Preserved HST’s?

[Envoy]

I wonder if a preserved HST could form a luxury train - using the First Class coaches only?

 

[XCTurbostar]

You'd need deep pockets but in theory it would work.
OR use HST Powercars and then use some of those 442s which are out of service in the middle.
Boom! Luxury train!
*Runs away and hides*
Thanks,
Ross

 

[gimmea50anyday]

LMFAO!!!!!!

We love 442s on this here forum!!

 

[CosherB]

Oh joy, the 'let's sling any old carriages between HST powercars' chestnut rears it's head again! :roll:

 

[tomatwark]

Anyone who would want to offer that sort of service, would probably want to refurb the coaches anyway, so could easily gut and refit the second class coaches in any configuration they wanted.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Oh joy, the 'let's sling any old carriages between HST powercars' chestnut rears it's head again! :roll:

The first post actually wasn't a bad one. Stick a rake of First class Mk3s along with a restaurant buffet car and you have a basis for charters.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Anyone who would want to offer that sort of service, would probably want to refurb the coaches anyway, so could easily gut and refit the second class coaches in any configuration they wanted.

Fair point.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

Was the Mk3 the first design of coach where the principle of lining the seats up with the windows was abandoned? For whatever reason, they used identical body shells for first and second class, which meant that when they wanted higher density seating in second, the windows no longer lined up. To convert a second class to first, you just replace the seating. We saw this in reverse with FGW a couple of years ago.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Howabout MkII first class coaches + MkII sleepers as a luxury train?

 

[yorksrob]

Was the Mk3 the first design of coach where the principle of lining the seats up with the windows was abandoned? For whatever reason, they used identical body shells for first and second class, which meant that when they wanted higher density seating in second, the windows no longer lined up. To convert a second class to first, you just replace the seating. We saw this in reverse with FGW a couple of years ago.

As it happens, on Mk 1's, the bodyshell, in terms od seating bay size was the same for 1st, 2nd and 3rd, and I would have thought the mk2's were the same. Wasn't it just that the mk3's were the first where they squeezed standard in more tightly.

 

[CosherB]

The first post actually wasn't a bad one. Stick a rake of First class Mk3s along with a restaurant buffet car and you have a basis for charters.

Indeed, quite easy to run a rake of HST Trailer Firsts, together with a TRFB or two. My bile was directed to ideas of using HST powercars with 442 trailers or Mk4 carriages and other daft scenarios of their ilk!

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Howabout MkII first class coaches + MkII sleepers as a luxury train?

What are you calling a MkII sleeper?

 

[Bletchleyite]

As it happens, on Mk 1's, the bodyshell, in terms od seating bay size was the same for 1st, 2nd and 3rd, and I would have thought the mk2's were the same.

No it wasn't, and no they weren't. Mk1s and Mk2s have 14 bays for First and 16 bays for Standard, with one window per bay. Mk3s were the first coach type with only one bodyshell and a seating arrangement that didn't match it. Originally that was 72 seats with only 8 (corrected) airlines, but was later changed to 76 seats with 10 table bays and the rest airline. A spacing that were it not for the awful design of the seats would have been quite generous.

What you did get in Mk1 days was Second Opens (as distinct from Tourist Second Opens) which were 2+1 seated but at Second Class pitch i.e. 16 bays.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

If a set is to be preserved it should be the set that broke the speed record for a diesel powered train, assuming that both power cars and all the coaches from that set still exist

 

[yorksrob]

No it wasn't, and no they weren't. Mk1s and Mk2s have 14 bays for First and 16 bays for Standard, with one window per bay. Mk3s were the first coach type with only one bodyshell and a seating arrangement that didn't match it. Originally that was 72 seats with only 8 (corrected) airlines, but was later changed to 76 seats with 10 table bays and the rest airline. A spacing that were it not for the awful design of the seats would have been quite generous.

What uyou did get in Mk1 days was Second Opens (as distinct from Tourist Second Opens) which were 2+1 seated but at Second Class pitch i.e. 16 bays.

To be honest, it looked the same on the slammers, although I never got out and measured. The long or short underframes had eight or seven bays and I always thought these were the same regardless of class. I could be wrong though.

 

[randyrippley]

As it happens, on Mk 1's, the bodyshell, in terms od seating bay size was the same for 1st, 2nd and 3rd, and I would have thought the mk2's were the same. Wasn't it just that the mk3's were the first where they squeezed standard in more tightly.

Some Mk2s didn't line up

 

[theblackwatch]

Some Mk2s didn't line up

Which were those? The only ones I can think of were the FOs which were converted to TSOs in the 1980s, well after the introduction of the HSTs which didn't line up in 2nd Class from the outset.

 

[fgwrich]

Was the Mk3 the first design of coach where the principle of lining the seats up with the windows was abandoned? For whatever reason, they used identical body shells for first and second class, which meant that when they wanted higher density seating in second, the windows no longer lined up. To convert a second class to first, you just replace the seating. We saw this in reverse with FGW a couple of years ago.

Many Mk3s have gone either way, and some of FGWs Mk3s have switched between both - protype 42353 has been a TS 42001 then TF 41171 before becoming TS-D 42353 in 2007 with FGW. Then there's the TS-D / TRSMB (Mini Buffet) and TC conversions that show how versatile the Mk3s are.

 

[co-tr-paul]

....and let's paint one blue and white and stick a Pullman crest on the.nose.....

 

[CosherB]

....and let's paint one blue and white and stick a Pullman crest on the.nose.....

Why .......?

 

[cjmillsnun]

If a set is to be preserved it should be the set that broke the speed record for a diesel powered train, assuming that both power cars and all the coaches from that set still exist

I disagree.

43002 and 43003 have a claim for preservation.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

....and let's paint one blue and white and stick a Pullman crest on the.nose.....

Nah.

I'd like three sets preserved. Not too bothered about the coach numbering.

One in as new rail blue. Ideally 43002 and 43003 as 253001.
One in Intercity Swallow. Perhaps the speed record set (maybe power cars only at NRM)
One in prototype livery with only one PC. The other PC to be 41001.

In reality we may get one set

 

[gage75]

Would it be possible to rebuild a power car to look like the prototype 41001??

 

[alexl92]

Would it be possible to rebuild a power car to look like the prototype 41001??

Think this was discussed and it was decided that it was possible but ultimately probably not worth the effort.


Maybe the power car on the other end of 41001 could be one with buffers? I think one of those should be preserved.

 

[43096]

Would it be possible to rebuild a power car to look like the prototype 41001??

:roll::roll::roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I disagree.

42002 and 42003 have a claim for preservation.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Nah.

I'd like three sets preserved. Not too bothered about the coach numbering.

One in as new rail blue. Ideally 43002 and 43003 as 253001.
One in Intercity Swallow. Perhaps the speed record set (maybe power cars only at NRM)
One in prototype livery with only one PC. The other PC to be 41001.

In reality we may get one set

In reality, anyone sensible preserving a set would choose the vehicles in the best condition.

 

[deltic08]

Which were those? The only ones I can think of were the FOs which were converted to TSOs in the 1980s, well after the introduction of the HSTs which didn't line up in 2nd Class from the outset.

They only didn't line up with windows as bays were abolished for unidirectional airline type seating either side of the central partitions.

To confuse things even further, on Mark 2 and 2a brake vehicles, BSOs used the BFK bodyshells which mean't second class bays were the same spacing as FOs with First Class size tables but in bays of eight instead of six except the bay nearest to the coach toilet end that had a bay of only three on one side of the aisle due to the vestibule door being off set and not central due to positioning of the toilet. This stopped with the introduction of Mark 2b where only BFKs were built. On introduction of Mark 2c in 1970, there were separate bodyshells for BFKs and BSOs but retained a bay of three seats due again to the position of the toilet. This was perpetuated into Mark 2d build but no more BFKs or FKs were built in Mark 2e/fs.

SOs were still retained in the Mark 2a build with a row of single seats down one side of an eight window second class bodyshell and wider double seats down the other with one very long headrest instead of two individual headrests. Total seats were 48 instead of 64 and the unit numbers were roughly in the 5230-5255 sequence half being vacuum braked and the higher numbers airbraked.

As there were plenty of Mark 1 FOs available during the build of Mark 2-2b, Mark 2 FOs were not built until the Mark 2c build in 1970. These were numbered 3152-3167 and 6400-6416 when downgraded to seconds in the late 1980s. 3168 was the first air-con Mark 2d FO without sliding toplights and smaller shallower depth bodyside windows built in 1971.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

If a HST set was preserved that was a SSL set, would it be allowed everywhere? It probably couldn't go on the Cambrian coast because of ERTMS. Could an HST power car be fitted with AWS, ATP, TPWS and ERTMS all at the same time (space onboard is probably the main issue)?

 

[sprinterguy]

Why .......?

The "Blue Pullman" luxury diesel sets of the 1960s are popularly considered as forerunners of the HST. If nothing else, the nanking blue and white livery was very fetching, IMO.

 

[JohnR]

If you are to create a luxury dining train, then having effectively two locomotives at each end enables you to visit locations without a run round, and provides reliability in the case of failure, so the idea certainly has potential.

The other factor is going to be marketing. You need to fill up seats and they're not going to be cheap. Painting them in the Blue Pullman livery will certainly help in the creation of a luxury train brand, and provide a hell of a lot of cheap/free publicity.

 

[RobShipway]

I like the idea of an HST luxury train, but would suggest that there is actually two trains. One set being a day train with say 5 first class coaches and a restaurant as has been previously suggested. The other train would be a 9 coach train with 3 First class coaches, 3 restaurant and three Mk3 sleeper cars adopted to work with HST power cars

The last train in the above list would then be able to do luxury journeys such as Penzance to Aberdeen or further north, with nighttime sleeping capabilities either while the train is in motion or while the train is stabled overnight.

Another alternative possible use for HST power cars, would also to use them as part of the Royal Train possibly as well?

 

[Ash Bridge]

I would be really happy if the remaining prototype trailer coaches make it into preservation, this one was photographed at Manchester Piccadilly in early 1973 when just a few months old and I believe it's still in frontline service in a GWR set, not bad for a 44 year old vehicle! funny to think its around three years older than the last builds of mk2 stock.

 

[Marklund]

I would be really happy if the remaining prototype trailer coaches make it into preservation, this one was photographed at Manchester Piccadilly in early 1973 when just a few months old and I believe it's still in frontline service in a GWR set, not bad for a 44 year old vehicle! funny to think its around three years older than the last builds of mk2 stock.

I'd go along with that - it would be nice if the remaining vehicles from the prototype could be formed in to one set where possible.

 

[Townsend Hook]

If a HST set was preserved that was a SSL set, would it be allowed everywhere? It probably couldn't go on the Cambrian coast because of ERTMS. Could an HST power car be fitted with AWS, ATP, TPWS and ERTMS all at the same time (space onboard is probably the main issue)?

By the time you get a HST set together and operational it'll need ERTMS for a lot more than the Cambridge.