HST retirements and secondary deployments.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Don't know about the XC ones, which were re-introduced by Arriva after they took over there from Virgin.

 

 

From memory, I was sure some of the XC Mk3's, if not one or two sets, were refurbished and converted LHCS.

I found this which sort of confirms it....

 

https://shed83a.smugmug.com/CoachingStock/Mk3-Loco-Hauled/Mk3a-TSO-121xx/i-vR2wcRQ

 

 

.

[Covkid]

Certainly the (now ex) GC sets, as spare HST stock was unavailable at the time

 

Don't know about the XC ones, which were re-introduced by Arriva after they took over there from Virgin

 

Given the talk of re-use of Mk4s, it's also worth noting that these are rapidly approaching 30 years

 

I believe all the non catering vehicles which Grand Central operated were ex LHCS, with just the three 404xx vehicles being "pure" HST.

 

Several XC trailers were ex LHCS too - I believe some of five Catering vehicles in the 45xxx are ex LHCS, but perhaps not all 

[eastwestdivide]

ABRail has a list of (current?) Mk3s including former numbers* showing loco-hauled to HST conversions at

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

 

- about 30-40 such conversions I reckon on a quick scan through.

 

*HST Mk3 numbers are 4xxxx and loco-hauled Mk3s are 1xxxx

Edited January 19, 2018 by eastwestdivide

[Glorious NSE]

A small number of LHCS Mk3's were converted for use in HST sets (I don't know how old these ones are?), but I don't think any of these are with, or have been with, GWR or VTEC.

The GC and XC sets spring to mind?.

GWR has just two ex LHCS TS trailers I think, if the list i'm looking at is correct only 42382 (12128) and 42383 (12172) - 12172 is an example of the limits of a list which only shows one previous number though, as I think that one must have been something else before becoming 12172! Many Mk3 have had multiple identities over the years.

 

Fair number of ex LHCS in the GC and XC fleets as you say though, including all of GCs TS and all of XCs TCC.

['CHARD]

GWR has just two ex LHCS TS trailers I think, if the list i'm looking at is correct only 42382 (12128) and 42383 (12172) - 12172 is an example of the limits of a list which only shows one previous number though, as I think that one must have been something else before becoming 12172! Many Mk3 have had multiple identities over the years.

 

Fair number of ex LHCS in the GC and XC fleets as you say though, including all of GCs TS and all of XCs TCC.

 

Interesting these new identities, Martyn, as you say.

 

Class 252 TS 42001 for example (and sisters 42000 and 42002) spent time as a TF (41171), before reverting to its original classification - but being given a new number, 42353.

 

I'm unsure if 12172 had another identity because the bible I've got in front of me does provide the two previous i.d's, and that particular former SO has only that number shown.

[jbqfc]

GWR has just two ex LHCS TS trailers I think, if the list i'm looking at is correct only 42382 (12128) and 42383 (12172) - 12172 is an example of the limits of a list which only shows one previous number though, as I think that one must have been something else before becoming 12172! Many Mk3 have had multiple identities over the years.

 

Fair number of ex LHCS in the GC and XC fleets as you say though, including all of GCs TS and all of XCs TCC.

12172 started life as first open 11022 also numbered 11922 when it was a Scotrail composite coach

 

John

[Dava]

There are two more refurbished class 43 power cars in Brush works yard, presumably will be heading for Scotland? Numbers not visible but you may see them if you're on the Tornado hauled train on GCRN this weekend.

 

Dava

[Glorious NSE]

Some images of the power car refurb - these look good!
https://twitter.com/FirstGW_00/status/961718967625830400

[45125]

As to putting a valencia engine back into a HST, the rules are very simple. A engine must comply to the emmisions standards at the time it was built, as long as it is inside the EU. The age of the engine is determined from when its block was built. As long as the engine still exsists inside the EU, no problem. Inports from outside the EU must comply with the emmisions standards at the date it was imported. There is minor exemptions for new blocks for historic reasons, but that is basically how the rules stand.

 

Who in their right mind would want to put a Valenta back into a power car. They are horrible dirty filthy engines that need lot s of TLC, consume massive amounts of oil, fuel and coolant plus all he man hours to look after them. They may sound nice but are **nts to works with.

[NittenDormer]

The Grand Central ones have gone to East Midlands to supplement their existing fleet, according to various forums (wnxxforums et al).

And the Pacer replacement suggested by woodenhead isn't that far off the mark: as far as I understand it, refurbished short HST sets with power doors go to GW and Scotrail, which along with other fleet changes allows a cascade of older DMUs to Northern (and others??) so they can phase out their pacers somewhere near the deadline in their franchise agreement. Ooh, a cascade, what a BR-era idea.

Why is Northern alway at the bottom of the cascade ladder?

[45125]

Why is Northern alway at the bottom of the cascade ladder?

 

Doesn't shout loud enough.

[woodenhead]

Why is Northern alway at the bottom of the cascade ladder?

Because they are buying new.

[royaloak]

Why is Northern alway at the bottom of the cascade ladder?

It probably stems from the last Northern franchise being let on a no growth basis but 'suffering' a lot of growth and it has been playing catch up ever since, not helped by the intransigent DaFT not allowing any more DMUs to be built while allowing/encouraging new EMU orders to replace other half life or nearly new EMUs which cannot be cascaded anywhere due to the lack of OHLE hence the class 769 which is basically sticking diesel engines underneath redundant class 319 EMUs so they can be reused.

[great central]

Why is Northern alway at the bottom of the cascade ladder?

No mention whatsoever about EMT getting any more units for non London services. In fact when the PRM regulations take effect our HSTs won't be compliant either it seems.

[royaloak]

No mention whatsoever about EMT getting any more units for non London services. In fact when the PRM regulations take effect our HSTs won't be compliant either it seems.

Come December 2019 there will be derogation orders flying around like confetti so that wont be an issue.

[Ron Ron Ron]

.....not helped by the intransigent DaFT not allowing any more DMUs to be built .....

 

 

I rather thought it was the ROSCO's and financial backers who would find it hard to invest in new DMU's; given that the long term future and therefore economic life of (solely) diesel powered MU's is rather uncertain.

 

It was that uncertainty and lack of willingness by the industry to order new DMU's in the nought'ties, that lead to the DfT's 202 New DMU's programme, which ran in parallel with the Intercity Express Programme, until new electrification plans resulted in the DMU programme being scrapped.

 

 

.

[PatB]

Who in their right mind would want to put a Valenta back into a power car. They are horrible dirty filthy engines that need lot s of TLC, consume massive amounts of oil, fuel and coolant plus all he man hours to look after them. They may sound nice but are **nts to works with.

Doesn't seem to be a problem for Deltic fans. Or the Co-Bo group (should they ever complete the resto). .

[royaloak]

I rather thought it was the ROSCO's and financial backers who would find it hard to invest in new DMU's; given that the long term future and therefore economic life of (solely) diesel powered MU's is rather uncertain.

 

It was that uncertainty and lack of willingness by the industry to order new DMU's in the nought'ties, that lead to the DfT's 202 New DMU's programme, which ran in parallel with the Intercity Express Programme, until new electrification plans resulted in the DMU programme being scrapped.

 

 

.

It is the SaFT DaFT who dictate who has what stock and how much of said stock, it is also the DaFT who stipulate in franchise applications whether new stock would be allowed or not, no franchise holder is going to bother trying to order new stock off their own back during a 7 year franchise because they wont get a return on their investment and could end up with lots of trains with no home.

 

If TOCs were allowed to order new DMU trains and the ROSCOs were given a long term agreement for the leasing of said trains they would get them ordered and built, but as DaFT are not prepared to do that the ROSCOs wont order the trains just in case the DaFT move the goalposts, and after the fiasco over the SWT 707s who can blame them!.

Edited February 12, 2018 by royaloak

[david.hill64]

DaFT don't gold plate anything. It's just the mind set of someone else is paying. The GWML electrification is a good example of costs going out of control. We had perfectly good safety with the old electrical clearances but EU introduces guidelines for OHL (only guidelines, not rules. Each gov body has to interpreted these into laws for their country) but the UK already had derogaration from these due to the smaller loading gauge. Then new H&S for electrical works was introduced. 

 

Actually there are two problems: the electrical clearances come primarily from a TSI (Technical Standard for Interoperability) as well as ORR's interpretation of the electricity at work regulations. TSI's are imposed by EU regulation and as such cannot be over-ruled by any parliament within the EU and do not require individual parliaments to interpret and enact them. If member states do not get the TSI amended in the drafting stage they have to live with it unless they get a derogation, as UK has for the gauging issue. Clearly DafT took its eye of the ball when the standard was being drafted.

 

I suspect that ORR's stance on using the UK electricity at work regulations is driven as much by a wish to cover up the civil service's ineptitude in missing the implications of the TSI given the complete lack of any safety justification for changing the old BR standard. 

[rodent279]

It'll be a crying shame if the NRM didn't claim at least a vehicle, if not a complete set.

These trains arguably kept BR in the Inter City business during the 70's & 80's.

[Dava]

The NRM have a stated intention to preserve at least a power car. The 125 Group now have 6 trailer cars [4 out today with Tormado] and the prototype power car, and a plan for more.

 

Dava

[Covkid]

The NRM have a stated intention to preserve at least a power car. The 125 Group now have 6 trailer cars [4 out today with Tormado] and the prototype power car, and a plan for more.

 

Dava

 

It will be good if it happens, but I fear for the future of our heritage with NRM's current activity of giving it's possessions away. I read this week that GWR 2818 is likely to relocate to Swindon. We know what happened to a certain diesel that went from NRM York to Swindon don't we. 

[96701]

It will be good if it happens, but I fear for the future of our heritage with NRM's current activity of giving it's possessions away. I read this week that GWR 2818 is likely to relocate to Swindon. We know what happened to a certain diesel that went from NRM York to Swindon don't we.

 

Actually, no

[rodent279]

I don't want to digress too much, but I think the NRM are very good at preserving the big sexy crowd pullers, but where are the humble mundane things that most people traveled in? Where is the example of an SR EPB that took millions to work over nearly half a century? Where is the 1st generation dmu? Where in fact is the MK1 carriage?

 

Rant over. I do enjoy a visit there, but would like to see more of the mundane stuff that most of us travelled in.

[black and decker boy]

NRM are currently refurbishing their 2-HAP I think.

 

Don’t they also own 101 685 Daisy which is out and in service?

 

Stuffed and mounted is only part of their remit, having examples in different cities & museums and running on preserved lines extends their accessibility