Royal Train Replacement

[JonathanH]

The Royal Train is only used by the Queen and Prince Charles (and anyone accompanying them) and recognises that they are of advancing years. Even Prince Charles is now 71.

It is not available to younger members of the Royal Family and Prince William won't be 70 until 2052.

So, logically the current train can remain in service until the passing of Charles and that will probably then see its withdrawal.

No need for an immediate replacement (which will be why one hasn't been constructed).

 

[daodao]

The Royal Train is only used by the Queen and Prince Charles (and anyone accompanying them) and recognises that they are of advancing years. Even Prince Charles is now 71. It is not available to younger members of the Royal Family and Prince William won't be 70 until 2052.

So, logically the current train can remain in service until the passing of Charles and that will probably then see its withdrawal. No need for an immediate replacement (which will be why one hasn't been constructed).

A pragmatic approach. Hopefully, QE2 will outlive her eldest son. When she passes away, the Royal Train can then be shunted off to a museum. It would be best (if the monarchy is to survive) that it is run as in Scandinavia, with only the sovereign and his/her immediate family (spouse and children) having any royal privileges; on that note Harry & Meghan have done the monarchy a service by emigrating to Canada and ceasing "royal" duties.

 

[Meerkat]

Hopefully, QE2 will outlive her eldest son

Why would you say such an awful thing?!

 

[MarkyT]

Why not have a more general purpose modern luxury 'VIP train' that could have a royal car inserted for state purposes when required. Like this Japanese example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E655_series
Thus the running costs might be at least partly be covered by hire for corporate functions and rail cruises. I'm not suggesting that it needs to be a multiple unit though!

 

[Meerkat]

Why not have a more general purpose modern luxury 'VIP train' that could have a royal car inserted for state purposes when required. Like this Japanese example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E655_series
Thus the running costs might be at least partly be covered by hire for corporate functions and rail cruises. I'm not suggesting that it needs to be a multiple unit though!

Then you lose the security of having a dedicated train, accessed only by cleared people, tucked away in a secure location.

 

[Journeyman]

Enough to replace it? Bearing in mind it’s low use is there anything to stop the current train lasting for decades?

Not really. It'll keep going for ages.

 

[duffield]

Why would you say such an awful thing?!

Well, there is an argument to be made that Charles' track record shows that he is more inclined to use his status to interfere in 'political' issues, whereas his mother has generally been very careful to stay out of politics and keep the monarchy neutral, and that this has been (generally) a successful way of keeping the monarchy from being too divisive even amongst people (like myself) of a fairly republican tendency.
So even ardent monarchists might fear that his reign would be bad for the monarchy, and the rest of us might fear it would be divisive, particularly in a country that has recently been divided down the middle by another issue whose name I will not mention. That doesn't mean we wish Charles an early death; more that we would prefer the current queen carry on for 'a long time'.

 

[daodao]

Well, there is an argument to be made that Charles' track record shows that he is more inclined to use his status to interfere in 'political' issues, whereas his mother has generally been very careful to stay out of politics and keep the monarchy neutral, and that this has been (generally) a successful way of keeping the monarchy from being too divisive even amongst people (like myself) of a fairly republican tendency.
So even ardent monarchists might fear that his reign would be bad for the monarchy, and the rest of us might fear it would be divisive, particularly in a country that has recently been divided down the middle by another issue whose name I will not mention. That doesn't mean we wish Charles an early death; more that we would prefer the current queen carry on for 'a long time'.

My thoughts entirely - may her majesty live "biz hundert un tsvantsik yahren".

 

[Meerkat]

Well, there is an argument to be made that Charles' track record shows that he is more inclined to use his status to interfere in 'political' issues, whereas his mother has generally been very careful to stay out of politics and keep the monarchy neutral, and that this has been (generally) a successful way of keeping the monarchy from being too divisive even amongst people (like myself) of a fairly republican tendency.
So even ardent monarchists might fear that his reign would be bad for the monarchy, and the rest of us might fear it would be divisive, particularly in a country that has recently been divided down the middle by another issue whose name I will not mention. That doesn't mean we wish Charles an early death; more that we would prefer the current queen carry on for 'a long time'.

so the person who is monarch acts like a monarch whereas the one who isn’t acts less like one? Blimey, outrage.
Have you not noticed that Charlie Boy has gradually wound his neck in the nearer he got to the throne?
I am more concerned that he will wear a suit and not full RN ceremonial so he will just look like a group of random official blokes. Her Maj deliberately wears bright colours to stand out.

 

[duffield]

so the person who is monarch acts like a monarch whereas the one who isn’t acts less like one? Blimey, outrage.
Have you not noticed that Charlie Boy has gradually wound his neck in the nearer he got to the throne?
I am more concerned that he will wear a suit and not full RN ceremonial so he will just look like a group of random official blokes. Her Maj deliberately wears bright colours to stand out.

I'm entirely happy to concede that his earlier behaviour might not be indicative of how he actually performs as monarch, and that he might have matured in that respect, but personally I'd feel happier with the current monarch due to her track record.

Anyhow, I guess this is getting well off-topic for the royal train discussion, so I'll stop now.

 

[Meerkat]

I was just about to post..
“So did we decide not to replace the Royal Train?”

 

[randyrippley]

Does the royal train have toilet retention tanks? Will modern hygiene regulations prohibit it from use?

 

[Lucan]

The Royal Train is only used by the Queen and Prince Charles ... and recognises that they are of advancing years. Even Prince Charles is now 71. ... It is not available to younger members of the Royal Family and Prince William won't be 70 until 2052.

So even when William becomes king, he won't be allowed to use it until he is 70. Who says?

 

[JonathanH]

So even when William becomes king, he won't be allowed to use it until he is 70. Who says?

That is not what I was trying to imply.

My understanding is that use of the Royal Train has continued because its users are of advancing years. It hasn't been available to other members of the Royal Family because it is seen as expensive.

It would appear that it could be withdrawn on William's ascent to the crown as the reasons it has remained in service will not arise unless his father lives to over 100.

 

[randyrippley]

Surely the reason the younger members of the family don't use it is simply because the security risk is less - the queen is head of state, they're not so more risks can be taken with them. Also for years there was a longstanding rule that flying the monarch by helicopter was deemed too dangerous thus requiring secure accommodation around the country - which the train provides. The rule has been relaxed, but helicopter travel for the queen is still kept to a minimum.

But if you want to get rid, donate it to Canada. They'll have need of it soon and they have prior history with second hand UK sleepers

 

[Peter Kelford]

Why would you say such an awful thing?!

It would be good to have King Charles the 3rd as a transition from a traditional monarchy to a more practical one suited to the 21st century. It might also be a good thing for post-Brexit British farming.

 

[pdeaves]

This is an interesting thread. We've had (elsewhere) no end of discussion trying to find uses for old worn out HSTs, yet here we are trying to replace a well looked after, low mileage train of essentially the same type!

 

[Indigo Soup]

My understanding is that use of the Royal Train has continued because its users are of advancing years. It hasn't been available to other members of the Royal Family because it is seen as expensive.

As far as I understand it, the Royal Train is a convenient means of providing secure mobile living and working accomodation for the Queen, her heir, their respective consorts, and the necessary household staff for the above. Only HMQ and the Prince of Wales, and their consorts, are allowed to use it - and I believe that it will only run if at least two of the four require it.

Upon Charles's accession, he will become the monarch, and William will become heir with all the associated duties and burdens. If train privileges for the Prince of Wales is warranted just before the current Queen dies, they will be warranted for the Duke of Cambridge just after. Presumably 2922 and 2923 will remain in the use of the then King Charles III and (in practice if not name) Queen Camilla, whilst 2902 and 2903 will become the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's saloons with appropriate redesign.

The train may or may not be got rid of for entirely different reasons, but superannuation of those permitted to use it isn't one. Incidentally, I've heard rumours that the Queen is a bit of a track basher, though I doubt she's sitting marking off lines!

 

[Lucan]

I've heard rumours that the Queen is a bit of a track basher

Then perhaps she is with us on this forum. Who knows what is behind some of these user names? We must be careful what we say

 

[60019]

It isn't as a rule used for day visits but retains an asset allowing a full day of engagements by letting the Queen or Prince of Wales travel to more far flung parts without having to find secure accommodation, etc. When the press loves quoting a £30k cost per trip they are never doing like for like where they factor in everything else. We're very good in this country of knowing the cost of a lot of things and ignoring the value.

As to replacing the train it isn't needed. Low use means it suffices for its purpose.

I wonder how much of that £30k figure comes from the low usage: McAlpine made quite a bit of use of his private carriage , and there's the DB company train too. Even though the Royal Train Mk3s are heavier than standard the VTAC, a day's work by a driver and guard, and hire of a locomotive wouldn't come to anywhere near that, but the fixed costs for maintenance of a rake of coaches plus security would be pretty high.

 

[Meerkat]

a day's work by a driver and guard

if they are overnighting it’s likely to be several shifts, probably two whole days by the time it has got to/from Wolverton. Do they just have one driver, or do they have two and/or someone more senior around too? VTAC to/from Wolverton too, and if they are using the train them it isn’t going to be a short trip. Depending where they are stabling that might require presence too (MOMs?)

 

[Helvellyn]

I am surprised the Royal Train wasn't disposed of by Blair in the same way the Royal Yacht Britannia was. Mind you even he came to regret it, recognising its unique selling power to represent Britain abroad. Blair supposedly resented the cack-handed way John Major committed to a replacement in the run up to the 1997 election without cross-party consensus being agreed. By the time he was having doubts Gordon Brown wouldn't commit the funds.

One poignant duty the train will perform will be if HM passes away in Scotland. The apparent plan, as reported in the press last year, will be for the train to bring HM to London to lay in state at Westminster Hall.

 

[Emyr]

If Willem-Alexander can accumulate hours as co-pilot on regular scheduled KLM flights, I don't see that dedicated rolling stock is justifiable for the House of Windsor.

 

[Indigo Soup]

If Willem-Alexander can accumulate hours as co-pilot on regular scheduled KLM flights, I don't see that dedicated rolling stock is justifiable for the House of Windsor.

Willem-Alexander (King of the Netherlands, for anyone who wasn't paying attention in the class) has dedicated rolling stock of his own, and that in a country which isn't much larger than the London commuter belt. As, for that matter, do the monarchs of Denmark and Norway. Admittedly, rather less of it.

 

[RichJF]

A pair of 68s in dark Royal Livery would look epic, especially if they don't need the yellow warning panels.

Tag some CAF Mk5 Royal sleepers onto the Caledonian order?

 

[Meerkat]

Didn’t someone say HSTs were fairly go anywhere.....??

 

[Tio Terry]

Didn’t someone say HSTs were fairly go anywhere.....??

Or a 442 with 73’s either end?

Well everyone else seems to be looking for something to use 442’s for!

 

[ChiefPlanner]

if they are overnighting it’s likely to be several shifts, probably two whole days by the time it has got to/from Wolverton. Do they just have one driver, or do they have two and/or someone more senior around too? VTAC to/from Wolverton too, and if they are using the train them it isn’t going to be a short trip. Depending where they are stabling that might require presence too (MOMs?)

Traditionally and probably even today , "Royal" movements are very well resourced with operational staff and every sort of technical support and supervision you can imagine. On and off the train.

Of course , the movement instructions were (and always have been) very carefully guarded with every single copy having to be accounted for before use and afterwards. So you cannot just dig up train crew diagrams and so on . Or at least , it was in my day.