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

[90019]

Once the 5BEL group have got everything they want off 1881 would what's left be used as parts for 1753/1497/1498?

Going back to the original question, I dunno if this has already been mentioned, but could they not use the preserved MLVs to get round the restrictions?
There are plenty preserved (well, relative to the original number built anyway), so would it not be possible to get one or two mainline registered and then either top and tailing with two or with one and a 33 or 73.

 

[yorksrob]

Once the 5BEL group have got everything they want off 1881 would what's left be used as parts for 1753/1497/1498?

Going back to the original question, I dunno if this has already been mentioned, but could they not use the preserved MLVs to get round the restrictions?
There are plenty preserved (well, relative to the original number built anyway), so would it not be possible to get one or two mainline registered and then either top and tailing with two or with one and a 33 or 73.

Yes indeed, this would be the easiest way. It would be authentic (sort of) as they were supposed to be used in multiple with EMU's anyway.

 

[ChampsRacing]

I would rather have MLV's being top and tailed onto a slamdoor than a 73 IMHO. Im sure 73 fans will disagree

 

[yorksrob]

They may well do, but I'm sure the majority of EMU enthusiasts would rather travel in a powered slammer than a hauled one

 

[Southern Dvr]

Couple of things. Someone said that 1399 was stored at Eastleigh? No its not, its having major work done on one of its dtcs vehicles before heading back to pontypool and blaneavon railway. As for return of slam doors for charters, i think so many of us were delighted to see 3417 on the mainline heading to bluebell line that to start with even some 33/73 tours would start us off in the right direction!

 

[Metadyneman]

Couple of things. Someone said that 1399 was stored at Eastleigh? No its not, its having major work done on one of its dtcs vehicles before heading back to pontypool and blaneavon railway. As for return of slam doors for charters, i think so many of us were delighted to see 3417 on the mainline heading to bluebell line that to start with even some 33/73 tours would start us off in the right direction!

Absolutely right about that and well said.

 

[SouthEastern-465]

Couple of things. Someone said that 1399 was stored at Eastleigh? No its not, its having major work done on one of its dtcs vehicles before heading back to pontypool and blaneavon railway. As for return of slam doors for charters, i think so many of us were delighted to see 3417 on the mainline heading to bluebell line that to start with even some 33/73 tours would start us off in the right direction!

I remeber seeing it in the RM, which said it was 'stored' by preservationists, sorry if this infomation was incorrect.

 

[yorksrob]

Couple of things. Someone said that 1399 was stored at Eastleigh? No its not, its having major work done on one of its dtcs vehicles before heading back to pontypool and blaneavon railway. As for return of slam doors for charters, i think so many of us were delighted to see 3417 on the mainline heading to bluebell line that to start with even some 33/73 tours would start us off in the right direction!

Well, I'm not saying I wouldn't go on one if it were hauled. Just that powered would be the ideal

 

[Chris125]

That's fair comment and I can see the logic in your thinking. However, what I'm more concerned about is that the "Belle" was, and is, no ordinary run of the mill EMU. It ran more or less solely on the Brighton Line for all of it's career (apart from the war years) and is of little interest to the rest of EMU enthusiasts in the greater south, east and west who probably never saw it in service. However most if not all of said enthusiasts did at some point in their lives ride on a 4-CIG and would probably have preferred to see one of those running rather than a train restricted to a minority who can afford to ride in it. For the likes of us mere minions in society, with the greatest of respect to those who can afford it, we are unlikely to ever be able to pay for a ride on the unit if the price is likely to be anything like that of a ride in the VSOE. It's a lovely train and likely to succeed in preservation but only because the price to place a bum on one of it's seats is enough to pay for it's keep and make a profit!

We simply dont know how the Belle will be run, so speculating on prices etc is pointless - however even if it ends up all 1st class pullman dining and they dont retain any third class seating, it will still generate a vast amount of publicity and interest in a working EMU, with profits going towards the restoration of the rest of their rolling stock and the setting up of a dedicated museum. I can think of worse outcomes...

With regards to the unit itself, i really dont see the problem. If using CIG gear is the only way to get it on the mainline, and its that self-powered EMU selling point which has generated the interest and the investment, then its a sacrifice worth making to keep the units EMU heritage regardless of the need for surgery. The alternative, if you can call it that, is to see either all the vehicles rot until their broken for spares, or have the trailers converted to vacuum braked first class loco-hauled pullman's, quite possibly on new bogies as well, at considerable cost. The DM's (MBPT's) would be lucky to even receive that, given the cost vs limited seating accomadation.

While im no fan of a CIG/BEL hybrid, i think you have to be pragmatic. It will keep the vehicles mainline EMU heritage with as much, or less, modification to the trailers than they would have required for VSOE or preserved line use, while ensuring the DM's (MBPT's) have a future beyond the scrapman; the operation of which will help the trust meet its aims of preserving its other EMU's and the setting up of a dedicated museum.

The loss of 1881 is a different issue. Relatively speaking, there isnt a lack of CIG's but there is a fundemental lack of money and support to put them on the mainline. 5BEL trust aside, the only other avenue is Bruce Knights but because of the rediculous backlash regarding 1881 he unsurprisingly gave up any thoughts of taking on the Lymmy units - the fact that one unit is now to be used as glorified LHCS and the other is still sitting in Bournemouth Depot says it all. Not for the first time in railway preservation, a lot of blame can be put on counter-productive infighting.

Chris

 

[SouthEastern-465]

We simply dont know how the Belle will be run, so speculating on prices etc is pointless - however even if it ends up all 1st class pullman dining and they dont retain any third class seating, it will still generate a vast amount of publicity and interest in a working EMU, with profits going towards the restoration of the rest of its rolling stock and the setting up of a dedicated museum. I can think of worse outcomes...

With regards to the unit itself, i really dont see the problem. If using CIG gear is the only way to get it on the mainline, and its that self-powered EMU selling point which has generated the interest and the investment, then its a sacrifice worth making to keep the units EMU heritage regardless of the need for surgery. The alternative, if you can call it that, is to see either all the vehicles rot until their broken for spares, or have the trailers converted to vacuum braked first class loco-hauled pullman's, quite possibly on new bogies as well, at considerable cost. The DM's (MBPT's) would be lucky to even receive that, given the cost vs limited seating accomadation.

While im no fan of a CIG/BEL hybrid, i think you have to be pragmatic. It will keep the vehicles mainline EMU heritage with as much, or less, modification to the trailers than they would have required for VSOE or preserved line use, while ensuring the DM's (MBPT's) have a future beyond the scrapman; the operation of which will help the trust meet its aims of preserving its other EMU's and the setting up of a dedicated museum.

The loss of 1881 is a different issue. Relatively speaking, there isnt a lack of CIG's but there is a fundemental lack of money and support to put them on the mainline. 5BEL trust aside, the only other avenue is Bruce Knights but because of the rediculous backlash regarding 1881 he unsurprisingly gave up any thoughts of taking on the Lymmy units - the fact that one unit is now to be used as glorified LHCS and the other is still sitting in Bournemouth Depot says it all. Not for the first time in railway preservation, a lot of blame can be put on counter-productive infighting.

Chris

Couldn't agree more.

 

[yorksrob]

We simply dont know how the Belle will be run, so speculating on prices etc is pointless - however even if it ends up all 1st class pullman dining and they dont retain any third class seating, it will still generate a vast amount of publicity and interest in a working EMU, with profits going towards the restoration of the rest of their rolling stock and the setting up of a dedicated museum. I can think of worse outcomes...

With regards to the unit itself, i really dont see the problem. If using CIG gear is the only way to get it on the mainline, and its that self-powered EMU selling point which has generated the interest and the investment, then its a sacrifice worth making to keep the units EMU heritage regardless of the need for surgery. The alternative, if you can call it that, is to see either all the vehicles rot until their broken for spares, or have the trailers converted to vacuum braked first class loco-hauled pullman's, quite possibly on new bogies as well, at considerable cost. The DM's (MBPT's) would be lucky to even receive that, given the cost vs limited seating accomadation.

While im no fan of a CIG/BEL hybrid, i think you have to be pragmatic. It will keep the vehicles mainline EMU heritage with as much, or less, modification to the trailers than they would have required for VSOE or preserved line use, while ensuring the DM's (MBPT's) have a future beyond the scrapman; the operation of which will help the trust meet its aims of preserving its other EMU's and the setting up of a dedicated museum.

The loss of 1881 is a different issue. Relatively speaking, there isnt a lack of CIG's but there is a fundemental lack of money and support to put them on the mainline. 5BEL trust aside, the only other avenue is Bruce Knights but because of the rediculous backlash regarding 1881 he unsurprisingly gave up any thoughts of taking on the Lymmy units - the fact that one unit is now to be used as glorified LHCS and the other is still sitting in Bournemouth Depot says it all. Not for the first time in railway preservation, a lot of blame can be put on counter-productive infighting.

Chris

Well, personally I wish the BEL trust well. I'm sure it will be a great train when it's up and running. Yes, it was a big dissappointment when it turned out that 1881 wasn't going to make it back to the mainline after all the fanfare, but as you rightly pointed out earlier on, Bruce was putting up the cash and it was his right to sell it.

As for the Mid-Norfolk railway, I think it's wonderful that they're looking after one of the Lymington CIG's. Going on a loco hauled EMU might not be quite the same as being on a powered one, but I heartily agree with Southern DVR and Metadyneman that having them out of harms way is a step in the right direction and far better than them going to the torch. They deserve our heart felt gratitude and I will certainly be visiting the next time I'm on holiday in that part of the country.

 

[Metadyneman]

I have to say that the backlash which occurred when 1881 was sold was probably brought on by the fact that there were a lot of people looking forward to seeing 1881 preserved as a main line unit spurred on by Bruce Kinghts own words, however I fully respect Bruce Knights for taking what must have been a very difficult decision to sell the unit. I don't know the precise ins & outs of exactly what went on and nor do I wish to really so on that issue I will say no more.

I am gently enthused at seeing the "Belle" ride again. I mourned the passing of the "Belle" back in April '72 even in the ghastly blue/grey colours, but I think the revival will be somewhat different!

When you think about it, there have been moans about 1881, but what about the sole remaining 4-SUB which I think is still quietly rusting away in Coventry??

I suppose we should think ourselves lucky that a 5-BEL unit is on it's way back from the dead!

Maybe one of Bulleids non steam successes will follow!

 

[yorksrob]

When you think about it, there have been moans about 1881, but what about the sole remaining 4-SUB which I think is still quietly rusting away in Coventry??

I'd love to see that one up and running again, especially having had the good fortune to actually travel on it in the good old days ! When you consider that many of Bullied's non steam carriages were carrying fare paying passengers well into the mid-nineties they were a success worth remembering

 

[SouthEastern-465]

I have to say that the backlash which occurred when 1881 was sold was probably brought on by the fact that there were a lot of people looking forward to seeing 1881 preserved as a main line unit spurred on by Bruce Kinghts own words, however I fully respect Bruce Knights for taking what must have been a very difficult decision to sell the unit. I don't know the precise ins & outs of exactly what went on and nor do I wish to really so on that issue I will say no more.

I am gently enthused at seeing the "Belle" ride again. I mourned the passing of the "Belle" back in April '72 even in the ghastly blue/grey colours, but I think the revival will be somewhat different!

When you think about it, there have been moans about 1881, but what about the sole remaining 4-SUB which I think is still quietly rusting away in Coventry??

I suppose we should think ourselves lucky that a 5-BEL unit is on it's way back from the dead!

Maybe one of Bulleids non steam successes will follow!

I am sure theres more than one SUB left around although not in there original formation and reduced to a 2SUB some survived into the Railtrack era, and are still around? I may be wrong but I seem to remeber doing a thread about one a couple of months back, not to sure though.

 

[Metadyneman]

There were a few 4-SUBs reduced to 2-car after withdrawal and heavily modified for rail treatment & de-icing which also included rebuilding of the cab fronts and replacement of the large front cab windows with EPB types. The BEL trust purchased one of these when network rail disposed of them with a view to using the traction and control equipment from it but they went for the CIG gear instead. On the plus side they are preserving the de-icer and it may become the only preserved old style bulleid shape EMU de-icing unit in the country.