Class 442 - HST sets

[swt_passenger]

SWT don't want anything to do with the Pigs.

The previous poster's plan doesn't work in any case because the inner suburban network is not 12 car capable, so 'extension by 450' is not going to happen.

And of course, as repeated time and again, replacing 12.450s on the Portsmouth route (and others) reduces that 'seats per train figure' that is all the DfT are interested in.

So all someone needs to do is get the DfT to write the next franchise spec to require reducing seats significantly on the route. That would be quite novel...

 

[Domh245]

And of course, as repeated time and again, replacing 12.450s on the Portsmouth route (and others) reduces that 'seats per train figure' that is all the DfT are interested in.

It also means that the timetable would need rewriting/adjusting to allow for the slower acceleration of the 442s.

I would almost say that if these units were owned by porterbrook, we might be seeing a more certain future, as Porterbrook seem to be willing to keep serviceable stock in use, even if it involves a deep overhaul (144e project) or retractioning (455s) or reformation (458/5s). Contrast that with the owners of the 442s, angel, who seem to be the least involved rolling stock lessor, although how much of this is down to angel getting a run-down fleet operated intensively at TOCs that aren't known for their traincare skills.

 

[The Box Photter]

And where are we supposed to get a fleet of 33/1's from? East Lancashire Railway? Bodmin & Wenford Railway? I assume that you're not serious about engaging 27yr old EMUs that have an uncertain future with 53 yr old heritage diesel locos! I do think, however, that you are advocating sending the displaced DMUs to the 'south' .....

Its no more bizarre than when GB Railfreight hired Deltic 55022 to run the alumina trains from North Blyth to Lynemouth, or when the same loco is used to position stock rather than using a 66.

Don't forget how reliable the 33s were and how simple they are to maintain without unnecessary computer gubbins that might cause the train to "sit down" because "computer says no". Having a loco at each end gives redundancy just in case of loco failure and if there is a rescue needed, its easy to attach a thunderbird loco to either end. There are currently seven operational preserved class 33/1s. I'm sure their owners would be interested in some paid work, so long as the necessary recording and safety equipment is fitted by the sponsoring TOC.

If none of the class 33/1 owners are willing, then look to the class 73/9 program. Assuming that the rebuilds haven't removed their capability to work with ex-SR EMU stock they would provide a ready source of power that even meets current EU emissions targets.

There really is no imagination amongst the current crop of TOCs. All they want to do is concentrate on milking as much revenue as they can from the Government subsidies available at the lowest possible cost to themselves. When a new operator attempts to try something different, the "big boys" like First and Virgin all go whining to the ORR about their loss of revenue. It just goes to prove the fallacy that the railway is privatised. Its just as nationalised as it ever was, the only difference is that the system allows privately owned multinational companies to cream off a healthy profit whilst taking no commercial risk.

 

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

All they want to do is concentrate on milking as much revenue as they can from the Government subsidies available at the lowest possible cost to themselves.

Well obviously. Did you think they were in the rail business for altruistic reasons?

I'm sure their owners would be interested in some paid work

7-days-a-week working over a physically challenging line for X number of years (you choose the number to replace X) doesn't really equate to 'some paid work'. I doubt the owners of said classic traction would submit their prides and joys to such a punishing regime!

 

[zn1]

firstly the 442s and HST's are completely different animals,,

442's They are being compared too much to the electrostars.
which have superior acceleration and take off compared to their older parents such as 442 .
The 442 isn't bad on take off acceleration, they don't get their legs until around 40mph,a little slower than an a class 411 or 421 . 442 cant cope with stop/start inner suburban or coastway work...411s and 309s hated stop start jobs, old school will confirm this..

Personally If southern were to keep them on the Gatwick express paths with brighton extensions they will earn their keep, Gatwick express when it was operated as loco hauled with the 73 and GLV often didn't run full and standing.

Gatwick express used to be the best service out of Victoria, its now become a joke..southern need to utilise the 442 to their best possible use, they have their electrostars to run the main jobs, 442 should be on their fast jobs.

retractioning is overdue, the 432 rep traction package is tired, motors etc can only be overhauled so many times before they become life expired, to provide spares units will have to be Christmas tree'd to keep others in traffic - that's a waste of decent units, when seating is a major priority

Angel Trains need to examine the remotoring to AC and regeneration system on the fleet, they are proven systems out there - the Hitachi package is a proven design and would be the one with the best service contract with hitachi now big in the UK..

Just a thought but the 442s are still a good unit and are too good to scrap, they were built for the southern and should stay where they belong..

comparing the 442 to deltic - well deltics were a maintenance hungry loco and not too cost effective, hence they got 20 years life..they were lucky to last 20 years I think..

 

[RobShipway]

firstly the 442s and HST's are completely different animals,,

442's They are being compared too much to the electrostars.
which have superior acceleration and take off compared to their older parents such as 442 .
The 442 isn't bad on take off acceleration, they don't get their legs until around 40mph,a little slower than an a class 411 or 421 . 442 cant cope with stop/start inner suburban or coastway work...411s and 309s hated stop start jobs, old school will confirm this..

Personally If southern were to keep them on the Gatwick express paths with brighton extensions they will earn their keep, Gatwick express when it was operated as loco hauled with the 73 and GLV often didn't run full and standing.

Gatwick express used to be the best service out of Victoria, its now become a joke..southern need to utilise the 442 to their best possible use, they have their electrostars to run the main jobs, 442 should be on their fast jobs.

retractioning is overdue, the 432 rep traction package is tired, motors etc can only be overhauled so many times before they become life expired, to provide spares units will have to be Christmas tree'd to keep others in traffic - that's a waste of decent units, when seating is a major priority

Angel Trains need to examine the remotoring to AC and regeneration system on the fleet, they are proven systems out there - the Hitachi package is a proven design and would be the one with the best service contract with hitachi now big in the UK..

Just a thought but the 442s are still a good unit and are too good to scrap, they were built for the southern and should stay where they belong..

comparing the 442 to deltic - well deltics were a maintenance hungry loco and not too cost effective, hence they got 20 years life..they were lucky to last 20 years I think..

Many people have provided the same comments as you prior to your post and anyway the class 442's will soon be leaving doing the Gatwick Express route with 387/2 trains replacing them.

As for the class 442's I agree, they are too good a train to scrap, although as has been mentioned within this thread I would re - traction them in some way if possible.