Potential future uses for class 68 & Mk5 sets?

[The Planner]

This thread has gone quiet for a while, guessing no new news.
I was reading the thread about the ORR approving the Grand Union proposal for London Euston - Stirling services. The decision letter states the services will utilize "existing off-lease diesel trains". Posts in the thread stated that no rolling stock had been decided yet, and therefore the "likely Class 22x" was not confirmed.
By any chance, could Grand Union utilize Mk5s for this service? With a proposed start date of June 2025, I'm wondering if there is a chance that no 22xs could be available in time.

The paths require 110mph stock, so a 68 isnt going to work.

 

[dgl]

It's probably a 99% chance that they will go to Chiltern as they will need the least amount of training and loco hauled train familiarization, plus the locomotives are already known to them. Assuming the replacement body panel plan for the locomotives works then the noise issues should at least be abated somewhat. Of the main TOC's the only other operators with experience in locomotive hauled stock are LNER and GWR, LNER won't want any stock that can't go at 125Mph (though I assume the coaches could do it if recertified) and I understand GWR have other plans (plus probably have a greater reliance on sprinter differentials). I guess we'll wait until TPE's lease on them actually expires and an announcement will be made.

It certainly won't be any of the new OA operators as their applications/approvals are based on 22x's.

 

[warwickshire]

Does anyone know when the Mk5 are actually off lease. Plus the latest storage locations for the 68s and Mk5 sets please?.
Thank You.

 

[Clansman]

Additionally with GU putting in for Edinburgh to Wales services, there is an element of trying to have a homogeneous fleet that can serve both to keep resourcing costs down to a minimum.

Also it is worth noting that paths have only been granted for 5 years, so utilising any new builds or Mk5s that would incur a higher cost than a 20 year old sweated asset on its way out, would require a huge incentive that isn't going to be found by viewing the rolling stock through a passenger or enthusiast perspective.

 

[43102EMR]

Does anyone know when the Mk5 are actually off lease. Plus the latest storage locations for the 68s and Mk5 sets please?.
Thank You.

On lease until May according to Clinnick

 

[Peter Mugridge]

It's probably a 99% chance that they will go to Chiltern as they will need the least amount of training and loco hauled train familiarization, plus the locomotives are already known to them. Assuming the replacement body panel plan for the locomotives works then the noise issues should at least be abated somewhat. Of the main TOC's the only other operators with experience in locomotive hauled stock are LNER and GWR, LNER won't want any stock that can't go at 125Mph (though I assume the coaches could do it if recertified) and I understand GWR have other plans (plus probably have a greater reliance on sprinter differentials). I guess we'll wait until TPE's lease on them actually expires and an announcement will be made.

It certainly won't be any of the new OA operators as their applications/approvals are based on 22x's.

Huw Merriman has recently stated ( either in Parliament or to a Transport select Committee ) that he is pushing for Chiltern to have the Mk5 sets "from next year" ( which presumably means the May 2025 timetable change? ).

 

[warwickshire]

On lease until May according to Clinnick

Thank you.

 

[jagardner1984]

Huw Merriman has recently stated ( either in Parliament or to a Transport select Committee ) that he is pushing for Chiltern to have the Mk5 sets "from next year" ( which presumably means the May 2025 timetable change? ).

Always good to promise something you definitely won’t be held accountable for delivery on

 

[Class93]

Slightly off topic - did the MK3/?4s go to scrap after being moved on from Chiltern? And I assume the locos returned to freight services?

 

[Peter Sarf]

Slightly off topic - did the MK3/?4s go to scrap after being moved on from Chiltern? And I assume the locos returned to freight services?

The Mk3s are still in use at Chiltern, never been Mk4s there. The future has not happened yet.

 

[12LDA28C]

Slightly off topic - did the MK3/?4s go to scrap after being moved on from Chiltern? And I assume the locos returned to freight services?

The only Mk3s to be scrapped from Chiltern were those from the slam-door set which was withdrawn from service a few years ago. Chiltern has never operated Mk4s.

 

[warwickshire]

It has been reported by a op on the mk5 updates thread, that TP07 actually returned to Longsight, for servicing on Thursday 29th March 2024, with its original branding still on it, actually in still its original Tpex Livery, any reason why this has?, But two other sets TP04, TPO3 x2, went back previously unbranded instead,
1. Is it possible these are possibly decommissioned or going off lease early.
2. Is it possible a couple or so parties ie Tocs or Open Access have put in a Tender For them.
3. Is it possible the Mk5s was meant for a Toc, but in past couple of weeks something has happened, has the bid fell through, ie no longer happening ie cost, Dft and Toc for a bid saying no, ie it costs to much due to amount of works needed on them, due to previous failures and hence why they finished on Transpennie Express. Maybe the Chiltern Railways option???? But again that option was speculation or still could be???. For example

 

[Peter Sarf]

It has been reported by a op on the mk5 updates thread, that TP07 actually returned to Longsight, for servicing on Thursday 29th March 2024, with its original branding still on it, actually in still its original Tpex Livery, any reason why this has?, But two other sets TP04, TPO3 x2, went back previously unbranded instead,
1. Is it possible these are possibly decommissioned or going off lease early.
2. Is it possible a couple or so parties ie Tocs or Open Access have put in a Tender For them.
3. Is it possible the Mk5s was meant for a Toc, but in past couple of weeks something has happened, has the bid fell through, ie no longer happening ie cost, Dft and Toc for a bid saying no, ie it costs to much due to amount of works needed on them, due to previous failures and hence why they finished on Transpennie Express. Maybe the Chiltern Railways option???? But again that option was speculation or still could be???. For example

4 No time/urgency (yet) to de-brand ?.

 

[Jacob Porrett]

I just want to clear something up if I may regarding Chiltern and the ex TPE MK5s. I've hears two different stories, No 1 - Chiltern to not use the ex TPE MK5s the deal is off because of the cost and practicalities. Story no. 2 - Chiltern will use the MK5s on their Birmingham to London routes and use the other units elsewhere.

I'm rather conflicted at the moment so if anyone knows anymore or could but my mind at ease that would be much appreciated.

 

[JonathanH]

I'm rather conflicted at the moment so if anyone knows anymore or could but my mind at ease that would be much appreciated.

What is the reason to worry? Can't you just put it out of your mind and wait for an official announcement?

 

[12LDA28C]

I just want to clear something up if I may regarding Chiltern and the ex TPE MK5s. I've hears two different stories, No 1 - Chiltern to not use the ex TPE MK5s the deal is off because of the cost and practicalities. Story no. 2 - Chiltern will use the MK5s on their Birmingham to London routes and use the other units elsewhere.

I'm rather conflicted at the moment so if anyone knows anymore or could but my mind at ease that would be much appreciated.

Nothing has been agreed or ruled out yet. The DfT will have the final say one way or the other, regardless of any aspirations Chiltern may have to take on the ex-TPE Mk5s. You'll just have to wait and see what happens like everyone else. My advice is not to listen to rumours.

 

[The exile]

I just want to clear something up if I may regarding Chiltern and the ex TPE MK5s. I've hears two different stories, No 1 - Chiltern to not use the ex TPE MK5s the deal is off because of the cost and practicalities. Story no. 2 - Chiltern will use the MK5s on their Birmingham to London routes and use the other units elsewhere.

I'm rather conflicted at the moment so if anyone knows anymore or could but my mind at ease that would be much appreciated.

That is the nature of speculative discussions. By definition there are no hard and fast facts- or at the very least only indicators that can be interpreted in very different ways.

 

[Snow1964]

Nothing has been agreed or ruled out yet. The DfT will have the final say one way or the other, regardless of any aspirations Chiltern may have to take on the ex-TPE Mk5s. You'll just have to wait and see what happens like everyone else. My advice is not to listen to rumours.

The one factual thing is that the latest DfT procurement pipeline spreadsheet (reissued yesterday 10th May), now has 2 Chiltern tenders (new or used), but both seem to be for multiple unit stock (to replace those currently leased from Angel trains), either BEMUs or low emissions multiple units, clearly either or (not both) as both for same 30-70 units

There simply isn't any mention of long distance stock for Birmingham services on the spreadsheet. So either the mk3s (some of which are over 45 years old) are being replaced by DMUs or DfT already has a plan for something else.

Realistically the only longer distance rolling stock can only be mk5s or 175s or spare 221s or 222s. (and none of 175, 221 or 222 could be described as low emissions, which is required, so can rule them out)

Future commercial contracts for DfT and partners

Listing of upcoming Department for Transport (DfT) and associated bodies commercial contracts – known as the commercial pipeline – for which bidders may apply.

www.gov.uk

 

[172007]

The DaFT spreadsheet your quoting is "Future". The tender for upto 70 vehicles that may involve the 68's closed in March so would not figure on this tender. The 70 vehicles in this tender whilst the same number could be a typo or anything.

The main issue with 68's is noise at Marylebone. The fact that not a single 68 has a modification to reduce the sound and I would have thought it there was one we would have heard about it meant the Mk5's are a non starter.

 

[JonathanH]

The main issue with 68's is noise at Marylebone.

Yes, although that issue exists whether a 68 is hauling a Mk3 set or a Mk5 set.

The subsidiary issue remains whether it is worth hiring Mk5s for a few services a day, where they offer less capacity than the Mk3s, and subbing them for 168s means a guard needs to be provided who isn't necessary south of Banbury on a 168. The cost of reforming the Mk5 sets would no doubt be recognised in any lease costs. I'd imagine using Mk5s simply doesn't stack up from a financial perspective.

 

[12LDA28C]

The one factual thing is that the latest DfT procurement pipeline spreadsheet (reissued yesterday 10th May), now has 2 Chiltern tenders (new or used), but both seem to be for multiple unit stock (to replace those currently leased from Angel trains), either BEMUs or low emissions multiple units, clearly either or (not both) as both for same 30-70 units

There simply isn't any mention of long distance stock for Birmingham services on the spreadsheet. So either the mk3s (some of which are over 45 years old) are being replaced by DMUs or DfT already has a plan for something else.

Realistically the only longer distance rolling stock can only be mk5s or 175s or spare 221s or 222s. (and none of 175, 221 or 222 could be described as low emissions, which is required, so can rule them out)

Future commercial contracts for DfT and partners

Listing of upcoming Department for Transport (DfT) and associated bodies commercial contracts – known as the commercial pipeline – for which bidders may apply.

www.gov.uk

Both those tenders are for brand new (or converted) stock. The previously-issued document which detailed Chiltern's requirement for cascaded stock to be introduced in 2024 has now closed with options currently being considered by Chiltern and the DfT.

The DaFT spreadsheet your quoting is "Future". The tender for upto 70 vehicles that may involve the 68's closed in March so would not figure on this tender. The 70 vehicles in this tender whilst the same number could be a typo or anything.

The main issue with 68's is noise at Marylebone. The fact that not a single 68 has a modification to reduce the sound and I would have thought it there was one we would have heard about it meant the Mk5's are a non starter.

Unless you have spoken to the relevant people at DRS or Beacon Rail, how could you possibly know that no Class 68s have been modified? There may well be no external evidence of such a modification to a locomotive with any changes being made internally.

Yes, although that issue exists whether a 68 is hauling a Mk3 set or a Mk5 set.

The subsidiary issue remains whether it is worth hiring Mk5s for a few services a day, where they offer less capacity than the Mk3s, and subbing them for 168s means a guard needs to be provided who isn't necessary south of Banbury on a 168. The cost of reforming the Mk5 sets would no doubt be recognised in any lease costs. I'd imagine using Mk5s simply doesn't stack up from a financial perspective.

The Mk3s are life-expired and becoming increasingly difficult to maintain and source parts for. That's the main consideration here and the reason why an alternative is being sought at the earliest opportunity. If the use of Mk5s didn't 'stack up from a financial perspective' why on earth would Chiltern be interested in taking them on?

 

[172007]

Both those tenders are for brand new (or converted) stock. The previously-issued document which detailed Chiltern's requirement for cascaded stock to be introduced in 2024 has now closed with options currently being considered by Chiltern and the DfT.



Unless you have spoken to the relevant people at DRS or Beacon Rail, how could you possibly know that no Class 68s have been modified? There may well be no external evidence of such a modification to a locomotive with any changes being made internally.



The Mk3s are life-expired and becoming increasingly difficult to maintain and source parts for. That's the main consideration here and the reason why an alternative is being sought at the earliest opportunity. If the use of Mk5s didn't 'stack up from a financial perspective' why on earth would Chiltern be interested in taking them on?

Unless you have spoken to the relevant people at DRS or Beacon Rail, how could you possibly know that no Class 68s have been modified? There may well be no external evidence of such a modification to a locomotive with any changes being made internally.


Be sensible please. Such a modification would be audible to the average persons hearing. They sound the same as they always have.

 

[12LDA28C]

Be sensible please. Such a modification would be audible to the average persons hearing. They sound the same as they always have.

I'm being perfectly sensible. Have you listened carefully to every single Class 68 recently? I very much doubt it. There is of course no reason why it has to be a Chiltern 68 that receives such a modification and any 68 could be used as the 'guinea pig' for trialling such a mod. In fact it would make more sense for an ex-TPE loco that currently has no work to be used, whilst it's unproductive.

 

[87015]

Yes, although that issue exists whether a 68 is hauling a Mk3 set or a Mk5 set.

The subsidiary issue remains whether it is worth hiring Mk5s for a few services a day, where they offer less capacity than the Mk3s, and subbing them for 168s means a guard needs to be provided who isn't necessary south of Banbury on a 168. The cost of reforming the Mk5 sets would no doubt be recognised in any lease costs. I'd imagine using Mk5s simply doesn't stack up from a financial perspective.

I'm being perfectly sensible. Have you listened carefully to every single Class 68 recently? I very much doubt it. There is of course no reason why it has to be a Chiltern 68 that receives such a modification and any 68 could be used as the 'guinea pig' for trialling such a mod. In fact it would make more sense for an ex-TPE loco that currently has no work to be used, whilst it's unproductive.

l

Yes, although that issue exists whether a 68 is hauling a Mk3 set or a Mk5 set.

The subsidiary issue remains whether it is worth hiring Mk5s for a few services a day, where they offer less capacity than the Mk3s, and subbing them for 168s means a guard needs to be provided who isn't necessary south of Banbury on a 168. The cost of reforming the Mk5 sets would no doubt be recognised in any lease costs. I'd imagine using Mk5s simply doesn't stack up from a financial perspective.

as said previously and you ignored, Mk5+68 can go DOO

 

[Energy]

as said previously and you ignored, Mk5+68 can go DOO

What would be needed? Chiltern south of Banbury is monitors/mirrors so I presume the angles need to be fixed.

 

[12LDA28C]

What would be needed? Chiltern south of Banbury is monitors/mirrors so I presume the angles need to be fixed.

Rather more than that I would assume. Does Chiltern's safety case even allow for LHCS to be worked DOO?

 

[Energy]

Rather more than that I would assume. Does Chiltern's safety case even allow for LHCS to be worked DOO?

Is it public? I believe the limit is 9 cars but much more seems to be known than that. If any new build stock is ordered then I reckon DOO cameras would be specified, I'm not sure how this would be handled on loco-hauled stock.

 

[12LDA28C]

Is it public? I believe the limit is 9 cars but much more seems to be known than that. If any new build stock is ordered then I reckon DOO cameras would be specified, I'm not sure how this would be handled on loco-hauled stock.

No, but DOO is for units only. All LHCS runs with a Train Manager unless ECS.

 

[Snow1964]

Rather more than that I would assume. Does Chiltern's safety case even allow for LHCS to be worked DOO?

Historically they haven't ever had any push-pull stock equipped for DOO, so question has never arisen.

The 68 & mk5 do have the DOO equipment, but Transpennine didn't use it, as their routes were not equipped.

I would guess the mk5 DOO is 3 decades ahead of what Chiltern currently use, so if it can't pass a safety case that the older equipment (currently in use) got through then there is something wrong with the safety rules. Even grandfather rights are not supposed to ban a improved alternative.

 

[A0wen]

So what, the railway has probably been there longer than any of its neighbours.

If I moved next door to a railway what do you think I would expect to hear? Train noise!

You could make the same claim about major airports, yet the airports and airline industry have been working to reduce noise pollution.