Jump to content

IoW light rail conversion proposed


Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

 

They were also 4 rail originally, which has some differences from the Network Rail 3 rail system (particularly relating to track circuits?).

Yet the preserved Metropolitan Bo-Bo Sarah Siddons has ran successfully on the main line third rail.

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 minutes ago, PhilJ W said:

Yet the preserved Metropolitan Bo-Bo Sarah Siddons has ran successfully on the main line third rail.

 

Is Sarah Siddons running on the Isle of Wight?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt Sarah Siddons would fit through Ryde Tunnel but the possibility is intriguing. 

 

Does the Island Line have mainland safety systems, e.g. AWS and TPWS? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I seam to recall reading about the mixing of 3rd rail units and 4th rail units on part of the sw suburban network. It has something to do with changing the polarity of the 4th rail. There is a change over point I think somewhere around Putney.

 

Keith

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, KeithHC said:

I seam to recall reading about the mixing of 3rd rail units and 4th rail units on part of the sw suburban network. It has something to do with changing the polarity of the 4th rail. There is a change over point I think somewhere around Putney.

 

Keith

 

Where Underground and National rail share a conductor rail power supply, the centre rail is bonded to both running rails - LU trains do NOT* have the ability to return traction current to the running rails like Nation Rail trains do.

 

This arrangement gives both trains the 600 - 700V voltage difference necessary to power them. On LU proper the voltage difference remains the same - only its split into +400(ish)V (3rd rail) and -200(ish)V (4th rail). On National Rail the voltage is split between 600 - 700V on the 3rd rail and 0V on the running rails

 

*Sarah Siddons had some pretty significant modifications in the 1980s to allow use on pure 3rd rail systems

 

On the Wimbledon branch the changeover is done on Putney Bridge with a dead section slightly longer than a District line change so as to avoid linking the two systems as trains pass from one to the other. Similarly the Richmond branch has a dead section between Gunnesbury and Turnham Green.

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John M Upton said:

I doubt Sarah Siddons would fit through Ryde Tunnel but the possibility is intriguing. 

 

Does the Island Line have mainland safety systems, e.g. AWS and TPWS? 

 

IIRC it had tripcocks as befitting ex tube stock (possibility also related to the ability to fit TPWS gear / receivers onto the trains).

 

However given the replacement ex District line trains are bigger and have successfully had TPWS fitted for mainland use then I imagine TPWS will be fitted instead

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

This problem must be serious - there must be indications of wrong-side failures in running, which points to compatibility with the signalling system. I cannot think of anything else which would require a wholesale review of the software introduced. It cannot just be a frequency issue, or eddy currents. A traction issue on the 3rd rail would just require some minor tweaking, to ensure effectiveness on the third rail, either by the supply or by the on-board systems. Any other views?

 

Either way, this is bad news, both for the IOW, and for VivaRail.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Vivarails honesty on various social media platforms in taking responsibility for the issue is to be applauded

Their social media person was very busy yesterday on Twitter not only on their own stream but also deflecting criticism from  those blaming SWR 

 

Edited by Foulounoux
Make clearer nature of swr responses
  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Foulounoux said:

Vivarails honesty on various social media platforms in taking responsibility for the issue is to be applauded

Their social media person was very busy yesterday on Twitter not only on their own stream but also deflecting criticism from  those blaming SWR 

 

 

Oh, ok. Fair enough then. But I am not sure they had any alternative???

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Oh, ok. Fair enough then. But I am not sure they had any alternative???

 

They could have remained silent, they could have stood by while people blamed SWR.

 

Yes, they are responsible for the delay but they could have handled it differently / worse.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sarah Siddons runs on third rail because it doesn't have fancy computer systems on board apart from the TWPS and AWS stuff. It's only since the widespread introduction of computers on trains that these sort of reliability problems have arisen. Computers are for teenagers with nothing better to do. :)

I don't see why SS shouldn't fit through Ryde Tunnel, but with very little rolling stock to pull apart from a few pw wagons, it wouldn't be much use. Unless of course the IWSR would alone SWR some vintage stock. but then there's no run-rounds anywhere.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is capable of push-pull with 33/1 and 73/1 and any compatible BR/SR EMU stock. It can be pushed by SS but needs a driver at the front to use the brake and a driver on the loco to make it go with radio communication between the two. BR C1 stock won't fit the IWR.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, PhilJ W said:

Sarah Siddons is a big locomotive, power equivalent of a 37 IIRC. She certainly would not fit into the tunnels at Ryde. 

 

I don't see that the power of an electric locomotive has anything to do with size when compared with a not very powerful diesel.

 

Better to look at where Sarah Siddons could go, the somewhat restricted tunnels north of Baker St, which the D78 stock were not, I think, cleared for. So, it would seem, anywhere a D78 can go, Sarah Siddons should be OK.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

I don't see that the power of an electric locomotive has anything to do with size when compared with a not very powerful diesel.

 

Better to look at where Sarah Siddons could go, the somewhat restricted tunnels north of Baker St, which the D78 stock were not, I think, cleared for. So, it would seem, anywhere a D78 can go, Sarah Siddons should be OK.

The D78's were restricted due to their length (outswing).

1 hour ago, rodent279 said:

Really? Sarah can run in multi with a TC?

Has done so for years with London Transports own TC set which was the one used on the main line.

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Regarding how these trains worked on the District - remember that they didn't - they are in effect new trains that just happen to use the old shells and underframes of the District stock. All the motors, control gear etc is new, and that seemingly is what's causing the problems.

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

They could have remained silent, they could have stood by while people blamed SWR.

 

Yes, they are responsible for the delay but they could have handled it differently / worse.

 

Yes, they could. But I suspect this is as much to do with trying not to get sued (or a big compensation claim - good luck with that), and trying to keep their reputation intact for other sales. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, PhilJ W said:

The D78's were restricted due to their length (outswing).

Has done so for years with London Transports own TC set which was the one used on the main line.

When used on the Met with the 4TC, SS was at one end and a loco at the other for the return journey. And often there would be an extra loco at one end, or both, so the 4TC was in reality just loco-hauled stock, not used in 'push' mode.

  • Like 2
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...