1st Generation units as crowd busters?

[61653 HTAFC]

Reading up about the use of 121s at Chiltern and ATW, I was wondering whether any operators might have looked at a similar operation, perhaps using 2/3-car units. It occurred to me that summer services on the Looe, Newquay and St. Ives branches would perhaps be suitable for use of overhauled 101s (or others, but there's a fair few 101s about) as they are largely segregated from the mainline services they connect with.

A power-twin set would probably be required on those routes, and as insurance against failure- but surely if overhauled to the level of Chiltern's 121s including CDL fitment, this would be an ideal way to free up a few sprinters.

I vaguely remember hearing something about ATW looking into hiring a 'heritage' unit a few years ago but that was in RAIL, so probably nothing in it...

Thoughts?

 

[Class172]

I have often thought similar. I can think of quite a few candidate services that could be operated by 116/117/121s.

Similarly you could have spammers slammers back on the Lymington Branch.

 

[NSEFAN]

I think the opportunity for increased "heritage" operation has largely been missed. In most cases, the majority of now-withdrawn classes have been scrapped, making spare parts difficult to source. An example of this problem is ATW's bubble car, which has been out of use for months, as discussed in another thread.

If, for example, the slam-door units on SWT were only just being withdrawn, I would suggest a scheme like keeping a small fleet for relief trains and strip as many others as possible for spares before scrapping their remains.

 

[455driver]

Similarly you could have spammers back on the Lymington Branch.

I would prefer the slammers myself but each to their own!

 

[Class172]

I would prefer the slammers myself but each to their own!

Whoops! Blame the auto-correct.

 

[Penmorfa]

Reading up about the use of 121s at Chiltern and ATW, I was wondering whether any operators might have looked at a similar operation, perhaps using 2/3-car units. It occurred to me that summer services on the Looe, Newquay and St. Ives branches would perhaps be suitable for use of overhauled 101s (or others, but there's a fair few 101s about) as they are largely segregated from the mainline services they connect with.

I don't think 'largely segregated' is good enough nowadays. The Chiltern and Cardiff Bay branches are completely segregrated from other trains. The only other line where this applies is the Lymington branch.

Aside from which 1st generation DMU's are a dreadful passenger experience nowadays (and you won't even get the drivers view through the front end!)

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I don't think 'largely segregated' is good enough nowadays. The Chiltern and Cardiff Bay branches are completely segregrated from other trains. The only other line where this applies is the Lymington branch.

Aside from which 1st generation DMU's are a dreadful passenger experience nowadays (and you won't even get the drivers view through the front end!)

Er, the Looe branch is entirely segregated from the mainline (other than ECS to depots and the occasional freight to Moorswater), and the St. Ives branch too, if running as a shuttle from the St. Erth bay platform. Even the Newquay branch has only the running through Par station shared with mainline services- I don't have the measurements to hand but I imagine it'll not be much more than the approaches to Queen Street or Aylesbury (for the 121s) or Brockenhurst (for the Lymingtons).

Fair point that the ship might've sailed though- that said, I still think it would be possible to overhaul and improve the ride quality of the units. Even the old DMUs pootling up and down our preserved railways are no worse than a 150, and far superior to a pacer- and that's running on track that's only permitted for 25mph running. I appreciate that I'm venturing into fantasy land a little, but a 2-car 104 (ideal for the deep windows) with new engines running on the Looe branch would probably boost passenger numbers in the summer season too, much like how the Lymington slammers were often full of enthusiasts. They'd probably even be easier to make DDA-compliant than the pacers or 153s, too!

 

[455driver]

Whoops! Blame the auto-correct.

I dont use auto correct for that very reason.

 

[Techniquest]

Wasn't it back in 2005/2006 that ATW had the plan to get a 3-car 101 done up for Heart of Wales services? Recall there was much discussion here at the time, and in all fairness it was mentioned in more than just RAIL. Think we were in the early planning stages of a forum meet for it too!

 

[Penmorfa]

Er, the Looe branch is entirely segregated from the mainline (other than ECS to depots and the occasional freight to Moorswater), and the St. Ives branch too, if running as a shuttle from the St. Erth bay platform. Even the Newquay branch has only the running through Par station shared with mainline services- I don't have the measurements to hand but I imagine it'll not be much more than the approaches to Queen Street or Aylesbury (for the 121s) or Brockenhurst (for the Lymingtons).

Fair point that the ship might've sailed though- that said, I still think it would be possible to overhaul and improve the ride quality of the units. Even the old DMUs pootling up and down our preserved railways are no worse than a 150, and far superior to a pacer- and that's running on track that's only permitted for 25mph running. I appreciate that I'm venturing into fantasy land a little, but a 2-car 104 (ideal for the deep windows) with new engines running on the Looe branch would probably boost passenger numbers in the summer season too, much like how the Lymington slammers were often full of enthusiasts. They'd probably even be easier to make DDA-compliant than the pacers or 153s, too!

Yes, you're quite right about the Looe branch, so long as there is'nt a cement train about.. But I don't think that the Newquay line would be acceptable as china clay traffic also uses it.

But just how many old DMU's are left which would be robust enough to operate a diagram reliably?

 

[Beveridges]

I dont understand why LHCS isnt used for crowd busters. Even just a loco & stock & DVT on certain peak hour services, releasing Units which can double up on peak services which currently use only one 142 or even one 153. There are so many peak hour services struggling for capacity, yet so much LHCS sitting in sidings doing nothing except the occasional 13-carriage charter train once every 6 weekends. Yes some passengers may compain heavily about old 1960's stock being brought back into use but surely its better to have all that space than to squeeze into a more modern 1980's built unit like a 142 with 100's of others

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm not sure how easy it would be to bring a heritage unit into reliable working order, but possibly sets that have been in departmental use will have been well maintained mechanically at least- perhaps taking engines etc. from those units and fitting to preserved units would be a way of achieving a more reliable trainset?

Of course, this wouldn't be particularly cheap, but when compared to buying new stock to sit idle in low-season maybe wouldn't be too bad. As for using LHCS, the big problem is of course the track access; leasing and fuel costs, not to mention the requirement for top & tailing or DVT/DBSO use on the branches mentioned previously.

It's a shame the 151s got wrecked at LNWR really, as although they wouldn't have quite the charm (and subsequent tourist/enthusiast lure) of the 1st-gen units, there'd have been another two 3-car units available!

 

[anthony263]

Wasn't it back in 2005/2006 that ATW had the plan to get a 3-car 101 done up for Heart of Wales services? Recall there was much discussion here at the time, and in all fairness it was mentioned in more than just RAIL. Think we were in the early planning stages of a forum meet for it too!

Yes I remember reading about that idea I think the problem was ATW were struggling to get hold of some class 101's.

I didnt become a member of this forum til around 2007 so this is the 1st time I have heard about a possible forum meet for it though.

It is a shame the idea didnt come off as I think the class 101's could have brought more psassengers to the heart of wales line.

Another shame was when ATW pulled the plug on the Rhymney loco hauled services which were very popular not just among the railway enthusiasts.

Shame the managers at ATW or someone in the WG will look at brining back loco haulage on certain peak hour services on the Rhymney route what with ATW having the Mk2 carriages sat around at Canton.

I am sure DRS could do us a deal to hire 37425

 

[Clip]

I don't think 'largely segregated' is good enough nowadays. The Chiltern and Cardiff Bay branches are completely segregrated from other trains. The only other line where this applies is the Lymington branch.

Dont the skips still use the branch between Risborough and Aylesbury once or twice a day?

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Trouble with using the 1st gen stock such as the 101's is the age and image they present. The engines are old, tired and not very green and acceleration is rather tardy to say the least. Not that perhaps using some of these routes as a heritage trail on occasional weekends would be of benefit, but they couldn't be relied upon for a day to day service. Perhaps optare or wright should be approached to re-kindle leylands idea using lessons learned from the 142's and develop a modern practical and comfortable Replacement for the railbus that doesn't age like a bus nor ride like a MGR wagon!

 

[aylesbury]

I had a trip from Risboro to Aylesbury on the 121 some time ago ,it was not a pleaseant experience compared to a usual unit.There sre regular freights on this line and when the East West line opens regular services to MK will be running.

 

[starrymarkb]

Perhaps optare or wright should be approached to re-kindle leylands idea using lessons learned from the 142's and develop a modern practical and comfortable Replacement for the railbus that doesn't age like a bus nor ride like a MGR wagon!

Optare build quality isn't great... just ask Trent Barton about the Tempo SR!

I still reckon approaching Stadler for a cheap D or EMU would be a good idea. As well as bulk Eurounits, Stadler build a lot of stock for obscure Swiss gauges and voltages with some designs being one off vehicles! They are also relatively cheap, so a bulk order wouldn't break the bank...

Of course giving the order to the Swiss might not be politically acceptable (it'll set Bombardier and the Derby MP off again), but Stadler do have a history of moving in to plants that have been closed by Bombardier (Berlin & Winterthur) and restarting manufacturing

 

[NSEFAN]

Of course giving the order to the Swiss might not be politically acceptable (it'll set Bombardier and the Derby MP off again), but Stadler do have a history of moving in to plants that have been closed by Bombardier (Berlin & Winterthur) and restarting manufacturing

How would that work with the train procurement rules?

As I understand it, the railway as a whole can't just give the order to any company it wants, as nice as that would be. There has to be a bidding process with a selection of companies competing, with the best value product selected.

 

[tom1649]

The engines are old, tired and not very green and acceleration is rather tardy to say the least.

Yes the power trailer units weren't the fastest off the mark, but the power twins could be pretty good I thought. Some were better than others though. They could certainly give the pacers and sprinters a run for their money. (I'm referring to former FNW Class 101s here).

 

[starrymarkb]

How would that work with the train procurement rules?

As I understand it, the railway as a whole can't just give the order to any company it wants, as nice as that would be. There has to be a bidding process with a selection of companies competing, with the best value product selected.

I know, but it's a better suggestion then making a Son of Pacer out of an Optare and an MPV

 

[rebmcr]

How would that work with the train procurement rules?

As I understand it, the railway as a whole can't just give the order to any company it wants, as nice as that would be. There has to be a bidding process with a selection of companies competing, with the best value product selected.

I wonder if it would still 'count' if instead of announcing "Hey you guys, come and have a go at this", the DfT says "Hey you guys, we think Stadler is the best for this order but you're welcome to try and beat them".

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Does anyone know if Stadler have bid for any previous rolling stock orders in the UK? If they did they weren't successful, so maybe there's something in that. I did hear they were thought to be a potential builder for the Tram-train trial though. The one time I've knowingly travelled on one of their vehicles (on the metre-gauge 'Ligne de Cerdagne' in French Catalonia) i was quite impressed, but if that's typical of their expertise it's certainly more suitable for a 'light-rail' or indeed tram-train type vehicle than a heavy rail one.

 

[43074]

I don't think 'largely segregated' is good enough nowadays. The Chiltern and Cardiff Bay branches are completely segregrated from other trains. The only other line where this applies is the Lymington branch.

The Chiltern branch isn't completely segregated from the main line as there are ECS workings that use it (i once saw a Wrexham & Shropshire 67 & Mark 3 set on the route) between Wembley & Aylesbury depots, in addition to a few peak services from Aylesbury to Marylebone via High Wycombe.

 

[Beveridges]

Trouble with using the 1st gen stock such as the 101's is the age and image they present

I don't think anything could be worse than the current image... 1x 142 on busy peak hour services, train already full and standing as it comes into the station, many more trying to get on, guard telling passengers to squeeze down the train to make room for more, finally get on the train and your squeezing in with all the other passengers squashed against each other... then banging into each other when the unit starts bouncing. Dwell times at further stations huge because it takes so long to squeeze more people into the unit already operating at crush capacity, and often leaving passengers behind.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Seen it on voyagers, see it on 185's. and I know it isn't getting any better. What we really need is for those at the top to top dithering over the procurement and actually get the damn things built. Get the voyagers up to 6 with a pan car and restore the micro buffet. Increase the 185's to 4 car and put 180's to work on the ecml in their place. also the 350's replacing them on west coast work should be 5 car 23m "344's" instead. Double up the 142's 150's 156 etc permanently and get a fleet of 3 and 4 car 378 diesel equivalents to replace them where they have been doubled. Platform lengths will no doubt have to be extended in some places but the need i think is to get away from the belief that more trains is the answer to capacity problems and make the trains bigger.

The trouble with the industry is were very good at talking about what needs to be done, but so much money is spent on feasibility studies, value for money studies, consultant fees etc that by the time someone finally makes that decision to go ahead there's no money left to pay for it! I cannot see either how the industry can be given an incentive to be so bold and expand on this scale either in its present micro managed and tightly specified private franchise state either. Anything that improves capacity should of course be encouraged as long as It is not to the detriment of the travelling experience.

On a final note, surely optare can't do much worse than leyland did!

 

[Chris125]

I still reckon approaching Stadler for a cheap D or EMU would be a good idea.

I really doubt designing and building a new class of unit meeting the latest crashworthiness and engine regulations, especially with no guarantee of follow-on orders, could ever be described as 'cheap'.

Chris

 

[Penmorfa]

The Chiltern branch isn't completely segregated from the main line as there are ECS workings that use it (i once saw a Wrexham & Shropshire 67 & Mark 3 set on the route) between Wembley & Aylesbury depots, in addition to a few peak services from Aylesbury to Marylebone via High Wycombe.

I did'nt say a line could not be used by other traffic. In the case of Chiltern, the DMU is effectively locked in and no other train can use that section of track at the same time.

 

[starrymarkb]

I really doubt designing and building a new class of unit meeting the latest crashworthiness and engine regulations, especially with no guarantee of follow-on orders, could ever be described as 'cheap'.

Chris

Given they build custom designs that are affordable for small railways they should be willing. I believe the GTW used in the Netherlands came in at £1.5m per unit. AFAIK they do meet crash-worthiness with the current cabs. Not sure on the engine regs... Might have to ask MAN who supply the engines

 

[route:oxford]

I really doubt designing and building a new class of unit meeting the latest crashworthiness and engine regulations, especially with no guarantee of follow-on orders, could ever be described as 'cheap'.

Chris

Relatively cheap then...

The new "Flirt-3" has been designed for the latest crashworthiness and emissions requirements.

Includes Electric, Diesel and Hybrid versions.

http://www.stadlerrail.com/en/vehicles/flirt-3/

 

[Cherry_Picker]

I did'nt say a line could not be used by other traffic. In the case of Chiltern, the DMU is effectively locked in and no other train can use that section of track at the same time.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. One of the basic principles of our railway is that you only have one train in a section at a time. The Aylesbury - Princes Risborough branch is used by the 121, by freight and by through services between London - High Wycombe and Aylesbury. It is a single line but there are multiple (well, two) signal sections within that single line. There is no reason whatsoever why you couldnt have the bubble and a 66 pulling wagons from the waste factory on the branch line at the same time.