|
Title: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: woody on December 27, 2009, 20:43:45 According to the latest "Modern Rail" magazine the venerable HSTs could well stay in service for more than half a century if further life extension work,which the Dft has been discussing with train owners and engineering companies gets the go ahead.
With electrification of the "Berks and Hants" still only an aspiration and the industry now being asked by the Dft to provide proposals for IC125 life -extension for a further 20 years or so the HSTS are likely to be seen in the South-West for many years to come. Thoughts! Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on December 27, 2009, 21:03:02 i dont think its a bad thing? most people on this forum would prefer a hst to a modern alternative...even if they do have to open the door! besides they wouldnt be shipped outa the country for works! keeping jobs in the uk has got to be a good thing
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Timmer on December 27, 2009, 21:18:08 Bring it on! Until someone comes up with a IC train that is better than the HST then I will be happy to see them go on and on and on. If it ain't broke keep em going!
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: devon_metro on December 27, 2009, 21:23:27 Whilst the HST is a good train, a well built modern train is miles ahead, we need to look to Europe and the Far East for inspiration, a train similar to the 395s would be good. The HSTs are rough riding, potentially very draughty. It's about time we had a decent replacement!
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Chris from Nailsea on December 27, 2009, 21:42:06 Hmm.
The problem, I suspect, is that having used ^850 billion of taxpayers money, just keeping a few banks afloat (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8394393.stm), there is perhaps little left over to fund such improvements to our railways? Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Btline on December 27, 2009, 21:52:58 Ok, the HSTs are good. But they DO need replacing.
We need to design and build a good quality, reliable and versatile new train. None of these wacky super-dooper trains from China or Japan, full of gismos which will make the train break down whenever Windows Vista decides to crash. No, a new BR Mark 5 carriage, building on the Mk3 and 4. Either with underfloor electric motors, or with a loco (diesel or electric or both). Capable of 155 mph and tilting. With 23 metre carriages, capable of going anywhere on the IC network, and rakes up to 12 cars, a guard's van etc. etc. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: gwr2006 on December 27, 2009, 22:06:51 I think we all knew the cash crisis was going to come and stifle the railways sooner rather than later. I suspect we will see things slowing down with some of the recently announced projects and some may be deferred indefinately, including electrification of the Great Western Main Line and procurement of the IEP.
If we are to retain HSTs for a few more years (which may not be a bad thing as they're still going strong after 40 years!) what do they need to do to them to make them acceptable. I'll start with a few ideas but what do the rest of you think should be done:?
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Chris from Nailsea on December 27, 2009, 22:11:01 - Reduced volume on the public address system in quiet carriages.
- Buffet cars. ;) Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: thetrout on December 27, 2009, 22:21:43 Definately WiFi and Restaurants for Long Distance IC Travel...
A Visual & Audio PIS System, with Exterior Destination Display Boards No offensive Voyager like smells ;D Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: RailCornwall on December 27, 2009, 23:21:48 Disagree, this is simply wrong, the HST is already compared to European Stock on Inter City routes 10 years if not more outdated. This'll do nothing to bring people to a modern railway system.
The Voyager and even the IEP are not ideal replacements as they do nothing to add to comfort of the passenger. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: woody on December 27, 2009, 23:47:49 Could the HST power cars be uprated to give better excelleration.The MTU series 4000 diesel engine now installed in FGW power cars is de-rated to 2,250bhp from its full rating of 3,500bhp because of the power cars electrical limitations(ie traction motors,alternator etc). Would it be possible to cost effectively re-engineeer the HST power cars electrical systems in order to make better use of the MTUs engines available horsepower to improve performance and therefore journey times on non electrified parts of the FGW network given that journey times have hardly changed since the first HST power cars entered service 33 years ago a situation that could be perpetuated beyond 50 years without power car uprating.You can imagine what the media would make of that.
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: dog box on December 28, 2009, 09:48:39 Angel proposed life extention work for HST trailer cars when the mtu programme was in develpment stage , this included retention tanks, plug doors. etc. and more recently delta rail proposed similar.
As for the power cars re engineering of generator, traction motor, and control cubicles are possible, so therefore life extention of the HST is possible and should go ahead. Its far better to do this than plough on with the loony IEP super express which is quite frankly goinging to be a very expensive white elephant. The way forward is to re engineer the MK3 Trailer cars to a modern specification and then transfer this technology to new build MK5 Coaches. Build a few DVT Coaches and then get a modern diesel loco { TRAXX ?] as motive power for non electrified areas replacing the diesel for an electric for under the wires Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: eightf48544 on December 28, 2009, 11:39:34 Couldn't agree with you more 'dog box'; bring on the locos and DVTs.
The Mark 3 body shell has proved almost industructable at both Southall and Ladbroke Grove. As dog box says would be reasonably cheap to refurbish the bodies to make modern loco hauled coaches complete with retention tanks, powered plug doors and possibly new bogies. Loco haulage gives you the flexibility to have different length sets plus through working with loco changes at the end of the wires. You could then scrap the dual mode IEP which as Roger Ford says may get to Aberdeen although not very fast from Edinburgh on diesel, plus it would have to use it's diesel engine to keep time on the ECML. The worst of both worlds. What a tribute to the orginal designers of the Mark 3. Lets hope the same people design the Mark 5 and it doesn't turn out to have another 737 interior. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: matt473 on December 28, 2009, 12:13:09 One thins springs o mind when I saw this which is "If it isn't broken, then why fix it?" The hst is a relaible bit of kit as it is simple compared to modern trains as there are few computers that cause problems or over-complicated systems. A new or re-engineered mark 3 coach with the powercars can be more than adequate in the near future as they can be used whilst electrification is being carried out and once it is completed the hst's could then be cascaded instead of retired thanks to the re-engineering. Of course this all depends on a thorough overhaul and not a job carried out on the cheap
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: IndustryInsider on December 28, 2009, 12:32:11 Are there any hints as to what effect this would have on the IEP program?
The Mark 3 body shell has proved almost industructable at both Southall and Ladbroke Grove. But didn't one of the carriages fold in half during the Upton Nervett crash? I don't think that a Mk3 coach would have stood up anywhere near as well as the Pendolino involved in the more recent crash at Grayrigg and several modern inventions (crumple zones, carriage override protection, etc.) would be impossible to retro-fit to Mk3's. Without wishing to sound too melodramatic, a life extension could well end up costing lives. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: devon_metro on December 28, 2009, 12:47:29 In all major HST accidents I believe the Mk3 buffet has been folded or crushed, whereas there was only minor damage to the pendolino, however a train with the restrictive interior of a pendolino would not be a better replacement to the Mk3, and to some extent this is the reason they are so strong, due to the numerous structural support - of which the FGW mk3s have none.
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Electric train on December 28, 2009, 13:18:35 The weakness of the Mk3 compared to Pendolino is the buckeye, the buckeye is a good coupling but not as Strong as the bolted flange type which I believe the Pendolino use.
Whether it is cost effective to modify the Mk3's to have plugin type doors is questionable. The real choice is with the ETH supply and control cabling, if the HSDT Mk3's were rewired with the standard single phase 850 volt ETH, this would require a motoraltenator to be fitted to each coach, this would increase the flexibility of. IF the TOC's FOC's and train leasing companies could agree a standard form of train control this again increase the flexibility of use. It goes with out saying that retention toilets are a must but this could reduce the number of toilets on the train to one per coach. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: RichieG on December 28, 2009, 13:20:05 Build new HSTs?
Not IEP or anything like that, just a new fleet of good old fashioned Class 43 HSTs. Some changes to the original design would need to be made, such as the what engine is used (after all, spending ^x in upgrading from the Valentas to MTUs would be silly if new ones were made with Valenta engines!) and I'm sure that there have been a number of other things that have been added to the original design of the locos since their original manufacture. I believe (but will be happy to be corrected!) that structurally the MK3 coaches are fine to a certain extent so just a load more would need to be made, perhaps with automatic doors (or at the very least, doors which can be opened from the inside! As an aside, I've noticed many times that there is a metal plate screwed on to the doors on the insides where the handle is; why can't they put handles on the inside as well as the outside?) I believe that New Zealand have a few MK2 coaches and have adapted them to automatic doors so would assume that we could create MK3s with automatic doors fairly simply. The seating arrangements of the carriages would need a bit of work from the FGW standard, but as each TOC has upgraded their MK3s differently that's a bit of a by-point. (I will point that I am not by any means all that knowledgeable of the actual structure of stock so the above suggestions might - and probably will - be exceptionally wrong. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: IndustryInsider on December 28, 2009, 14:02:46 Build new HSTs? Far too many safety regulations since the mid-70's to make that worth considering. You might as well start out from scratch than try and make a 40 year old design meet modern safety standards. By all means keep the same principal of the design though, i.e. engines separated from carriages. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: eightf48544 on December 28, 2009, 14:54:36 The Wessex units were basically mostly mark 3 with power doors.
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: JayMac on December 28, 2009, 15:22:24 I believe eightf was referring to the Class 442 (5WES) 'Wessex Electrics' EMUs. The best things running on the third rail in my opinion. They are indeed based on the MkIII design and have powered external plug doors.
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Btline on December 28, 2009, 16:26:41 By the time you've faffed around with adding plug doors etc. you might as well have built NEW Mark 5 coaches.
Adding yet more to the Mark 3s will just make them unreliable, as this mods keep breaking down. And of course there is the crashworthiness. Yes, they've been pretty good, but we've made advances since then. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: moonrakerz on December 28, 2009, 16:29:49 But didn't one of the carriages fold in half during the Upton Nervett crash? Yes.....but......... "The third coach, which contained the buffet, impacted or was impacted by a loose bogie. This caused severe damage to the underframe in the area of the kitchen, weakening the structure and allowing the body to be bent in plan view through an angle of around 150 degrees." "It would be impracticable to expect a rail vehicle body to survive ........... impact with such an object without sustaining gross permanent deformation" From the accident report. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: paul7575 on December 28, 2009, 16:31:15 Surely one of the basic things you have to do to justify the introduction of new stock is to compare the whole life costs of new build with the cost of life extension of the existing stock - and the latter is only over the extension period. Just because DfT have asked for the figures to be worked out it is no guarantee that it will happen, in fact the opposite is just as likely, as far as I can see.
Paul Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: IndustryInsider on December 28, 2009, 16:50:50 But didn't one of the carriages fold in half during the Upton Nervett crash? Yes.....but......... "The third coach, which contained the buffet, impacted or was impacted by a loose bogie. This caused severe damage to the underframe in the area of the kitchen, weakening the structure and allowing the body to be bent in plan view through an angle of around 150 degrees." "It would be impracticable to expect a rail vehicle body to survive ........... impact with such an object without sustaining gross permanent deformation" Fair enough - I didn't realise it'd been hit by a stray bogie - though it does prompt the question whether a newer and lighter design of bogie (the smaller wheel design as on most modern vehicles) would have caused the same damage to a carriage with a stronger design? Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: RailCornwall on December 28, 2009, 17:27:29 The physical appearance of the stock is poor, most of the coachwork has dents and minor buckles. All the vinyls can't mask that. The thought that the stock will be here in ten years let alone any longer really is offputting.
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: smithy on December 28, 2009, 17:55:57 The physical appearance of the stock is poor, most of the coachwork has dents and minor buckles. All the vinyls can't mask that. The thought that the stock will be here in ten years let alone any longer really is offputting. the slight buckles as you put it are just ripples in the steel work of which is not major structure just cosmetic,the main structure is beneath this.if you had a car that used such large pieces of steel panel on the exterior then they too would have ripples etc. also the dents are only of a cosmetic concern and not structural,the best mod they could do to improve crash worthiness and extend life would be to fit overriders at the end of each vehicle to prevent coaches from riding up on each other in event of accident,much like newer stock has. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Electric train on December 28, 2009, 18:11:15 The Mk3's coaches are a stressed steel skin welded to the steel frame with a corrugated floor pan and extremely strong form of construction.
Would a modern coach suffer major structurally failure in similar type of impact as Uffton Nervett, I suspect this is not a type of impact envisaged in the design and build of coaches; also I think the fact that it was a buffet car is irrelevant the construction of the coaches is the same. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: RailCornwall on December 28, 2009, 18:17:58 Just to clarify I'm not doubting the safety of the rolling stock, just it's poor appearance.
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: FlyingDutchman on December 28, 2009, 18:37:37 If they electrify the Line to Plymouth they could use some of the 225.
Can some one tell me why you could not use the MK4 coach with Class 43. Guy Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Super Guard on December 28, 2009, 18:49:42 I believe (but will be happy to be corrected!) that structurally the MK3 coaches are fine to a certain extent so just a load more would need to be made, perhaps with automatic doors (or at the very least, doors which can be opened from the inside! As an aside, I've noticed many times that there is a metal plate screwed on to the doors on the insides where the handle is; why can't they put handles on the inside as well as the outside?) If you ever try to open a locked HST door from the outside, you can potentially leave it "on the catch", where the door is locked, but slightly open (not as dramatic as i'm putting it), but it's a safety risk all the same, hence why a TM should visually check every door to ensure it is fully closed and why dispatchers will stop a departing train if they see a door 'on the catch'. Now in this day and age of the Nanny State and some members of the public lacking in common sense, it was probably a requirement to remove the internal handles. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: JayMac on December 28, 2009, 19:42:24 Does the central locking activate if a door is on the catch? Does the TM have an indication on a door panel to show central locking activation? Forgive me if I'm being na^ve, but if there is an indication and the train moves off with a door 'on the catch' then the fault lies with the TM for mistakenly giving 'two' to the driver.
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: John R on December 28, 2009, 19:52:45 Yes, the Central Locking does activate even with a door on the catch otherwise the TM would have a fail safe way of checking.
You could criticise that, but remember the installation as is was very costly but has (on the evidence to date) completely removed the risk of doors opening and people falling out. In hindsight, one of the most cost effective safety improvements in terms of lives saved. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: JayMac on December 28, 2009, 19:56:34 Thanks JohnR. Apologies to any TM's out there for my assumptions.
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: caliwag on December 28, 2009, 21:04:37 Well you're wrong. I have been on an HST from KX to Newcastle that left Peterboro with (luckily) a trailing door open. I set off to the buffet from First and the train was battering along at 90+.
I just slammed it shut, but quizzed the SC who said...Aye it happens sometimes, thanks for closing it...GNER days... ::) Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Chris from Nailsea on December 28, 2009, 21:12:39 In the past, we have had a very educational discussion on the subject of opening HST doors from inside the carriage: see http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=1490.msg9638#msg9638 ;)
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: John R on December 28, 2009, 21:49:31 Well you're wrong. I have been on an HST from KX to Newcastle that left Peterboro with (luckily) a trailing door open. I set off to the buffet from First and the train was battering along at 90+. I just slammed it shut, but quizzed the SC who said...Aye it happens sometimes, thanks for closing it...GNER days... ::) Sorry, who's "you're" in you're wrong? If it were me then my comment was meant to say that doors can remain on the catch with the CL activated, and thus the TM can indeed despatch a train in a potentially unsafe state. Though the number of fatalities from people falling from trains has fallen to nil over several years, so despite this flaw the system has been a major improvement in passenger rail safety. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: super tm on December 28, 2009, 22:04:24 Does the central locking activate if a door is on the catch? Does the TM have an indication on a door panel to show central locking activation? Forgive me if I'm being na^ve, but if there is an indication and the train moves off with a door 'on the catch' then the fault lies with the TM for mistakenly giving 'two' to the driver. If the door is on the catch the CDL will hold it closed. It cannot come open. This is how the system is designed. However there is no detection system to show this so it is possible to give two with a door on the catch or even open. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Henry on December 29, 2009, 08:39:53 Totally unacceptable in my opinion. As much as I like the HST's, in their current form are they not life expired in 10 years (i.e. slam doors)? Seem to remember SWT had to replace their slam door stock a few years back. Surely the cost of modification wouldn't be practical ? Current climate or not, I believe that doing nothing is not an option. Sometimes you wonder if the Government realise their is a world outside the M25. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Tim on December 29, 2009, 09:59:36 I thought that the "on-catch" problem was actually a safety feature caused by the door mechanism having two catches. When properly closed both catches are used and when "on catch" only the first catch is engaged. Your car doors have a very similar system. Both catches are obviously safer than one mainly because the door is less likely to fly open if there is a single catch failure (caused by door malfunction or impact of a crash), but a door "on catch" is equally safe to a single catch door and is not an immediate threat to life especially when the CDL is engaged because it is very unlilely to open by just being lent on.
Whilst a design from scratch would doubtless have CDL only working when both catches were closed, and whilst manual doors have obvious drawbacks in terms of hassle and delay for dispatch staff and passengers, I do not think that there is a significant safety problem. Remember that most doors are not left on catch and that most that are are spotted by the TM or platform staff and sorted (and there is the experimental yellow diamond to help with this) and that even if a door was locked on catch the chances of it opening in transit are very remote. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Not from Brighton on December 29, 2009, 10:06:23 I rode around on quite a few different types of stock on the continent a couple of years back. I think that the Mk3s compare very favourably to anything else in Europe. In general, stock on the continent seems to be much older than that found here in the UK. The TGVs in particular are nothing special on the inside. Loco-haul seems to be very common on all but the most high profile routes.
I think if they could just get the TM/PA system combination to work the mk3s would be on a par with anything else in europe for many years to come. Clearly you can't compare the performance of the diesel HST with electric stock on the continent. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Tim on December 29, 2009, 11:00:17 truth is all this talk of electrification will have put ROSCO off investing in desiel stock (especially mainline stock) so an HST life extension is entirely sensible.
The next government will and must cut spending and rail will not be immune from this. The best we can hope for is that it is done intellegently. Life extension of HSTs instead of the unproven desiel and bimode IEP trains might be intellegent. I'd much rather put up with drafty mark 3 for another decade than have the network or services cut back. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: woody on December 30, 2009, 10:55:24 Ultimately trains are only as good as the infrastructure they run on,compromise is therefore going to be the name of the game on our railways as public sector spending cuts and rising TOC franchise premiums take their toll.A re-engineered HST though not an ideal solution running on upgraded infrastructure is in the circumstances preferable to a inadequate new train running on inadequate infrastructure.
Its 33 years since the first HST power cars entered service,unfortunately even today 125mph still remains unatainable anywhere away trom the core Paddington/Bristol route and in some parts of the FGW network only half that speed is possible so what money is available needs to be spent wisely on train and infrastructure improvements.The reason we are where we are now is because when the money was available it was squandered a process that started with the 1955 modernisation plan and has continued right up to today as the true costs of John Majors botched rail privatisation have emerged Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Chris from Nailsea on December 30, 2009, 12:33:26 A topical news article, from the Gloucester Citizen (http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/gloucestershireheadlines/inquiry-train-door-incident/article-1655888-detail/article.html):
Quote Call for inquiry after train door incident A politician is demanding an inquiry after a man was almost thrown from a train when the door flew open mid-journey in the Cotswolds. Gloucester councillor Andrew Gravells was travelling to the city from London on a First Great Western service this month when a door on one of the carriages opened. The incident happened as the train travelled between Kemble station, near Cirencester, and the station in Stroud. Mr Gravells said a young passenger tried to get it closed again and was almost thrown from the train as it went through a tunnel. He said: "If anyone had been stood by the door when it flew open they wouldn't have had a chance of surviving, especially while the train was travelling through the tunnel. There should be a trip device in place to stop trains from leaving a station if the door isn't securely locked. Luckily nobody was injured this time but if the train had been packed it could have been a different, tragic story." Mr Gravells said he believed the man in question, who had a lucky escape when he tried to close the door, was called Noel. He added that after the train stopped and the door was closed again, the driver of the train was forced to walk through a tunnel to get it moving. He said: "Because the train driver couldn't make contact with the signal operators, he had to leave the train and walk to the end of the tunnel to get the signals altered." Meanwhile, rail bosses have said they will launch an investigation. A First Great Western spokesman confirmed the door was left open on the service on December 9. He said: "This should never have happened and, although no one was injured, we are treating the matter very seriously. "We've reported the incident to the Office of Rail Regulation and the Rail Accident Investigation Branch. "When we were alerted to the incident the train was stopped immediately and the door was locked out of use." Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: inspector_blakey on December 30, 2009, 13:53:26 There's a good reason why there are stickers by the doors saying "if the door is not properly cloed and the train is moving, do not attempt to close it but use the emergency alarm located in the saloon"!
Internal door handles have never been regarded as a good idea because they do greatly increase the chances of a door being opened by mistake (think small child wandering around in the vestibule and fiddling with the latch...as well as many othe possibilities). BR did fit some mark I stock (both loco-hauled and EMU) with internal door handles but these are a completely different design from the outside handles and so stiff (to reduce the chances of accidental door opening) that you need pretty stong fingers to open them. The net result is that most people ended up using the outside handles anyway and I think, although I'm open to correction, that the locks with internal handles were ultimately replaced. Bear in mind that these vehucles never had CDL. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: TheLastMinute on December 30, 2009, 23:44:57 Exactly Blakey.
There was a nasty incident back in February 2008 on the Nene Valley Railway when a 2 year old child fell from moving ex-Danish carriage that had internal handles. The fall gave the child some cuts and bruises but thankfully nothing more serious. The RAIB report (http://www.raib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/080717_R152008_Orton.pdf) concluded that it was most likely the child used the handles to pull themselves up from sitting on the floor and thereby opening the door. A vivid example as to why internal handles on trains are bad. TLM Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Tim on December 31, 2009, 14:54:17 BR did fit some mark I stock (both loco-hauled and EMU) with internal door handles but these are a completely different design from the outside handles and so stiff (to reduce the chances of accidental door opening) that you need pretty stong fingers to open them. The net result is that most people ended up using the outside handles anyway and I think, although I'm open to correction, that the locks with internal handles were ultimately replaced. Bear in mind that these vehucles never had CDL. Some of the old EMU's that worked on the Glossop branch when I was young had these stiff internal handles. A later batch of similar stock then arrived with what looked like the same locks but with the internal handle (which was never a proper handle to turn, more a very stiff slider) plated over. My habbit was to use the external handle always. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Electric train on December 31, 2009, 15:13:28 The Mk1 (classic) DMUs had an internal door handle. I don't recall the Mk2 main line stock having internal handles but the did have the classic T external handles and the windows did drop right down the biggest complaints when the HSDT Mk3's came in were the conventional L shaped handle which has to be push right down to get past the safety catch and the fact that the windows don't drop right down.
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Btline on December 31, 2009, 17:15:32 The Mk1 (classic) DMUs had an internal door handle. I don't recall the Mk2 main line stock having internal handles but the did have the classic T external handles and the windows did drop right down the biggest complaints when the HSDT Mk3's came in were the conventional L shaped handle which has to be push right down to get past the safety catch and the fact that the windows don't drop right down. The worst doors to "get used to" are old GWR doors, where slamming them doesn't lock them. You push them to, and then turn the T handle to vertical. The number of times I've seen people slamming and slamming GWR doors on preserved lines, only to be told by staff "they're Grea' Westerrrnn doorrrrs! You 'av t' turn handle after-t closing!!" I have to say, the HST doors are a pain to open sometimes! Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: onthecushions on December 31, 2009, 19:24:37 .....and of course the late lamented CIG's and VEP's of the Southern had side moving inside door handles. The doors were generally open at 3mph with 10-15% customers off before dead stand. That way they could handle a 30s station stop with a 12 car set and 1 guard. Passengers shut the doors also. I've noticed French train crews opening sliding/swing doors after start/ before stand. The Sydney harbour ferries had a habit of passing close to but not mooring at jetties. The Aussie office girls were very impressive in being able to jump across from a moving vessel (in rough water) and in tight skirts and heels... Happy h&s new year, OTC Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: John R on December 31, 2009, 19:25:53 The Sydney harbour ferries had a habit of passing close to but not mooring at jetties. The Aussie office girls were very impressive in being able to jump across from a moving vessel (in rough water) and in tight skirts and heels... Not that you were looking of course. ;) Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: devon_metro on December 31, 2009, 19:33:07 .....and of course the late lamented CIG's and VEP's of the Southern had side moving inside door handles. The doors were generally open at 3mph with 10-15% customers off before dead stand. That way they could handle a 30s station stop with a 12 car set and 1 guard. Passengers shut the doors also. I've noticed French train crews opening sliding/swing doors after start/ before stand. The Sydney harbour ferries had a habit of passing close to but not mooring at jetties. The Aussie office girls were very impressive in being able to jump across from a moving vessel (in rough water) and in tight skirts and heels... Happy h&s new year, OTC Didn't think CIGs had internal doors, or is that a retro fit to the Lymington examples? Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: DanielP on January 02, 2010, 01:23:44 I think that Mk2s were drop down windows with door handles on the outside only.
I also remember those funny internal door handles on the Southern Electrics- it was nice to be able to get out of a train without too much kerfuffle. In Italy, the door interlocking in UIC-Z stock turns off below 3mph automatically so that you can open the doors before the train stops (you can hear it click like on the HSTs)- this even occurs at signals! This is why you often hear of mass passenger revolts in Italy when trains get held up for ages- this is because they can get out and form an unruly mob if necessary! I can't really image UK passengers being trusted with a system like this! As for refitting the HSTs, the latest Virgin and FGW refits are far from shabby and show that the good old Mk3 is still good for frontline. I particularly think the idea of ditching one toilet per coach on the Virgin refits was a good idea. However- I thought that corrosion was going to be a terminal problem soon. They are surely going to need a major refit, which will be expensive and trigger all the DDA regulations etc. It's a shame that noone can get all those spare MK3 coaches (including the Irish ones), DVTs and Class 90s / 67s togther to solve medium term problems- obviously, a certain degree of refitting would be necessary, but at least we wouldn't be fighting over 150s! Any other country in Europe would have managed to get something together. Don't forget that all those aircon Mk2s are happily trudling around New Zealand in various states of refitment- why can't we manage something like that here? Daniel Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: Henry on January 02, 2010, 06:58:59 Slightly off subject, but all this talk of Southern region reminded me of my days working in London. Commuting Hampshire to Waterloo, opening the doors and half way down the concourse before the train had even stopped. Dodging the Royal Mail, Evening Standard vans who took no prisoners and finally boarding a Routemaster bus still doing 5-10 m.p.h. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: FlyingDutchman on January 02, 2010, 12:09:17 I been to NZ and see the Nk2 Coach several years ago. They done a good job
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NZR_British_Rail_Mark_2_carriage The Capital Connection and Wairarapa Coaches Look nice Wairarapa Coaches http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Metlink_SW_3945_at_Masterton_Station.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DCP4818_and_SW_set_at_Carterton_station_with_Waiararapa_Connection.jpg Guy Guy Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: hornbeam on January 02, 2010, 12:34:50 The HST is in my option the best thing ever built by BR. However, the one thing that concerns me is capacity. If they are kept longer, how will they cope when passenger numbers go up in the future? One would hope if they are replaced by electrics that they would buy extra units/ or they would be longer. Also if they do up-rate the power cars and fit pug doors this will speed things up but not by much. The whole point of the Reading rebuild is to increase capacity but at this rate there won^t be any extra paths used as there won^t be enough stock!
Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: paul7575 on January 02, 2010, 13:07:24 Capacity is behind all the proposals, and often (ISTM) forgotten about in the discussions. For instance on the ECML, there is a view that the 10 car all-electric IEP isn't needed as the Mk4/91 sets are fine as they are.
But the capacity uplift per train is 25% AFAICT. Based purely on length of train it's 207m (9x23m Mk4) vs 260m (10x26m IEP) - and that's before they rejig the proportions of first/standard, bin the restaurant car, fit thinner seats etc etc. I'd be surprised if there wasn't to be a 30% increase in seats on that basis. Paul Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: FarWestJohn on April 15, 2011, 13:09:05 Forgive me if this has already been reported but I have been away.
The current Railway Gazette has an interesting write up on HST extension until 2035: http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/industry-technology/single-view/view/hsts-are-good-to-2035.html Part: With life-extension likely, it was decided to apply Finite Element Analysis to the Mk III bodyshell, to determine the fatigue life and identify weak points. Forces were measured using an instrumented FGW vehicle and fed into the model, which was run for 60 years. The work showed that the Mk III body structure is 'a lot better than expected' and can run safely to at least 2035. The modelling had a built-in margin of error, because present-day loads are greater than in the past and the HSTs are operated more intensively. Only four weld locations were identified as potential problem areas, and these will be monitored during future overhauls. Crack propa^gation analysis was also carried out. Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: The SprinterMeister on April 16, 2011, 23:32:19 If they electrify the Line to Plymouth they could use some of the 225. Can some one tell me why you could not use the MK4 coach with Class 43. Guy The ETS systems and multiple working are not compatible. 91's and MK4 / DVT's use TDM (Time division multiplex) for the multi control and standard LHCS ETS systems. Even when the loco is leading the set the E70 (brake pipe pressure control unit) on the trailing DVT is controlled via the TDM from the locomotive at the front end. HST's use 415 volt 50Hz AC three phase ETS and have their own bespoke 36 way multi system running the length of the train so that the power cars can work in multi with each other. A single class 43 power car on its own would struggle pushing and pulling a full Mk4 set plus DVT over the Devon Banks anyway.... Title: Re: HST-Dft proposes life extension! Post by: The SprinterMeister on April 16, 2011, 23:38:23 Build new HSTs? Far too many safety regulations since the mid-70's to make that worth considering. You might as well start out from scratch than try and make a 40 year old design meet modern safety standards. By all means keep the same principal of the design though, i.e. engines separated from carriages. Which seems to me a far better option than the Japanese Voyager clone with pantograph option which seems to be the current line of thinking. In fact further life extention / upgrading of the HST fleet and forgetting the electrification (until such time something half decent can be found to run under the wires) would probably provide a better product for the passengers.... This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. Views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net |