Class 43 (HST) trains post 2020.

[tbtc]

We can argue until the cows come home about whether an HST is physically sound to last another twenty years - my own opinion is that the power cars have had an upgrade in recent memory, so should be capable of lasting, but the coaches are going to need a lot of money spent on them (not just for equal access either)...

...however, I think that the significant thing is that after one hundred and fifty comments on this thread, nobody has found a realistic use for large numbers of HSTs post 2020.

Interesting though some of the ideas are (two coach HSTs, 3rd rail shoes on HSTs...), there's not going to be a lot of lines that fit all of these criteria:

• Require 100/110/125mph trains
• Are not electrified
• Have sufficient platform capacity at termini to accomodate two power cars on each train (e.g. Glasgow Queen Street)
• Are not so busy that they can afford to have sufficient platform capacity at termini to accomodate two power cars on each train (e.g. Waterloo - Exeter needs all nine/ten coaches to be passenger accomodation - a multiple unit could fit a lot of extra passengers into the space that power cars take up)
• Don't need to split/join en route
• Don't have regular stops (given how poor HSTs are at pulling away)
• Need long trains (at least five coaches long, say?)
• No/few platforms that are significantly shorter than the train (okay on one or two trains a day, like the Highland Cheiftan, but not ideal on more frequent services)
• No interworking with services that don't meet these criteria

IEP and bi-mode will fill most of those "gaps" on the ECML and GWML. Electrification around the WCML (Blackpool, Bolton etc) will see more 125mph tilting trains for the WCML franchise, which will free up most of the twenty/twentyone Voyagers that they have (if anyone wants to split hairs re the "spare" driving cabs), so that they only require some for Chester/Holyhead services...

...electrification of the MML will see the entire fleet of 222s become spare...

...electrification to Hull will see some 180s become spare...

...plus GWML electrification will see the FGW 180s become spare.

So, assuming no more electrification/bi-mode IEP on order, I reckon there'll be enough modern DMUs to run Paddington - Devon/Cornwall and to bolster the Cross Country network (the only real places for HSTs, post IEP) - plus you could run all of the Manchester - Southampton services with EMUs in a few years anyway which means fewer diesels required at XC.

Beyond that... erm... Chiltern's Birmingham services are a possibility for HSTs, but should be very high up the electrification list for CP6 regardless.

The Central Belt - Inverness/ Aberdeen services fit most of the criteria I listed above (fouling the points at Queen Street notwithstanding), but people keep telling me that Scotland would only want post-privatisation DMUs.

Anything else is more about "a couple here, a couple there" (e.g. you could have one or two reserved for the "WAG Express"), but this is tinkering at the margins.

Really, the idea of running large numbers of HSTs post-2020 is that old favourite - a solution in need of a problem. And I really can't see many problems that HSTs are going to be the long term solution for, sorry.

 

[jopsuk]

Really, the idea of running large numbers of HSTs post-2020 is that old favourite - a solution in need of a problem. And I really can't see many problems that HSTs are going to be the long term solution for, sorry.

This. Those of us shooting down these ideas are not in a hurry to see them go, and some of us fear the new stock may not be as pleasant to travel on.

But we're realistic

 

[Haydn1971]

Agreed with tbtc on this, it's not going to be economic to have odd IC125 units scattered around the country, I can see several operators carrying on using after 2020, but 50% or more of the fleet will disappear with the arrival of the 800/801 fleets

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Realistically will HSTs be going anywhere but a scrap yard post 2020? The cost and/or feasibility of installing the ETCS must also have an affect on their future.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Realistically will HSTs be going anywhere but a scrap yard post 2020? The cost and/or feasibility of installing the ETCS must also have an affect on their future.

They're already planned in for ETCS. (the EC ones at least)

 

[Class 170101]

I have said it before and will say it again

HSTs will end their days on Cross Country between Plymouth and Edinburgh with a Chiltern style refurbishment to get them to 2025ish (maybe 2030).
It will enable the Voyager Fleet to operate in pairs for the majority of services instead of a minority of services as today to reduce crowding issues and cater for growth (extension of Reading to Newcastle to Gatwick and Edinburgh and for Bristol to Manchester service extended from Bristol to Plymouth). Also supported with Class 222s. It may also enable a 3rd Hourly service to operate between Birmingham and York (destinations south and north subject to previous discussion but a personal preference for Heathrow and Sunderland / Middlesborough). I would also like to see Cross Country return to operating services between Birmingham and Scotland via the WCML using the 221s from West Coast Franchise.

Class 91 and Mark IV sets will finish their days on the MML with the GEML getting a Chilternised Mark III refurbishment to get them towards 2025/30.

 

[Class172]

I strongly suspect that this has already been asked in the thread, but I can't find it currently: can a class 43 work with a rake of mk4s?

tbtc, as usual, seems to have hit the nail on the head - we are going to end up with too many trains for the number of services available to run them on. I ask about the mk4s, whilst, since I would prefer to see them on the MML, they could perhaps be used as an upgrade for the mk3s that would otherwise stay in service (that's providing they are not already used (ie. MML) or to that fact, even compatible).

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I strongly suspect that this has already been asked in the thread, but I can't find it currently: can a class 43 work with a rake of mk4s?.....

The HST power cars can haul the Mk4 coaches, but can't supply them with power.

 

[cjmillsnun]

I have said it before and will say it again

HSTs will end their days on Cross Country between Plymouth and Edinburgh with a Chiltern style refurbishment to get them to 2025ish (maybe 2030).
It will enable the Voyager Fleet to operate in pairs for the majority of services instead of a minority of services as today to reduce crowding issues and cater for growth (extension of Reading to Newcastle to Gatwick and Edinburgh and for Bristol to Manchester service extended from Bristol to Plymouth). Also supported with Class 222s. It may also enable a 3rd Hourly service to operate between Birmingham and York (destinations south and north subject to previous discussion but a personal preference for Heathrow and Sunderland / Middlesborough). I would also like to see Cross Country return to operating services between Birmingham and Scotland via the WCML using the 221s from West Coast Franchise.

Class 91 and Mark IV sets will finish their days on the MML with the GEML getting a Chilternised Mark III refurbishment to get them towards 2025/30.

And I still disagree with you.

HSTs will pretty much finish their days when 222s can move over to the GWML. The remaining 222s will be made compatible with the voyagers and move to XC along with the Super Voyagers currently in service on the WCML.

Some HSTs may get a reprieve and move to Chiltern where a minimal refurb to get them through TSI-PRM (internal door handles and improved CDL on the manual doors and an accessible toilet.) but that is by no means a definite.

I agree that the 225s are likely to go to the MML (freeing the 222s and the HSTs that are likely to go into the hands of preservationists - they have Paxman engines albeit VP185s and IC70 seats)

For the GEML I have a feeling they will look for EMUs, probably ending up with a Siemens 110 MPH capable 10 coach (23m coaches) with end doors. Many have said the 444 would be ideal for the GEML and they have a point, however with how busy the service can be I think a 10 coach unit with a full coach of first class and one mini buffet would be better. This would be based on whichever platform is current in the UK.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm of the impression that we've been building lots of new InterCity diesel trains over the past few years and wound down production of shorter distance diesel units when we should have been doing the opposite.

Realistically, InterCity diesel traction is going to be declining a lot more quickly with electrification, something that could have been tided over with existing stock, including already re-engined 125's and tarted up Mk3's. Yet we have regional railway lines which are already over crowded, many of which won't be electrified for a long time, surviving on ageing rolling stock of varying longevity, which are expected to survive on a trickle of electrification.

Rolling stock policy has been very topsy-turvy IMO.

 

[cjmillsnun]

I'm of the impression that we've been building lots of new InterCity diesel trains over the past few years and wound down production of shorter distance diesel units when we should have been doing the opposite.

Realistically, InterCity diesel traction is going to be declining a lot more quickly with electrification, something that could have been tided over with existing stock, including already re-engined 125's and tarted up Mk3's. Yet we have regional railway lines which are already over crowded, many of which won't be electrified for a long time, surviving on ageing rolling stock of varying longevity, which are expected to survive on a trickle of electrification.

Rolling stock policy has been very topsy-turvy IMO.

Agree whole heartedly.

 

[43074]

Having previously been dismissive of debating about where the HSTs will end up, I will now look into my crystal ball...

By 2020: There will be very few HSTs still in service, but plenty of 125mph DMUs such as Meridians, displaced from elsewhere by electrification schemes etc. The HSTs that remain will be on secondary routes such as the Chiltern Main Line and the North Wales - South Wales services. Apart from this fleet (of what I think would be approx. 20 sets maximum) the rest will have been scrapped, maybe with one or two preserved.

CrossCountry will probably be all Voyager/EMU operated: by 2020 some timetable re-jigging could occur to give a Reading - Manchester service so the use of EMUs can be maximised. Voyagers cascaded from here can strengthen the remaining Voyager operated services, and displace the HSTs.

The MML will probably be operated by two fleets (all indications from EMT thus far have suggested this): one a 125mph InterCity EMU fleet for London - Nottingham & Sheffield, and the other an Outer-Suburban ''Express'' unit for London - Corby; these HSTs still retain relatively untouched interiors, so perhaps one or two are ideal candidates for preservation? The Meridians could be used on London - Plymouth/Penzance services. Don't waste their capabilities on Liverpool to Norwich

Apart from this, there will be no real need for HSTs on 'core' InterCity duties: Grand Central have already shown interest in the Hull Trains 180s released from the Hull Electrification or Great Western to replace their HSTs.

Rolling stock policy has been very topsy-turvy IMO.

Or, perhaps more accurately, non-existant. If there was a rolling stock policy, this discussion wouldn't need to happen.

 

[Brian Aylott]

[QUOTE=Class 170101;1783127 I have said it before and will say it again}

There is no point in keep saying it again if it is not factual
I presume that you are saying what you think might happen or you would like to happen, not anything that is based on actual knowledge of what is going to happen
For example, as the leasing companies do not expect that many HSTs will be made compatible for 1/1/2020, I accept it as surely they must have a better idea than any of us
Similarly when they say that it is unlikely that Class 91s will go to the MML because they will not be able to keep to even the present diesel timings, I would accept that too
Brian

 

[RichmondCommu]

Class 91 and Mark IV sets will finish their days on the MML with the GEML getting a Chilternised Mark III refurbishment to get them towards 2025/30.

I would disagree with this. Loco hauled stock is simply not quick enough for the MML given the close proximity of many of the stations and the need to accelerate quickly from sharp curves. 125mph EMU's are much more likely if not a follow on order for the IEP's.

 

[Rick1984]

The MKIII trailer coaches could be used to bolster the threadbare regional diesel fleets? Use with a class 68/88 and convert some of the power cars to DVT's
to avoid top and tailing.

For example:
Could be used on a service like Norwich to Great Yarmouth, Lowestoft or Sheringham with three coaches, 2nd class. You could then cascade 156's to Scotrail to lengthen more trains.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

I would disagree with this. Loco hauled stock is simply not quick enough for the MML given the close proximity of many of the stations and the need to accelerate quickly from sharp curves. 125mph EMU's are much more likely if not a follow on order for the IEP's.

Could Siemans make a 125mph version (if possible) of either a 350/450 or a 444?

 

[starrymarkb]

I suspect they'd do a scaled down version of the ICx for 125mph rather then try and redo the Desiro.

 

[thealexweb]

Manchester Airport to Barrow-in-Furness? It would be justified between Manchester Airport and Lancaster and its unlikely the line to barrow will be electrified any time soon. The current services run with three to six 185 are having overcrowding issues now. So by 2020 it might be getting critical.

 

[Mikey C]

I'm of the impression that we've been building lots of new InterCity diesel trains over the past few years and wound down production of shorter distance diesel units when we should have been doing the opposite.

Realistically, InterCity diesel traction is going to be declining a lot more quickly with electrification, something that could have been tided over with existing stock, including already re-engined 125's and tarted up Mk3's. Yet we have regional railway lines which are already over crowded, many of which won't be electrified for a long time, surviving on ageing rolling stock of varying longevity, which are expected to survive on a trickle of electrification.

Rolling stock policy has been very topsy-turvy IMO.

But most of the high speed diesels (220, 221, 222, 180) were for growth and new services, not replacements for 125s, and where 125s were replaced (e.g. Cross Country) the 125s were used elsewhere to cover growth. And once the 800/801s come into service, the IC125s will take a well earned retirement, 40 years is a good innings.

Maybe a few more DMUs should have been purchased, but that's a separate issue.

 

[yorksrob]

But most of the high speed diesels (220, 221, 222, 180) were for growth and new services, not replacements for 125s, and where 125s were replaced (e.g. Cross Country) the 125s were used elsewhere to cover growth. And once the 800/801s come into service, the IC125s will take a well earned retirement, 40 years is a good innings.

Maybe a few more DMUs should have been purchased, but that's a separate issue.

We'll, it's true, you'd have needed some. But if for example, Mk 2's on the Anglia line had been replaced by EMU's and maybe with a small extension of electrification - perhaps Bedford - Nottingham, again with EMU's we could have gone a long way towards satisfying Growth (and updating Cross Country) without being left with a glut of newish InterCity type DMU's which will be difficult to place as the main lines are wired.

I still think shorter distance DMU's are going to be a problem.

 

[The Ham]

One criticism of the use of HST's on regional routes is the high cost of running them compared with (say) 158's.

However IIRC doesn't GW own some of their HST's?

If they do then there is the argument that they could be reasonable to run as there would be no lease costs with them. Even allowing for the track access charges for a year coming in at about £90K for a 5+2 HST and about £18K for a three coach 158 (assuming the same number of miles) that still leaves well over £250K per year in saved lease costs (based on £110K per coach for the 158's, which I understand is about the going rate) plus the fact that there are more seats (i.e. more potential passengers) which could generate extra revenue.

Yes, any works would have to be paid out of the "saving" as would any extra costs (i.e. higher fuel costs and higher maintenance costs), however it may just tip the balance in the favour of keeping them for a bit until a large new order of DMU's can be justified and/or electrification frees up enough other DMU's.

 

[higthomas]

One criticism of the use of HST's on regional routes is the high cost of running them compared with (say) 158's.

However IIRC doesn't GW own some of their HST's?

If they do then there is the argument that they could be reasonable to run as there would be no lease costs with them. Even allowing for the track access charges for a year coming in at about £90K for a 5+2 HST and about £18K for a three coach 158 (assuming the same number of miles) that still leaves well over £250K per year in saved lease costs (based on £110K per coach for the 158's, which I understand is about the going rate) plus the fact that there are more seats (i.e. more potential passengers) which could generate extra revenue.

Yes, any works would have to be paid out of the "saving" as would any extra costs (i.e. higher fuel costs and higher maintenance costs), however it may just tip the balance in the favour of keeping them for a bit until a large new order of DMU's can be justified and/or electrification frees up enough other DMU's.

I don't think them owning some will come into play until new trains have been procured for London-Penzance runs.
If that is done and the HSTs are still not life-expired, then I would imagine they would probably use them on another franchise with longer faster runs, e.g. Scotrail if they keep the franchise.

 

[Mikey C]

We'll, it's true, you'd have needed some. But if for example, Mk 2's on the Anglia line had been replaced by EMU's and maybe with a small extension of electrification - perhaps Bedford - Nottingham, again with EMU's we could have gone a long way towards satisfying Growth (and updating Cross Country) without being left with a glut of newish InterCity type DMU's which will be difficult to place as the main lines are wired.

I still think shorter distance DMU's are going to be a problem.

But then the Anglia Mk2s were replaced by former Virgin Mk3s which seemed a pretty sensible move, as the Mk3s had plenty of life in them. By the time they are replaced, they will have had another 15 years of service and near the end of their natural life.

At the time these IC type DMUs were purchased, there was no plan at all for rolling electrification, and additional trains were needed. These DMUs (for all their faults) made sense to buy at the time.

 

[1018509]

During my lifetime I've lost - in no particular order - A60's, Class 117 DMU's, (RF Regals, RT's, (buses)) Hymeks, Warships, Westerns and Prairies; and now the HS 125's are on their way out apparently. I've just moved here - (New Milton) - leave my 444's alone - please.

 

[thenorthern]

Manchester Airport to Barrow-in-Furness? It would be justified between Manchester Airport and Lancaster and its unlikely the line to barrow will be electrified any time soon. The current services run with three to six 185 are having overcrowding issues now. So by 2020 it might be getting critical.

I don't think they would fit in the platforms at most stations along the route which is a shame.

 

[al.currie93]

I would disagree with this. Loco hauled stock is simply not quick enough for the MML given the close proximity of many of the stations and the need to accelerate quickly from sharp curves. 125mph EMU's are much more likely if not a follow on order for the IEP's.

Not sure this is generally true... The Class 91 maybe, with their high-speed gearing, but I have heard before that the Class 87 hauling 9 Mk 3 coaches and a DVT could easily out accelerate a Class 390 until about 80mph...

Re-gear the Class 91 to 125mph, or even to 110mph (the current speed limit of the Midland Main Line) and they may well do the same, and will have better reliability due to the motors having to apply less direct torque.

I personally find high-acceleration on intercity express trains a bit uncomfortable; I remember first going on a Class 222 and thinking "Whoa, ease off!" as it left London St. Pancras! I would actually prefer a slower accelerating train, and sacrifice the overall journey time a bit (which wouldn't be excessive) but that's just me :P

 

[yorksrob]

But then the Anglia Mk2s were replaced by former Virgin Mk3s which seemed a pretty sensible move, as the Mk3s had plenty of life in them. By the time they are replaced, they will have had another 15 years of service and near the end of their natural life.

At the time these IC type DMUs were purchased, there was no plan at all for rolling electrification, and additional trains were needed. These DMUs (for all their faults) made sense to buy at the time.

Well, in my view, that's the problem.

Mk 3's would have been better for Cross Country services until the next step change in InterCity rolling stock.

For an electrified route like Norwich, it would have made sense to build new electric stock because the electric InterCity network is not going to shrink, and it would have been guaranteed work throughout its lifespan.

Whilst rolling electrification may not have been on the cards just then, any railway worth its salt should have been contemplating an expansion of electrification at some stage in the near future, and a short extension, say to Nottingham, could either have been used as a launch pad for further electrification, or just to release diesel/loco stock for the time being to keep things ticking over.

Instead of building InterCity DMU's, we could have been building InterCity electrics, which we know we'll need for the full forty years and Inter-regional and local DMU's, since we know a lot more of these lines are going to be unelectrified for longer.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Not sure this is generally true... The Class 91 maybe, with their high-speed gearing, but I have heard before that the Class 87 hauling 9 Mk 3 coaches and a DVT could easily out accelerate a Class 390 until about 80mph...

Re-gear the Class 91 to 125mph, or even to 110mph (the current speed limit of the Midland Main Line) and they may well do the same, and will have better reliability due to the motors having to apply less direct torque.

I personally find high-acceleration on intercity express trains a bit uncomfortable; I remember first going on a Class 222 and thinking "Whoa, ease off!" as it left London St. Pancras! I would actually prefer a slower accelerating train, and sacrifice the overall journey time a bit (which wouldn't be excessive) but that's just me :P

I thought the MML had been upgraded for 125 in places?

EDIT: it has... http://www.eastmidlandstrains.co.uk...-Trains-Prepares-for-Launch-of-New-Timetable/

 

[Class 170101]

I would suggest those who are sceptical of my views answer the following questions

1) Will the travelling public accept trains that are perfectly adequate for use albeit in the twlight of life sit in sidings or go to the scrap yard whilst they have to stand on the trains that do operate?

2) Electrification announced for CP5 is not expected to actually complete in CP5. CP6 has not been declared yet and this assumes there will be some electrification included within it. If the HSTs are scrapped how do you propose to operate parts of FGW and XC - there aren't enough 220s / 221s / 222s to cover these I would suggest. CP6 electrification (if there is any) is unlikely to be in situ until December 2021 at earliest for first schemes pushing out towards December 2025 / December 2026 for later ones.

3) I don't see the DfT authorising any more DMUs being built and additionally it has been said that squeezing in 3B compliant engine into our UK guage trains is very unlikely. so how do you propose to replace scrapped Pacers whilst retaining and perhaps enhancing capacity.

4) I doubt the DfT will authorise any EMUs unless all existing stock is utilised first. This includes the Mark III and Mark IV sets. Refurbishment is cheaper than new trains.

 

[JamesRowden]

I would suggest those who are sceptical of my views answer the following questions

1) Will the travelling public accept trains that are perfectly adequate for use albeit in the twlight of life sit in sidings or go to the scrap yard whilst they have to stand on the trains that do operate?

2) Electrification announced for CP5 is not expected to actually complete in CP5. CP6 has not been declared yet and this assumes there will be some electrification included within it. If the HSTs are scrapped how do you propose to operate parts of FGW and XC - there aren't enough 220s / 221s / 222s to cover these I would suggest. CP6 electrification (if there is any) is unlikely to be in situ until December 2021 at earliest for first schemes pushing out towards December 2025 / December 2026 for later ones.

3) I don't see the DfT authorising any more DMUs being built and additionally it has been said that squeezing in 3B compliant engine into our UK guage trains is very unlikely. so how do you propose to replace scrapped Pacers whilst retaining and perhaps enhancing capacity.

4) I doubt the DfT will authorise any EMUs unless all existing stock is utilised first. This includes the Mark III and Mark IV sets. Refurbishment is cheaper than new trains.

3) Thameslink Southern Great Northern (TSGN) need more DMUs for the Uckfield line in order to run 10-car during the peak. The TSGN invitation to tender stated that there was the potential for a new DMU order. I think that this could be implemented in the form of an EDMU order for about 80 carraiges for the London-Uckfield and Brighton-Ashford routes since a significant amount of both routes is electrified. TSGN would still have a uniform self-powered fleet and the 171 fleet would be cascaded to other TOCs. More EDMUs could be ordered for other regoins as required. I think that 171s, commuter EDMUs and bi-model super express trains would be more suited to the needs of the network than HSTs.

During the next month let's see if anything close to my idea is announced.