New TPE Train Discussion

[47802]

I'd heard it said (on this forum) that HSTs may be compliant without powered doors, if handles were provided on the inside. This may be untrue, and in any case going to that trouble wouldn't be much easier or cheaper than replacing the slam doors with power doors anyway.

DDA compliance is not relevant in this case as the new CAF LHCS should arrive well before the compliance deadline.


As an a aside I believe the option of using internal door handles is possible but requires changes to the central locking so it may not be much cheaper than powered doors.

 

[CosherB]

What happened to the former Cargo D Mk3s?

Here's a reference database for you to peruse:

http://www.abrail.co.uk/lhspassengerdetail.htm

 

[61653 HTAFC]

DDA compliance is not relevant in this case as the new CAF LHCS should arrive well before the compliance deadline.


As an a aside I believe the option of using internal door handles is possible but requires changes to the central locking so it may not be much cheaper than powered doors.

That was my thinking, thanks.

 

[AndrewE]

I think the Pretendolino fleet consists of 5 x TSOs, 3 x FOs, 2 x RFMs and 2 x DVTs. DRS has a number of Mk3 carriages going spare as they got hold of a rake (including the spare Pretendolino DVT) with the intention of using it for Class 68 testing, but used a rake of Riviera Mk2s instead.

What locos can the DVTS work with? Wikipedia says the Mk IIIs don't still use the old train lighting circuits to communicate with Cl 90s, but are there any diesels ready to run with it?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

What locos can the DVTS work with? Wikipedia says the Mk IIIs don't still use the old train lighting circuits to communicate with Cl 90s, but are there any diesels ready to run with it?

I think (and if I'm mistaken I'm sure someone will correct me!) that 68s are fitted with AAR multiple working which is a universal system from the USA which initially came over the water with the 59s. The DVTs as built weren't fitted with this system but quite a few have had it fitted in recent years (for example the Chiltern and ATW examples along with the DBS company train). As it's now a known quantity it should be fairly simple.

 

[Bungle965]

I think (and if I'm mistaken I'm sure someone will correct me!) that 68s are fitted with AAR multiple working which is a universal system from the USA which initially came over the water with the 59s. The DVTs as built weren't fitted with this system but quite a few have had it fitted in recent years (for example the Chiltern and ATW examples along with the DBS company train). As it's now a known quantity it should be fairly simple.

I believe that only certain 68`s are fitted with the AAR equipment, and i believe all but one are in the Chiltern Grey livery.
Sam

 

[AndrewE]

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As it's now a known quantity it should be fairly simple.

Thanks, I do hope your optimism is justified!
How soon do we think a set of LHCS with a DVT (or 3, or 6 sets?) could be introduced to provide extra Trans-Pennine capacity then? Given the following steps...

A) Adapt or borrow DVTs (months?)
B) hire locos (Weeks, months?)
C) find enough LHCS and polish it up for use (months?)
D) Train drivers on locos (months?)
E) Train guards on "new" stock - weeks?
F) get infrastructure manager agreement - ever?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

68s are fitted with AAR multiple working which is a universal system from the USA which initially came over the water with the 59s.

I see... America's unsinkable aircraft carrier again! No wonder the rest of the EU views us with suspicion (and the Yanks want us to stay in!)
A

 

[northwichcat]

I wonder if due to the delay, pending suitable conversion, the 442's are back on the cards esp. As they have powered doors.

Does porterbrook have enough mk3's including the possible use (and if necessary splitting up) of the prentendolino.

Porterbrook claim that have 19 x mk3 'Day Coach' carriages and 1 x DVT in storage: https://www.porterbrook.co.uk/rolling-stock/lease-end-dates

 

[Whistler40145]

Presumably, this is the Pretendolino stock +DVT?

 

[northwichcat]

Presumably, this is the Pretendolino stock +DVT?

The Pretendolino wasn't loco+19+DVT!

 

[D6975]

I believe that only certain 68`s are fitted with the AAR equipment, and i believe all but one are in the Chiltern Grey livery.
Sam

If 68s are going to work with CAF push pull sets, they are going to have some kind of system fitted. From DRS's point of view it would make sense to use the same system for the CAFs as the Chiltern sets so that the flexibility of the 68 fleet is maximised. TP might have different ideas though.

there are 2 DRS liveried AAR fitted 68s by the way, 008/9

 

[Whistler40145]

Well considering that FTPE currently don't run any LCHS or locomotives, they might just go along with any system that DRSs locomotives use.

 

[Bungle965]

If 68s are going to work with CAF push pull sets, they are going to have some kind of system fitted. From DRS's point of view it would make sense to use the same system for the CAFs as the Chiltern sets so that the flexibility of the 68 fleet is maximised. TP might have different ideas though.

there are 2 DRS liveried AAR fitted 68s by the way, 008/9

Ah right okay, thanks for some reason I only thought that there was one.
Sam

 

[Class 170101]

With Newton Aycliffe full up with orders I'd like to know when Hitachi plan to fulfill their promise to build body shell fabrication facilities at Newton Aycliffe.

Indeed some of the GWR Rolling Stock is being built in Italy. However wasn't the AT300 the reserve train should the deal with CAF fall through? Presumably there was capacity within Hitachi's business to build it somewhere otherwise they wouldn't have bid I would have thought.

I got off an East Midlands train from Sheffield at St Helens Central when it was diverted due to an evacuation of Warrington Central. People where encouraged to get off there and get the stopping service back to Warrington Bank Quay. I don't know if that is/was normal practice.

Seems to be a sensible alternative given that getting buses at short notice is all but impossible particularly at certain times of the day, indeed I wonder why EMT and TPE bother running buses at all, instead of just get ticket acceptance on ATW between Manchester and Warrington Bank Quay.


Does anyone see the 68s and the new hauled stock as being a long term plan or a short term solution pending electrification between Manchester and York and new trains ordered (via the next TPE franchise competition) in 2022/3?

 

[43074]

Does anyone see the 68s and the new hauled stock as being a long term plan or a short term solution pending electrification between Manchester and York and new trains ordered (via the next TPE franchise competition) in 2022/3?

That will very much depend on what Rail North want from the next franchise, but the indications seem to be that TPE see loco hauled as a long term solution, and there's no reason it couldn't be.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

That will very much depend on what Rail North want from the next franchise, but the indications seem to be that TPE see loco hauled as a long term solution, and there's no reason it couldn't be.

Absolutely. As the 68s with Chiltern have narrowed the performance gap between LHCS and units there's no reason they can't be a long term option. Indeed if it was only going to be a stop-gap I can't imagine that new coaches would be ordered.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

That will very much depend on what Rail North want from the next franchise, but the indications seem to be that TPE see loco hauled as a long term solution, and there's no reason it couldn't be.

It's the ROSCO Eversholt that has taken the punt on LHCS being a workable solution long-term (probably linked to the withdrawal of Mk3 stock).
FirstGroup may not be running TPE beyond 2023.
We don't know if there is some kind of deal with DfT to keep the stock longer.

 

[D6975]

Does anyone see the 68s and the new hauled stock as being a long term plan or a short term solution pending electrification between Manchester and York and new trains ordered (via the next TPE franchise competition) in 2022/3?

They'll probably be running to Cleethorpes in about 10 year's time.

 

[fowler9]

Indeed some of the GWR Rolling Stock is being built in Italy. However wasn't the AT300 the reserve train should the deal with CAF fall through? Presumably there was capacity within Hitachi's business to build it somewhere otherwise they wouldn't have bid I would have thought.



Seems to be a sensible alternative given that getting buses at short notice is all but impossible particularly at certain times of the day, indeed I wonder why EMT and TPE bother running buses at all, instead of just get ticket acceptance on ATW between Manchester and Warrington Bank Quay.


Does anyone see the 68s and the new hauled stock as being a long term plan or a short term solution pending electrification between Manchester and York and new trains ordered (via the next TPE franchise competition) in 2022/3?

I'm not sure it will be a long term plan but it seems to make more sense to me than the current class 185 compromise.

 

[dgl]

It's the ROSCO Eversholt that has taken the punt on LHCS being a workable solution long-term (probably linked to the withdrawal of Mk3 stock).


.

Fyi it's beacon rail leasing that are financing the LHCS, the same company that is financing the 68's

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Fyi it's beacon rail leasing that are financing the LHCS, the same company that is financing the 68's

Yes, I was getting mixed up with the CAF EMUs, which are Eversholt.
Interesting that the "major" ROSCOs are not involved in this one.
Anyway, Beacon has taken the long-term risk.

 

[Class 170101]

Fyi it's beacon rail leasing that are financing the LHCS, the same company that is financing the 68's

Clearly the 68s have a long term future on freight work (perhaps drags too) if not required for passenger duties however what about the coaches? Now yes if the Mark IIIs are retired it opens possibilities for them to slot in.

However how easy would it be to convert the TPE coaches to sleeper coaches for the Penzance sleeper if the next TPE franchisee decides to change to all multiple units?

 

[WatcherZero]

Apparently upcoming Class 68's will be delivered from the factory already in TPE livery.

 

[RobShipway]

Clearly the 68s have a long term future on freight work (perhaps drags too) if not required for passenger duties however what about the coaches? Now yes if the Mark IIIs are retired it opens possibilities for them to slot in.

However how easy would it be to convert the TPE coaches to sleeper coaches for the Penzance sleeper if the next TPE franchisee decides to change to all multiple units?

Well, if the carriages are similar and use the same bogies etc.. as the Caledonia Sleeper coaches then it is likely that the TPE carriages would be able to be converted in the future to sleeper carriages. Time will tell though.

 

[dgl]

But still the idea of financing LHCS in the modern railway is still quite a risky move, although BRL have the advantage that they have the modern locomotives to go with the modern LHCS so they could offer a complete solution if DRS didn't end up needing all the 68's. And considering the fact that from what I've heard the silver sets on Chiltern with the 68's seem to easily match the DMU timings.

 

[swt_passenger]

Well, if the carriages are similar and use the same bogies etc.. as the Caledonia Sleeper coaches then it is likely that the TPE carriages would be able to be converted in the future to sleeper carriages. Time will tell though.

The issue with such a conversion is always going to be the window pitch. What is good for the planned seating layout may not fit with the bulkheads required for sleeper compartments.

Dedicated sleeper vehicles usually have smaller windows as built, and the reverse conversion has not proved possible in the past, allegedly because the carriage structure didn't allow for larger window openings to be cut out.

I'd put conversion into a "possible but only if initially designed for" category.

 

[Spartacus]

There's no reason they couldn't become extra day coaches though.

I can't see where's there's any big risk though, other than it's not the usual UK solution. There's still going to be plenty of unelectrified mileage for plenty of years yet. and even more when it comes to diversionary routes. Yes, TPE are due to run 19 5 car 802s, but that's no reason why having something else that can run away from the wires isn't a bad idea. Having more than they really need just means the service can continue with minimal alterations during disruption: I dread to think how often Diggle might be blocked due to vegetation on wires.

 

[47802]

There's no reason they couldn't become extra day coaches though.

I can't see where's there's any big risk though, other than it's not the usual UK solution. There's still going to be plenty of unelectrified mileage for plenty of years yet. and even more when it comes to diversionary routes. Yes, TPE are due to run 19 5 car 802s, but that's no reason why having something else that can run away from the wires isn't a bad idea. Having more than they really need just means the service can continue with minimal alterations during disruption: I dread to think how often Diggle might be blocked due to vegetation on wires.

I very much doubt they will be retained as 68 hauled trains after electrification and the next franchise, either they will be cascaded to other mainly Diesel routes, which there should be plenty of choice given many 15x will be due for replacement by the mid 2020's and lack of electrification progress, the alternative will of course as has already been suggested be to replace the 68's with an electric loco and put them back on the Newcastle/Edinburgh services, I personally think the first option is more likely with new EMU's for the Newcastle Edinburgh route. TPE would still have the Bi-Modes for Diversions and the off wire destinations.

I think it is quite possible we will see more Bi-Mode trains or Loco Hauled Diesels to replace the more major routes currently worked by Second Gen DMU's to allow Second Gen DMU's to replace 1st gen DMU's. There will also be Scotrail's Clapped out HST's but that's some way off and getting off the point.

 

[RobShipway]

I very much doubt they will be retained as 68 hauled trains after electrification and the next franchise, either they will be cascaded to other mainly Diesel routes, which there should be plenty of choice given many 15x will be due for replacement by the mid 2020's and lack of electrification progress, the alternative will of course as has already been suggested be to replace the 68's with an electric loco and put them back on the Newcastle/Edinburgh services, I personally think the first option is more likely with new EMU's for the Newcastle Edinburgh route. TPE would still have the Bi-Modes for Diversions and the off wire destinations.

I think it is quite possible we will see more Bi-Mode trains or Loco Hauled Diesels to replace the more major routes currently worked by Second Gen DMU's to allow Second Gen DMU's to replace 1st gen DMU's. There will also be Scotrail's Clapped out HST's but that's some way off and getting off the point.

The only replacing I see in the future with the TPE LHCS, is that the class 68 could be replaced by a Hybrid class 88 locomotive. Having the LHCS would allow TPE flexibility in a similar way to having the class 802 hybrid trains will enable flexibility.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Chiltern might like them, or perhaps Arriva Trains Wales for the WAG Express and North Wales Coast.