higthomas:1806641 said:
And since there is going to be rather a lot of -admittedly a bit older- Mark 3s coming on line in the next few years, I for one doubt that they will ever be loco-hauled, so personally I think that they will either be misplaced somewhere else in DC land, or sent to the scrap heap.
Regarding the loco hauled debate, there are a few points worth bearing in mind. Any ex HST trailers no longer required will not be instantly available for use in loco hauled rakes, there are some well documented and significant differences in electrical spec between the two types. Assuming a TOC doesn't want to run the thing as an HST, converting from HST trailer to loco hauled requires some expensive and significant rewiring work. The same may apply to a 442 of course, but it's certainly a big consideration. The biggest user of HST trailers, FGW, will be retaining a number of sets and likely adding redundant coaches into them. They will presumably retain as many as possible of the best examples, including those recently converted from buffets, those vehicles which will have recently undergone major overhauls or other significant work, and presumably those considered to be in the best condition in general. Nearer the time, I would expect to see minimal maintenance carried out on the rest of the vehicles, and presumably the same will be true of other operators dispensing with theirs. Whilst this still leaves a vast pool for other users to choose from, we can imagine that much of what is available will be in need to work, as well as being sigificantly older and having spent their lives being worked much harder than the 442s. Whilst the HST trailers were all subject to major works overhaul a few years ago, most of the benefits of that work are now fading, with many of the vehicles again becoming careworn and a shabby. And, of course, the wait for ex HST stock will be longer than for the 442s if they are to be withdrawn in a couple of years.
The 442 vehicles also offer a couple of major benefits, most notably of course their automatic doors. Introducing slam door stock onto new routes is a very big deal indeed. It would require substantial staff training, as well as possibly increase the number of staff required on the platform at busy locations to safely disptach the train, and it will lead to a big increase in door incidents of a type not seen before (door on catch, door open etc). Chiltern have spent huge amounts on their project to fit power doors, one can reasonably assume they would have considered the alternatives had their been a yard full of unwanted 442 trailers available at the time.
Finally of course, we have ready made driving vehicles, purpose built to a proper standard. If you are looking to run a loco and coaches, that is a very helpful feature to have when the alternative now is generally to have a heavy, expensive second locomotive sat doing nothing on the back end of the train at all times.
Anything is possible of course, but if there is a desire to use any redundant Mk3 vehicles as loco hauled stock, I would think any switched on TOC would look very closely at the 442s.
