sprinterguy
Established Member
Class 172s' suggestion for a DMU version of the 442 has reminded me of one of my more fanciful notions for the Crosscountry network, presuming that if we have to be stuck with underfloor engine DMUs on XC then there should be better alternatives than the current Voyagers: Perhaps, if BR in the late eighties had been experiencing the same levels of passenger growth as we have now, then they wouldn't have gone down the line of life extending a number of class 47s through conversion to 47/8s, or the conversion of a number of mark 2 vehicles to RFB vehicles, but instead there would have been a new build of "Class 244s"; a diesel variant of the class 442 Wessex units.
This would consist of a fleet of 28 seven carriage units and 36 five car units, which roughly works out with a slight increase in fleet size so that in general the seven carriage units would replace the HSTs and the five car units would replace the 47+mark 2 rakes, as well as Crosscountrys' one time small pool of 158s.
The seven carriage units would be formed:
DMF - MBRFB - MS(W) - TS - MS - MS(W) - DMS
And the five car units would be formed:
DMF - MBRSB - TS(W) - MS - DMS
The motor carriages would each be powered by a 750hp engine, giving 4000hp in the seven car sets (A bit of a reduction on the power of the HSTs, but without the weight of the power cars to consider), and 3000hp in the five car sets (More than a 47). (W) marks those carriages fitted with a disabled toilet.
Some rough figures give the seating capacities as:
Seven car sets: 64 first class, 370 standard class. (Against 48 first class and 402 standard class in a 2+7 HST formation).
Five car sets: 50 first class, 250 standard class. (Against 68 first class and 288 standard in a 7 car mark 2 formation).
As far as I know, BR in the late eighties/early nineties had no plans to accelerate the Crosscountry service, I think the biggest improvement that was expected was to be the cascade of mark 3s from the West Coast to replace the mark 2s as a benefit of the Intercity 250 project, so the 100mph maximum speed and end corridors would be just fine.
These units, particularly in their five car form, would also be ideal for deployment on inter-regional routes that saw 158 operation in the early nineties, such as Liverpool to Norwich, Waterloo to Salisbury and Exeter (I assume that Regional Railways wouldn't have had twenty two surplus 158s to send to NSE had BR been in a growth period: The 244s would also have matched the 442s which share the same route as far as Basingstoke), Transpennine North and Edinburgh/Glasgow to Aberdeen/Inverness. This would displace a sufficient number of 158s to ensure that Edinburghs' 117s and Manchesters' 101s would have been replaced far earlier than proved to be the case, through the cascade of Sprinter stock.
This would consist of a fleet of 28 seven carriage units and 36 five car units, which roughly works out with a slight increase in fleet size so that in general the seven carriage units would replace the HSTs and the five car units would replace the 47+mark 2 rakes, as well as Crosscountrys' one time small pool of 158s.
The seven carriage units would be formed:
DMF - MBRFB - MS(W) - TS - MS - MS(W) - DMS
And the five car units would be formed:
DMF - MBRSB - TS(W) - MS - DMS
The motor carriages would each be powered by a 750hp engine, giving 4000hp in the seven car sets (A bit of a reduction on the power of the HSTs, but without the weight of the power cars to consider), and 3000hp in the five car sets (More than a 47). (W) marks those carriages fitted with a disabled toilet.
Some rough figures give the seating capacities as:
Seven car sets: 64 first class, 370 standard class. (Against 48 first class and 402 standard class in a 2+7 HST formation).
Five car sets: 50 first class, 250 standard class. (Against 68 first class and 288 standard in a 7 car mark 2 formation).
As far as I know, BR in the late eighties/early nineties had no plans to accelerate the Crosscountry service, I think the biggest improvement that was expected was to be the cascade of mark 3s from the West Coast to replace the mark 2s as a benefit of the Intercity 250 project, so the 100mph maximum speed and end corridors would be just fine.
These units, particularly in their five car form, would also be ideal for deployment on inter-regional routes that saw 158 operation in the early nineties, such as Liverpool to Norwich, Waterloo to Salisbury and Exeter (I assume that Regional Railways wouldn't have had twenty two surplus 158s to send to NSE had BR been in a growth period: The 244s would also have matched the 442s which share the same route as far as Basingstoke), Transpennine North and Edinburgh/Glasgow to Aberdeen/Inverness. This would displace a sufficient number of 158s to ensure that Edinburghs' 117s and Manchesters' 101s would have been replaced far earlier than proved to be the case, through the cascade of Sprinter stock.
Last edited:
