(too old to reply)
What future the stored HSTs?
Colin Redman
2004-06-25 22:04:12 UTC
The failure of Grand Central means that more HSTs will be consigned to
store.

Considering the versatility of this type of train, it is a tragedy,
and I am surprised that Porterbrook and the SRA are not working
together on developing refurbishment options as there are no
replacements in the pipeline.

No way is it a Voyager or Meridian a satisfactory replacement. On top
of that around 200 Mk 3s face scrap. It's a disaster.

Just why is it that no one can make the right decisions on stock and
traction policy. SRA is an example of the blind leading the blind.

Anyone got any other views?
John Ruddy
2004-06-25 22:20:14 UTC
Post by Colin Redman
The failure of Grand Central means that more HSTs will be consigned to
store.
Considering the versatility of this type of train, it is a tragedy,
and I am surprised that Porterbrook and the SRA are not working
together on developing refurbishment options as there are no
replacements in the pipeline.
No way is it a Voyager or Meridian a satisfactory replacement. On top
of that around 200 Mk 3s face scrap. It's a disaster.
Just why is it that no one can make the right decisions on stock and
traction policy. SRA is an example of the blind leading the blind.
Anyone got any other views?
Part of the problem is that it costs roughly the same to lease a HST
as it does a brand new train. Which, considering that many of these
units are nearly 25 years old, is ridiculous. But the banks must make
their money somewhere, I hear they are down to their last £10 billion.
EverettPet
2004-06-25 22:44:33 UTC
What will happen to MML's HSTs in September when project rio finishes?

Are they keeping the hourly Manchester service or reducing it?
Peter Masson
2004-06-25 22:45:33 UTC
Post by Colin Redman
The failure of Grand Central means that more HSTs will be consigned to
store.
Considering the versatility of this type of train, it is a tragedy,
and I am surprised that Porterbrook and the SRA are not working
together on developing refurbishment options as there are no
replacements in the pipeline.
No way is it a Voyager or Meridian a satisfactory replacement. On top
of that around 200 Mk 3s face scrap. It's a disaster.
Just why is it that no one can make the right decisions on stock and
traction policy. SRA is an example of the blind leading the blind.
Anyone got any other views?
There were 95 HSTs. After December, FGW will use 42. GNER will need about 14
when they have to send the GNE*s back. MML also use about 14 (someone will
probably have exact numbers), though they've got the problem of what to do
with the 9-car Meridians. Even allowing for some write-offs (Southall and
Ladbroke Grove) and the Dr Yellow (Network Rail Track Recording Train), by
my reckoning there'll be about 20 HSTs with no work

There needs to be a decision on a thorough re-engineering to make HSTs
suitable for another 15 or more years. From the passenger perspective this
includes power doors, retention toilets, DDA provision, modern PIS, as well
as reliable aircon, and Jon will no doubt have information about what work
the power cars will need. This will of course have to be costed against HST2
new build. However, if the re-engineering is to go ahead, quite a number
will need to be out of service at a time for the work to be carried out.

I don't see sending some of them back to VXC as a realistic answer. There
needs to be a way found to make the 220s up to 5 cars - could surplus
intermediate cars in MMLs 9-car 222s be the basis for a solution?

There needs to be a small fleet of modern trains for the Charter and spot
hire markets. Should someone like Fragonset take on a small fleet of HSTs?
or Mk3 rakes plus 67s? Rail needs to be able to offer realistic capacity for
such opportunities as Millennium Stadium events, Ascot, Glastonbury, the
Grand National, as well as a few extras on peak Saturdays to the South-west.
I realise that the crankex market probably wants to keep Mk1s if it can, but
what about the luxury market (VSOE, etc). Can they keep 1920s Pullmans going
forever, or should they replace them with Mk3s, furnished in a way that
displays timeless luxury, and painted in a distinctive livery? After all,
the last build of loco-hauled Mk3s started life as Pullmans, complete with
names.
How many Mk3 loco-hauled FOs and SOs were built, and how many have found
other uses or will be needed by One Anglia?
Other thoughts and info?

Peter
Peter Masson
2004-06-25 22:48:53 UTC
Post by EverettPet
What will happen to MML's HSTs in September when project rio finishes?
Are they keeping the hourly Manchester service or reducing it?
Scrapping it (i.e. the SRA will stop paying them to run it), and they won't
be able to cope with it anyway in 2.5 platforms at St Pancras.
Peter
Tony Miles
2004-06-25 22:59:49 UTC
Post by EverettPet
What will happen to MML's HSTs in September when project rio finishes?
Are they keeping the hourly Manchester service or reducing it?
Ending it - SRA subsidy (from the WCRM budget) runs out and paths have not
been allocated.

Rio HSTs go to FGW and GNER - the allocation has been agreed by the two TOCs
and those heading to FGW are being fitted with ATP in readiness, with two
ex-VT power cars covering.

Tony
TP
2004-06-25 23:09:03 UTC
Post by John Ruddy
Part of the problem is that it costs roughly the same to lease a HST
as it does a brand new train. Which, considering that many of these
units are nearly 25 years old, is ridiculous. But the banks must make
their money somewhere, I hear they are down to their last £10 billion.
The reason for this is that, in the privatisation legislation, all
rolling stock had to be leased out by ROSCOs at a rate that reflected
its *replacement* cost.

The thinking was that this would encourage TOCs to demand new stock
rather than leasing the old rattletraps at the same price as new. But
it also meant that the old rattletraps were a massive earner for the
ROSCOs in the first round of franchises, which were largely based on
the use of existing rolling stock. The windfall profits for the
ROSCOs were astronomic.

One of the architects of this unholy legislative mess was of course
our good friend the Rail Regulator, aka the Ayatollah Tom Winsor.
EverettPet
2004-06-25 23:12:55 UTC
Are CT not interested in an HST or two for their long distance routes? (e.g.
Liverpool-Norwich) They could use shortened (1 first, 1 buffet and 3 standard)
HSTs.

It might not be much faster than a Turbostar - especially on routes with lots
of stops and lowish line speeds. I think it would be better for passengers.
Paul Harley
2004-06-25 23:18:16 UTC
On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 23:20:16 +0100, John Ruddy
Post by John Ruddy
Part of the problem is that it costs roughly the same to lease a HST
as it does a brand new train. Which, considering that many of these
units are nearly 25 years old, is ridiculous. But the banks must make
their money somewhere, I hear they are down to their last £10 billion.
ITYF the leasing cost is less, but one needs to add on the higher
maintenance cost of an HST.

The problem seems to be that the ROSCOs would rather store the HSTs
rather than sell them off at slightly more than scrap value. It's in
their financial interest to ensure there is a "healthy" shortage of
rolling stock; this helps keep leasing costs high for stock still in
use.

Paul Harley
Ross
2004-06-26 00:00:35 UTC
On 25 Jun 2004 23:12:55 GMT, EverettPet wrote in
Post by EverettPet
Are CT not interested in an HST or two for their long distance routes? (e.g.
Liverpool-Norwich) They could use shortened (1 first, 1 buffet and 3 standard)
HSTs.
Given the problems North Western had when they tried to introduce 309s
between Crewe and Carlisle, I suspect there may be safety case
problems were CT to try to introduce HSTs.

We'd also have to get SRA approval, which I doubt would be
forthcoming.

Shame: I think most CT crews would like to get their hands on an
HST... :)
--
Ross

From & reply-to addresses will bounce. Reply to the group.
4973
2004-06-26 07:50:35 UTC
Post by Tony Miles
Post by EverettPet
What will happen to MML's HSTs in September when project rio finishes?
Are they keeping the hourly Manchester service or reducing it?
Ending it - SRA subsidy (from the WCRM budget) runs out and paths have not
been allocated.
Rio HSTs go to FGW and GNER - the allocation has been agreed by the two
TOCs and those heading to FGW are being fitted with ATP in readiness, with
two ex-VT power cars covering.
Do you mean that the cars are being fitted with ATP and then going back into
service with MML until the transfer ?

That does surpise me considering what I heard about ATP being ripped out of
ex GW cars going to MML a few years ago.
Tim Rogers
2004-06-26 08:17:01 UTC
Post by EverettPet
Are CT not interested in an HST or two for their long distance routes? (e.g.
Liverpool-Norwich) They could use shortened (1 first, 1 buffet and 3 standard)
HSTs.
It might not be much faster than a Turbostar - especially on routes with lots
of stops and lowish line speeds. I think it would be better for passengers.
Since when has comfort been forefront in the TOC's mind?!!!

Tim


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.711 / Virus Database: 467 - Release Date: 25/06/2004
John Ruddy
2004-06-26 08:21:59 UTC
Post by TP
One of the architects of this unholy legislative mess was of course
our good friend the Rail Regulator, aka the Ayatollah Tom Winsor.
Indeed, which is why it comes as no surprise that the Rail Regulator
thinks that there is nothing wrong with the current structure.
TP
2004-06-26 10:03:25 UTC
Post by John Ruddy
Post by TP
One of the architects of this unholy legislative mess was of course
our good friend the Rail Regulator, aka the Ayatollah Tom Winsor.
Indeed, which is why it comes as no surprise that the Rail Regulator
thinks that there is nothing wrong with the current structure.
Personally, I think the thing that is most wrong with the current
structure is the fact that someone so closely involved in creating the
current shambles is equally closely involved in preserving it.
Jack Taylor
2004-06-26 10:11:43 UTC
Post by 4973
That does surpise me considering what I heard about ATP being ripped out of
ex GW cars going to MML a few years ago.
What GW power cars went to MML a few years ago? Only 43007/178/180 and 184,
of GWML origin, are on MML and most of those came via Virgin CrossCountry
for Rio. All of the MML core fleet are ex-ECML.
Peter Fox
2004-06-26 14:36:43 UTC
Post by Ross
On 25 Jun 2004 23:12:55 GMT, EverettPet wrote in
Post by EverettPet
Are CT not interested in an HST or two for their long distance routes? (e.g.
Liverpool-Norwich) They could use shortened (1 first, 1 buffet and 3 standard)
HSTs.
Given the problems North Western had when they tried to introduce 309s
between Crewe and Carlisle, I suspect there may be safety case
problems were CT to try to introduce HSTs.
I can't see this. The problems with the 309s were allegedly due to them not
having Central Door locking, which HSTs have, of course.

Connex were going to use some on Trans-Pennine, but they lost out to first.
It might be a good idea to use some on either Nottingham - Cardiff or
Liverpool - Nottingham, but the dead hand of the SRA would prevent this.

Peter Fox
Post by Ross
We'd also have to get SRA approval, which I doubt would be
forthcoming.
Shame: I think most CT crews would like to get their hands on an
HST... :)
--
Ross
From & reply-to addresses will bounce. Reply to the group.
Peter Fox
2004-06-26 14:36:43 UTC
Post by Ross
On 25 Jun 2004 23:12:55 GMT, EverettPet wrote in
Post by EverettPet
Are CT not interested in an HST or two for their long distance routes? (e.g.
Liverpool-Norwich) They could use shortened (1 first, 1 buffet and 3 standard)
HSTs.
Given the problems North Western had when they tried to introduce 309s
between Crewe and Carlisle, I suspect there may be safety case
problems were CT to try to introduce HSTs.
I can't see this. The problems with the 309s were allegedly due to them not
having Central Door locking, which HSTs have, of course.

Connex were going to use some on Trans-Pennine, but they lost out to first.
It might be a good idea to use some on either Nottingham - Cardiff or
Liverpool - Nottingham, but the dead hand of the SRA would prevent this.

Peter Fox
Post by Ross
We'd also have to get SRA approval, which I doubt would be
forthcoming.
Shame: I think most CT crews would like to get their hands on an
HST... :)
--
Ross
From & reply-to addresses will bounce. Reply to the group.
Philip
2004-06-26 15:05:09 UTC
Post by Colin Redman
The failure of Grand Central means that more HSTs will be consigned to
store.
No way is it a Voyager or Meridian a satisfactory replacement.
Is that a fact or merely your opinion? If the latter, then I have to
disagree.

Philip.
Mike D
2004-06-26 15:33:36 UTC
snip
Post by Colin Redman
The failure of Grand Central means that more HSTs will be consigned to
store.
Considering the versatility of this type of train, it is a tragedy,
and I am surprised that Porterbrook and the SRA are not working
together on developing refurbishment options as there are no
replacements in the pipeline.
Why not use them for Liverpool - Newcastle and Middlesborough - Man Airport?

In shortened form (say 1 first class, 3 2nd, 1 buffet) they would give more
capacity on this busy route, and they would be much better on the sections
North of York where current stock regularly uses the slow lines and ends up
running at 65mph for most of way to Northallerton.

I fear that this will still be a problem when the new stock is introduced on
this route, as it is only 100mph, and with the volume of GNER and Virgin
services it will still end up being 'in the way' and shunted on to the slow
lines, so HST would probably be the best solution for this route even after
the new stock is delivered.

I would have thought that the performance of a 5 coach HST would be more
than adequate on the TPX route, and I still think that the HST is some of
the best stock as far as passenger comfort is concerned, even after 25+
years and probably millions of miles it still rides well is quick, and
spacious.

As for the MK3 carriages marry them up with some surplus locos and use them
so that all 14x can be sent to the scrap yard they are being used on routes
for which they are not suitable and really are the most uncomfortable things
on the railway. Yesterday my girlfriend traveled from Hull to Thirsk, 14x
all the way (train from Hull forms the Middlesborough departure from York),
why are they being used on relatively long journeys like this (1h 30m ish
Hull Thirsk)
Tim Rogers
2004-06-26 15:45:14 UTC
Post by Mike D
snip
Post by Colin Redman
The failure of Grand Central means that more HSTs will be consigned to
store.
Considering the versatility of this type of train, it is a tragedy,
and I am surprised that Porterbrook and the SRA are not working
together on developing refurbishment options as there are no
replacements in the pipeline.
Why not use them for Liverpool - Newcastle and Middlesborough - Man Airport?
In shortened form (say 1 first class, 3 2nd, 1 buffet) they would give more
capacity on this busy route, and they would be much better on the sections
North of York where current stock regularly uses the slow lines and ends up
running at 65mph for most of way to Northallerton.
I fear that this will still be a problem when the new stock is introduced on
this route, as it is only 100mph, and with the volume of GNER and Virgin
services it will still end up being 'in the way' and shunted on to the slow
lines, so HST would probably be the best solution for this route even after
the new stock is delivered.
I would have thought that the performance of a 5 coach HST would be more
than adequate on the TPX route, and I still think that the HST is some of
the best stock as far as passenger comfort is concerned, even after 25+
years and probably millions of miles it still rides well is quick, and
spacious.
As for the MK3 carriages marry them up with some surplus locos and use them
so that all 14x can be sent to the scrap yard they are being used on routes
for which they are not suitable and really are the most uncomfortable things
on the railway. Yesterday my girlfriend traveled from Hull to Thirsk, 14x
all the way (train from Hull forms the Middlesborough departure from York),
why are they being used on relatively long journeys like this (1h 30m ish
Hull Thirsk)
Unfortuneately we are in the era of the 'throw away train'. The operators
think the public will like to be wedged into their shiney new noisy units
instead of refurbished (and maybe re-engined) HST's. Just look at what has
happened on VXC. Madness!

Tim
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.711 / Virus Database: 467 - Release Date: 25/06/2004
Next Page >
Page 1 of 7