh Works. They will also be used to provide training for engineers and technicians learning about electric traction systems.

Bruce Knights commented

“I’ve wanted to get one of these trains back running again for many years and seeing the immaculate blue VEP 3417 at Swanage in May tipped me over the edge. I would have dearly loved to acquire that one but it’s already spoken for, so 1881 it is. The other vehicles we have purchased would need extensive work to bring them back into service and it may make sense to look around for another sound 4 car unit to join 1881.

Electric trains parked off the power are a bit like Concorde in a museum, in that you really need to see them in action to appreciate them properly. We are uniquely placed to run these classic electric trains, having all the facilities, resources and expertise to do it. Whilst I will be quite happy to lend our units to preserved lines from time to time, the real purpose is to run them back over their old routes under power, whilst giving hands on training to the next generation of engineers. Of course, when the day comes that we run a classic 8 car slam door EMU into a London Terminus you can expect me to be grinning from ear to ear”

The purchased units 1881 and 1304, along with a hybrid made from vehicles from 3536 and 1884 will be moved to the Knights Rail’s Eastleigh Works in July for assessment. Unit 1881 will be re-commissioned into mainline running status over the next 6 months, initially for use in multiple with class 73s but later for use on its own. The issues concerning fitment of OTMR and secondary door locking are under investigation. It is hoped that some or all of the vehicles will feature in a celebration of Eastleigh Works centenary in 2009.

Well I just hope it happens. I might email Knight's Rail to ask what the likelihood of a Slammer rail tour in 2010 is. Personally I think it's too good to be true.

I think they should have kept at least one or two of these running in mainline service for a few more years yet. A bit like those one or two Routemaster buses still being used on service 9 and 15 in London.

 

[matt]

I take it you did not read my post then? I had already said about knights rail and 1881

 

[Drsatan]

I think they should have kept at least one or two of these running in mainline service for a few more years yet. A bit like those one or two Routemaster buses still being used on service 9 and 15 in London.

That would have been nice however it would be difficult for them to run regularly on the main line (excluding the Lymington branch where two 3CIGs operate, soon to be replaced) because of Health & Safety Executive crash protection standards. None of the 3rd-rail Mk1 units offer the required level of crash protection which is why they were all withdrawn, even though some of the 4CIGs were only finished in 1972 and had plenty of life left. I understand there can be individual exemptions for units for a short period of time (which require the aforementioned units to have central door locking and TPWS installed), but that would be difficult to arrange for units running regularly on say, the South Western mainline
.

My advice: if you want to ride on 3CIGs in BR blue/grey and green, go to the Lymington branch ASAP. You change trains at Brockenhurst which is served by all SWT trains going to Weymouth and XC services. SWT wants to replace them with 158s since they claim Bournemouth depot can't maintain them. The only one which probably could is Wimbledon but the number of paths for transfer movements is limited.

 

[Class 33]

Well I did email Knights Rail Services. But sadly it doesn't look like they're going to reply now - being a week since I sent the email. Would have been nice to get a reply at least. I therefore remain sceptical that we'll ever get a slam-door EMU tour in the near future now. On the one hand KRS said(last year) "when the day comes that we run a classic 8 car slam door EMU into a London Terminus you can expect me to be grinning from ear to ear.". But on the other hand there's this silly HSE rule saying they're banned from the mainline. So we'll just have to sit back and keep an eye on the railtours listings over the comings months/years and see if any slammer EMU tours are announced. If so, I for one will be very pleasantly surprised.

Drsatan, yes I went down to Lymington last month to ride the CIG's. Bit of a long and expensive journey down to Brockenhurst just for a 10 minute journey each way to and from Lymington on the CIG's though. But it's still good to ride on these beauties nevertheless. I will go down there again soon, this time making sure I take my video camera with me and do a few return trips that day. I plan to go down on the Gala Weekend next May too, which may well turn out to be their final final workings anywhere on the UK rail network.

 

[Metadyneman]

I notice this hasn't been added to for a while but 421881 was observed behind Class 47 No. 47739 on it's way to Barrow Hill. I have heard rumours that it is to be stripped/scrapped for electrical components for the 5-BEL project.. does anyone out there know in forumland what is happening with 1881?

 

[matt]

I notice this hasn't been added to for a while but 421881 was observed behind Class 47 No. 47739 on it's way to Barrow Hill. I have heard rumours that it is to be stripped/scrapped for electrical components for the 5-BEL project.. does anyone out there know in forumland what is happening with 1881?

1881 is being stripped for the Brighton Belle project apart from one of the vehicles which is going to the Dean Forest Railway. I understand the Brighton Belle is using the motors of the cig.

 

[Metadyneman]

Hmm. Well nice to hear the Belle project have found their traction motors but why 1881? I think that is a shame to be honest. I thought that was the best of what was left and suitable for preservation itself. Are there not traction motors on the other two EMUs that Knights Rail obtained from store at Shoeburyness? or have K R got their eyes on the 2 3-CIGs on the Lymington branch??

 

[royaloak]

Why didnt the pullman lot get some coaches when they were withdrawn a few years ago, now they buy a preserved unit just to use for spares then scrap it, I suppose it shows how lowly these things are thought of!

Wonder what would happen if they did the same with a steamer?

How many people who think this is a sad state of affairs has given money or time to help with 3rd rail preservation?

 

[yorksrob]

Why didnt the pullman lot get some coaches when they were withdrawn a few years ago, now they buy a preserved unit just to use for spares then scrap it, I suppose it shows how lowly these things are thought of!

Wonder what would happen if they did the same with a steamer?

How many people who think this is a sad state of affairs has given money or time to help with 3rd rail preservation?

Yes indeed. I must plead guilty as charged as my available dosh seems to go on travelling costs and I'm too far away up North to be of much use as a volunteer. Keep meaning to get down to one of the EKR EMU days. If someone could be granted a dispensation to run some slammer railtours on the mainline as a way of raising funds for EMU preservation I'd definately go on those.

But it's true what you say. Interesting though the 5 BEL project is, I'd far rather see the workeable CIG remain in one piece.

 

[Metadyneman]

The two other units that Knights Rail acquired at the same time as 1881 would surely have provided what the 5-BEL trust needed in terms of traction motors etc. I agree it is quite concerning that anyone should even contemplate the destruction of a perfectly functioning heritage EMU even for the resurrection of an older slightly more famous EMU.

I wonder if it's the BELLE getting it's own back by being ousted by the CIG in 1972!!

Incidentally now that KR have sold 1881 does anyone know what is happening to the other CIG and the half CIG half VEP that they acquired from Shoeburyness last year?

 

[Christopher125]

Very simply, restoring and running a Mk1 EMU on the mainline is a rich man's game. Unless you can afford to spend several hundred thousand on it, then it isnt going to happen.

Its a shame, but you can be sure Bruce didnt give it away lightly - the resources to fund it werent there and given the situation and the very niche interest in mainline EMU's a public appeal would not only have been unlikely to raise enough money, but also hurt the chances of the VEP raising the money it requires as well.

Chris

 

[starrymarkb]

even though some of the 4CIGs were only finished in 1972 and had plenty of life left.

Interestingly the Mk2 was in production (and IIRC production was starting on the Mk3s) at that time which does meet the standards. The Southern Region was ordering an obsolete design based around a light body and heavy underframe, which disintegrated in accidents. Everything built since Mk2 has a much stronger self supporting Monocoque structure (even Pacers are self supporting, though then mounted on a separately built underframe/chassis)

 

[Metadyneman]

....... but also hurt the chances of the VEP raising the money it requires as well.

Chris

What VEP would that be then? The only complete VEP at Eastleigh AFAIK is 423417 "Gordon Pettitt" which is currently owned by the Bluebell Railway and nothing to do with Knights Rail other than them kindly allowing storage of it there. The one Knights Rail obtained was only the open second and MBSO of unit 423536 flanked by a couple of CIG DTC's from unit 421304 and as far as it was made known at the time they were acquired this was to provide spares for 421881.

 

[royaloak]

What is being stripped off 1881, if its just the motors and control gear maybe the remains can be kept as a 4 coach loco hauled set, just a thought!

 

[Metadyneman]

Well here is the exact text from the 5-BEL trust's website. It seems 1881 is to be dismantled apart from its TSO which may be going to the Dean Forest Railway to augment their 4-CIG 421499 into a 4-Car unit.

Quote fron 5-BEL Trust website

"The Trust has purchased a 4-CIG train set from Eastleigh Works to act as the donor vehicle for bogies, traction motors, control gear, EP braking system, couplings and other items for the Brighton Belle. No. 1881 will be moved to Barrow Hill, where all the parts needed for the project will be removed by the Harry Needle Railroad Company.

EMU 1881 had been destined for the scrapyard. Some restoration has been carried out recently and some of this work will live on in the Brighton Belle. A Trust spokesman said "Our aim is to recycle all parts from 1881 that are not needed for our own project. Our main hope is that we can donate intact the unique open second class car to the Dean Forest Railway; this would allow them to complete their preserved 4-CIG, No. 1499.

I'm a bit concerned that they say 1881 was destined for a scrapyard... at no time was this ever mentioned by Knights rail... I presume the other two EMUs he has at Eastleigh are now under the threat of scrapping too then!

 

[d.collins26]

So, could 1881 become a TC then? Certainly ironic given its SW background.

Also, WHY isnt 423417 Gordon Pettitt ever used? it was delivered to East Grinstead for the Bluebell months back, the removed about 2 weeks later. Where is it now and why dont/didnt SWT ever run it on Lymington?

Surely 432417 would be in good mechanical condition and could be run to Lymington and/or mainline railtours?

Its also a shame that no Southern DEMUs (bar 1001) operate. I think the Marshlink is an ideal line for hertiage operation, given the historic and popular towns it goes though. (Rye, Hastings, Appledore, Winchelsea) A 2 hourly shuttle between Ashford and Hastyings could be a 205 and the other 2 hourly service inbetween the heritage could be a Turbo to Brighton. Still an hourly service, its just every other train would be a heritage.

 

[NSEFAN]

I thought 1881 would be pretty much unusable after it is stripped of useful parts? Making it into a TC wouldn't be possible.

3417, whilst fit to work on the mainline, doesn't have central door locking, and there's the issue of having a barrier vehicle. Whilst a head on collision is extremely unlikely, health and safety still won't allow it for one single passenger run. I suppose you COULD have a 73 at each end, but there's still the issue of door locking.

As for the Marshlink, I can understand why they wouldn't want to use a nicely restored DEMU: it'd get trashed by certain individuals. I believe the DEMUs had/have wooden interiors similar to those of the EPBs, which make them especially nice but equally more vulnerable to vandalism.

Perhaps if the Hastings DEMU ran on certain daytime workings on summer weekends and holidays, when vandalism is less likely to occur? It would also have the flexibility of adding extra cars if needed to increase capacity.

 

[royaloak]

3417 is in "safe" store at Eastleigh works, although with what has happened to 1881 how safe is safe, I mean the Bluebell railway only took it on because it was cheap and Knights (who I HAD a lot of respect for) have now shown us that money is key and anything will be scrapped if the price is right.

The bogies and brake equipment are being removed from 1881 so not much use as a TC, it would make a mess of the track being dragged along , could always stick other bogies under it but the braking system would take some sorting.

 

[ChrisCooper]

The Mk1 ban was stupid anyway. Whilst they are not up to modern standards, they are still perfectly safe. As has been said you are more at risk crossing the road than travelling in the leading coach of a Mk1 EMU at 90mph. Even the figures from the HSE to try and justify the ban were heavily massaged to get the conclusion they wanted. The figures for deaths and injuries from accidents involving later types were modified to remove those where high speeds were involved, yet no effort was taken to adjust for speed in the Mk1 figures. Loadings were also not taken into account. It's hardly fair to compared the casualty figures from a packed train at Clapham and the Mk3 and 4 accidents that have all involved lightly loaded first class coaches. They also took door related injuries into account, many of which could occur with Mk2 or Mk3 coaches. Two accidents are always cited as examples of why Mk1s are bad, Clapham and Cannon Street. Clapham was a serious accident involving 3 trains. I'm sure had it been Desiros we'd have seen multiple fatalities. Cannon Street was not Mk1s, they were earlier design and not to the same standards. The irony is that the Mk1s were for many years highly praised due to their safety.

Even the derrogations are stupid. The problem with Mk1s is that the body is fairly weak so the very strong underframes can ride up onto each other and destroy the body. A loco or "barrier" vehicle isn't going to stop that. Say the highly unlikely scenario occurs where a Mk1 railtour is rear ended by another train. If the rear vehicle is a none passenger carrying Mk1, what is to stop it riding up onto the underframe of the passenger carrying coach infront? Nothing. If it's a Mk2 it's going to have passengers in as Mk2s are stronger. It's probably just going to ride up onto the Mk1 infront then. Of cource the Mk1 getting destroyed absorbs the impact and possibly reduces injuries and fatalities further up the train and on the other train.

With TPWS the chances of a collision are much less likely. Derailments are still possible, but Mk1s have never shown problems standing up to derailments. To me it highlighted the stupidity of the whole "crashworthness" issue after that Pendolino derailed in Cumbria. There was so much talk of it being built "like a tank" and how "if it had been one of the old trains!". The "old trains" which were Mk3s, widely praised for their crashworthyness and tank like construction. When it comes to Mk1s, I always think Purley is a great example of how strong they are. 5 dead after the train smashed into the back of another one and went down an embankment. One of the survivors was the driver. I think the one accident that showed the crashworthyness of all the BR standard coaches was Colwich where the only fatality was one of the drivers. That was a 100mph collision involving Mk1, Mk2 and Mk3 coaches. The Mk1 BG of the southbound train which was behind the loco didn't come off that badly. Even that's an example of "spin" though since praise is usually directed at the Mk3s, yet the leading coaches of both trains were Mk1 and Mk2.

 

[SouthEastern-465]

Although it was a sad story seeing 1881 Class 421 CIG scrapped for parts, but its not like it was for bad reason? I think it is a brilliant idea what Knights Rail Services have done with 1881, there are no 5BELs preserved and a good amount of Class 421 CIGs preserved, so by selling 1881, its gone for a good reason. I hope the 5BEL restoration goes good with the spare parts from the CIG have helped alot, and hope to see it in the near future, as there are no 5BELs left and would be nice to see one.

And I do speak as someone who loves SR 'Slammers to bits so I hope someone can understand my point.

 

[yorksrob]

Whereas I'd have probably gone out of my way to travel on some CIG railtours if they came about (are they really that much more incomprehensible than the other various Mk1 trains on the network to this very day?) I doubt there will be much chance to go on this 5BEL unit anyway since it will probably be aimed towards the premium "orient express" market. To be honest, now that the CIG has been sacrificed for it, I feel even less inclined to go on it.

 

[royaloak]

I agree YR, I mean will it be a 5BEL or is it just a 4CIG with a posh frock on?

 

[SouthEastern-465]

I just hope it isn't a CIG with a frock on, and hope the CIG was sacrificed for a GOOD reason to actually help the 5BEL restoration go ahead.

 

[yorksrob]

Well, it's not going to be either really is it. I mean, a BEL unit with EP brakes !?

 

[bluebottle]

Well, it's not going to be either really is it. I mean, a BEL unit with EP brakes !?

Almost as bad as Lord Nelson with air brakes.

 

[devon_metro]

I agree YR, I mean will it be a 5BEL or is it just a 4CIG with a posh frock on?

Don't know what is wrong with the hauled Pullman coaching to be honest, why do we need a 3rd rail example?

I'd pay to travel on a mainline CIG, and I highly doubt the Dean Forest Railway is ever going to get a mainline CIG considering the nearest 3rd rail is in Hampshire!! Stupid decision.

Hopefully something is made of this VEP.

 

[Metadyneman]

Although it was a sad story seeing 1881 Class 421 CIG scrapped for parts, but its not like it was for bad reason? I think it is a brilliant idea what Knights Rail Services have done with 1881, there are no 5BELs preserved and a good amount of Class 421 CIGs preserved, so by selling 1881, its gone for a good reason. I hope the 5BEL restoration goes good with the spare parts from the CIG have helped alot, and hope to see it in the near future, as there are no 5BELs left and would be nice to see one.

And I do speak as someone who loves SR 'Slammers to bits so I hope someone can understand my point.

I think it's a crap idea what Knights rail have done to be honest.. they could have donated the other two EMU's they had for the 5-BEL project and stuck with Bruce's"dream" to see a 4-CIG pull into a London terminus in preservation. Yes it's brilliant to see the Belle again but I will only believe it when i see it. If the Belle fails then it will be to the detriment of all that runs on the third rail in preservation and in particular to the destruction of a perfectly functioning 4-CIG unit which they will have destroyed in the process! On their heads be it!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
1881 was supposed to have been saved by Knights rail so we could enjoy riding in a HSE safe CIG... I'm not impressed with Knights rail & preservation being used in the same sentence.. I hope th Bluebell Railway is watching closesly being the owners of the only complete and functioning 4-VEP that can technically still draw power from the third rail and escape!

 

[SouthEastern-465]

I think it's a crap idea what Knights rail have done to be honest.. they could have donated the other two EMU's they had for the 5-BEL project and stuck with Bruce's"dream" to see a 4-CIG pull into a London terminus in preservation. Yes it's brilliant to see the Belle again but I will only believe it when i see it. If the Belle fails then it will be to the detriment of all that runs on the third rail in preservation and in particular to the destruction of a perfectly functioning 4-CIG unit which they will have destroyed in the process! On their heads be it!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
1881 was supposed to have been saved by Knights rail so we could enjoy riding in a HSE safe CIG... I'm not impressed with Knights rail & preservation being used in the same sentence.. I hope th Bluebell Railway is watching closesly being the owners of the only complete and functioning 4-VEP that can technically still draw power from the third rail and escape!

I agree in a way, but you will have to give the 5BEL restoration a chance.

I am a Southern Region Fanatic, and love The Slammers (CIGs, VEPs, CEPs, EPBs, 'Thumpers' etc..) and talk as someone who adores the CIGs, but I am giving the 5BEL trust a chance, there are no 5BEL units around and to see one in working order would be great, and thats just a sacrifice I would take to see one, as there are quite a few CIGs around currently, and who knows what will happen to the Lymington ones after all?

Good luck to the 5BEL!

 

[yorksrob]

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one SouthEastern-465

It's great that there are already a few CIG's preserved around the country but realistically the Knights Rail scheme was the only one which was likely to end up running on the main line. My hopes of a mainline electric slammer railtour have suddenly receded somewhat. And after so much work had taken place already!

 

[Christopher125]

I really dont understand people complaining that Bruce didnt spend his money the way they wanted. 1881 was not unique, what made it special was the chance that it was owned by someone who had the money to put it back on the mainline - ultimately that ambition was unrealistic, and he sold it to recoup his losses.

Asking the relatively small number of enthusiasts willing to put their hands in their pockets for Mk1 EMU's to either outbid the 5BEL trust, or get it on the mainline, would have only served to make the likely appeal for 3417's mainline return at best a lot more difficult and most likely impossible.

Chris