edcayton Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 I get the impression that the failure rates for the 57's are appalling. Are they really that bad? Ed 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted August 21, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) I get the impression that the failure rates for the 57's are appalling. Are they really that bad? Ed They tend to be high profile because they are a small class confined two two well-known and observed workings (the sleepers and the "VegEx" Long Rock - Par - Exeter - Penzance summer Saturdays relief). When the overnight fails it can leave passengers many hours late or woken at an unexpected time and place for transfer. Or even left overnight at the wrong end of the line. My opinion is that the class is not as reliable as it ought to be. The 75% reliability required is very low by present standards. Two from four are required for the nightly "Beds" (up and down) and a third shunts the stock at Paddington which can be done by an 08 if needs be. The train engine shunts the stock at Penzance and the loco from the Saturday morning arrival there normally works the Exeter duty. They don't fail all the time but when even 75% reliability cannot be reliably obtained something is amiss somewhere. Edit to correct figures Edited August 21, 2015 by Gwiwer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gary H Posted August 21, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 21, 2015 They tend to be high profile because they are a small class confined two two well-known and observed workings (the sleepers and the "VegEx" Long Rock - Par - Exeter - Penzance summer Saturdays relief). When the overnight fails it can leave passengers many hours late or woken at an unexpected time and place for transfer. Or even left overnight at the wrong end of the line. My opinion is that the class is not as reliable as it ought to be. The 60% reliability required is very low by present standards. Two from five are required for the nightly "Beds" (up and down) and a third shunts the stock at Paddington which can be done by an 08 if needs be. They don't fail all the time but when even 60% reliability cannot be reliably obtained something is amiss somewhere. Interestingly, (if that's the right word) traction reliability problems with Serco's operation of the caledonian sleeper services to and from Euston is equally dire at the moment, if not more so! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chy Mengrowyn Paul Posted August 21, 2015 Author Share Posted August 21, 2015 It does not help that 603 is off for repaint. Most problems since last summer have also been with the DRS replacements. Prior to that, for some 2 years, the up only failed to reach London some 4 times, 1 of those due to weather. Figures were all recorded by myself in the old CT thread, 605 was by far the most used and most reliable. Must get round to doing a more recent survey..... . By January 2017, we are supposed to take over allocation and maintenance of the 57s at Long Rock so we can really get a grip on things in a similar style to the coach maintenance. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WD0-6-0 Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 I get the impression that the failure rates for the 57's are appalling. Are they really that bad? Ed I have been told that certain FGW staff would like the 57s replaced with 67s (these are personal views and not company views or even likely things to happen) or coaches/class 43s to be re-wired to run the sleeper basically as an HST set. These are unlikely to even be considered let alone happen but I like them. I hope the idea of a turntable at Long Rock is real but it was a joke wasn't it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cornish trains jez Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Bearing in mind the HST's are undoubtedly British Rails most successful diesel loco ever, the idea of seeing these on sleeper services would be fantastic. It would certainly prolongue their shelf life. Worth considering FGW! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 and a turntable might be useful Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WD0-6-0 Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 I believe the main reason they are being done away with is the lack of bog tanks. Having worked underneath MK3s I know the "sh*t chutes" and the surrounding under frames are very unpleasant to work around as when its dumped onto the track at high speeds it has a tendency to bounce… That, of course, is unacceptable and rightly so, the Sleepers have tanks but I believe it would cost too much to install waste tanks and plumbing in the existing coaches. The 43s are mechanically sound and it would be a great shame for them to be done away with, it would be a waste of fairly new engines at the very least, not to mention great loss to the railway system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Nice idea that it is, I can't see that keeping a dedicated pool of 43's to work the sleeper would be worthwhile. I would think that the cost of wiring the coaches alone would be prohibitive. You would need six? loco's which would be unique and not suitable for other work. Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WD0-6-0 Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 (edited) These are just the opinions of friends. I haven't researched the practicality of it. The idea has its advantages and disadvantages however I don't think you'd need a pool of Power cars as large as the 57s, the 43s are more reliable for a start and with two on a sleeper set at a time it will be like an HST set, if one fails it can carry on, unlike the current 57s. HSTs are used as thunderbirds at the moment, while not necessarily ideal, they have proved they can do it. They wouldn't be any more unique than they are now, there would be less of them but they wouldn't be unique and as I've said they could be used for other work even if that work is limited. Regardless of the above, you are still probably correct, it would probably not be as practical as the above. Edited August 27, 2015 by WD0-6-0 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rods_of_Revolution Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 I believe the main reason they are being done away with is the lack of bog tanks. Having worked underneath MK3s I know the "sh*t chutes" and the surrounding under frames are very unpleasant to work around as when its dumped onto the track at high speeds it has a tendency to bounce… That, of course, is unacceptable and rightly so, the Sleepers have tanks but I believe it would cost too much to install waste tanks and plumbing in the existing coaches. The 43s are mechanically sound and it would be a great shame for them to be done away with, it would be a waste of fairly new engines at the very least, not to mention great loss to the railway system. There's quite a few welds and castings in the Mk3 structure which according to the BS spec they were produced to means that they will soon be life expired. They will all need an extensive inspection with some welds and casting potentially needing to be renewed/replaced to extend the life of the coaches. There are some operational issues with using HSTs Power Cars on the Sleeper, especially after they have been replaced with Hitachi units and few PCs remain. If the leading Power Car had a fault with a safety system down at Penzance for example, the train would be out of action. You'd then need to send another PC to replace it. If you want to run a spare London facing PC down to Penzance then you actually need to send two PCs as you can't run a single PC to PZ. So right there you have 4 PCs tied up on a single train because the AWS isn't working in one cab. You'd also have a West facing Power Car stuck at PZ until the fault with the London facing PC was corrected. With the current set up that scenario would require a single 57 being dispatched to PZ, this would leave a spare 57 on depot should the other set fail or should a 57 be out for the night on an exam. Total number of 57s required is 4, though 5 is what FGW would like. The total number of PCs for running the sleeper would be 7 or 8, 4 to operate the standard service, 2 to be on standby for failures and 1 or 2 on exam. All the best, Jack Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WD0-6-0 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 There's quite a few welds and castings in the Mk3 structure which according to the BS spec they were produced to means that they will soon be life expired. They will all need an extensive inspection with some welds and casting potentially needing to be renewed/replaced to extend the life of the coaches. Ahh I wasn't aware of that, that makes sense. Yet another reason to replace them. There are some operational issues with using HSTs Power Cars on the Sleeper, especially after they have been replaced with Hitachi units and few PCs remain. If the leading Power Car had a fault with a safety system down at Penzance for example, the train would be out of action. You'd then need to send another PC to replace it. If you want to run a spare London facing PC down to Penzance then you actually need to send two PCs as you can't run a single PC to PZ. So right there you have 4 PCs tied up on a single train because the AWS isn't working in one cab. You'd also have a West facing Power Car stuck at PZ until the fault with the London facing PC was corrected. With the current set up that scenario would require a single 57 being dispatched to PZ, this would leave a spare 57 on depot should the other set fail or should a 57 be out for the night on an exam. Total number of 57s required is 4, though 5 is what FGW would like. The total number of PCs for running the sleeper would be 7 or 8, 4 to operate the standard service, 2 to be on standby for failures and 1 or 2 on exam. I hadn't considered the need for the spare 43s to be in pairs too. I don't think for one minute it's a path FGW will go down but it has its advantages and as what you've said its disadvantages too. We can only wait, the unreliable 57s won't go on for ever and a replacement will have to found, hopefully soon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted August 28, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 28, 2015 The guts of the class 43 power cars are not that far different in age from those of the class 57s. In both cases the structure itself is much older and has travelled far more miles, accumulated much more stress to the metalwork and all those casts and welds involved. Nothing lasts forever in the world of machines especially when you drive them up and down at speeds reaching 125mph at times. That said I would prefer to have a paid of 43s assigned to the sleeper than a single 57 if only because should anything fail there are now so few locomotives anywhere (never mind anything nearby / compatible / with a route-signed driver available / ready-to-hire)that any failure of any sort can often involve many lost miles and many hours of delay. I take issue with the point that pairs of 43s would be needed if only because they can haul trains singly. They are not permitted singly over the Devon banks with a full HST formation and therefore would not be with the sleeper. But they can otherwise work in haulage-only mode as locomotives. Once the HST fleet runs down there would be a respectable number of them otherwise spare so creating a pool of say 12 might not be unrealistic. Two per train, up and down, one facing each way as spares at each end of the route and another pair berthed somewhere mid-way such as Exeter. And two on maintenance. It's all money. But what price providing a reliable overnight service and with seated coaches and traction already assigned and available for daytime use (as now on summer Saturdays) which could also be called into use at short notice to cover a failure or relieve overloading. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Hi Rick. Wouldn't the power cars need to be in pairs as they can't work aren'tallowed to work backwards Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted August 28, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 28, 2015 Hi Rick. Wouldn't the power cars need to be in pairs as they can't work aren'tallowed to work backwards Ed True. They are not permitted to run blunt-end first on the main line though are permitted to do so under shunting conditions otherwise we'd never be able to get HST sets formed! That alone doesn't stop them being technically able to haul a train singly as a locomotive other restrictions permitting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rods_of_Revolution Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 (edited) I think the most likely Scenario is CAF coaches as currently being produced for the Caledonian Sleeper operated by a dedicated pool of 5 Class 57s; depending on funding the Class 57s may be superseded by Vossloh Euro Duals. All the best, Jack Edited August 28, 2015 by Rods_of_Revolution Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chy Mengrowyn Paul Posted August 28, 2015 Author Share Posted August 28, 2015 Wait until the new 2019/20 franchise requirements are published is all I will/can say regarding new sleeper fleet... . The HST sleeper has been done to death several times on rmweb so I won't repeat it again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted August 29, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 29, 2015 The HST sleeper has been done to death several times on rmweb so I won't repeat it again. Just as well - because it's a complete non-starter for technical reasons (numerous), operational reasons (several), and the fact that there are very unlikely to be enough power cars (including a spare allocation) to make it possible anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chy Mengrowyn Paul Posted August 29, 2015 Author Share Posted August 29, 2015 And let's not go down the 67 route either, DBS wanting their own drivers stopped that.... . Next Saturday is this season's last 57 Saturday LHCS Par - Exeter, return. Should it run next year, then this trip will be the last in dynamic lines livery so get your shots ! Not running today, no staff.... !! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted August 29, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 29, 2015 And let's not go down the 67 route either, DBS wanting their own drivers stopped that.... . Next Saturday is this season's last 57 Saturday LHCS Par - Exeter, return. Should it run next year, then this trip will be the last in dynamic lines livery so get your shots ! Not running today, no staff.... !! And let's not forget what happened on the final day last year ......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chy Mengrowyn Paul Posted August 29, 2015 Author Share Posted August 29, 2015 (edited) The shunter shouldn't forget to disconnect the pipe a second time..... ! Edited August 29, 2015 by Chy Mengrowyn Paul 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted August 30, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 30, 2015 There were certainly some choice terms used at St. Davids given the number of people who had invested in a return from somewhere down west specially. Myself included. Not helped by the Exeter staff decanting everyone from the sprinter on platform 6 once the train was "platformed" on 1. I think some even missed the unit as it left from 6 on time - they were still arguing with the "vests". Myself - I nipped smartly over the footbridge and hopped aboard the 17.47 to Plymouth which overtook the stock in Totnes loop meaning I was able to photograph it then coming through Plymouth on the middle road. And I managed to get a refund on my ticket on the grounds that my chosen service was cancelled. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Country Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 And let's not go down the 67 route either, DBS wanting their own drivers stopped that.... . Next Saturday is this season's last 57 Saturday LHCS Par - Exeter, return. Should it run next year, then this trip will be the last in dynamic lines livery so get your shots ! Not running today, no staff.... !! It'll be hard to beat the (unrepeatable) combination we were treated to on the final trip last year - yellow 57 and four purple mk3s. 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chy Mengrowyn Paul Posted August 30, 2015 Author Share Posted August 30, 2015 (edited) I always said the yellow of "Sand Castle" suited. Along with the slightly deeper engine tones of a 57/3. Incidentally, when eventually the TSODs are undergoing repaint, there should be 4 day coaches in the set to make up for the loss of seating. Edited August 30, 2015 by Chy Mengrowyn Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marky7890 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 A few taken on Thursday. 43164 passes the site of Chacewater station working 1047 Penzance to London Paddington. 153325 & 150106 near Wheal Busy, Chacewater working 1141 Penzance to Plymouth The same location as above, this time 150246 & 153373 working 1018 Exeter St Davids to Penzance. 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now