Class 43 Scrappings?

[Phoenix]

And now I'm not sure what I said!

I'm actuallly surprised this thread hasn't been locked yet

I think it's cause the MODS are involved in this one and actually realise that it's fun to let these things just carry on.

 

[John_158]

How so? The first production HST sets did not come into play until spring 1976, which was 33 years ago.

Wasn't the first actuall type of HST the ATP ?

As for the topic of scrapping of the class, no-one really knows when this will be but it is heavily likely to be the Eastern Region sets to go first since they should be getting the IEP so withdrawals should begin over there before they do on the Western Region. At which point I would hope the 125 Group will jump in and get whatever they can.



I don't think they should be scraped they should and proably get cascaded Between Cross Country & EMT with there cariges hopefully to free up Voyagers (AXC) and Merdians (EMT).

 

[Royston Vasey]

I don't think they should be scraped they should and proably get cascaded Between Cross Country & EMT with there cariges hopefully to free up Voyagers (AXC) and Merdians (EMT).

From an enthusiast's (and maybe passenger's) point of view, that'd be nice. But no business is going to discard 10 year old capital equipment for what will be approaching 40 year old capital equipment. Not as a preferred option anyway... Remember FGW only started to have HSTs re-engineered after the failure of the preferred option of new equipment (Adelantes) to perform reliably which should have been a better option.

I suspect if the Adelantes had performed extremely well when introduced, at a time when the HSTs were unfashionable and suffering in reliability terms, the HST fleet may never have found itself anywhere near the full use we see today, and many more Adelantes (and similar units) would be in place, at least on the GWML.

Meridians and Voyagers, whatever their faults, aren't having the reliability problems the Adelantes had. Having been built to modern safety, efficiency and disability standards, and assuming they are cheaper to maintain well into the future (I don't have this knowledge to say this for certain), I don't think there is much chance of HSTs replacing the far newer trains on the franchises you mention by that time.

 

[John_158]

I didn't actually mean replace i ment more to free up other units to be worked in doubles to increasec capacity that way.

 

[Royston Vasey]

I didn't actually mean replace i ment more to free up other units to be worked in doubles to increasec capacity that way.

Ok fair enough, but my point is the same, I'm pretty sure new builds by that point will be preferred options over what will then be 40+ year old stock.

 

[John_158]

Built to last !

 

[90019]

Built to last !

They were originally built to last, what, 10 years or something, not 40+.
If a TOC has the choice of newbuild of 40 year old stock, i'm fairly certain they'll go for the newbuild.

 

[yorkie]

From an enthusiast's (and maybe passenger's) point of view, that'd be nice. But no business is going to discard 10 year old capital equipment for what will be approaching 40 year old capital equipment. Not as a preferred option anyway... Remember FGW only started to have HSTs re-engineered after the failure of the preferred option of new equipment (Adelantes) to perform reliably which should have been a better option.

That's not correct. Adelantes were never intended to replace HSTs.

Meridians and Voyagers, whatever their faults, aren't having the reliability problems the Adelantes had. Having been built to modern safety, efficiency and disability standards, and assuming they are cheaper to maintain well into the future (I don't have this knowledge to say this for certain), I don't think there is much chance of HSTs replacing the far newer trains on the franchises you mention by that time.

They are very expensive to maintain. FGW are saving money in maintenance by using HSTs instead of underfloor DMU Adelantes.

It is generally accepted that above about 5 or 6 cars, it is cheaper and more efficient to run a loco and coaches, rather than a DMU consisting of loads of smaller engines beneath each coach.

A study was done a few years ago which found Voyagers to be the least efficient trains in the country, while the '225s' were the most efficient. The Voyagers were rated at worse than 4 people sharing a car.

Talking about when Voyager engines had the engine problems in 2006, 'Cod Roe' on uk.railway said:-
"being horizontally mounted makes
lubrication difficult, and the very confined underfloor space has also
lead to small coolers which are yet further limited by being clogged up
due to a coating of discharged lubricating oil making them sticky. Any
engine that gets through lubricating oil like this has a flaw of some
variety. Whilst it is nice to believe that Cummins have rectified this
with fitting a bush in the right direction, I don't think it is anything
like the end of the story for what has all the signs of a flawed design.
I can't see a connection between using a huge amount of lubricating
oil (you can even smell it next to a Voyager) and the oil supply to the
rocker assembly, so there is at least one more problem. Time will be
the great judge, but I don't think we are going to see Voyagers lasting
like HSTs. "

 

[Techniquest]

That's not correct. Adelantes were never intended to replace HSTs.

Correct, they were ordered to replace 47/8s on day trains.

 

[Royston Vasey]

Correct, they were ordered to replace 47/8s on day trains.

I stand corrected... though still wonder if they'd been successful FGW would still have gone ahead with the HST life extension or invested in new trains, of whatever sort?

 

[Techniquest]

One does wonder what would have happened if the 180s had been more reliable and successful, could be anything considering how totally random the industry goes at times.

 

[yorkie]

I stand corrected... though still wonder if they'd been successful FGW would still have gone ahead with the HST life extension or invested in new trains, of whatever sort?

I think 180s have nothing to do with it, except it may have made them think it is better to stick with a proven design rather than a new design that was unproven.... but if that was the case they went against that by taking a risk going for the (relatively unproven) MTU over the VP185.

 

[WillPS]

Just a thought about HSTs and Mk.3 coaches particularly - why has nobody replaced the doors on them yet? Surely powered doors wouldn't be to big an ask - some of the Sprinters have the Mk.3 Body Frame - and they have the doors.

Slam doors were by and large out in the 90s - somehow InterCity trains escaped the cull.

 

[90019]

I guess its because of the way they curve round the end of the coach, meaning that it would probably be fairly expensive to change, added to the number of doors that would have to be changed, and it would mean taking part or whole sets out of service.
If so it'll be similar for the mk2s as well.

 

[Techniquest]

It'll be the expense I should imagine that's off-putting. Can't say I blame them, it's a mammoth job! For just one 8-car set, that's...28 doors (not including the two emergency doors in the buffet car and the guard's end doors on the TGS) to replace, then considering FGW have a requirement for 50 sets to run the weekday service, that's a lot. 50x28, in my head, is...1,400 doors to replace, plus the doors on the other 7(?) sets on exam/spare, that's far too much expense for a premium-paying TOC (or for that matter any other TOC on a franchise), more so in the current economic climate.