What an earth is this?

Totally wild stab in the dark, but I think it is a Hastings gauge Thumper, non-engine end modified to be set up for videoing.

www.nwrail.org.uk/nw0503f.htm

Take a look at the 3rd picture down.

Great! Thanks Rob, this more than help-most interesting.

What is a refurbished C-stock train doing at Chesham?

Was it for BR drivers' route-learning?

The ex-Hastings Saloon (now 'Caroline') from memory can work with Class 73 and 33/1 via bagpipes and also any blue star diesels including Class 37. Is it owned by Fragonset? I am sure that it has been propelled by a 31 in the past.

It's been used for route-learning and inspection and was famous for carrying the newlyweds Charles & Diana from Waterloo to Romsey hauled by the ED 73142 'Broadlands' (Broadlands, once Palmerston's house was at the time owned by the Lord Romsey I think, son of the Countess of Mounbatten of Burma and the Earl Mountbatten's grandson).

More on it here:
33103.com/975025.html

I didn't know that C stock could operate with fewer than 6 cars.

But on the other hand, a 6-car set had one redundant cab and an 8-car set had two redundant cabs. Redundant cabs cost money to build and maintain, and they take passenger space.

With a decrease in the funding available for public transport, the balance will swing towards reduced cost rather than flexibility.

Why did D stock get built for the District? I think the 8 car C stock would have been better, because there would have then been a standard sub-surface fleet, apart from the A stock. It would have been easier to change the services, and as trains could have been borrowed from the District, a shortage of trains on the Circle/H&C would have been less likely to happen.

Then why couldn't they design a new version of C stock that was compatible to C69s? If that would have been inpossible, then they could have at least have designed the D stock so they could have run to Edgware Road, because it would then be easier to divert trains on the District when there is a problem.

The D stock also replaced 7 car trains so limiting them to 6 car short length would have reduced capacity.

Only for stabling at Neasden, possibly. The A stock fleet, in total, was large for the services required. Ive heard rumours that this was to preempt BR's abandonment of suburban services to Aylesbury, and its subsequent take over; but who can say now.

As for the question of standardising stock, its already been mentioned that the C77's were outdated by a decade when ordered. They had to be almost identical to be cost effective to manage as one fleet. Truth is that there are broadly three different types of service requirements on the SSR; Long distance 420' platforms, medium distance 400' platforms and short distance 350' platforms. The district has always been stuck between the two extremes. Having said that, the original seating layout of the C stock would be suitable for it; maybe combine that with PDO and a solution wouldn't be far off. Still though, by that time 7 cars were the rule because of what looks like 5/6 platforms in total; the staff shortage ment OPO was a necessity, money was tight and patronage wayning. The D stock were the best solution to that; just a pity they had single doors.

Its funny though how at the time it wasn't seen as necessary to re-jig the SSL services. A service from Wimbledon to Upminster travels over just as many flat junctions as one from Uxbridge would; and the platforms on that stretch can take 8 cars aswell. Would anyone around in the 60's 70's be able to comment on this?

Could the A stock have been adapted for use on the District services (excepting Wimbleware) in order to yield a more standardised fleet of trains in the 1960s when the older stock was being phased out? Maybe as 7-car trains?