What will happen to the VTEC plans for retaining some MK4s?

[Rhydgaled]

Current list is here: https://group.sciencemuseum.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/RHDAB-Designated-Items.pdf

Thanks for that. I am however a little confused by that table; there appear to be three relevant items listed:

• 171: Class 91 locomotive 91031
• 375: (Unknown) Class 91
• 852: Nameplates, vinyls and power car number of 91111

Item 375 appears to be an inactive designation (it has been de-designated), while 171 is listed as 'designation active' but has a date of de-designation, suggesting that 91131 may no longer be safe. Virgin East Coast are listed as the responsible party for 91111, item 171 (91031) is apparently "Leased to East Coast Main Line Ltd." and "Forward Trust Rail Ltd." is also mentioned. Does anyone know anything about those two firms?

 

[kje7812]

Thanks for that. I am however a little confused by that table; there appear to be three relevant items listed:

• 171: Class 91 locomotive 91031
• 375: (Unknown) Class 91
• 852: Nameplates, vinyls and power car number of 91111

Item 375 appears to be an inactive designation (it has been de-designated), while 171 is listed as 'designation active' but has a date of de-designation, suggesting that 91131 may no longer be safe. Virgin East Coast are listed as the responsible party for 91111, item 171 (91031) is apparently "Leased to East Coast Main Line Ltd." and "Forward Trust Rail Ltd." is also mentioned. Does anyone know anything about those two firms?

That's the legal name for VTEC.

 

[randyrippley]

Thanks for that. I am however a little confused by that table; there appear to be three relevant items listed:

• 171: Class 91 locomotive 91031
• 375: (Unknown) Class 91
• 852: Nameplates, vinyls and power car number of 91111

Item 375 appears to be an inactive designation (it has been de-designated), while 171 is listed as 'designation active' but has a date of de-designation, suggesting that 91131 may no longer be safe. Virgin East Coast are listed as the responsible party for 91111, item 171 (91031) is apparently "Leased to East Coast Main Line Ltd." and "Forward Trust Rail Ltd." is also mentioned. Does anyone know anything about those two firms?

Forward Rail Trust Ltd was previously Eversholt Holdings and is the leasing company
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03085530
East Coast Main Line Ltd was previously Abbey Rail Ltd and is the operating company
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04659708

the records of both companies to me suggest businesses in turmoil
Forward shows 49 officers listed with 45 resignations since 1995
East Coast shows 49 officers with 36 resignations since 2003
Somethings wrong when a business can't keep its directors

 

[Domh245]

I don't know why it should be surprising that a company that has been taken over will have led to resignations and replacements

Forward shows 49 officers listed with 45 resignations since 1995

Forward's history has involved a management/employee buyout, sale to HSBC, and then 2 subsequent sales to 2 different consortium (first to 3i, Morgan Stanley, and STAR in 2010, and then more recently CK investments in 2015), all of whom will have wanted to make sure that they have their say in the direction of the company. You just have to look at the filings for the 6th of March 1997 (corresponding to the sale to Midland Bank/HSBC), where there were 9 director resignations! Also note that the companies house filings includes secretarys in the list of resignations and officers - of which there have been 14 who have resigned - that is half of the resignations accounted for already, and I don't know about you, but an average of 1 director resigning a year doesn't seem that outlandish to me.

East Coast shows 49 officers with 36 resignations since 2003

Again, a company that has been through a few changes of ownership - at first little more than a shell company set up by the DfT so that it could replace a TOC at minimum notice (much like all of the companies set up to bid for franchises that you can see on Companies House) - that then became East Coast, which was then bought out by Stagecoach/Virgin rather than replaced as often happens at franchise changeover. Again, there are a few couple of changeovers that occur, such as those filed on the 25th March 2015, or late 2009/early 2010.

It is also worth noting that (especially with ECML ltd) some resignations have been duplicated where directors have also had a secretarial role (eg Misters Bodicoat, Walker) and a few other oddities (eg Timothy Kavanagh, who is a director, former director, and secretary!)

 

[Rhydgaled]

Forward Rail Trust Ltd was previously Eversholt Holdings and is the leasing company
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03085530
East Coast Main Line Ltd was previously Abbey Rail Ltd and is the operating company
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04659708

Thanks, I would have recognised Eversholt had it been listed; didn't realise the name had changed (the ownership of the three main ROSCOs has changed a few times but not (until now) the names if I recall correctly). The fact that the science museum group has updated the company info is somewhat reassuring, but the de-designation date of 25/06/2010 still has me worried.

As for East Coast Main Line Ltd. being the operator, is that the current one (ie. the one that trades as Virgin Trains East Coast) or a previous one? Or even the new 'operator of last resort' that will take over shortly?

 

[Domh245]

Thanks, I would have recognised Eversholt had it been listed; didn't realise the name had changed (the ownership of the three main ROSCOs has changed a few times but not (until now) the names if I recall correctly). The fact that the science museum group has updated the company info is somewhat reassuring, but the de-designation date of 25/06/2010 still has me worried.

As for East Coast Main Line Ltd. being the operator, is that the current one (ie. the one that trades as Virgin Trains East Coast) or a previous one? Or even the new 'operator of last resort' that will take over shortly?

It is VTEC - note the directors include David Horne (VTEC's MD), Tim Shoveller (Stagecoach UK Rail MD), and Martin Griffith (Stagecoach CEO) - as I said above they had a weird transition where they simply bought out East Coast Main Line Ltd. rather than replacing it as happens at most other changeovers. The new OLR doesn't look like it'll do the same and will instead replace ECML Ltd with a new company, but I would presume that the science museum will update their records when they get round to it.

 

[transmanche]

As for East Coast Main Line Ltd. being the operator, is that the current one (ie. the one that trades as Virgin Trains East Coast) or a previous one? Or even the new 'operator of last resort' that will take over shortly?

It's the current one and the previous one. (And could well be the next one too.)

When the East Coast franchise was let, they used a different technical method. Instead of transferring the operations to a new company and TUPEing staff across, they merely transferred ownership (sold the share) in the existing operating company.

 

[Prestige15]

My ideal would be having a 67/68 + 5/6 Mk4 + DVT for wales for long distance routes (Milford Havern - Manchester/Holyhead) or maybe EMT Norwich - Liverpool

 

[Rail Blues]

Can anyone realistically see anything other than a one way trip to Booths for the 91s? They're 30 years old, have hardly been a paragon of reliability, are comparatively sluggish off the mark and whilst they've not reached the clapped out stage, they're pretty long in the tooth and they aren't that cascadable: there's no electrified route with a comparable stopping pattern to the East Coast mainline for them to go.

I'm also slightly puzzled how people are desperate to shoehorn Mk4s onto the network, scarcely anyone had a good word to say about them or their ride quality for most of their existence. I really don't know what you could do with the majority of that stock.

 

[Jowdan Naowsee]

Can anyone realistically see anything other than a one way trip to Booths for the 91s? They're 30 years old, have hardly been a paragon of reliability, are comparatively sluggish off the mark and whilst they've not reached the clapped out stage, they're pretty long in the tooth and they aren't that cascadable: there's no electrified route with a comparable stopping pattern to the East Coast mainline for them to go.

I'm also slightly puzzled how people are desperate to shoehorn Mk4s onto the network, scarcely anyone had a good word to say about them or their ride quality for most of their existence. I really don't know what you could do with the majority of that stock.

I've always had an admiration for the 91s, so personally it will be sad to see them come to their end. As for the Mk4s, I don't imagine it would take major work to convert them to operate with other locos. Simply because they're about to hit 30 doesn't mean they should instantly be sidelined, look at the Mk2s for example, they're still in use some 50 years on from their construction. Re-purposing them for another decade or so would definitely be a cheaper option than ordering another batch of Mk5s for example.

 

[HSTEd]

Can anyone realistically see anything other than a one way trip to Booths for the 91s? They're 30 years old, have hardly been a paragon of reliability, are comparatively sluggish off the mark and whilst they've not reached the clapped out stage, they're pretty long in the tooth and they aren't that cascadable:

As opposed to the pile of obsolescent diesel junk from the 50s and 60s that the rail network continues to utilise daily?

 

[mallard]

As opposed to the pile of obsolescent diesel junk from the 50s and 60s that the rail network continues to utilise daily?

The "obsolescent diesel junk from the 50s and 60s" locomotives are generally used on very light workings (test trains, engineering, stock moves, etc.) well away from the wires. There are also very few 1950s locomotives still active outside preservation (I believe there are one or two class 31s that were built in 1958/59). I suppose there might be some interest in using a 91 for a high-speed OHLE test train or something, but the majority of that "diesel junk" will continue running for a good while yet.

 

[gallafent]

Once electrification to Oxford is completed, 91+mk4s (maybe a slightly shortened rake) would make an excellent crowdbuster for some of the Oxford fasts during rush hours, (a great deal of the route is 125mph, remember, so their 125mph capability would be well-used) freeing up some 5-coach 80xs to strengthen other GWR services

 

[Rail Blues]

As opposed to the pile of obsolescent diesel junk from the 50s and 60s that the rail network continues to utilise daily?

They are used on limited workings and in the main part are still on the network thanks to their versatility, favourable route availability and go anywhere capability (CL 20 and 37). When they get pressed into intensive service they fail see the Cumbria coast service with Drs 37s.

91s can haul express passenger stock over electrified lines and that's it. There's nowhere for them to operate other than on the East Coast mainline.

As for the mk 4s they could be converted to work with other stock, but where and on what services? Transpennine Express have ordered new stock, other operators have preferred MK3 with power door conversions. I simply can not see where 30 odd rakes of mk 4s will be used without getting into serious wobble territory.

 

[JamesT]

Once electrification to Oxford is completed, 91+mk4s (maybe a slightly shortened rake) would make an excellent crowdbuster for some of the Oxford fasts during rush hours, (a great deal of the route is 125mph, remember, so their 125mph capability would be well-used) freeing up some 5-coach 80xs to strengthen other GWR services

Except the 91s offer poorer acceleration than the 80xs. The timetable is going to be recast to take advantage of the improvements they will offer over the HSTs, then you'd have to roll it back to stick 91s back in and lose the uniformity of the fleet.

 

[The Ham]

Except the 91s offer poorer acceleration than the 80xs. The timetable is going to be recast to take advantage of the improvements they will offer over the HSTs, then you'd have to roll it back to stick 91s back in and lose the uniformity of the fleet.

Also there's enough 80x's on order to cover all the HST's as 9/10 coaches and 180's as 5 coaches (even before allowing for those services which are shorted before the end of their routes and faster journey times which mean fewer units needed, however that is offset by the need for some more units to run a more frequent service).

 

[Rail Blues]

Also there's enough 80x's on order to cover all the HST's as 9/10 coaches and 180's as 5 coaches (even before allowing for those services which are shorted before the end of their routes and faster journey times which mean fewer units needed, however that is offset by the need for some more units to run a more frequent service).

So apart from that being too slow and not needed, they're absolutely perfect for the role.

As I said, I've yet to see a non-wibble suggestion for where the 91s could go.

 

[D365]

As I said, I've yet to see a non-wibble suggestion for where the 91s could go.

Rotherham?

 

[xotGD]

So apart from that being too slow and not needed, they're absolutely perfect for the role.

As I said, I've yet to see a non-wibble suggestion for where the 91s could go.

Edinburgh - Glasgow.

A return to push-pull loco and stock after too long an absence.

 

[James James]

How about the GN routes out of Kings Cross? Some decent stock on the KGX-Cambridge directs would've been nice (less useful for those services continuing to Ely, but if you add a second DVT in the formation you could still do a split at Cambridge - lack of seating in the DVT is a huge waste though).

Edinburgh-Glasgow also sounds nice, but probably not viable given platform length issues.

 

[D365]

How about the GN routes out of Kings Cross?

Good luck getting loco haulage on that!

 

[Rhydgaled]

As I said, I've yet to see a non-wibble suggestion for where the 91s could go.

Fast services between London Kings Cross and Edinburgh/Glasgow via the ECML. They're absolutely perfect for the role. The only other sensible suggestion now that electrification to Swansea has been kicked into (perhaps even beyond) the long grass is the open-access London-Blackpool proposal. On the ECML, the question is what you do with all the class 80x units that (perhaps) draw too much power from the OHLE to operate at present (although if they don't use full power they could probably run the current timetable without taxing the power supply much) until Network Rail can beef the power supply up to take Virgin's full proposed 80x + IC225 'pocket rockets' timetable. And yes, even taken together the Blackpool open access and Edinburgh fasts are not going to use all the 91s; which (along with the possiblity that the extra ECML services are dead in the water) is why I'm concerned with the preservation of the most significant members of the class.

As for the mk 4s they could be converted to work with other stock, but where and on what services? Transpennine Express have ordered new stock, other operators have preferred MK3 with power door conversions. I simply can not see where 30 odd rakes of mk 4s will be used without getting into serious wobble territory.

I expect the operators that have gone for power-door mark 3s have done so because they needed TSI-PRM compliant stock sooner than they could be sure of mark 4s coming off lease and/or because mark 4s are not particularly compatible with class 43s (IC125 powercars). TPE probably went for mark 5s either because the DVTs lack seats or, again, because of the TSI-PRM deadline. Once the 2020 deadline is passed and the mark 4s are off-lease, the ROSCO will presumably be keen to get them leased out again and any TOC wanting coaching stock might find mark 4s work out cheaper than mark 5s. I doubt that all 30 rakes will find a home (at least not in the current 9-car formations) but a good number might well find a use for a few years.

 

[D365]

Fast services between London Kings Cross and Edinburgh/Glasgow via the ECML. They're absolutely perfect for the role.

It's a shame the Class 91s are not more reliable then, isn't it...

 

[Rail Blues]

Edinburgh - Glasgow.

A return to push-pull loco and stock after too long an absence.

I hope that's a joke.

 

[hexagon789]

Edinburgh - Glasgow.

A return to push-pull loco and stock after too long an absence.

Now that's my kind of suggestion!

 

[Rail Blues]

It's a shame the Class 91s are not more reliable then, isn't it...

Or if there were adequate power supply for them.

 

[D365]

Or if there were adequate power supply for them.

That one's a long and sorry tale...

 

[Mollman]

It's a shame the Class 91s are not more reliable then, isn't it...

I'm sure that there was an option to upgrade the 91s but this was dropped when the extra IEPs were ordered.

 

[xotGD]

I hope that's a joke.

Certainly not. Since other Scottish Inter-City services are getting HSTs, which some consider to be loco-hauled services, why should Edinburgh - Glasgow be stuck with an inferior EMU service?

 

[D365]

What is inferior about the Class 385 (from a passenger perspective) compared to an IC225?