-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Grand Central to lease five more 180s from 2017
- Thread starter jopsuk
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
NotATrainspott
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 3,304
Chiltern Railways have fitted their Mk3 coaching stock with power doors and retention toilets, and it appears that Abellio ScotRail are planning to do the same to their HST sets.
Alliance seem to like saying all the GNER/GNWR routes are due to start in 2016. Are any of these feasible given they haven't got rights or trains to operate them yet?
it would be good to see it happen (if it does) bring a direct service from leeds to London via Manchester v, i am just thinking about how they will try to get passengers from virgin.
tbtc
Veteran Member
What a difference a day makes. The HSTs have gone from being "knackered old sheds" to "the future of Scottish railways"...
Look at the bus industry - to raise money, First had to sell some "profitable" bits of business (whilst keeping the unprofitable bits, or just closing them down and walking away).
I don't know whether any ECML franchise winner would have to abandon its Open Access operations on the route, but you could certainly argue that GC + HT are worth more together than they are separately, which may mean that DB would pay a premium for First's operations (compared to their worth on the open market). A bit like buying train stations at Monopoly, where they are worth a lot more if you hold more than one
(I'm not saying that First would want to sell, of course, just that GC may value HT higher than "the market" would, since a combined operation would be able to save a few quid in operating costs and have better market share for setting "cheap" ticket prices)
Look at the bus industry - to raise money, First had to sell some "profitable" bits of business (whilst keeping the unprofitable bits, or just closing them down and walking away).
I don't know whether any ECML franchise winner would have to abandon its Open Access operations on the route, but you could certainly argue that GC + HT are worth more together than they are separately, which may mean that DB would pay a premium for First's operations (compared to their worth on the open market). A bit like buying train stations at Monopoly, where they are worth a lot more if you hold more than one
(I'm not saying that First would want to sell, of course, just that GC may value HT higher than "the market" would, since a combined operation would be able to save a few quid in operating costs and have better market share for setting "cheap" ticket prices)
Still "Knackered old sheds in my book" and probably an intrim solution until eventually some meridians or voyagers are freed up, and electrification towards Aberdeen.
Yes they are still comfortable to travel in well at least the East Coast one ones are, the EMT ones look out of the ark inside and less said about the FGW ones the better, whether I would be wanting to use them on a daily basis from a reliability viewpoint might be another matter. Still assuming 2 powers cars and a shorter coach formation that could still be reasonably hauled quite well with 1 power car, it might not be too bad, and if the are getting automatic doors these work reliably.
From GC's viewpoint I would imagine choosing 180's was a no brainer.
Last edited:
Failed Unit
Established Member
From a reliablity point of view the HSTs are better than the 180s. It is well known the 180s are dogs. I don't think they have overtaken the HST in terms of the minutes per technical failure matrix, we will find out in the Janurary Modern Railways. But the re-engineed HST holds its own
theblackwatch
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2006
- Messages
- 10,889
I'm not sure where the HSTs being 'Knackered Old Sheds' came from, they are still (IMO) one of the most superior trains on the rail network. Having said that, from a comfort and travel point of view, I quite like the 180s - it's just a shame they aren't a bit more reliable.
87019Chris
Member
If they had of been more reliable maybe we wouldn't have those pesky Voyager bits of ****! The leg room on 180's are very good, and ride is decent (most of the time). An all round good train.
And I find the HST's to be some of the most comfortable stock on the railways, they only need power doors (even though I love the windows) and a good refurbishment and they would all be just as good as anything else out there, they ride very smoothly, and don't rattle.
Last edited:
Because these were fitted to some early mark 2 coaches and people kept opening them when the train was moving and falling to their deaths so they were removed, bearing in mind how stupid the great British public is these days I cant see them making a comeback any time soon!
sprinterguy
Veteran Member
Interior door handles are a cheaper DDA compliance solution that Porterbrook are offering as a refurbishment option. The HSTs have been fitted with central door locking since the bad old days of people alighting from moving mark 2s.
The outside handle no longer works until the doors are unlocked. Presumably an interior handle could work the same way.
Before central door locking at inside handle would probably have increased the number of doors being opened inappropriately when the train was moving :cry:. Especially nasty at 125mph and for a wide door. Opening the window first meant this is less likely to happen, and if one did want to open it before the train stopped you had a chance to see if you might hit someone standing too close.
Going back to the 1970s when they were introduced, the first air-con vehicles were the Mk 2D, which came out in 1971, initially on the ECML. They did indeed initially have a large door handle on the inside. Within months several passengers, including a child, had fallen from these trains, and the interior handles were removed and droplights made operable. The Mk 3 stock of the HST came just a couple of years later.
It all seemed strange, because a large amount of high-density stock, both dmu and emu, had been built in the preceding 15 years which all had interior door latches, not a big handle but down on the lock. You needed strong thumbs to operate them but they don't seem to have had the falling out issue, despite them being right alongside your knee when seated in units with side doors to each seating bay.
Last edited:
180zephyr
Member
Just an idea here, but GC to could re-route Bradford trains to foster square, Sunderland trains to Newcastle, and then upgrade the Tyne and wear to 25kv (if it's not already) then get some shortend intercity 225s, then give the 180s to FGW to go to the West country (5 or 10 car)
northwichcat
Veteran Member
If the proposed GNWR and GNER services go ahead would it not be easier for 6 car Pendolinos to be used on Grand Central services as well? OK they won't utilise the tilting facility but they may be able to make maintenance more efficient.
25kv and 750v DC overhead (for the Metro) wouldn't mix too well and the 180s are not what's needed for the West Country.
They could but they wouldn't do any of those diversions as diverting to Newcastle will be shot down as being purely abstractive of East Coast's revenue and how, exactly, do you serve Eaglescliffe and Hartlepool? Bradford is unlikely as you'd be going into Leeds and reversing (and you ain't gonna get to call as it'll be abstractive) and would make it hard to call at stations like Halifax and Brighouse.
The Tyne and Wear Metro is 1500v DC and they are unlikely to want to go to the expense of changing to 25kv AC just for the good of Grand Central.
If the Bradford trains were rerouted to Forster Square, it'd involve GC calling at a completely different list of towns and cities in West Yorkshire (and hand them quite an ORCATs raid as they'd be passing through Leeds).
Apologies for being slightly off topic but I remember travelling on the old 2-HAL & 2-BIL EMU's of the Southern Railway between Winnersh Halt & Wokingham in the mid 1960's and these trains had these type of handles. I was only young ( 9 years) but they were the days when parents let sensible children travel on their own. Now some of these locks were very stiff for a youngster and I recall having to open the window and shout for assistance to the station staff on more than one occasion. I think the Chiltern bubble cars between Princes Risborough & Aylesbury still have these type of locks augmented by the safety systems so the doors cannot be opened until the train has stopped,
northwichcat
Veteran Member
I forgot the obvious. The Grand Central routes aren't wired and the proposed GNWR services were revised to use only electrified lines.
- Status