New build rolling stock?

With all the talk at the moment about new-builds, it occurred to me the other day - has anyone actually conducted a 'new-build' of a vehicle, as opposed to a locomotive?

I know that there have been very, very thorough rebuilds to the point that 90+% is new, but has anyone gone the whole hog and deliberately started from scratch?

It struck me that a few, just a few, interesting losses to the scrapman could be made anew, for significantly less than the cost of a new loco (just as well, as interest for new coaches/wagons will probably be less). Obviously, there are very valid discussions about saving what we have before we start afresh, but putting those aside for one moment...

The two options that I think are most likely to attract interest are:

1) GWR B Set - I know that something akin to one exists at the GlosWarks, but I mean a proper genuine one.7

2) A fully operating Slip Coach, of any railway, most likely GW however. In fact, heavy alterations to existing carriages, to create something likely to arouse more interest and therefore donations wouldn't be impossible. There are enough Hawksworth bowends in existence but not in service that one could be turned into the last design of Slip.

 

Slip coach is a nice idea I would have loved to have seen this when it was in operation.Wonder how h&s would go on this tho

 

Not entirely a new build but the Beano showed a BR brakevan with a completely new body at the Nene Valley

 

H&S in this day and age is quite sensible if a watertight safety case can be written, which I think can. Grandfather rights would also come into it I imagine, and it not operating on the mainline would of course also help. Points to consider:

1) Audible warning. They had bells fitted, but a horn/pneumatic whistle would not be an unreasonable addition.
2) Only fully qualified drivers could operate it. Furthermore, they would have to pass a test on operating the coach.
3) Special bell codes in use from one 'box to the next to indicate/remind the signalman that a slip coach fitted train was approaching.
4) Guards in place at any pedestrian or road crossings over which the slip coach would pass independently - including crossings for staff only.
5) Some form of signal from the local signalman to indicate that it was 'alright' to slip. This was done with special distant signals at Reading in the old days. A handsignalman in radio contact with the local signalman could suffice in this case.

 

I have always harboured a crazy dream of building a Class 128 DMU, which would be a newbuild from the floor upwards. My secret weapon was that I believe it could be a Class 115 "below decks", as they were mechanically very similar. With a 115 powercar having been scrapped this year, and a further two currently for sale, there has been ample opportunity to obtain the required bits, which just leaves the £50k to find!!

 

The basic problem with slip coach operation is that it involves two trains running in the same section at once. I suspect slip coaches antedated the concept of absolute block working and escaped the general tidy up of sins in the Regulation of Railways Act, 1889. Whether or not resumption of the practice would be countenanced I could not say. "Grandfathers' rights" are, I fear, another form of convenient urban myth.

As ever the narrow gauge has beaten the standard gauge to it when it comes to replica carriages. There are a number of splendid replicas, notably on the F.R. and W&LLR but these things will never be cheap if done properly as they are in these instances.

 

The rules regarding slip coaches were extremely tight, for obvious reasons - a favourite rule of mine was in the GW rule book, and read something along the lines of 'Level Crossings on lines where Slip coaches may be released and pass over the Level Crossing or Crossings must be kept closed until the Slip Coach has passed' - one gets the feeling that that was learnt the hard way!

Grandfathers' rights do exist, usually in regard to the building rather than the operation of something, otherwise all newbuild locomotives would have to comply with modern rules - crumple zones, air conditioning, yellow panels - and so would the carriages that you have noted on the narrow gauge.

I think that a safety case for a slip coach could be implemented.

 

I have a similar dream of a class 129 using a 105 power car as the starting point... well, there are an odd number of 105 power cars preserved...! Not sure what the present owners would think of this one though! ;-)

 

Slip couplings have been used on the GCR (and probably elsewhere) in recent years for wagon brake testing contracts.

Doing it with passengers would be a whole different ball game, I suspect, but there is at least some experience of the method. The principle difference with slip coaches being that the operator is expected to work the brake, rather than just having the brakes come on automatically, and obviously the risk that if the front portion brakes for some other reason (emergency or whatever), you don't want the back portion running into it.

Can't honestly say I'd dare ride on it, or in the vehicle at the back of the train pulling it. Would be nice to see though.

 

Would you not? That surprises me, the idea doesn't scare me a bit. So long as it is carefully operated - as with all things - I can't see the problem. It was done thousands of time with never a problem, to my knowledge.

 

I would love to see a "new-build" rake of pre-1948 stock for main line use - externally resembling e.g. Gresley teaks or Bulleid coaches (or whatever) but with the frames, etc, designed to be compliant with modern health & safety standards and able to run at 75mph.

On this forum, there is much debate about loco liveries (and yes, I've sometimes added my pennyworth), but I wonder whether those who would like to see, say 6201 painted up as BR 46201 would feel so strongly if Lizzie was coupled to 12 new-build Stanier vehicles - or Pendennis Castle (which will surely go into GWR livery rather than BR) at the head of something looking like the old and much missed Great Western Society's vintage train.

This may be more of an aesthetic issue for the benefit of photographers, but there is another point too: personally I think that the ambience of the "big four" era coaches beats a Mk ! hands down. if I go for a ride on a heritage line that operates pre-nationalisation coahes (and for 30 years or so, I was only 25 miles from the Bluebell) I always look out for pre-1948 vehicies. I would love to be able to have this option on the main line too. Well, I suppose can, but the VSOE Pullmans don't come cheap!

Am I an eccentric and a lone voice? perhaps, but I suspect not.

 

One problem to overcome with the slip coach.
Except for the GCR where could it run at a speed that would demonstrate its working?
Or did they actually work at 25 mph in there day?

 

Whilst we often think of them slipping at high speed on the approach to a station and rolling for several hundred yards or even miles, truth is that the train to which they were attached more often than not had to slow down quite significantly and the coach would be slipped close to the station at reasonably low speed. If the station had complicated trackwork, or a sharp curve leading into it this became a prerequisite. The advantage of a slip coach wasn't in the train losing no speed at all, but in cutting out the hardest part of the acceleration (the weak point in a steam locomotive's output) - from standing, getting the momentum of the train moving.

 

Certain specific derogations have to be obtained; e.g. from the need to provide disabled access arrangements. Not the same as being able to do this by "right".

P.H.

 

I was just going to mention this but you beat me to it! The Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations apply to new vehicles built after, I think, 2007 and require all sorts of non-heritage things, such as wide doorways and different coloured doors. This would apply to any replica, which would in effect mean it couldn't be a replica. Whilst it could be possible to gain exemption from these requirements, this would require agreement from those with the power to exempt and a lot of paperwork hurdles to overcome.

 

Indeed and this has been done in the case of the vehicles alluded to in my original post on this topic.

I was anxious to avoid possible misapprehensions that just because drawings dating back prior to modern regulations are utilised, somehow this gets around the need to comply with these.

P.H.

 

Fair enough, only something that I've had explained to me anecdotally. I imagined that derogations would need to be acquired to som extent - I don't think that would be impossible. In the case of my suggested Slip coach, if you started with an already extant carriage and converted it presumably a fair amount of this could be avoided?

 

Being 57ft and with near enough standard mechanics I'm sure we could do it with something more common like a 108 with a Mk1 BG body on top. They're even the same profile, so itwould be even easier than my 128!!

I shall return to reality in due course

 

Many of the NG lines have built new replica coaches - WLLR FR Corris etc

 

There seems to be an opinion that any new build stock would have to operate on the main line to be of any use. May I assume the new-build regulations only apply there? Otherwise, many 'heritage' lines (light railways) are operating illegally.

It is true that there is a huge amount of stock awaiting restoration, but I could see a case for some types that have disappeared being new-built. A 57 foot underframe could indeed be a good start for many types.