Whatever happened to the DART 8200 EMU units?

L1011

I'd also expect the current situation will increase the expectation that public transport should be air conditioned, which the last 8500s are and none of the 8100s

Effects

L1011 wrote: »

I'd also expect the current situation will increase the expectation that public transport should be air conditioned, which the last 8500s are and none of the 8100s

Isn't that what the windows are for:pac:

end of the road

Effects wrote: »

Isn't that what the windows are for:pac:

of course, but this is the modern railway and going forward we probably won't be able to have opening windows on a train as people might fall out of them or something, dispite the fact it would be impossible for them to fit through them.

devnull

goingnowhere wrote: »

8100 are rubbish in reliability numbers compared to the 8500, nowhere close.

8500 are stainless steel so don't have any corrosion issues and are based directly off designs in use large fleets in Japan. The LHB units were always unique, the current refurbed version is a Frankenstein train of bits from Siemens, LHB, GEC, Wabtec.

They're getting on in years certainly but even as someone who doesn't like bench seats and generally doesn't prefer older stock in most cases, they are for sure the train that feels the most suited to the work that they do. They feel like a real inner suburban train whereas the others feel like an outer suburban train.

The whole build quality inside since they were refurbished is really good. You wouldn't think that the interior refurbishment was 15 years ago. The Passenger information system is also far better quality, although the software update where they made everything totally bilingual on the announcements 3 years or so ago resulted in things being announced at the wrong time which was never an issue before.

devnull

end of the road wrote: »

of course, but this is the modern railway and going forward we probably won't be able to have opening windows on a train as people might fall out of them or something, dispite the fact it would be impossible for them to fit through them.

Windows are not needed when trains have a good and reliable air-conditioning system.

The problem of not having any windows is only a problem when trains are specified with weak and unreliable air conditioning.

Vic_08

devnull wrote: »

Windows are not needed when trains have a good and reliable air-conditioning system.

The problem of not having any windows is only a problem when trains are specified with weak and unreliable air conditioning.

Having opening windows can also be a cause of non-functioning AC, once the backup of opening windows is there the AC becomes an optional fix for maintenance rather than something expected to be operational on every carriage every day.

This situation has plagued most of the UK 158 and 166 fleet for decades, "emergency" ventilation windows are fitted so a huge % of the fleet spend most of the summer with broken AC.

TheBoyConor

They are basically and EMU version of the 2700s. Otherwise they are the same.

I have often said it, but I wonder could IE look into the potential to re-introduce the 8200 and 2700s in modified form as hauled stock? This would circumvent the issues with drivetrain as they would be just modifying the braking system and removing the power and motor equipment. Prefereably they could replace the bogies with BT10 units as used on the MkIIIs which had excellent ride quality. Perhaps there are still some to be recliamed from any remaining MkIIIs.
I envisage that they would be outfitted for push-pull which isn't a massive ask as the set ends already have a divers cab.
I think they would go well as short haul commuter trains if hauled by something like a baby GM, some of which are still perfectly servicable but ITG owned. I can imagine IE leasing back a few baby GMs which would not cost a fortune, and would also be a handy revenue stream for the ITG plus having the locomotives kept operational and maintained by IE. Personally, I would like to see the converted sets hauled by a C201 Metrovick of which there are a 2 in or very close to full working order condition, but realistically they are too far long out of action to be brought back into service.
Failing either, I expect that they could be hauled by an 071 or new IE201 of which there are plenty on hand. In this configuration with high speed locomotives I envision their potential use on more long distance routes, perhaps the Westport line.
It is not all that far fetched an idea, I mean there is precedent for it. The AEC railcars were similarly modified for a new career as hauled stock and were quite successful. I have no doubt that it would be far cheaper than purchasing brand new trains.

The 27/8200s are far from perfect or even good, but i think it is a terrible waste to scrap stock that is hardly even in it's mid life in railway stock terms.

If they cannot be salvaged, would the ITG or RPSI take on a few?

L1011

The cost of introducing them as hauled stock would not be significantly cheaper than a full refurb; as the days of just making sure they rolled and putting some school chairs down the sides are long gone.

Full rewire, new seating, new toilets (or toilets + tanks at all in the case of the 8200s), new PIS, completely different braking/door control/all other forms of control etc etc. All you're avoiding is motor rework.

So no, that's not happening. And the baby GMs are never coming back for commercial service, nor the Metrovicks, nor any other surreal fantasy. Things are retired for a reason.

SeanW

We're unlikely to go back to loco haulage of commuter and regional services, so we have little need for coaches except on the Cork and Belfast Intercity lines. As to the Sligo and Rosslare lines, hopefully they'll get some more 22ks cascaded from short-haul duties around Dublin with DART upgrades. And I heard a saying years ago "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear" but that's basically what you'd be trying to do turning a small custom fleet of crappy DART cars into long distance coaches. The 2700 DMUs might be better because they were sort of designed for regional service (They had toilets AFAIK) but still in the modern era it would likely be a lot of retrofitting cost for very little reward, relatively speaking. As to Metrovick locomotives ... just ... no.

GT89

Suggesting the metrovicks coming back is surely a wind up

TheBoyConor

Why would you need to rework the doors or toilets on the 2700s? They should all work fine. They'd just need a supply of compressed air to function. And there would be no need to replace all the seats and tables as the layout is already suitable for regional use.

Another option that I could imagine is reintroducing the 2700 fleet and inserting the 8200s as unpowered intermediates. This could be never to work with just wiring changed as most of the mechanicals on both types are identical.

I think if the will was there to go out they could make fine sets. I mean, ie see no problem in spending hundred of millions on far eastern ICRs that are harsh cheap boxes with no character, but the existing stopped fleets and locomotives could be refurbished at some lesser cost.

TheBoyConor

GT89 wrote: »

Suggesting the metrovicks coming back is surely a wind up

Not when there are 4 of them in working order or very close to working order. Most of the time they have nothing to do and are idle and the main job of work is too keep them from seizing up from non use. If they could be brought in for use it would keep them maintained and active and the lease be a source of funds for the ITG .

and it wouldn't necessarily have to be IE running them. You could have a West rail type set up on some lines, for example I could envisage the north tipperary line, and LJ Waterford where a West rail type group could operate the time table with their locos and sets modified for haulage. In an honesty , if it were to be done, I bet they could operate the services at a fraction of the coats that IE claim it takes to run it because they are a bloated inefficient beuraucracy.
The AEC railcars worked well in their hauled configuration for many many years, and the westrail set up worked well for a number of years of it's existence. It was CIE killed it off by strangling it with beuraucracy and fabricated fees.
I think it's a lack of vision and a refusal of IE to consider anything outside of what they've always done. An organization terminally incapable of imagination or innovation.

GT89

TheBoyConor wrote: »

Not when there are 4 of them in working order or very close to working order. Most of the time they have nothing to do and are idle and the main job of work is too keep them from seizing up from non use. If they could be brought in for use it would keep them maintained and active and the lease be a source of funds for the ITG .

and it wouldn't necessarily have to be IE running them. You could have a West rail type set up on some lines, for example I could envisage the north tipperary line, and LJ Waterford where a West rail type group could operate the time table with their locos and sets modified for haulage. In an honesty , if it were to be done, I bet they could operate the services at a fraction of the coats that IE claim it takes to run it because they are a bloated inefficient beuraucracy.
The AEC railcars worked well in their hauled configuration for many many years, and the westrail set up worked well for a number of years of it's existence. It was CIE killed it off by strangling it with beuraucracy and fabricated fees.
I think it's a lack of vision and a refusal of IE to consider anything outside of what they've always done. An organization terminally incapable of imagination or innovation.

Maybe as preserved stock even that seems unlikely but the chances of 1950s locomotives that were withdrawn nearly 30 years ago coming back into regular service is 0

end of the road

GT89 wrote: »

Maybe as preserved stock even that seems unlikely but the chances of 1950s locomotives that were withdrawn nearly 30 years ago coming back into service is 0

exactly, it's never going to happen.
the c 201 class were worked rather hard when they were in service on the dublin suburban, as well as that, having a herritage diesel working on main line services means greater maintenence and spare parts are required to keep them running.
giving them a little run out as they are getting keeps them in working order and allows everything to last a lot longer.

end of the road

from what i hear the AEC pushpull sets weren't a success, apparently it took a lot to keep them going and they had to have maintenence staff on board as well.
not to mention they were in a desperate state for years and even more so by the end, and even as rail cars i believe they were worked rather hard compared to other diesel rail cars of their generation, having to power a number of unpowered coaches on long inter city and regional routes.
the AEC pushpull sets were a stop gap during serious austerity and while interesting to look at pictures of them there is no doubt they were the pits.

the 2700s really were designed for suburban routes, they might look a little better internally then their counterparts in the 26/8/900s but they are a bog standard suburban train and not a very good one.
i don't know if the original intent was for them to operate regional services and they got diverted to suburban, or the fact they were forced on to regional services around 2004 gave the impression that they were designed for regional services, but regional they certainly aren't or at least not in terms of modern expectations by passengers which thankfully are high these days.
why in hell IE should waste money converting them to loco haulage is beyond me, they are aweful rickety heaps of junk, and if they cannot be fixed up as DMUS they should be cut up and be done with it for god sake and the same with the 8200s.

GT89

end of the road wrote: »

from what i hear the AEC pushpull sets weren't a success, apparently it took a lot to keep them going and they had to have maintenence staff on board as well.
not to mention they were in a desperate state for years and even more so by the end, and even as rail cars i believe they were worked rather hard compared to other diesel rail cars of their generation, having to power a number of unpowered coaches on long inter city and regional routes.
the AEC pushpull sets were a stop gap during serious austerity and while interesting to look at pictures of them there is no doubt they were the pits.

the 2700s really were designed for suburban routes, they might look a little better internally then their counterparts in the 26/8/900s but they are a bog standard suburban train and not a very good one.
i don't know if the original intent was for them to operate regional services and they got diverted to suburban, or the fact they were forced on to regional services around 2004 gave the impression that they were designed for regional services, but regional they certainly aren't or at least not in terms of modern expectations by passengers which thankfully are high these days.
why in hell IE should waste money converting them to loco haulage is beyond me, they are aweful rickety heaps of junk, and if they cannot be fixed up as DMUS they should be cut up and be done with it for god sake and the same with the 8200s.

Any attempt to bring the 2700 or 8200s back into would be very much an expensive stop gap solution. IE screwed up badly ordering those trains but they really need to move on and replace them with new stock. No point spending a fortune to fix them up only for them to need to replaced again a few years later might aswell buy new rolling stock with a proper service, waaranty and parts agreement.

end of the road

GT89 wrote: »

Any attempt to bring the 2700 or 8200s back into would be very much an expensive stop gap solution. IE screwed up badly ordering those trains but they really need to move on and replace them with new stock. No point spending a fortune to fix them up only for them to need to replaced again a few years later might aswell buy new rolling stock with a proper service, waaranty and parts agreement.

i would tend to agree.
perhapse the gear boxes engines and generators might be salvagable as spairs for the 26 and 2800s as i believe they are all the same type but that's about all the 2700s are good for now.

tabbey

end of the road wrote: »

from what i hear the AEC pushpull sets weren't a success, apparently it took a lot to keep them going and they had to have maintenence staff on board as well.
not to mention they were in a desperate state for years and even more so by the end, and even as rail cars i believe they were worked rather hard compared to other diesel rail cars of their generation, having to power a number of unpowered coaches on long inter city and regional routes.
the AEC pushpull sets were a stop gap during serious austerity and while interesting to look at pictures of them there is no doubt they were the pits.

.

The AEC railcars were acquired at a time when expectations were low regarding speed and performance. People were accustomed to clapped out steam engines pulling coaches, many of which were over forty years old. The railcars were almost space age in comparison.
The bodies, built by Park Royal, were timber frame, as was the norm in Ireland at the time, and had been the norm in Britain until very shortly before.
They entered service on mainline trains, running sedately across the Midlands. The mainline to Cork and the Rosslare line were more demanding of the 125 hp engines (two per power car, four in a three or four car train).
As Craven coaches became available for mainline trains, in the late 1960s, the railcars mostly gravitated to the suburban service along the east coast. During the summer all sorts of people travelled from the city centre to Bray, killiney seapoint, Howth and Malahide. Sadly some of these had no respect for the railcars, the other passenger or society, and vandalised the coaches. To accommodate larger numbers, the main line seats were replaced with 3+2 bus type seats, upholstered in vinyl/leatherette. These were increasingly slashed. The main damage was in the summer. The rest of the year, suburban trains were mostly used by genteel middle class commuters. With the opening of Kilbarrack in 1969, this began to change.
One year in the late sixties, the CIE annual report mentioned the low average mileage run by the railcars, 26,000 miles per year, or 500 a week, not a lot more than a family car.
In the late 1960s, as the economy was beginning to boom, new housing estates and increasing car ownership led to greater traffic congestion, consequently more commuters turned to rail. One of the four car sets was extended to six cars in the peak hours and a new service started to Dalkey. That was 1968. The following year, most of the suburban trains started running across the city, north/south, before that, there had been only one, Howth to Bray in the morning and Bray to Howth in the evening, (primarily serving the large number of women working in the sweepstakes at ballsbridge). With through running, greater numbers of people used the train.
By 1970, it was obvious that the railcars could not last much longer, they were working more intensely, with doors being closed or slammed every few minutes, morning and evening, as well as abuse in the summer. Increasing passenger loads led to frequent overheating in summer, especially on the Saturday afternoon train to Rosslare, overloaded with people going on holiday to seaside resorts around Gorey. Going up the hill from Wicklow to Rathdrum was very taxing for the railcar engines. Structurally the bodies were deteriorating, as the doors swung, you could even see the door frame twisting.
Electrification started being mentioned but most people wanted new railcars in the interim. The CIE board probably felt that with 34 C class locos rebuilt with 1,100 hp GM engines, it would be a waste not to use them. Thus the decision was made to convert the railcars to push pull vehicles, powered by B 201 locos. As a short term measure, the cars were Spartan to say the least. The internal end of each car, where the cab had been, was covered with plywood, a graffiti artist paradise. To avoid people slashing the seats, solid plastic seats, of the type used in meeting halls, were fixed on metal frames along each side, with standing space in the middle.
Nobody had any respect for these trains. If the scum could not slash the seats, they did their best to make their mark. Lighters were used to burn the plastic seats.

When the DART trains were built, the lesson had been learned, a good standard of vehicle is more respected, leading to less vandalism

91wx763

TheBoyConor wrote: »

They are basically and EMU version of the 2700s. Otherwise they are the same.

I have often said it, but I wonder could IE look into the potential to re-introduce the 8200 and 2700s in modified form as hauled stock? This would circumvent the issues with drivetrain as they would be just modifying the braking system and removing the power and motor equipment. Prefereably they could replace the bogies with BT10 units as used on the MkIIIs which had excellent ride quality. Perhaps there are still some to be recliamed from any remaining MkIIIs.
I envisage that they would be outfitted for push-pull which isn't a massive ask as the set ends already have a divers cab.
I think they would go well as short haul commuter trains if hauled by something like a baby GM, some of which are still perfectly servicable but ITG owned. I can imagine IE leasing back a few baby GMs which would not cost a fortune, and would also be a handy revenue stream for the ITG plus having the locomotives kept operational and maintained by IE. Personally, I would like to see the converted sets hauled by a C201 Metrovick of which there are a 2 in or very close to full working order condition, but realistically they are too far long out of action to be brought back into service.
Failing either, I expect that they could be hauled by an 071 or new IE201 of which there are plenty on hand. In this configuration with high speed locomotives I envision their potential use on more long distance routes, perhaps the Westport line.
It is not all that far fetched an idea, I mean there is precedent for it. The AEC railcars were similarly modified for a new career as hauled stock and were quite successful. I have no doubt that it would be far cheaper than purchasing brand new trains.

The 27/8200s are far from perfect or even good, but i think it is a terrible waste to scrap stock that is hardly even in it's mid life in railway stock terms.

If they cannot be salvaged, would the ITG or RPSI take on a few?

Lad, I thought in the past you were acting the maggot but you seem to be serious. Come on will ya ?

tabbey

tabbey wrote: »

The AEC railcars were acquired at a time when expectations were low .....

When the DART trains were built, the lesson had been learned, a good standard of vehicle is more respected, leading to less vandalism

Thanks for the detailed history of the AEC Railcars. I never knew that much about them.

The Preserved 6111 vehicle was never converted to crappy school chair seating. Was this deliberate or was it a case of they never got around to it?

Jamie2k9

Financially the only option is to order further 22s out of the options if more coaches are required. 2700s are 25 years old now at least a level of modification is possible on 22s in terms engines etc.

TheBoyConor

25 years old is still relatively new in railway stock terms. At least it used to be. Those MTU engines are solid and there will be parts availability for them for many years to come.
22ks would be all well and good if they were good quality. But they do not seem to be finished to a good standard. The seats are hard and uncomfortable, they vibrate uncontrollably and are noisy. That is the main advantage of hauled stock - comfort and smoothness. And they are looking at replacing transmissions already. Surely the cost of that refit would exceed the savings on fuel which are likely to be only very meagre.

Jamie2k9

TheBoyConor wrote: »

25 years old is still relatively new in railway stock terms. At least it used to be. Those MTU engines are solid and there will be parts availability for them for many years to come.
22ks would be all well and good if they were good quality. But they do not seem to be finished to a good standard. The seats are hard and uncomfortable, they vibrate uncontrollably and are noisy. That is the main advantage of hauled stock - comfort and smoothness. And they are looking at replacing transmissions already. Surely the cost of that refit would exceed the savings on fuel which are likely to be only very meagre.

Agree with the seats. The noise/vibration is down to IE. They have done work on the fleet over the last 18 months and gradually sets that were bad for noise/vibration have vastly improved. I hope they have accelerated this work during the restrictions.

Fix the PA issues, use better lighting replacements, reservations and they will be grand.

As for the transmission, don’t know much about it but is the replacement necessary or a choice. Surly normal replacement is 10-15 years anyway?

I just don’t see enough value to bring the 2700s back. The 2600/2800 could be worked a littler harder as well.

hurricanemk1c

Some rather "interesting" comments about here, so let's break some down

The 8100s will be the first to go when the new DART fleet arrives (once fleet replacement starts - I believe the few few are for expansion). They are hated in Fairview, electrically they are on the absolute limit of what they can do and cannot operate in multiple with the 85xx fleet post refurb.

The 8200s (and 2700s) were typical Alstom products of the time. Once the 2700s transferred down to Limerick they really settled down due to the dedication shown by that depot (they could concentrate on them). Electrically again they are a mess. As for compensation, I suspect 8511-8516 were part of it

Replacing bogies means effectively new vehicles as far as certification goes. One thing off the top of my head is the wheel diameters would be different which woulf affect the vehicle gauging, clearance, step height and ride quality. Generating enough BT22 bogies is a non starter as well, with only 36 bogies left between Belmond, stored and Enterprise EGVs. Then there's things like bogie centre castings which are likely to be different (they are between Craven and Mk2 B4 bogies)

Using A, C or 141/181 Classes on push pull work is laughable. Railtours maybe, everyday service work no way. Why would you bring back a 60 year old loco full of non standard and lonh out of production parts?

ICR transmissions are a hot topic, certainly my experience with the ZF test set 22007 showed it was quieter, faster accelerating, less intrustive and when the new power packs arrive (the original engines coming to the end of their lives as expected with high hours) fuel savings are expected to offset the cost within a couple of years. As for the interiors, I've travelled extensively in them and they could be a lot worse. Modern fire and crash regulations mean an IC70 seat will never come back.

91wx763

hurricanemk1c wrote: »

Some rather "interesting" comments about here, so let's break some down

The 8100s will be the first to go when the new DART fleet arrives (once fleet replacement starts - I believe the few few are for expansion). They are hated in Fairview, electrically they are on the absolute limit of what they can do and cannot operate in multiple with the 85xx fleet post refurb.

The 8200s (and 2700s) were typical Alstom products of the time. Once the 2700s transferred down to Limerick they really settled down due to the dedication shown by that depot (they could concentrate on them). Electrically again they are a mess. As for compensation, I suspect 8511-8516 were part of it

Replacing bogies means effectively new vehicles as far as certification goes. One thing off the top of my head is the wheel diameters would be different which woulf affect the vehicle gauging, clearance, step height and ride quality. Generating enough BT22 bogies is a non starter as well, with only 36 bogies left between Belmond, stored and Enterprise EGVs. Then there's things like bogie centre castings which are likely to be different (they are between Craven and Mk2 B4 bogies)

Using A, C or 141/181 Classes on push pull work is laughable. Railtours maybe, everyday service work no way. Why would you bring back a 60 year old loco full of non standard and lonh out of production parts?

ICR transmissions are a hot topic, certainly my experience with the ZF test set 22007 showed it was quieter, faster accelerating, less intrustive and when the new power packs arrive (the original engines coming to the end of their lives as expected with high hours) fuel savings are expected to offset the cost within a couple of years. As for the interiors, I've travelled extensively in them and they could be a lot worse. Modern fire and crash regulations mean an IC70 seat will never come back.

Well said.

The real issue here though is that the enthuiast will have the eternal and somewhat proven belief that "old is good, new is bad".

Getting IÉ or any train operator for that matter to dispel that belief is where the situation needs to go.

But as long as capacity is an issue (and with decarbonisation on top of us that is only going to be even more prevalent !), cheap will be as cheerful as it gets. Buy 100 units for X million euro or buy 50 units to a much higher spec for the same X million euro, guess what will win.

tabbey

Fratello wrote: »

The Preserved 6111 vehicle was never converted to crappy school chair seating. Was this deliberate or was it a case of they never got around to it?

I am not aware of 6111 never being converted to such seating. I thought they all were.
The website of the Downpatrick & County Down railway (downrail.co.uk) confirms my recollection, stating that the seats had been replaced with "plastic stacking chairs".
Of course we could all be mistaken.
I assume when Downpatrick eventually get around to restoring 6111, it will have more conventional seats, although the original railcar seats are long gone.
Incidentally some of the first class seats (12 behind each driver's cab), were reupholstered and fitted in loco hauled composite coaches shortly before the mk ii coaches entered service. Those seats were pure luxury.

GM228

tabbey wrote: »

I am not aware of 6111 never being converted to such seating. I thought they all were.
The website of the Downpatrick & County Down railway (downrail.co.uk) confirms my recollection, stating that the seats had been replaced with "plastic stacking chairs".
Of course we could all be mistaken.
I assume when Downpatrick eventually get around to restoring 6111, it will have more conventional seats, although the original railcar seats are long gone.
Incidentally some of the first class seats (12 behind each driver's cab), were reupholstered and fitted in loco hauled composite coaches shortly before the mk ii coaches entered service. Those seats were pure luxury.

6111 retains it's original seats, or at least a version of them. It was withdrawn without the plastic seats so not sure if there was some sort of restoration before withdrawal or it never got the plastic seats at all?

https://m.facebook.com/groups/171953576291342/permalink/441922199294477/

TheBoyConor

I never suggested that a haulage rebuild of the 27/8200 and modification of older locos to PP would be simple or straightforward - but it does have they potential to be done if there was the will and financial resources put in place to realise it. Most things like braking systems which need modernising can be bought as proprietary systems so wouldn't need to be completely reengineered. While bogie replacements are an option, it is not essential The motors/transmissions could just be detached leaving the original axles to freewheel. Brakes would just need amendments to the pneumatics to allow for their control from the DVT or loco cab. One thing i did not think of to date though was the 1/3 spacing of the doors rather than vestibules. While it would not be ideal for intercity services, it would make them ideal for short regional or commuter use which incidentally also suits the case for the suggested smaller locos.

As for the seating on the 22ks, they are abysmally uncomfortable. You cannot relax in them at all. The MkIII IC70 seats were far superior in comfort terms and any serious intercity coaching stock offering needs to have comfort as a key selling point of the service. That is of major importance to travellers - far more so that stupid stuff that seems to get priority like needlessly verbose PA announcements and talking toilets. Saying that IC70 seats would not be allowed for crash performance is a cop out - (they had a problem with the plastic shattering). There is no need for the exact IC70 to be used, but a modernised equivalent that is crash safe, accessible for those with disabilities, and comfortable. THe current seats and tables are shockingly bad - they are only one step up from the stacking chairs on the AEC 6100s except they have a think layer of cheap upholstery draped over them.
THe lighting is also too harsh. The blue tinge to the lighting and interior fittings is not relaxing at all. I wonder is this a design decision to keep people awake and not have them nodding off in more relaxing and confortable interiors? IMO they should have a more pleasing and relaxing colour scheme of softwer warmer colours and warmer llighting tones.

SeanW

TheBoyConor wrote: »

25 years old is still relatively new in railway stock terms. At least it used to be. Those MTU engines are solid and there will be parts availability for them for many years to come.
22ks would be all well and good if they were good quality. But they do not seem to be finished to a good standard. The seats are hard and uncomfortable, they vibrate uncontrollably and are noisy. That is the main advantage of hauled stock - comfort and smoothness. And they are looking at replacing transmissions already. Surely the cost of that refit would exceed the savings on fuel which are likely to be only very meagre.

If we need locomotive hauled coaches, the UK is throwing out hundreds of HST Mk3s and Intercity 225 Mk4 carriages. It would be much cheaper and better for passengers to buy these and re-gauge them than to try to rebuild those Alstom yokes as coaches.

The reason the 22ks are being rebuilt has nothing to do with the reliability of the existing engines and drivetrains, but has to do with projected fuel economies. In general, they're not bad trains. I liked the old Mark 2s, because you didn't hear any engine noise at all, but IMHO the 22ks are a good second-best.

end of the road

if people are unhappy with 22s then they can send them our way please.
much better then rickety tickety rattle box 29s.
thanks.