HST 8 or 9 coach?

[Master29]

Just out of curiosity I often wonder why GWR never upped some of their HST`s to 9 car as GNER did. There would`ve been a case surely. Not all of them I know but how many trains have I been on between London and South Wales have been packed to the rafters, not to mention many a disgruntled guard saying they should also do the same on the West of England line, especially in summer.
I did once ask then FGW and just got a vague`that`s just the way we do things here` answer which didn`t really answer anything at all.

I know there could be many factors like performance, particularly on West of England line but surely any time difference would be very minor.

Any thought?

 

[Darandio]

Any thought?

Were the HST trailers available to do it? GNER took the majority of the remaining available HST trailers for their extension project.

Bear in mind that when Grand Central were sourcing stock, although the powercars were available, trailers weren't, hence the need to convert loco hauled ones.

 

[221129]

Just out of curiosity I often wonder why GWR never upped some of their HST`s to 9 car as GNER did. There would`ve been a case surely. Not all of them I know but how many trains have I been on between London and South Wales have been packed to the rafters, not to mention many a disgruntled guard saying they should also do the same on the West of England line, especially in summer.
I did once ask then FGW and just got a vague`that`s just the way we do things here` answer which didn`t really answer anything at all.

I know there could be many factors like performance, particularly on West of England line but surely any time difference would be very minor.

Any thought?

Platform lengths...

 

[Bald Rick]

1) were the spare coaches available
2) it would have an impact on performance, ie running times. They used to be 2+7, going to 2+8 slowed them down, so 2+9 would do so further.

 

[221129]

Just out of curiosity I often wonder why GWR never upped some of their HST`s to 9 car as GNER did. There would`ve been a case surely. Not all of them I know but how many trains have I been on between London and South Wales have been packed to the rafters, not to mention many a disgruntled guard saying they should also do the same on the West of England line, especially in summer.
I did once ask then FGW and just got a vague`that`s just the way we do things here` answer which didn`t really answer anything at all.

I know there could be many factors like performance, particularly on West of England line but surely any time difference would be very minor.

Any thought?

Also FGW do use 2+9 in the summer to Newquay on some services.

 

[Master29]

Also FGW do use 2+9 in the summer to Newquay on some services.

I`ve never known of that to be honest, but you could be right. They may have only had one FO and a small buffet sometimes with almost 7 standard coaches.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Were the HST trailers available to do it? GNER took the majority of the remaining available HST trailers for their extension project.

Bear in mind that when Grand Central were sourcing stock, although the powercars were available, trailers weren't, hence the need to convert loco hauled ones.

Good points, however. it would have only been necessary on certain services.

 

[221129]

I`ve never known of that to be honest.

Well there we go, you learn something new everyday. I believe it is normally on the Fast Service from Paddington to Newquay.

 

[Master29]

Well there we go, you learn something new everyday. I believe it is normally on the Fast Service from Paddington to Newquay.

The Atlantic Coaster...I`ll hold you to that next summer...

 

[Ash Bridge]

It would have an impact on performance, ie running times. They used to be 2+7, going to 2+8 slowed them down, so 2+9 would do so further.

I understood Paxmans at time of the prototype HST's construction offered BREL a 16 cylinder 3000hp engine option which would have fitted into the powercars in place of the Valenta 12 cylinder units but BR didn't take up the option, also the class 254 units built for East Coast and Scottish services were to have had their Valenta engines set to deliver 2,500hp each rather than the 2,250hp on the Western Region units, that extra 500hp would have been rather handy when adding an extra trailer car.

 

[Phil.]

I understood Paxmans at time of the prototype HST's construction offered BREL a 16 cylinder 3000hp engine option which would have fitted into the powercars in place of the Valenta 12 cylinder units but BR didn't take up the option, also the class 254 units built for East Coast and Scottish services were to have had their Valenta engines set to deliver 2,500hp each rather than the 2,250hp on the Western Region units, that extra 500hp would have been rather handy when adding an extra trailer car.

The 254s for the Eastern were to have the 2,500hp Valenta because they were eight trailers from the off. The western 253s were seven from the off. The main reason for not bothering with the 2,500hp Valenta was to keep the reliability and to keep an engine commonality.

 

[jopsuk]

It really is mainly the lack of 58(?) more available Mark 3s- remember to get to 8-car across the fleet they had to get catering vehicles converted to full open carriages.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

It really is mainly the lack of 58(?) more available Mark 3s- remember to get to 8-car across the fleet they had to get catering vehicles converted to full open carriages.

Luckily there were surplus catering cars as I believe the East Coast sets had 2 per set initially, or at least some did.

 

[sprinterguy]

Luckily there were surplus catering cars as I believe the East Coast sets had 2 per set initially, or at least some did.

Both the first batch of GWML and ECML HSTs were initially provided with two catering cars (First class TRUK and standard class TRSB). The redundant first class kitchen cars, twenty TRUKs, were converted to loco hauled RFMs many years ago (mid to late eighties): FGW had spare catering cars available to convert as a result of replacing TRFBs with micro-buffets in the high density sets a few years ago.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Good points, however. it would have only been necessary on certain services.

Which raises an additional complication of rostering a sub-fleet of 9-car sets on the correct services.

 

[Taunton]

Performance of the original sets with 7 cars was quite good, adding the 8th sapped the power somewhat and a 9th does more so, particularly for acceleration. The ECML has some long runs where this is less significant, but stopping from Paddington at Reading, Didcot, Swindon, Chippenham etc, all in the first hundred miles, which has progressively become the norm for most services, brings a notable performance impact if you add another 35 tons.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

It really is mainly the lack of 58(?) more available Mark 3s- remember to get to 8-car across the fleet they had to get catering vehicles converted to full open carriages.

*awaits the inevitable suggestion as to an imminent source of Mk3s*


More seriously, as the ones going to Scotland are to be shortened, might it be possible to augment those that are staying on GWR for at least a short while longer with the vehicles removed from the sets destined for Scotland?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

*awaits the inevitable suggestion as to an imminent source of Mk3s*


More seriously, as the ones going to Scotland are to be shortened, might it be possible to augment those that are staying on GWR for at least a short while longer with the vehicles removed from the sets destined for Scotland?

Yes, if you rework the timetable and pay for the loss of paths that arise from 2+8 to 2+9 lengthening. HSTs really should have been uprated for that train length, if we remember the original BR plan (which involved the Paxman 16RP200L Valenta engine giving around 750hp extra per power car).

 

[sprinterguy]

More seriously, as the ones going to Scotland are to be shortened, might it be possible to augment those that are staying on GWR for at least a short while longer with the vehicles removed from the sets destined for Scotland?

For the sake of perhaps eighteen months of continued service (AT-300 sets for the West of England services are being built in Japan in tandem with the class 800/801s being built at Newton Aycliffe) it hardly seems worth it.

 

[Haydn1971]

For the sake of perhaps eighteen months of continued service (AT-300 sets for the West of England services are being built in Japan in tandem with the class 800/801s being built at Newton Aycliffe) it hardly seems worth it.

I'd disagree - we strengthen for one off day events, why not for 6-18 months

 

[jimm]

I'd disagree - we strengthen for one off day events, why not for 6-18 months

Well for one thing there's the extra leasing costs of running extra coaches and then there's the performance over the Devon banks. While the odds of encountering poor rail conditions at the time of year the Newquay trains are lengthened are pretty slim, I doubt trying to get a nine-coach formation up those hills on a dank and dark autumn or winter morning would be much fun for the drivers.

 

[455driver]

I see this thread up there with its supposition and conjecture!

What buffet cars were converted to standard when the Western region HSTs went from 7 to 8 coaches?
A lot of the original displaced buffets were converted to Royal train, test train or 1st class coaches!
Note the latest round of buffet conversions were to compensate for the existing standard class coaches were converted to mini buffets!

The 2+7s went to 2+8 by the insertion of the TGS coach into the rake and a small order of new standard class coaches (42323-42341 lot no 30983 Derby 1984-5) to replace the second (removed) buffet coach when these went down to one buffet coach.

Some of the Summer Newquay trains are indeed 9 coaches, the extra is carriage X, and you can travel in it as long as you are a surfboard or suitcase!
It is coupled between the 1st class coach and power car so isn't accessible when the train is moving.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'd disagree - we strengthen for one off day events, why not for 6-18 months

Uh yeah, in summer! :roll:
I don't think it would work as well in November.

 

[sprinterguy]

A lot of the original displaced buffets were converted to Royal train, test train or 1st class coaches!

Four were converted to royal train vehicles, two into First Opens, and the prototype vehicle was rebuilt for departmental use. The majority were converted into loco hauled RFMs for the West Coast, as I say.

 

[455driver]

Four were converted to royal train vehicles, two into First Opens, and the prototype vehicle was rebuilt for departmental use. The majority were converted into loco hauled RFMs for the West Coast, as I say.

So as I suspected none were converted to standard class HST coaches despite others up thread saying they were!

 

[jimm]

I see this thread up there with its supposition and conjecture!

What buffet cars were converted to standard when the Western region HSTs went from 7 to 8 coaches?
A lot of the original displaced buffets were converted to Royal train, test train or 1st class coaches!
Note the latest round of buffet conversions were to compensate for the existing standard class coaches were converted to mini buffets!

The 2+7s went to 2+8 by the insertion of the TGS coach into the rake and a small order of new standard class coaches (42323-42341 lot no 30983 Derby 1984-5) to replace the second (removed) buffet coach when these went down to one buffet coach.

There may be a bit of confusion over buffet conversions for FGW here.

When the mini-buffets entered service with FGW in 2009, a good few of the high-density sets went down to 2+7 formations - 16 or 17 sets, I think.

These were then made back up to 2+8s in 2012 by converting some first opens and a number of the redundant buffet cars into standard class coaches, though with only one toilet.

A further batch of redundant buffet cars was converted more recently to provide a float of spare coaches during the latest round of overhauls being carried out at Kilmarnock.

 

[43096]

Four were converted to royal train vehicles, two into First Opens, and the prototype vehicle was rebuilt for departmental use. The majority were converted into loco hauled RFMs for the West Coast, as I say.

Correct. The 20 production build TRUKs were converted as follows:
12 vehicles to LHCS RFM
4 to Royal Train
2 to TF (41179/180 as replacements for 41049/050 written off at Southall)
1 to NMT coach 977984
1 to "executive saloon" and later sold to Irish Rail

 

[cjmillsnun]

Yes, if you rework the timetable and pay for the loss of paths that arise from 2+8 to 2+9 lengthening. HSTs really should have been uprated for that train length, if we remember the original BR plan (which involved the Paxman 16RP200L Valenta engine giving around 750hp extra per power car).

Which would've needed new generators as by all accounts, they couldn't cope with 2,4000 hp when Mirrlees Engines were trialled.

 

[455driver]

Which would've needed new generators as by all accounts, they couldn't cope with 2,4000 hp when Mirrlees Engines were trialled.

I am not surprised they couldn't handle over 10 times the power!

 

[43096]

Which would've needed new generators as by all accounts, they couldn't cope with 2,4000 hp when Mirrlees Engines were trialled.

On a point of technical pedantry, HST power cars have alternators, not generators.

In any case, the issue with the 2,400hp output from the Mirrlees engines wasn't the alternators, it was the rectifiers. This was discovered after a serious rectifier fire on 43169 not long after it received its Mirrlees engine. After that the output from the MB190 engines was de-rated to the same 2,250hp as the Valentas.

 

[Master29]

Hmm, spawned an interesting sidelight of buffet/restaurant car removals, conversions. I do remember seeing this on the EC but I thought it was only projected on the WR. weren`t the extra buffet cars withdrawn for an extra standard coach before service entry in 76. I thought they were.

 

[jimm]

Hmm, spawned an interesting sidelight of buffet/restaurant car removals, conversions. I do remember seeing this on the EC but I thought it was only projected on the WR. weren`t the extra buffet cars withdrawn for an extra standard coach before service entry in 76. I thought they were.

No, some sets definitely entered service as TS-TS-TRSB-TS-TRUK-TF-TF.

There is a long discussion of Western Region HST formations from 1976-78 here http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=34464 including this picture showing a set with both a TRSB and a TRUK at Cardiff http://s176.photobucket.com/user/robertcwp/media/Units/HST_Cardiff_12-4-77_crop.jpg.html

 

[The Ham]

Well for one thing there's the extra leasing costs of running extra coaches and then there's the performance over the Devon banks. While the odds of encountering poor rail conditions at the time of year the Newquay trains are lengthened are pretty slim, I doubt trying to get a nine-coach formation up those hills on a dank and dark autumn or winter morning would be much fun for the drivers.

I don't recall how many of the HST's are GW franchise assets, but there could be an argument that if there are enough of them to consider lengthening some rakes then there wouldn't be any additional leasing costs.

On a slightly crazy side question, would it be possible to run a pair of class 43's with six coaches with a further class 43 and a further 3 coaches (so the class 43 is at the end of the train) on one end so as to be able to leave the third class 43 and the 3 coaches at (say) Plymouth?

43, coach, coach, coach, coach, coach, coach, 43, coach, coach, coach, 43

In terms of length is would be slightly longer than 260m so not too dissimilar to a 10 coach 80x.

As I said a crazy question, which would likely be impractical if for no other reason that the horrendous track access charges that it would incur (208.14 ppm). Although some of that would be offset by a slightly lower track access charge west of Plymouth (138.76 ppm vs 156.14 ppm for the current set up).