Class 442 - HST sets

[HarleyDavidson]

Not even a thorough refurbishment could fix the problems of the 442!

You really don't have a clue do you! I was trained on them, I could still quite easily drive one on either auto or EP braking and I can still diagnose faults on them, I have the drivers manuals etc.

They just need retractioning. The 442s were designed for the Weymouth fasts, not the plebs of Brighton & Gatport Airwick.:roll: who TBQH wouldn't know a decent train if they saw one and Electrostars aren't decent trains.

 

[Techniquest]

Not even a thorough refurbishment could fix the problems of the 442!

You really don't have a clue do you! I was trained on them, I could still quite easily drive one on either auto or EP braking and I can still diagnose faults on them, I have the drivers manuals etc.

They just need retractioning. The 442s were designed for the Weymouth fasts, not the plebs of Brighton & Gatport Airwick.:roll: who TBQH wouldn't know a decent train if they saw one and Electrostars aren't decent trains.

You don't have a clue about the North and West or 175s do you?! Just because you were signed off on 442s doesn't mean that they're suitable for use with ATW. Did you not for one second read my original post on this thread, the first reply to it? In which the arguments for not using 442s up here are listed and I have yet to see someone prove them wrong!

If 442s are so wonderful, force SWT to take them back and use the 444s on Pompey services again!

 

[jopsuk]

in an alternate universe... 442s get sent for a massive overhaul. Cabs rebuilt to be identical to 444. Doors modified to be wider. Traction completely replaced with similar equipment to Desiros. Structural modifications carried out for provision for AC equipment. Work done on both classes to allow them to work together as a combined, expanded, SWT long distance fleet...

 

[Bletchleyite]

At what point does doing all that become more expensive than new stock?

Neil

 

[AM9]

At what point does doing all that become more expensive than new stock?

Neil

Very quickly as all the mod. costs need to be written off over no more than 10-15 years whereas the cost of a new train is written off over 35-40 years.*

That is not necessarily an accountant's write-off but the overall real cost to the ROSCO.

 

[physics34]

really dont think they will be scrapped regardless of what is said here.

The DfT wont allow tem to be, im pretty sure of that.

Publically, when trans are still crowded in many parts of the country.. to just go and scrap 120 useable coaches with another 10 years use would be mental and wouldnt be seen well in the public eye

 

[RichardW]

I believe I am right in saying that the TPE ITT is anticipating that the 442 fleet may be used as part of the proposal but that Northern Rail tenderers may not do so. Which to my mind implies that the DfT are of the opinion that they will move to TPE, without traction motors but with some other form of power. I apologise if this has already been mentioned.

 

[RobShipway]

The only parts of the class 442's I can see being scrapped are the driving cabs as they are being used on frames and other parts that are over 50 years old.

However, the carriages are Mk3 carriages with air operated doors which would be required if the HST's where to move North to Scotland.

Please bear in mind, that task and cost that Chiltern went through to get their Mk3 coaches to have air operated doors, which would need to be done with any Mk3 from the GWML before moving northwards so that they pass the disability act to be inforced from 2020.

 

[DT611]

The only parts of the clss 442's I can see being scrapped are the driving cabs as they are being used on frames and other parts that are over 50 years old.

didn't know that. thought it was just the traction package recycled. isn't there something about all the wiring though as well?

 

[RobShipway]

didn't know that. thought it was just the traction package recycled. isn't there something about all the wiring though as well?

I will stand corrected, but I believe that it was not only the traction motors and electrical control gear, but the frames from the old class 432's where adapted to be used for the driving cab coaches as well.

 

[CosherB]

The only parts of the class 442's I can see being scrapped are the driving cabs as they are being used on frames and other parts that are over 50 years old.

However, the carriages are Mk3 carriages with air operated doors which would be required if the HST's where to move North to Scotland.

Please bear in mind, that task and cost that Chiltern went through to get their Mk3 coaches to have air operated doors, which would need to be done with any Mk3 from the GWML before moving northwards so that they pass the disability act to be inforced from 2020.

so that's 24 x 2 = 48 ex-442 TSO and TSW carriages for 'alleged' re-use. not many is it, in the grand scheme of things? and i have no idea what is required to make them compatible for HST use (probably a small fortune i'd gamble).

has anyone asked Angel Trains what their long term plans are for the 442's? did Abellio approach them for this latest 'scheme' as part of their franchise committment to introduce the 27 refurbished HST sets?

 

[swt_passenger]

I will stand corrected, but I believe that it was not only the traction motors and electrical control gear, but the frames from the old class 432's where adapted to be used for the driving cab coaches as well.

You've been misled somewhere along the line. But what do you understand by the term 'frames' in this context?

The two driving trailers and and the other two trailer vehicles are 'ordinary' Mk3 construction, it is the centre coach that is strengthened because that's the one that's got all the traction equipment hanging off it, as well as being mounted on the two motor bogies.

 

[RobShipway]

so that's 24 x 2 = 48 ex-442 TSO and TSW carriages for 'alleged' re-use. not many is it, in the grand scheme of things? and i have no idea what is required to make them compatible for HST use (probably a small fortune i'd gamble).

has anyone asked Angel Trains what their long term plans are for the 442's? did Abellio approach them for this latest 'scheme' as part of their franchise committment to introduce the 27 refurbished HST sets?

Well, wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_442 has them with a possible future with TPE. However, the HST sets going to Abeillo scotrail they will need to have the former HST coaches rebuilt to have the same type of air operated doors on them as class 442's or the Chiltern Mk3's.

So not being sure as to who has the need for them more whether it is TPE or Scotrail, I would state that I believe it would be cheaper to change the Mk3 class 442 coaches to work with HST power cars, than rebuild the HST coaches.

 

[Ash Bridge]

I will stand corrected, but I believe that it was not only the traction motors and electrical control gear, but the frames from the old class 432's where adapted to be used for the driving cab coaches as well.

The 442 body shells must surely have been all new when built, plus being of monocoque construction would not have frames as such like a mk1 coach. Edit: Beaten to it by swt_passenger!

 

[CosherB]

Well, wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_442 has them with a possible future with TPE. However, the HST sets going to Abeillo scotrail they will need to have the former HST coaches rebuilt to have the same type of air operated doors on them as class 442's or the Chiltern Mk3's.

So not being sure as to who has the need for them more whether it is TPE or Scotrail, I would state that I believe it would be cheaper to change the Mk3 class 442 coaches to work with HST power cars, than rebuild the HST coaches.

1) If you believe everything you read on Wiki, you need help! lol
2) You guess it would be cheaper to refurb the 442 carriages than the HST trailers?

Until someone can quote some decent figures as to what the options actually cost, we can play 'guess the future use of 442's' until the cows come home. In the meantime, it's conjecture at best.

 

[cjmillsnun]

The only parts of the class 442's I can see being scrapped are the driving cabs as they are being used on frames and other parts that are over 50 years old.

However, the carriages are Mk3 carriages with air operated doors which would be required if the HST's where to move North to Scotland.

Please bear in mind, that task and cost that Chiltern went through to get their Mk3 coaches to have air operated doors, which would need to be done with any Mk3 from the GWML before moving northwards so that they pass the disability act to be inforced from 2020.

Ummm wrong. The cabs are on Mk3 coaches. Look at the under floor equipment on them.

The motor coach on the other hand is a Mk3 generator coach/REP hybrid.

EDIT: CosherB and SWT Passenger beat me to it... I really need to read the whole thread before replying...

 

[daniel3982]

Totally agreed, and having 2-car trains running solo on a busy route is just madness. Yes I know there is no alternative to doing so, but you just cannot explain to the norms why it is how it is.

If all the 175s were a minimum of 3 carriages it would have been a much better situation. However, I'm sure you'd also agree it's better now than having, as we once did, former First ScotRail 150/2s with 3+2 seating layout on Cardiff to Manchester runs (this was back in 2005).

This exact thing happened to me from Shrewbury to Manchester in October. Was full of football fans too to make it even more hellish!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The TPE ITT hints that TPE will be allowed to take them whilst also suggesting a 60% capacity uplift on Sheffield TPE services despite them remaining hourly.

Does this mean a 2 car 170 replaced by a 5 car 442 in their eyes (despite the fact most Sheffield services are 3 car or 2 x 2 car)?

 

[Chris125]

So not being sure as to who has the need for them more whether it is TPE or Scotrail, I would state that I believe it would be cheaper to change the Mk3 class 442 coaches to work with HST power cars, than rebuild the HST coaches.

I can't see why - it's surely cheaper to rebuild vehicles already configured for use as HST trailers and for which an upgrade programme will already exist for the Scotrail sets.

 

[northwichcat]

Well, wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_442 has them with a possible future with TPE. However, the HST sets going to Abeillo scotrail they will need to have the former HST coaches rebuilt to have the same type of air operated doors on them as class 442's or the Chiltern Mk3's.

So not being sure as to who has the need for them more whether it is TPE or Scotrail, I would state that I believe it would be cheaper to change the Mk3 class 442 coaches to work with HST power cars, than rebuild the HST coaches.

The only reason someone's concluded that is:

• The Northern ITT effectively says bidders can take on any EMUs which are off-lease and not still required on their existing services except 442s.
• The TPE ITT says bidders can take on the 442s freed when they are no longer required for Gatwick Express if they wish to do so.

 

[al.currie93]

The only reason someone's concluded that is:

• The Northern ITT effectively says bidders can take on any EMUs which are off-lease and not still required on their existing services except 442s.
• The TPE ITT says bidders can take on the 442s freed when they are no longer required for Gatwick Express if they wish to do so.

Okay, time for some engineer case analysis:

The ITT specifically says that the only rolling stock that can be proposed by the bidding companies are:

- Class 185, minus those being subleased to Northern until December 2015
- Up to ten Class 350s
- Class 180s, Class 220, Class 221 and Class 222 IF they become available at some point
- Up to four Class 170 until December 2017, with only two carriages
- Class 442
- New builds of suitable design

As the Class 185, Class 350 and complement will not be sufficient for the duration of the franchise - this means that either the Class 442 option or the new build option will have to be taken at some point - after December 2017. Hence, to some people's delight or horror, if a way of modifying or hauling the Class 442 for use on the routes served by TPE is found, deemed cheaper than new builds, and sufficient 180s or 22X are not available (I don't think they will be), we will be seeing Class 442 on the TPE routes... however much some people think they'll be used elsewhere or insist that they're destined for the scrapyard.

If they turn out not to be being used on TPE routes, however much I like the Class 442 and like seeimg existing resources used, there is no more work for them, so one may be preserved and the rest scrapped.

While I personally like the idea or existing resources being used where possible, I take a neutral stance on the 442s future, and I have to admit that I'm rather surprised at this idea of them on TPE routes!!

 

[Emblematic]

I can't see why - it's surely cheaper to rebuild vehicles already configured for use as HST trailers and for which an upgrade programme will already exist for the Scotrail sets.

Fitting powered doors to to the HST carriages is going to cost, and isn't a trivial task. The 442s are significantly younger than any of the HST or hauled Mk3s, and although they will need differences in electrics, brake rigging etc. sorting out there will be no shortage of spares available from the pool of Mk3 stock that will be surplus. No doubt there will be some Mk3 stock converted, but I would expect it to be the bare minimum to cover requirements in 2020.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Okay, time for some engineer case analysis:

The ITT specifically says that the only rolling stock that can be proposed by the bidding companies are:

- Class 185, minus those being subleased to Northern until December 2015
- Up to ten Class 350s
- Class 180s, Class 220, Class 221 and Class 222 IF they become available at some point
- Up to four Class 170 until December 2017, with only two carriages
- Class 442
- New builds of suitable design

As the Class 185, Class 350 and complement will not be sufficient for the duration of the franchise - this means that either the Class 442 option or the new build option will have to be taken at some point - after December 2017. Hence, to some people's delight or horror, if a way of modifying or hauling the Class 442 for use on the routes served by TPE is found, deemed cheaper than new builds, and sufficient 180s or 22X are not available (I don't think they will be), we will be seeing Class 442 on the TPE routes... however much some people think they'll be used elsewhere or insist that they're destined for the scrapyard.

If they turn out not to be being used on TPE routes, however much I like the Class 442 and like seeimg existing resources used, there is no more work for them, so one may be preserved and the rest scrapped.

While I personally like the idea or existing resources being used where possible, I take a neutral stance on the 442s future, and I have to admit that I'm rather surprised at this idea of them on TPE routes!!

And it is the very narrow stock specification for the TPE franchise that makes me think that 442s in some form will be used, as a stop gap until further electrification. As you quite rightly say the amount of existing units that TPE has will not be sufficient for the capacity improvements required BEFORE electrification, which is not expected during the next franchise period. The availability of diesel units which TPE are allowed to take on (bearing in mind that most sensible and useable classes of DMU are barred) will be limited and almost certainly not in sufficient quantity.

There has been talk of bi-mode units, however there is no requirement for this, and it will be a very brave bidder who will factor in buying bi-mode units with an uncertain future - if such a unit were in fact available in the timescales required.

No, I can quite easily see some comparatively cheap modifications to 442s to give them say a further 10 years life as hauled stock on suitable routes in the North.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Fitting powered doors to to the HST carriages is going to cost, and isn't a trivial task. The 442s are significantly younger than any of the HST or hauled Mk3s, and although they will need differences in electrics, brake rigging etc. sorting out there will be no shortage of spares available from the pool of Mk3 stock that will be surplus. No doubt there will be some Mk3 stock converted, but I would expect it to be the bare minimum to cover requirements in 2020.

There is no need to fit power doors for PRM-TSI. From Porterbrook.. (scroll down until you find doors)

http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/Mk3 Brochure.pdf

The exterior doors of the Mk3 coach are of the traditional “slam” design, with a handle on the outside only. While this has been adequate for many years of service it is not possible to comply with the TSI-PRM with an arrangement where a passenger inside the train has to drop a window to reach the door handle. It is therefore essential to improve this arrangement for operation in 2020 and beyond when compliance becomes mandatory.
There are three possible solutions to this, which are to fit:
• An interior handle with new safety interlocks
• A swing plug power door based on the Class 442
• A power door of a new design offering a larger
opening
Interior Handle
The existing Central Door Locking (CDL) system on the train does not have sufficient safety integrity to allow the fitting of an interior handle without substantial changes. Fitting an interior handle requires the addition of three interlocks per door to ensure the door is safely closed and locked before the train can move.
The CDL system has to be modified to work with the new arrangement which means unmodified vehicles cannot work with modified ones; hence sets must be modified together. The new arrangement has been tested and the required interlocking circuits designed

Now I know Abellio Scotrail had an artists impression picture of Chilternised Mk3 coaches on its HSTs, but that doesn't mean it'll happen.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Either scrap them, or retraction them and put them on Brighton - Southampton semi fasts. Got to be better than a 313 and at least they have toilets...

 

[cjmillsnun]

Either scrap them, or retraction them and put them on Brighton - Southampton semi fasts. Got to be better than a 313 and at least they have toilets...

Station dwell is too long. The only routes that in any way suited them were the two lines they ran on whilst with NSE and SWT. SWML and Pompey direct.

 

[CosherB]

here we go again ...... retractioning, pantograph conversion of the motor trailer, LHCS with 67's etc etc etc .......

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Am I right in thinking that as built, the 442s could be hauled away from the juice rail by 33/1s or 73s, and also driven from the 442 cab in this arrangement? If so, perhaps there's a possibility of running 442+super73 on the South TPE route?

 

[nlogax]

I think every single viable / hilarious / pointless permutation of the 442s' future has already ended up on a previous thread. May be worth merging..

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=101048

 

[edwin_m]

The ITT specifically says that the only rolling stock that can be proposed by the bidding companies are:

- Class 185, minus those being subleased to Northern until December 2015
- Up to ten Class 350s
- Class 180s, Class 220, Class 221 and Class 222 IF they become available at some point
- Up to four Class 170 until December 2017, with only two carriages
- Class 442
- New builds of suitable design

Having realised this is ridiculously restrictive I have checked it back in the source ITT (the TPE one). A bit below the text summarised in the quote above are three conditions which allow bidders to offer other stock. Condition 3 allows any stock for which the bidder can demonstrate they have an unconditional offer. So this could include, for example, 170s displaced by Scotrail part way through the franchise, or any other unit that would otherwise be off-lease. This clause would also cover 442s when displaced by TSGN, so one wonders why they need to be specifically mentioned in the ITT unless it's to provoke discussions like this in places like here!

 

[SprinterMan]

Okay, time for some engineer case analysis:

The ITT specifically says that the only rolling stock that can be proposed by the bidding companies are:

- Class 185, minus those being subleased to Northern until December 2015
- Up to ten Class 350s
- Class 180s, Class 220, Class 221 and Class 222 IF they become available at some point
- Up to four Class 170 until December 2017, with only two carriages
- Class 442
- New builds of suitable design

As the Class 185, Class 350 and complement will not be sufficient for the duration of the franchise - this means that either the Class 442 option or the new build option will have to be taken at some point - after December 2017. Hence, to some people's delight or horror, if a way of modifying or hauling the Class 442 for use on the routes served by TPE is found, deemed cheaper than new builds, and sufficient 180s or 22X are not available (I don't think they will be), we will be seeing Class 442 on the TPE routes... however much some people think they'll be used elsewhere or insist that they're destined for the scrapyard.

If they turn out not to be being used on TPE routes, however much I like the Class 442 and like seeimg existing resources used, there is no more work for them, so one may be preserved and the rest scrapped.

While I personally like the idea or existing resources being used where possible, I take a neutral stance on the 442s future, and I have to admit that I'm rather surprised at this idea of them on TPE routes!!

Northern are subleasing Class 185s?! When are they and on what routes?

Adam