Chiltern's Mk3s

[laphroaig]

So I took my first journey today on the refurbished loco-hauled stock from Moor St to Marylebone, (£6 advance booked a week ago, bargain!) now I'm of a certain age and remember these carriages when new in the 1970s so I just wanted to say what a lovely job they've done of modernising them, creating a proper 'Inter-City' interior ambience, comfortable low-backed seats, arranged in a spacious way with good window views, airy, quiet. A most pleasant journey experience all round! Such a contrast to what Great Western have done to their originally similar HST trailers! A girl got on at Banbury, looked a bit uncertain but then sat in the bay opposite me, when the guard came through she asked; "is this first class?" No, it's just a particularly nice train!

Well done Chiltern, I shall be using you more often from now on.

 

[dk1]

Lets just hope they come to a GEML station very very soon

 

[sprinterguy]

I just wanted to say what a lovely job they've done of modernising them, creating a proper 'Inter-City' interior ambience, comfortable low-backed seats, arranged in a spacious way with good window views, airy, quiet. A most pleasant journey experience all round!

They really are very good, aren't they? Let's not forget to give a big hand to the late, lamented Wrexham & Shropshire for laying down the best part of the groundwork for their current excellent condition and internal layout, although Chiltern have succeeded in raising the bar even higher through the power door programme.

A girl got on at Banbury, looked a bit uncertain but then sat in the bay opposite me, when the guard came through she asked; "is this first class?" No, it's just a particularly nice train!

That is not the first time that exactly that same comment has been said of Chiltern's loco-hauled rakes, not by a long way. The Solihull local passengers from Moor Street always seem quite wary of boarding the loco-hauled trains because of the perceived "class" of them - They simply don't expect to be lavished with such luxurious surroundings when various brands of Turbostar, even the very good 172s, are the usual fodder!

 

[bronzeonion]

It is a slight shame the Chiltern refurbished vehicles are not quite to the same spec as the ex WSMR but they are still by far the nicest out of the lot! Dont even talk to me about FGW MK3's, though the seated sleeper ones are quite nice.

 

[SprinterMan]

I fear I may be about to cause uproar here, but I think that ATW & FGW Mark 3s are ever-so-slightly better than Chiltern's :P

Adam

 

[aylesbury]

Lets just hope they come to a GEML station very very soon

You,l be lucky ,might get a souped up 350!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ChilternHenry]

I fear I may be about to cause uproar here, but I think that ATW & FGW Mark 3s are ever-so-slightly better than Chiltern's :P

Adam

To quote Victor Meldrew, " I don't believe it!" There is no way on earth this is the case. However, I will admit that the fgw carriages with screens in the seat backs are good for long distance trips, in terms of entertainment, but the interior is nowhere near the standard of Chiltern's. Buy hey-ho, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I guess tastes differ from person to person.

 

[Class172]

That is not the first time that exactly that same comment has been said of Chiltern's loco-hauled rakes, not by a long way. The Solihull local passengers from Moor Street always seem quite wary of boarding the loco-hauled trains because of the perceived "class" of them - They simply don't expect to be lavished with such luxurious surroundings when various brands of Turbostar, even the very good 172s, are the usual fodder!

It makes me even more jealous that Kiddy gets them but not Droitwich!

 

[SprinterMan]

To quote Victor Meldrew, " I don't believe it!" There is no way on earth this is the case. However, I will admit that the fgw carriages with screens in the seat backs are good for long distance trips, in terms of entertainment, but the interior is nowhere near the standard of Chiltern's. Buy hey-ho, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I guess tastes differ from person to person.

It is purely the fact that the seats are so low-backed. I love the headrests on Grammer seats, they give neck-support like nothing else I have ever experienced :P

Adam

 

[fgwrich]

I fear I may be about to cause uproar here, but I think that ATW & FGW Mark 3s are ever-so-slightly better than Chiltern's :P

Adam

Agreed. One of the worst features about the Chiltern modernisation, is the removal of the internal sliding doors between the vestuble & saloon, and the removal of all of the large luggage racks. It's a good job well done, but it just misses out on some not very good 'design clever' traits.

 

[RPM]

Agreed. One of the worst features about the Chiltern modernisation, is the removal of the internal sliding doors between the vestuble & saloon, and the removal of all of the large luggage racks. It's a good job well done, but it just misses out on some not very good 'design clever' traits.

That was done because they are used on commuter services and it helps reduce the station dwell times. The luggage capacity required on a London - Birmingham run is somewhat less than what was required when the coaches were used on longer distance services so removal of the carriage-end racks has not caused too many problems. It was always the plan to remove the vestibules when the power doors were fitted - this predates the slight change of direction that was taken when the WSMR coaches unexpectedly became available.

 

[sprinterguy]

Agreed. One of the worst features about the Chiltern modernisation, is the removal of the internal sliding doors between the vestuble & saloon, and the removal of all of the large luggage racks. It's a good job well done, but it just misses out on some not very good 'design clever' traits.

There's some pretty huge vestibules on the Chiltern sets now though that look to be a good deal bigger than the luggage racks that they have ousted - They are akin to those that you would find in a mark 4, but across both sides of the carriage in some cases. Additionally fitting the powered doors has considerably reduced the number of drafts and external noise entering the carriage. I find the passenger saloon of the Chiltern sets without internal sliding doors to be quieter than the passenger saloon of slam-door mark 3s that have those doors closed, and in my experience they are often jammed open by luggage on the footpads or just plain jammed anyway.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You,l be lucky ,might get a souped up 350!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I believe that consideration is presently being given to upgrading the mark 3 stock on the GEML, potentially with new locos, rather than replacing the loco-hauled sets with new trains.

 

[TDK]

I just wanted to say what a lovely job they've done of modernising them, creating a proper 'Inter-City' interior ambience, comfortable low-backed seats, arranged in a spacious way with good window views, airy, quiet.
Well done Chiltern, I shall be using you more often from now on.

The reason they are in that livery is that originally WSMR had them refurbished and not Chiltern, Chiltern just aquired them (apart from the most recent ones) when WSMR were shut down, so it's a well done to the old WSMR and not Chiltern who in fact back in 2007 would never have dreamed of using 67's/Mk3?DVT combos, it was only when they realised they needed some extra stock that the idea came to mind!!!

 

[90sWereBetter]

Hopefully when the GE franchise is let in a few years time, there'll be money allocated to doing up the MK3s to this standard. Hopefully no bloody EMUs.

 

[dk1]

Hopefully when the GE franchise is let in a few years time, there'll be money allocated to doing up the MK3s to this standard. Hopefully no bloody EMUs.

They certainly seem to favour the MKIII upgrade at the moment but who knows. These things change every few months.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Agreed. One of the worst features about the Chiltern modernisation, is the removal of the internal sliding doors between the vestuble & saloon, and the removal of all of the large luggage racks. It's a good job well done, but it just misses out on some not very good 'design clever' traits.

Those doors were always a pain in the backside though, especially on overcrowded summer XC services- there'd be people crammed in every vestibule and the pads would constantly be triggering the internal doors to open and close repeatedly- squashing any unsuspecting passengers stood in the doorways. Luckily, some of the coaches had a visible switch in the vestibule to lock the door in the 'open' position!

 

[bronzeonion]

442's had that switch visible on either end of the corridor past the guards compartment till Southern removed them for some reason.

I wouldn't mind EMU's on the GEML just as long as it's not a god damn Desiro pile of awful rubbish. A longer more luxurious 395 would do the trick.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

It is a slight shame the Chiltern refurbished vehicles are not quite to the same spec as the ex WSMR but they are still by far the nicest out of the lot! Dont even talk to me about FGW MK3's, though the seated sleeper ones are quite nice.

Really? I work for Chiltern and I cant tell the difference any more between ex WSMR coaches and the Mk3 coaches which were refurbished after WSMR folded. There is a slight difference in the ceiling aesthetically, but that is the only thing I can think off though I am fully prepared to admit I might have missed something.

When the coaches were fitted with power doors I know that the ex WSMR sets also had their WiFi upgraded (presumably wireless G to wireless N) so it's not like Chiltern have neglected the older coaches too. I do have to add to the WSMR love though, they really did a great job with them. I might be biased, but I think they are the best coaches on the network at the moment, and I'd go as far as to say that standard is so nice that it makes first/business a fairly pointless upgrade unless the train is very busy.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Agreed. One of the worst features about the Chiltern modernisation, is the removal of the internal sliding doors between the vestuble & saloon, and the removal of all of the large luggage racks. It's a good job well done, but it just misses out on some not very good 'design clever' traits.

Has anyone got a link to a detailed interior diagram/floor plan of the Chiltern mark3s, showing the positions of doors, walls, seats etc and preferably window positions? I'd like to see how big the vestibles are and things (it would be great if there are similar diagrams for other operator's mark3s too), and perhaps play with it a bit in Photoshop/Illustrator (I've only made one trip on the Chiltern mark3s, before the power door mods (it was after WSMR ceased though)).

Hopefully when the GE franchise is let in a few years time, there'll be money allocated to doing up the MK3s to this standard. Hopefully no bloody EMUs.

They certainly seem to favour the MKIII upgrade at the moment but who knows. These things change every few months.

The one problem I have with the GEML and IC225 plans is the Traxx UK (and the other new electric loco options) doesn't look nearly so fetching as a 91 or 90 (I like the look of both 90s and 91s, but 91s (and the IC125 class 43 powercars) are the greatest (to look at anyway)). Can't anyone style INTERCITY locomotives that look the part anymore?

442's had that switch visible on either end of the corridor past the guards compartment till Southern removed them for some reason.

I wouldn't mind EMU's on the GEML just as long as it's not a god damn Desiro pile of awful rubbish. A longer more luxurious 395 would do the trick.

Looking at the outside of a 5WES (class 442), (I have no memories of what they were like when I last rode on one, which was a long time ago, if I ever did) they look like they might make a suitable Intercity trains for routes that don't require more than 100/110mph, with a buffet car and the doors in the right place etc. Certainly if lines like the north Wales coast and Welsh Marches Line are ever electrified, I think a 5WES-like EMU would be a good replacement for 158s and 175s.

 

[E-Rail]

Looking at the outside of a 5WES (class 442), (I have no memories of what they were like when I last rode on one, which was a long time ago, if I ever did) they look like they might make a suitable Intercity trains for routes that don't require more than 100/110mph, with a buffet car and the doors in the right place etc.

A 444 is basically a 442 with all the ambience designed out.

The 442s had a lot more table seating, a larger mark 3 IC style buffet with a pub style lounge area adjacent, compartments for First Class (although additional First Class accommodation was later added by converting the standard seating at the end of those coaches to First) and I am pretty sure they also had an IC style phone booth.

Incidentally the standard class seating originally used in the 442 is the same design as used for First Class in the 321s and was far more comfortable than the IC70 units.

 

[D365]

Now if only AC 442s (342?) had been possible, anyone up for some of those?

 

[AndyLandy]

I wouldn't mind EMU's on the GEML just as long as it's not a god damn Desiro pile of awful rubbish. A longer more luxurious 395 would do the trick.

What's wrong with the Desiros. I admit that the 444s might not have much character, but I've always found them comfortable, spacious and clean trains.

And to echo the other commentry in this thread. I do miss the piggies. They really were nice trains to travel on!

 

[jopsuk]

I'm sure at the original build, nothing would have physically stopped BR building an AC version. But at the time only NSE wanted such a thing. If electrification had been more extensive, perhaps RR or even IC would have ordered such things, but a combination of money and different management seems to have resulted in only NSE managing to eliminate loco hauled from their sector (Gatwick Express was, as I understand it, an InterCity operation? Even so, it was, as with HSTs and loco+DVT operations, a quasi-unit operation)

 

[Rhydgaled]

Now if only AC 442s (342?) had been possible, anyone up for some of those?

Certainly up for some of those, or perhaps a 5WES-style member of the Electrostar family (IC door layout, more tables, 2+2 rather than 2+3 seating etc.) with the corridor-fitted cabs of a 377. I feel such trains might be more appropriate than 350s for some of LM's fast services, particularly routes like Crewe - Liverpool that don't have much of an ICWC service (or you could use class 90s, mark3 LHCS and DVTs, depending on how long the train needs to be to meet demand).

444s look (again, I can't remember what they are like to travel on, or if I've been on one)) like they might do the job too, but there is a door taking space out of the middle of one of the carriages, and perhaps letting fresh air in, and they don't seem to have a buffet car like the 5WESes do/did.

Anyway, back on topic, and more the object of my previous post, interior layout diagrams of (Chiltern) mark3s anyone?

 

[ainsworth74]

444s look (again, I can't remember what they are like to travel on, or if I've been on one)) like they might do the job too, but there is a door taking space out of the middle of one of the carriages, and perhaps letting fresh air in, and they don't seem to have a buffet car like the 5WESes do/did.

444s have end doors throughout with proper vestibules and a micro-buffet (SWT hardly ever use it but it's there) and of course there's no reason why a more chunky buffet couldn't be fitted if an operator required in new build.

Also worth noting, of course, that it wouldn't be more 444s it would be whatever Siemens latest EMU is but built in a 444 style.

 

[Rhydgaled]

444s have end doors throughout with proper vestibules

One door on the fourth coach in this image doesn't look like it's at the end, maybe it's only a disabled toilet (or the mini-buffet you speak off) between that and the end of the coach though. What's with that? More 3rd-rail 444/442-style trains for South West Trains might not be a bad idea either, if they are still using 450s on Portsmouth fasts and getting complaints from doing so, and the released 450s could cover Lymingnton and perhaps extended electrification, either Southampton-Romsey or convert them to 350s to cover for late delivery of cascaded units from Thameslink.

 

[ainsworth74]

Hmm I think it's a disabled toilet but I can't remember for sure off the top of my head. Either way I've done a full walk through of a 444 and trust me even that door is protected from the passenger saloon by vestibule doors.

Edit: Actually going on the formation that will be the buffet as the fifth vehicle is the DMCO and the next in the formation is the TSRMB aka the buffet.

 

[Rhydgaled]

I've done a full walk through of a 444 and trust me even that door is protected from the passenger saloon by vestibule doors.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Vestibule doors being something that's missing from the (very?)slightly suburban-ised Chiltern refurb which would perhaps be wanted on any similar refurbs for GEML/GWML/ECML mark3s.

 

[AndyLandy]

Edit: Actually going on the formation that will be the buffet as the fifth vehicle is the DMCO and the next in the formation is the TSRMB aka the buffet.

One door on the fourth coach in this image doesn't look like it's at the end, maybe it's only a disabled toilet (or the mini-buffet you speak off) between that and the end of the coach though. What's with that?

The TSRMB vehicle in a 444 set does indeed contain the micro buffet, guard's office and the disabled loo. I assume the inset door is also for accessibility. All the other vehicles have end doors and vestibules, but the TSRMB has a doorway that opens directly into the saloon area.

 

[sprinterguy]

One door on the fourth coach in this image doesn't look like it's at the end, maybe it's only a disabled toilet (or the mini-buffet you speak off) between that and the end of the coach though. What's with that?

I can confirm that that is the carriage with the buffet and the disabled toilet, but I cannot provide details of the internal layout, sorry.