Is there such a thing as too many heritage railways?

That's true for four wheelers, but I think the practical reality is that Mark 1's are unlikely to be a source of replacement underframes for vintage carriages, on the grounds that (1) most interesting such carriages are much shorter than a Mark 1, so at the very least, you would need to do significant shortening and (2) there aren't many unrestored vintage bogie carriages that are held up just for want of an underframe in any case. Four- and six-wheeled carriage bodies, grounded without underframes, are reasonably common and for those there will be an ongoing requirement for "new" underframes, generally sourced from redundant 1950s-vintage vans. However, the few remaining vintage bogie carriages generally come with underframes (*), and it is the provision of replacement interiors that is the major sticking point for restoration.

(*) There are odd exceptions; 7598 on the Bluebell and 2403 on the Isle of Wight being exceptions of bogie carriages that were recovered as grounded bodies without underframes - but in both cases, the length of the vehicle (originally 48') meant that a Mark 1 underframe (at 63' long) would have been unsuitable. 7598 is on a recovered 50' LNWR ambulance carriage underframe (which was shortened by 2') and 2403 as you know was stretched by two feet and put on a 50' BR(S) bogie scenery van underframe.

Tom

 

Well I and many others take great pride in our restoration of mk1s! I understand your dislike of grotty carriages which do typically tend to be mk1s, but a nice varnished wooden paneled interior and a gleaming paint job crisply lined out is not something to be sniffed at! And if you say you've never seen such a beast, come and visit the GWSR!

 

ECJS 189 on the NYMR is another recovered bogie coach and was more of a challenge than most because it also had Pullman gangways. When first preserved it was mounted on an ex-LNER suburban underframe but is due to be moved onto a cut-down ex-LNER BTK underframe that has the correct dragbox and end framing to allow Pullman gangways to be fitted.

 

I am sure you do a lovely job and I would not even imply otherwise. However they are not for me and never were. Have a look at the L.C.D.R. teak bodied stock as found on the K.& E.S.R., Bluebell and I.O.W.S.R. and see what I mean. The Ventnor West set has even seen Royal Train use which is something I don't see Mk. 1 stuff being used for.

Paul H

 

One problem with fitting old 4 or 6 wheelers onto former van chassis, is getting the springing right for passengers. Some conversions can be a bit bone-jarring until this is sorted.

 

Yes, some railways do a proper job of restoring their MkIs. The West Somerset had some good examples last time I visited.

A lot of railways don't have the resources to really restore their MkIs. Instead they are "preserved" in their as-withdrawn condition. Often quite shabby. Not sure what Joe Public makes of that.

I've nothing against MkIs, and I can understand why they have become the standard for so many lines, but I'm always on the lookout for something different. I'm usually happy to pay a supplement to ride in a observation saloon or vintage train.

 

A MK1 is just a people mover without any character, but if well maintained do what most punters want. Yes the window design is poor with two pieces of wood around the windows with the condensation holes on the inner piece, and as in a lot of cases there is a gap between the two and the water just drops between the two and makes the rusting worse along the base of the coach.

 

Indeed, but my point is that it is in such short intervals that small children have to be managed, and where the urgency arises. Even on the motorway, it is possible (though emphatically not recommended) to use the hard shoulder; this is one of a number of reasons why rural buses do not feature in our transport planning.

More to the point, this parent is just highlighting where, if expenditure on ontrain facilities is being considered, he would prefer it to be focused.

 

I don't think I would have travelled on a heritage line when my kids were in nappies. It's a couple of years when family outings are difficult

 

Nappies were no problem. The potty training years, on the other hand,...

 

Ok, that's fair enough, that's you personal preference, fine. So your suggestion to rebuild them into something you prefer is also your personal WIBN. no problem with that, we all have our own.

 

I must say I was less than impressed with some of the WSR's mk1s when I visited. I appreciated I visited on a gala and so might have been unlucky enough to end up with "spare" stock not in normal service though. But their exteriors seemed somewhat faded, and there seemed to be a lack of lovely interior varnished wood and more Formica, which IMHO makes a real difference between a "people mover" and a heritage vehicle.

I agree there are plenty of shabby mk1s, but that's not their fault! That's their home railway's, due to lack of resources or whatever, bit the intrinsic fact they are mk1s.

And finally I absolutely agree with you that I too will usually prefer to ride in older more interesting stock if possible!

 

Sorry to disappoint you but much less W.I.B.N. on my part as good business. Let me cite a recent trip to a line where the bulk of the train comprised Mk 1s which were neither the best nor the worst of their kind. The exception was a vehicle which was as virtually full as the rest of the train was not. Evidently the non-enthusiast majority agreed with me that it was much the most attractive vehicle on the train.

No, I am not going to say which railway or which vehicle.

PH

 

That's an argument for restoring more heritage vehicles. But I can't see how it is an argument for using Mark 1s as the basis for constructing new vehicles? The only older design of carriage I can think of that looks remotely like a Mark 1 is a Bulleid, and there are several of those awaiting restoration in their own right without needing to chop up a Mark 1 to do so.

I think @flying scotsman123 is right here: the best thing to do with a Mark 1 is to do a really nice restoration on it, taking it as far as possible back to 1950s condition (moquette, panelling, interior lighting and decor etc). I can't see the point of butchering one just to create a sham "heritage" carriage that won't look anything like anything other than a butchered Mark 1.

Tom

 

Much the same as using a secondhand boiler to recreate a long departed locomotive or recreating a tank locomotive from a tender engine (he says pointedly). It is precisely the Mark 1 body I would not want to save! Using running gear from PMVs as well as their cut down underfames is well established and doing the same for bogie stock is a natural progression albeit more complicated.

PH

 

The Mk1 itself, or the layout therein? As a passenger, I find little to differentiate between a TSO of Bulleid or Mk1 provenance; even, dare I say it, finding the Mk1 more comfortable than some seats in Gresley TSOs.

 

Have a look at the Bluebell's Maunsell era droplight third to get some idea of a really attractive (and comfortable) vehicle. Lovely thing.

PH

 

On the whole I agree, but the NYMR are restoring a Metro-Cammell Pullman(Garnet) as a dining car, and for me the original interior just doesn't look good. I'd far rather see it gain a pseudo "proper" Pullman interior than perpetuate the awful early 1960s one, and I'm sure that the majority the NYMR's potential customers would agree. There's plenty of precedent for similar, with many line's dining trains being upgraded Mk 1s rebranded in pseudo Pullman liveries and with pseudo-Pullman interiors.

 

I'm a big fan of the vintage train experience but if a rake of 6-wheelers turned up for my morning commute instead of the usual class 319/377/387/700 EMU I think the novelty would very quickly wear off. On the other hand if a rake of Mk.1s turned up I think I would be very happy indeed.

It's worth noting that the later built Mk.1s had formica instead of varnished wood from new. You might not prefer that look but they may well be authentic.

 

Good point. And it takes us back to the question of what the general public expects. Although a seasoned enthusiast might acknowledge that first generation diesels and MkIs with a formica finish are a genuine heritage experience, I imagine that the general public will be looking for steam and a more traditional carriage interior.

As an enthusiast, I feel very little real nostalgia for MkIs, even though they have been around almost as long as I have. Possibly because they never really went away.

Is it possible to feel nostalgia for something you only know from photographs?