No Life Extension for HSTs

[Aictos]

Ehh, no. I said "sources".

I've already quoted what is general knowledge to the wider railway community, I'm sorry if that just ain't good enough for you!

 

[At_traction]

I've already quoted what is general knowledge to the wider railway community, I'm sorry if that just ain't good enough for you!

Yes, but it has been customary in any semi-serious discussion about a research or historical topic to point to written information about one's claim. Or at least back in the days of lively Usenet newsgroups (R.I.P.), perhaps this has diminished since.

I am well aware that some may take umbrage that written proof of a claim is asked for, but I still think to have the audacity to ask for it. It's good that rail staff has pride in their work and knowledge, and in that case it might not be too difficult to point to a bit more documented source. ISBN suffices.

 

[swt_passenger]

I'm sure you're wrong there, the 91s as far as I was aware were designed for passenger services during the day and freight/sleeper services during the night but to also have the capability for tilt which was removed during the last GNER refurbishment of the 91s.

I think the actual story is that although the Class 91 loco was not designd to tilt, the space provided for retrofitting a tilt control system for the train (ie the Mk4 coaches only) was provided in the loco.

So what's happened is simply that the space allocated for the tilt control system has been taken up.

All that means to me is that if Mk4 coaches had to be made to tilt, the control equipment would have to go somewhere else, maybe in the lead coach. But with current electronics being much smaller than 25 years ago, anything could happen...

 

[dave59]

Assuming the 225 stays firmly put on the ECML what happened to the idea of re-marshalling the sets to 10 mk4's and forming a 'new' set of 10 re-furbished Mk3's? Seems a very good way of boosting capacity in the time before the new EMU comes into use but maybe the idea has been abandoned along with any HST life extension.

 

[route:oxford]

Assuming the 225 stays firmly put on the ECML what happened to the idea of re-marshalling the sets to 10 mk4's and forming a 'new' set of 10 re-furbished Mk3's? Seems a very good way of boosting capacity in the time before the new EMU comes into use but maybe the idea has been abandoned along with any HST life extension.

Probably cheaper to pick up the phone to Alstom and ask them to build a 10 car rake based on the 180, and at the same time to build 14 trailers for the 180s.

 

[sprinterguy]

I haven’t had my usual quota of tea this morning so am a little slow, but if you were to maintain the current number of carriage rakes in use with 91s then surely you’d need three rakes of suitably modified mark 3s? If you insert one mark 4 into each of 27 nine carriage sets to make ten carriage rakes, then that clearly requires 27 carriages, i.e. disbanding the remaining three mark 4 sets (9 carriages in each=27 carriages in total) of the total of 30 trains, even assuming the restaurant carriages could be converted to standard TSOs. Given that you’d require a total of 30 extra mark 3s for this, it’s no wonder the idea has gone quiet.

 

[route:oxford]

I haven’t had my usual quota of tea this morning so am a little slow, but if you were to maintain the current number of carriage rakes in use with 91s then surely you’d need three rakes of suitably modified mark 3s? If you insert one mark 4 into each of 27 nine carriage sets to make ten carriage rakes, then that clearly requires 27 carriages, i.e. disbanding the remaining three mark 4 sets (9 carriages in each=27 carriages in total) of the total of 30 trains, even assuming the restaurant carriages could be converted to standard TSOs. Given that you’d require a total of 30 extra mark 3s for this, it’s no wonder the idea has gone quiet.

So that would be 3x10 car 180 derived lhcs plus 14 trailers for the 180s...

Order of 44 coaches would be worth doing.

Might as well order another 30 to be used with 3 pairs of 67s at 125mph in push-pull mode too. That would sort out the Highland Chieftan problem.

 

[tbtc]

Probably cheaper to pick up the phone to Alstom and ask them to build a 10 car rake based on the 180, and at the same time to build 14 trailers for the 180s.

Gets my vote.

They'd be reasonable units if there were enough of them and they were long enough.