Mark_A

Things seem to have become complicated. Sleeper didn't run in either direction, after the following freight made it to Rannoch. https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/H48258/2020-02-11/detailed

Not a good Friday night for the sleeper. If I have it right, the southbound lowland service from Edinburgh was cancelled and its passengers were transferred to the southbound highlander on its call at Edinburgh in the small hours. Then, the following, which impacted on the northbound Edinburgh service as its loco was needed for rescue duties. https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C75081/2020-01-31/detailed

Neither overbridge nor underbridge: as it passes the site of Tiverton Junction the M5 rises on an embankment then down again. The embankment was built, but the Hemyock branch, which passed beneath, closed before the bridge that would have accommodated it was constructed. So, a bridge site, but never a bridge.

This exercise looks to be providing a good demo of the benefits of hydrophobic treatment of train window glass, yes?

Allegedly, tonight's 18:04 Penzance train sat at Paddington with its complement of passengers for an hour awaiting train crew, followed by a fix for something engineering related - with no information for the passengers - who were eventually downcast after they saw the 19:05 to Penzance leave ahead of them, the 18:04 then being cancelled. Not sure what's happened to the passengers as, save for the sleeper, that was it for the evening as far as Cornwall was concerned. https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/detailed/PAD/to/PNZ/2019-12-20/1700-2000?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt

If so, this has implications for an 80x that derails at speed as it makes it easier for a carriage end to be directed into lodging against an obstacle.

Difficult to understand the mechanism for this, but it's not reassuring to see the 80x's carriages so out of alignment with each other: in an accident involving a train in service, carriages decoupling (if that's what's happened) very much increases the potential for a severe outcome.

With airline, you have your back to the person in the seat behind and do not have sight of them. With a 'Bay of two' layout, you and the person behind have backs to each other - and the person in the seat across the table may have a view of anyone behind you. Though, certainly, single airline seats offer greater privacy than bays of two. Mark

Another thought on the IEPs. It's surprising that in 1st class, on the 'Single seat side' airline seats are the choice rather than bays of two. Apart from the disadvantage of the aircraft-cabin-like appearance it lends to the whole carriage, if someone needs to work and not share their screen, airline layout offers a lot less privacy.

One and a half hours in a nine carriage IET yesterday. While it ran to time, the smooth grey seat material needs to be retired asap - lots of really grubby seats on offer. Now: the windows. Not many people have picked up yet that they're not dirty, there's something else going on: whatever it is that's coated them has chemically bonded with the surface - you can see this yourself next time you're within reach of one - try cleaning it with a damp tissue, you'll have no effect at all. It might be that chemically reactive particulate matter from the brakes has landed on the window surface and, given time, bonded with it. Hopefully removing it will involve nothing more than a serious polish, but it would be good if this were in hand because the windows' appearance really undermines the journey experience.

Thanks, I knew they were taking action to represent their members, but I'd not read that from the RMT.

Entry into service doesn't seem to be going at all well. Last week's issues have now been compounded by a new issue today with one of the Lowland up sleepers that stopped the job at Acton Bridge - the day's events compounded by the down Fort William service arriving over 200 minutes late on 21st June, setting off a catalogue of bad experiences for passengers booked on the subsequent up train. Mark

21st May at Newport. HItachi's external cleaning routine for the IEPs doesn't seem to be going well and their windows are suffering. On this one, the information panels on the train exterior looked to have been hand cleaned.

Repeat and emphasise: fantasy, but I was thinking remove the internal combustion engine completely and new traction package powered off the OHL for use on an (imaginary) completely electrified system. I'd not thought of diesel at one end, AC at the other, which might offer advantages that would be another (imaginary) avenue to explore.

OK, firmly in the realms of fantasy, and of course a lot of things are *possible* but not necessarily desirable. But... the sight of Scotrail's HSTs running beneath their extensive though not universal electrification was provocative. If it had to be done, new kit, control systems + replacement of traction motors aside, would the expensive/impossible bits be addressing the lack of a 25Kv line the length of the set, which otherwise rules out transfer of 25Kv between the ends? Even a 'magically' electrified HST wouldn't help with their Inter7city network 'cos Dunblane to Aberdeen via Perth, Edinburgh to Aberdeen, Dunblane to Inverness of course. Yet. Mark

Here's a lovely photo from late on a damp monday afternoon in mid-december 2017, and a very cheerfully loaded HST arrived, surprising me that it was so well loaded - passengers had already been pouring off the platform for a minute or two.

Ah, thanks. Glad about that... Mark

The video's on a post to Twitter. Shows a blowback(?) with quite a bit of flame - I hope the crew were OK after that one... Mark

Apologies if it's been answered up-thread. Those 2x5 IET formations are... sub-optimal, and in curious ways. Does anyone know how possible it is to reconfigure them, removing the two 'Ends' in the centre of the sets, replacing those two driving cabs with 1 or 2 carriages (and then re-using the ends with new build carriages for additional complete sets)? Mark

Good. Will the new franchise retain the on board catering, does anyone know?

'Y Gerallt Gymro' ie 'Gerald of Wales' - does anyone know the date of its last run? Mark

From a planning document from Bath and North East Somerset Council, the third paragraph of a communication there states "As you may know, as there is to be no electrification of the railway through Bath, Network Rail no longer intend to remove trees along the railway embankment adjacent to the site". Presumably the wrong end of a stick has been picked up. Here's (hopefully) a link to the original... https://www.bathnes.gov.uk/publisher/docs/6D86E6B89AD80C03C3169520B1B9AB2B/Document-6D86E6B89AD80C03C3169520B1B9AB2B.pdf

When the last HST interior overhaul happened it *was* possible to switch 50% of the ceiling lights off and the result was more pleasant and still adequate, and a lot of the fleet runs with lighting set in that way - which must have given at least one TOC indication that there might be an issue. With newer trains, travellers ask for light levels to be lowered now, and TOCs respond "Not possible, can't be altered now in these new trains, and anyway, safety regulations mean carriages need to be that brightly lit". GWR's responded that way, and I suspect the Caledonian Sleeper's new stock is going to provoke the same sort of conversations. Does anyone know where the regs are to be found? Thanks in advance Mark

Agreed that it sounds high, but that was the figure I heard quoted by the rail industry - 50,000 a year and numbers neither declining nor increasing. Visually, the train was and remained sized to carry those numbers too, seated accommodation as well as berths - with many more carriages than say the present day Fort William sleeper. Anecdote not data, but it was busy both times I used it. I wish I could find a reference for the figure but it may be that the passenger records from that era have long gone in the bin. (Another anecdote, someone from work used it northbound from Bristol but hadn't long gone to bed when they were roused from sleep at Cheltenham and told that they needed to change carriages because theirs had developed a fault that meant that it needed to be removed from the train, a task that wasn't quite straightforward and caused a lot of sucking of teeth and a bit of a delay.)

50,000 passengers per year in its last year of operation... Mark