Class 43 (HST) trains post 2020.

[The Ham]

Does anybody remember when Virgin XC operated short formed HSTs in place of 158s due to unavailability? Would have been the late 90s, think they might have been as short as two coaches. I'd love to see the HSTs refurbished and retained in shorter formations to boost service frequencies and open up new through routes, sadly with the rail industry structured as it is, and interest rates so low, it's highly unlikely.

Although shorter formations (although as short as 2 is probably a bit too short) could work and could solve quite a few problems (e.g. paths when doing runs between other 125mph stock, lack of DMU's, etc.), I would expect that they would only last a fairly short time from 2020 until a new DMU order was being delivered (probably about 2025).

I would suggest that, other than sorting out the doors and tanks for the toilets, they could re-enter service with very little work needed to be undertaken. Especially if they where going to be used on routes where pacers are currently prevalent and/or routes used by a lot of people who think that the HST's should live forever.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Although shorter formations (although as short as 2 is probably a bit too short) could work and could solve quite a few problems (e.g. paths when doing runs between other 125mph stock, lack of DMU's, etc.), I would expect that they would only last a fairly short time from 2020 until a new DMU order was being delivered (probably about 2025).

I would suggest that, other than sorting out the doors and tanks for the toilets, they could re-enter service with very little work needed to be undertaken. Especially if they where going to be used on routes where pacers are currently prevalent and/or routes used by a lot of people who think that the HST's should live forever.

Please stop this.

As much as I love HSTs and Mk3s, they are certainly not suitable as Pacer replacements.

They would be most suited on the Chiltern line to work alongside the LHCS IMO. It would allow some of the DMUs to be cascaded elsewhere.

 

[The Ham]

Please stop this.

As much as I love HSTs and Mk3s, they are certainly not suitable as Pacer replacements.

They would be most suited on the Chiltern line to work alongside the LHCS IMO. It would allow some of the DMUs to be cascaded elsewhere.

I wasn't being very serious about them as Pacer replacements. My post was more about if they are to be used post 2020 they could see little work carried out to them, so that they are a cost effective option to not needing a small order of DMU's. Although this could cause some to complain about getting cast offs there will be those that think that its a good thing (i.e. those who have Pacers at present and/or those who love HST's).

 

[Class 170101]

Does anybody remember when Virgin XC operated short formed HSTs in place of 158s due to unavailability? Would have been the late 90s, think they might have been as short as two coaches. I'd love to see the HSTs refurbished and retained in shorter formations to boost service frequencies and open up new through routes, sadly with the rail industry structured as it is, and interest rates so low, it's highly unlikely.

East Midlands Trains and Midland Mainline used to use shortened HSTs in lieu of Class 222s when they first started operating.

As for the 170s running between Edinburgh / Glasgow and Inverness, between Glasgow / Edinburgh to Aberdeen and between Inverness and Aberdeen I don't see the trains themselves as the problem but the internal layout. I would suggest it is perfectly possible to place internal doors between the seating and the doors to keep cold air out and warm air in. Former Anglia 170s have this due to the large amount of first class when originally built.

 

[RichmondCommu]

SNCF introduced Europe's first 200km/h service in 1967, Le Capitole, from Paris Austerlitz to Toulouse. The train comprised modified BB9200 locos and specially prepared UIC Y type coaches. These were replaced in 1970 by CC6500 locos and new Grand Confort coaches and 200km/h running was extended to other trains out of Austerlitz to Bourdeaux as well as Toulouse.

Thanks very much for this! Always learning on this forum!

 

[deltic08]

Why not convert one power car to an AC 3,000hp electric with reduced formations of 5/6/7 coaches and then you have a "go anywhere" train for Cardiff-Portsmouth (especially if Westbury-Bathampton Jnc is electrified), Swansea-Manchester/Holyhead (Swansea-Newport and Crewe-Manchester), Glasgow/Edinburgh-Inverness/Aberdeen, even Hull-KX, Grand Central-KX, some XC routes/Chiltern after "Electric Spine".

No one has mentioned totally refurbishing Mk3s to sort out any corrosion issues with cabs, retention toilets, power operated doors and forming 100, 110 or 125mph AC 442-type units. New power coaches, with powered axles on adjacent coaches to reduce weight, would have to be built but that is where the DDA compliant toilet and buffet could be. This would be ideal for Edinburgh-Glasgow, Hull-KX (after electrification) and longer TPEx services to Glasgow/Edinburgh, Liverpool-Newcastle/Hull and possibly MML and GEML. This would be much cheaper than new build keeping leasing costs and fares down.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What sort of state would they most likely be in when it gets to 2020 both structurally and mechanically?

 

[higthomas]

No one has mentioned totally refurbishing Mk3s to sort out any corrosion issues with cabs, retention toilets, power operated doors and forming 100, 110 or 125mph AC 442-type units. New power coaches, with powered axles on adjacent coaches to reduce weight, would have to be built but that is where the DDA compliant toilet and buffet could be. This would be ideal for Edinburgh-Glasgow, Hull-KX (after electrification) and longer TPEx services to Glasgow/Edinburgh, Liverpool-Newcastle/Hull and possibly MML and GEML. This would be much cheaper than new build keeping leasing costs and fares down.

Or, since one is building just as many new carriages as would be re-used, and the more expensive bits at that (powered) why not just buckle up and actually replace them.
I imagine that a proper refurbishment takes quite a lot of money, and there is only so much life in them. So why not just order a new train, where the electrics all work together from the start, one doesn't have to replace half the carriges 12-20 years into its life and one would get a more reliable train I imagine.

 

[Western Lord]

All the pie in the sky daydreams on this thread are amusing but it is about time people faced reality. The days when secondary services got clapped out main line stock are long gone. HSTs were designed for a purpose and still fulfill that purpose today. Once they are replaced there is zero chance of these ancient trains being used on lesser routes. British Airways is currently withdrawing from service it's Boeing 747-400 fleet, they will not be using them to boost capacity on domestic services! When the QE2 was withdrawn, nobody thought it should be sent to Dover to boost capacity on cross channel routes! Expensive to operate and maintain 125mph inter city trains are not suitable for marginal cross country routes.

 

[jopsuk]

Whilst I quite agree that using HSTs on secondary routes is unlikely/not suitable, unlike your strawmen they could actually do it. The QE2 would have been useless on the Dover strait what with having no car decks or RORO ramps, and 747s wouldn't be able to operate to many domestic/short haul European airports.

 

[racyrich]

How many potential routes have clearances, particularly on any curved platforms, for the overhangs of 26m long MK3s?

 

[jimm]

How many potential routes have clearances, particularly on any curved platforms, for the overhangs of 26m long MK3s?

Mk3s are 23m. IEP coaches will be 26m.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Porterbrook's Mk3 LHCS Brochure

There's a map of all routes cleared for Mk3s in either HST or LHCS form. In essence, they're cleared for all but the non-main Southern Region routes, requiring the short-swing coupling bogies so that they don't foul the third rail.

BTW, the map they use includes some bus routes which are shown as non-compatible routes (oddly enough, there aren't any rails on the Isle of Skye!). That was confusing for a while when I first saw the map.

 

[starrymarkb]

Whilst I quite agree that using HSTs on secondary routes is unlikely/not suitable, unlike your strawmen they could actually do it. The QE2 would have been useless on the Dover strait what with having no car decks or RORO ramps, and 747s wouldn't be able to operate to many domestic/short haul European airports.

Most of BA's European destinations do see 747s (or have seen them) and many get large twins/quads from elsewhere. It would still be stupid to put a 747 on a A319 route. Some routes may get up gauged if needed to a 767 or 777 for large events.

Also with Airliners they are limited in pressurisation cycles (1 cycle = take off - cruise - land). Which is why A320s and B737s tend to have a life of 10-12 years and long haul widebodies have a 30+ year life. Aircraft must be retired when they hit a certain number of cycles. A long haul widebody will do 1 or 2 cycles per day typically, where as a short haul narrowbody may do 8-10 cycles per day.

Main thing is why spend a large amount converting HSTs to short haul use when the life will be limited. Better buy a new more fuel efficient DMU or better an EDMU (like the Bombardier AGC) which will be more fuel efficient, more suited to regional operations (look how badly the 442s do on Southern), and will have a 30 year life minimum. And it'll probably be a better return on investment.

 

[Haydn1971]

Main thing is why spend a large amount converting HSTs to short haul use when the life will be limited. Better buy a new more fuel efficient DMU or better an EDMU (like the Bombardier AGC) which will be more fuel efficient, more suited to regional operations (look how badly the 442s do on Southern), and will have a 30 year life minimum. And it'll probably be a better return on investment.

Completely agree, I'm not even convinced that converted Mk3's would be any cheaper than new once you start considering the vast amount of changes and the whole life costs

 

[racyrich]

Mk3s are 23m. IEP coaches will be 26m.

Sorry, my mistake. Should have stuck to feet, I know they're 75'.

I suppose even branch lines are used to such length coaches these days.

 

[deltic08]

Or, since one is building just as many new carriages as would be re-used, and the more expensive bits at that (powered) why not just buckle up and actually replace them.
I imagine that a proper refurbishment takes quite a lot of money, and there is only so much life in them. So why not just order a new train, where the electrics all work together from the start, one doesn't have to replace half the carriges 12-20 years into its life and one would get a more reliable train I imagine.

When the Virgin hauled coaches were extensively stripped to body shells and rebuilt in the 1990s at Eastleigh and Horbury, Mk2s cost £100k and Mk3s £120k. Twenty years on, the cost could be £3-400k per coach but this compares very favourably with the latest class 387 order that works out at £6M per unit or £1.2M per coach. 20 more years out of a Mk3 at this price is value for money especially with lower leasing costs.

 

[cjmillsnun]

When the Virgin hauled coaches were extensively stripped to body shells and rebuilt in the 1990s at Eastleigh and Horbury, Mk2s cost £100k and Mk3s £120k. Twenty years on, the cost could be £3-400k per coach but this compares very favourably with the latest class 387 order that works out at £6M per unit or £1.2M per coach. 20 more years out of a Mk3 at this price is value for money especially with lower leasing costs.

True enough, but HSTs have costs of their own. They're not exactly easy on fuel, and will need more maintenance (both planned and unplanned) due to their age.

A class 387 OTOH doesn't have fuel costs but you'll pay for the electricity as part of the track access charge, accelerates faster (although has a lower top speed), brakes faster.

You also have to look at spares availability. Power cars and coaches are approaching 40 years old now. Whilst spares aren't a problem now, with reduced numbers of trains in service, there will be less of an incentive for manufacturers to make new or refurb existing parts. Thus some spares may become unavailable whilst others become more expensive.

I'd love to see HSTs doing what they do best for many more years, however they have had probably the hardest life of any passenger train left in service on the network.

 

[deltic08]

True enough, but HSTs have costs of their own. They're not exactly easy on fuel, and will need more maintenance (both planned and unplanned) due to their age.

A class 387 OTOH doesn't have fuel costs but you'll pay for the electricity as part of the track access charge, accelerates faster (although has a lower top speed), brakes faster.

You also have to look at spares availability. Power cars and coaches are approaching 40 years old now. Whilst spares aren't a problem now, with reduced numbers of trains in service, there will be less of an incentive for manufacturers to make new or refurb existing parts. Thus some spares may become unavailable whilst others become more expensive.

I'd love to see HSTs doing what they do best for many more years, however they have had probably the hardest life of any passenger train left in service on the network.

Please read #96 about AC 25kv 442 type and come back. Rebuilding from body shell upwards is like a new train but less than half the cost. Traction equipment from the proposed 387s could be installed with gearing for 110mph or for 125mph.

A hybrid electric/diesel HST would need more spares but with a longer life more spares would be manufactured. Diesel would be used only off-wires or when diverted and quite capable of swift acceleration on short formations of 5 or 6 coaches using one power car.

 

[gingerheid]

I'd imagine a lot of them will be turning up abroad after withdrawal in the UK.

 

[The Ham]

True enough, but HSTs have costs of their own. They're not exactly easy on fuel, and will need more maintenance (both planned and unplanned) due to their age.

A class 387 OTOH doesn't have fuel costs but you'll pay for the electricity as part of the track access charge, accelerates faster (although has a lower top speed), brakes faster.

You also have to look at spares availability. Power cars and coaches are approaching 40 years old now. Whilst spares aren't a problem now, with reduced numbers of trains in service, there will be less of an incentive for manufacturers to make new or refurb existing parts. Thus some spares may become unavailable whilst others become more expensive.

I'd love to see HSTs doing what they do best for many more years, however they have had probably the hardest life of any passenger train left in service on the network.

Depeds on how long we are talking about and how many sets, if only until about 2025 for say 12 sets. Then a) there wouldn't be much demand for spares and b) most if not all spares could be taken from sets which have been scrapped.

 

[jopsuk]

I'd imagine a lot of them will be turning up abroad after withdrawal in the UK.

I imagine dragons will appear over London and proceed to roast parliament, but that's about as grounded in reality as your imagination!

British trains that have ended up abroad:
the (unused before export) Nightstar coaches to Canada
A couple of Pacers to Iran
A small number of Mark 2 coaches to New Zealand (some of which have had a full makeover with powered doors etc)

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....British trains that have ended up abroad:
the (unused before export) Nightstar coaches to Canada
A couple of Pacers to Iran
A small number of Mark 2 coaches to New Zealand (some of which have had a full makeover with powered doors etc)

37s in France and Spain
56s in France and Hungary
58s in France, Holland and Spain
86s in Hungary
87s in Bulgaria

 

[jopsuk]

Ah yes- forgot about locos. The diesels were all used on specific construction projects, weren't they?
I genuinely cannot see any other country wanting 40+ year old small loading gauge high platform-only passenger carriages.

 

[455driver]

37s in France and Spain
56s in France and Hungary
58s in France, Holland and Spain
86s in Hungary
87s in Bulgaria

DB66s, FL66s.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Ah yes- forgot about locos. The diesels were all used on specific construction projects, weren't they?....

The Dutch 58s were for intermodal work I think, not sure what the 86s, 87s and Hungarian 56s are used on.

....I genuinely cannot see any other country wanting 40+ year old small loading gauge high platform-only passenger carriages.

Maybe, but how many saw 141s getting use after retirement from the UK network?

 

[SansPareil]

Do the Regional Eurostars still do domestic work on the continent for SNCF?

 

[jopsuk]

yes- but those are French trains, really. And built to be able to operate at low platforms.
As for the 141s? They were only 12 years old when withdrawn from UK service. Those that went to Iran are only known to have run for eight years.

As far as passenger carrying stock goes, you're all clutching at straws- I'll eat my hat if they end up in squadron service elsewhere*

*I reserve the right to make a hat out of bacon

 

[starrymarkb]

Do the Regional Eurostars still do domestic work on the continent for SNCF?

Yes but they built to do so with fold out stairs to match UK and UIC platforms as well as providing a bridge to the tunnel evacuation walkways. Would there be space for the mechanism on a Mk3?

 

[jopsuk]

Modifying the mark 3s to have a fold out step is probably possible but certainly expensive. Who would want to bother doing so on 40 year old stock?