Mark 5, By Accurascale

[Simon Bendall]

On 13/03/2022 at 23:18, E100 said:

 Seems a bit overkill having both a class 66 and a 73. Is this due to power (for the coaches)/adhesion/reliability?

 

Its mostly due to reliability, the 66 provides traction but has no ability to power the train or couple to the stock so the 73 is coupled inside to do both of these.

 

For those seeking alternative traction options, today saw the first use of a 67 on Mk.5s, 67023 heading the Inverness portion with 73966 inside, 67 still in debranded Colas.

 

Edited April 8, 2022 by Simon Bendall

[E100]

2 hours ago, Simon Bendall said:

 

Its mostly due to reliability, the 66 provides traction but has no ability to power the train or couple to the stock so the 73 is coupled inside to do both of these.

 

For those seeking alternative traction options, today saw the first use of a 67 on Mk.5s, 67023 heading the Inverness portion with 73966 inside, 67 still in debranded Colas.

 

Thanks Simon for that info.

 

Wild camping this evening at Tulloch and these beauties go past! I noticed obviously this has five coaches. I assume four is still correct for the winter and it’s just the usual ramping up for the tourist season.

 

 

Based on what I was told at model rail Scotland I believe KMS should be announcing their new 73/9 partner.

[No Decorum]

15 hours ago, E100 said:

Thanks Simon for that info.

 

Wild camping this evening at Tulloch and these beauties go past! I noticed obviously this has five coaches. I assume four is still correct for the winter and it’s just the usual ramping up for the tourist season.

 

 

Based on what I was told at model rail Scotland I believe KMS should be announcing their new 73/9 partner.

What a wonderfully atmospheric video! Cracking stuff!

[cessna152towser]

On 12/03/2022 at 14:51, nightstar.train said:

On 15/02/2022 at 18:54, Afroal05 said:

Me too with the Fort William pack! My fault for continually putting off purchasing them until the next month. 

If you want a four coach train of Seated/Club/Sleeper accessible/sleeper then the Highlander pack 3 and Lowlander packs 1 and 3 contain that formation. 

Good suggestion.    Now that I have been gifted a Hornby Railroad 73/9 in GBRf livery as a retiral gift from colleagues,  I need coaches to run with it.   I was too late to order the Fort William pack but have instead ordered the Highlander pack 3 Inverness which contains the same formation.     By road but not by rail Inverness is the next closest sleeper destination to Fort William.   Apart from the destination displays beside the doors it should easily pass as a Fort William set, especially since I can barely read the small print on today's highly detailed models.

Edited to add:-  Or there could be a potential market for "Fort William" transfers to change the destinations on the coaches.

Edited May 2, 2022 by cessna152towser

[Iskra]

What diesel loco's are people going to run the CS Mk5's with, in the absence of a CS 73/9? Or are we all assuming that one will be produced in the near future?

[Graham108]

2 hours ago, Iskra said:

What diesel loco's are people going to run the CS Mk5's with, in the absence of a CS 73/9? Or are we all assuming that one will be produced in the near future?

Well I plan to use an A/S Class 92 and possibly an A/S Class 37 (37043 Loch Lomond) for the route north of Glasgow

Edited May 7, 2022 by Graham108
Additional comment

[Matt]

Prob a 66/7 which hauled them up this way (in addition to 73/9 often) but I’m still optimistic on 73/9 count…

[aeroplane]

With my Mk5s I will be running 37027 and 37043. My layout timeline is that all 37s have been preserved and are run with modern coaches for the benefit of tourists on summer weekends.

[TomScrut]

47 minutes ago, Iskra said:

What diesel loco's are people going to run the CS Mk5's with, in the absence of a CS 73/9? Or are we all assuming that one will be produced in the near future?

 

When I get round to ordering them, 92020 (which is already on order)

[ERIC ALLTORQUE]

Theres always steam,surely Thomas must have had a go and Gordon must be champing at the bit........

[adb968008]

2 hours ago, Iskra said:

What diesel loco's are people going to run the CS Mk5's with, in the absence of a CS 73/9? Or are we all assuming that one will be produced in the near future?

I’m assuming there will be a Dapol one, though it may need to be piloted by a 66 as their previous class 73 models tend to be a little “timid”.

But of course a class 92 or three.

[XChris]

Could always use a Deltic we know there passed on the WHL...

[E100]

Yeah, we really need the 73/9. Personally if I'd been the Accurascale chaps I'd have just gone ahead and made it with it's huge appeal across the variants. Obviously, they are a very clever bunch so I'm sure they had their reasons. 

[ERIC ALLTORQUE]

 

[adb968008]

On 11/05/2022 at 10:08, ERIC ALLTORQUE said:

 

Of course you can dream, and then there is reality….

 

(no food from Inverness that night because London didnt load enough “fresh” scottish products the day before)… nice decor, the vibration is slightly reminiscent of the APT, though I had been drinking….

 

 

(Our loco failed, but the weather got blamed)

 

 

 

The room was deserted..

 

no complaints on the room, but showers are for the elite.

 

 

don't let me put you off, its a great experience and with a 100% refund due to the delay i’ll definitely do it again, just beware the propaganda.

Edited July 30, 2023 by adb968008

[Ouroborus]

Going off topic, i have been toying with the idea of a 'just for the hell of it' trip on the GWR sleeper.  The overhauled cabins do look particularly nice.

[TomScrut]

5 hours ago, adb968008 said:

its a great experience

 

The issue for me, living in Yorkshire, is that it's a journey in itself getting somewhere to catch the bloomin thing! I would be keen to do so however.

 

I am going up to Berwick to meet my family from London next month (concert in London whilst they drive North the day after), I should maybe have said I'll meet you the day after and gone CS style!

[rob D2]

On 07/05/2022 at 23:29, E100 said:

Yeah, we really need the 73/9. Personally if I'd been the Accurascale chaps I'd have just gone ahead and made it with it's huge appeal across the variants. Obviously, they are a very clever bunch so I'm sure they had their reasons. 

Huge appeal ? A few ( apparently fairly useless ones as seem to need a 66 most of the time )for the sleeper and a few yellow ones . If it was dragons den I wouldn’t invest …..Dapol make a 73 , so they’d be the best bet I suppose 

[E100]

41 minutes ago, rob D2 said:

Huge appeal ? A few ( apparently fairly useless ones as seem to need a 66 most of the time )for the sleeper and a few yellow ones . If it was dragons den I wouldn’t invest …..Dapol make a 73 , so they’d be the best bet I suppose 

 

There was previously a thread on the 73/9 where it was discussed but I cannot find that thread anymore. However, the appeal is large as they cover a very large geographic area between GBRF, Caley Sleeper and NR, whilst being a somewhat heritage asset. Therefore most modern image modelers could justify one. Arguably more than both sets of Mk5's combined.

[TomScrut]

49 minutes ago, E100 said:

Therefore most modern image modelers could justify one.

 

Depending on what they wanted to pull. Most of what they do with GBRF (other than CS stuff) and NR is the same as what 37s do and so are people already sorted in this regard? I think I'd have a 73/9 if one was made, but it wouldn't be a surefire purchase because I have plenty of 37s for PLPR duties.

 

50 minutes ago, E100 said:

Arguably more than both sets of Mk5's combined.

 

Not sure about that, CS mk5s are reasonably regular on both WCML and ECML (on diversions, but it happens a lot). Those are probably the 2 most modelled main lines in the country. Mk5as are a bit more niche regionally (although still crossing both aforementioned mainlines) but I expect because they are new loco hauled sets that they will be a rule 1 purchase for many.

[No Decorum]

17 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Of course you can dream, and then there is reality….

 

(no food from Inverness that night because London didnt load enough “fresh” scottish products the day before)… nice decor, the vibration is slightly reminiscent of the APT, though I had been drinking….

 

 

(Our loco failed, but the weather got blamed)

 

 

The room was deserted..

 

no complaints on the room, but showers are for the elite.

 

 

don't let me put you off, its a great experience and with a 100% refund due to the delay i’ll definitely do it again, just beware the propaganda.

In 1984 I travelled in a Mk. III sleeper. It was very smooth. It’s a mystery to me why we don’t build new Mk. IIIs.

[boxbrownie]

13 hours ago, Ouroborus said:

Going off topic, i have been toying with the idea of a 'just for the hell of it' trip on the GWR sleeper.  The overhauled cabins do look particularly nice.

We looked into that as it’s just an hour or so to Penzance for us, then we realised we be stuck in London for the day 🤣

[boxbrownie]

20 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

In 1984 I travelled in a Mk. III sleeper. It was very smooth. It’s a mystery to me why we don’t build new Mk. IIIs.

They might not, or be difficult to comply with impact/crash regulations?

 

No idea, just a guess.

[No Decorum]

3 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

They might not, or be difficult to comply with impact/crash regulations?

 

No idea, just a guess.

The report on the Selby rail crash singled out the coaches for their crash worthiness. It’s hard to believe that was twenty years ago. Rail privatisation threw away a lot of skills and assets in British railways. Again, just a guess, but I think it more likely that much of the manufacturing capacity has been discarded. If the new Great British Railways authority which is proposed turns out to be an institution with wide vision rather than just a co-ordinating body, it should look afresh at re-establishing rail manufacturing and research in this country.

[TomScrut]

1 hour ago, No Decorum said:

The report on the Selby rail crash singled out the coaches for their crash worthiness. It’s hard to believe that was twenty years ago.

 

The Selby rail crash was mk4s though, your earlier post was about mk3s?

 

1 hour ago, No Decorum said:

it should look afresh at re-establishing rail manufacturing and research in this country.

 

I think most of where that could focus on is the key restrictions our loading gauge and track quality offers to established designs from Europe/Japan. Whilst I know this is very much a speculative generalisation I think a decent proportion of the issues we have come down to scaling an established design down to suit our routes.