Diesel speed records!

[Allegheny1600]

Warning!

A controversial subject here. How do you justify one record over another?

Apparently, with “independent verification” so, what happens when you are testing a new train and unexpectedly break an existing record? Or, you feel that you have sufficient recording equipment on board but outside authorities claim your equipment isn’t good enough?

For any number of reasons, you may not be able to simply run your test again, probably the main reason being cost but also traffic patterns, I.e. your new line has to open to service trains.

 

 The current “official” diesel train speed record is held by the British 43102 (later, 43302) at 148,5mph (237.6kmh) set on 1st November 1987. Not bad at all for an older machine that was “only” designed to run at 125mph.

 

However, on 12th June 2002, the Spanish Talgo XXI was claimed to achieve a speed of 256,38kmh (160,24mph) and this figure is quoted in Talgo marketing material. If Talgo are advertising their product with this data, they must surely be very confident they actually did achieve such a speed?

https://www.talgo.com/talgo-xxi
https://artsandculture.google.com/exhibit/talgo-a-train-ahead-of-the-curve-fundacion-de-los-ferrocarriles-espanoles/dAJSHI2dUkr-Ig?hl=en

“the world speed record for a diesel engine powered train has been set at 238 km/h since 1987, although not without some controversy: the Talgo XXI prototype (currently at the service of the Spanish infrastructure manager Adif as a laboratory train) reached 256.38 km/h between Olmedo and Medina del Campo in 2002. Record registration was, however, not officially accepted due to the lack of an independent verification.” From: https://mappingignorance.org/2020/01/22/the-limits-of-high-speed-rail/

 

Yet even the Talgo XXI isn’t the absolute fastest diesel train! A special run of one of only two TEP80 Diesel locomotives on 5th October 1993 saw this achieve a speed of 271kmh (169.38mph).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TEP80

 

The ride is rather lively but you can certainly see the speed recorder showing the claimed figure. You can also see around six or more people in the cab so it wasn’t just a case of the driver claiming he’d achieved that speed, there were witnesses.

Another video from the lineside;

I note that the locomotive concerned is now preserved in St. Petersburg in Russia, complete with a commemorative plaque and the manufacturer, as with the Talgo train is advertising this record.

https://www.tmholding.ru

 

Obviously, having a “record breaker” is a help to promoting your product but surely not if it’s a false claim?

Thoughts anyone?

Thanks,

John

[Pete the Elaner]

HST as designed to run regularly at 125. You would not expect any vehicle to reach its absolute maximum speed on every journey. It is quite understandable that they can go much faster if pushed.

That is similar to Mallard doing 126 in 1938, then promptly failed with an overheated bearing, which is why its normal service maximum was about 90mph. You still hear of people claiming there has been no progress 'because modern trains don't go faster than Mallard'. 

 

What constitutes a diesel? Didn't the APT-E use diesel fuel, but with a turbine instead of internal combustion?

Jet fuel is also very similar to diesel fuel.

[Oldddudders]

I think the paying customer is actually more interested in journey times rather than max speed. That is what may govern decisions between rail and air - or did pre-Covid. 

[Pandora]

1 hour ago, Pete the Elaner said:

HST as designed to run regularly at 125. You would not expect any vehicle to reach its absolute maximum speed on every journey. It is quite understandable that they can go much faster if pushed.

That is similar to Mallard doing 126 in 1938, then promptly failed with an overheated bearing, which is why its normal service maximum was about 90mph. You still hear of people claiming there has been no progress 'because modern trains don't go faster than Mallard'. 

 

What constitutes a diesel? Didn't the APT-E use diesel fuel, but with a turbine instead of internal combustion?

Jet fuel is also very similar to diesel fuel.

The record breaking HST speed was achieved with the help of oversize wheels on the power cars (from a BR officer involved with the run and known to me for many years).

[boxbrownie]

8 minutes ago, Pandora said:

The record breaking HST speed was achieved with the help of oversize wheels on the power cars (from a BR officer involved with the run and known to me for many years).

My understanding was they were “new” tyres, but just a little over spec........and also I always was told the HST125 was actually originally designed to run at 150 mph but trackage (and budget) only allowed for 125 mph in service.

 

I have been in the cab of several when they easily reached over 125 mph regularly.

[Nearholmer]

If you design something to spend a large proportion of its left belting along at speed X, then it is very logical, almost a given I might say, that a carefully selected, and possibly slightly tuned, instance of the machine will be able to achieve a short-term peak speed of 1.2X on a track alignment where it is safe to do so.

 

So, my question about the Spanish and Russian machines would be about whether they can dependably, and economically, deliver prolonged running at 134mph and 141mph respectively. It is perfectly conceivable that they can, and given that both countries have some large distances between large towns/cities (Russia enormous distances), and some good alignments, it may make economic sense for them to build "mile eater" locos. 

 

The challenge with a diesel is weight, I guess, in that speed needs power, and power needs mass of engine, all of which has to be spread adequately over the track, and be carried on a suspension system in a way that provides stability, as well as avoiding smashing the track. The power to weight ratio of electric traction is far better, but the challenges of collecting current at very high speed shouldn't be undeestinated.

[Allegheny1600]

2 hours ago, Pandora said:

The record breaking HST speed was achieved with the help of oversize wheels on the power cars (from a BR officer involved with the run and known to me for many years).

Using oversized wheels was one of the ways the French managed to get their TGVs to record breaking speeds, along with increasing line voltage and many other tweaks. See my link to Mapping Ignorance above and elsewhere on this site.

 

By the way, could your friend possibly confirm the process of verifying the speed record, please?

Would it be as simple as having an observer from Guinness along for the ride or something else.

Many thanks in anticipation,

John.

[Allegheny1600]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

If you design something to spend a large proportion of its left belting along at speed X, then it is very logical, almost a given I might say, that a carefully selected, and possibly slightly tuned, instance of the machine will be able to achieve a short-term peak speed of 1.2X on a track alignment where it is safe to do so.

 

So, my question about the Spanish and Russian machines would be about whether they can dependably, and economically, deliver prolonged running at 134mph and 141mph respectively. It is perfectly conceivable that they can, and given that both countries have some large distances between large towns/cities (Russia enormous distances), and some good alignments, it may make economic sense for them to build "mile eater" locos. 

 

The challenge with a diesel is weight, I guess, in that speed needs power, and power needs mass of engine, all of which has to be spread adequately over the track, and be carried on a suspension system in a way that provides stability, as well as avoiding smashing the track. The power to weight ratio of electric traction is far better, but the challenges of collecting current at very high speed shouldn't be undeestinated.

Quite so!

 I gather the Talgo XXI is designed for a top speed of 220kmh or as it happens, 137.5mph therefore within your quoted limit for reliable and prolonged running.

 The big Russian however, was only designed for 100mph running so that would be some serious overspeed! The traction motors must have been arcing like crazy! It also weighs 180 tons but this load is spread over 8 axles in a B+B-B+B formula. That’s still an axle load of 22.5 tons though, considerably heavier than the HSTs axle load but maybe not too bad by Russian standards, I don’t know. No shortage of power though at 6000hp.

 

[Pete the Elaner]

3 hours ago, boxbrownie said:

My understanding was they were “new” tyres, but just a little over spec........and also I always was told the HST125 was actually originally designed to run at 150 mph but trackage (and budget) only allowed for 125 mph in service.

 

I have been in the cab of several when they easily reached over 125 mph regularly.

 

Signalling & braking distances limit speed too. The 91s were designed to run at 140mph & this was trialled but while this sounded great, in practise they could not maintain it. The problem was they would catch up with the train in front too quickly.

[Nearholmer]

Be interesting to know why these locos were pushed, especially the Russian one of its designed sustained speed is only 100mph. 
 

It might be pure national pride, and/or a bit of ‘because we can’, but such tests don’t come cheap, so usually have a purpose behind them, often to gather data to feed forward into the design of “the next one”.

 

Did the Russians come out with a 140mph design some while after this, possibly electric rather than diesel? They may have been gathering data about wheel or suspension dynamics for instance, fo that.

 

As to verification: I would expect any serious test to involve the loco being heavily instrumented, with oodles of recordings being taken.

 

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by Nearholmer

[boxbrownie]

16 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Be interesting to know why these locos were pushed, especially the Russian one of its designed sustained speed is only 100mph. 
 

It might be pure national pride, and/or a bit of ‘because we can’, but such tests don’t come cheap, so usually have a purpose behind them, often to gather data to feed forward into the design of “the next one”.

 

 

 

Probably more to do with how much Vodka they consumed the night before 

[melmerby]

16 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

 

As to verification: I would expect any serious test to involve the loco being heavily instrumented, with oodles of recordings being taken.

 

 

Which, judging by the profusion of cables on the outside, the Russian one was.

[Pandora]

16 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

Signalling & braking distances limit speed too. The 91s were designed to run at 140mph & this was trialled but while this sounded great, in practise they could not maintain it. The problem was they would catch up with the train in front too quickly.

From a serious  documentary about the APT in which senior BR officers were interviewed, statements from those officers and the the decision to cancel APT included the financial case of operational costs of an APT service, the financial case changed to negative, so it was more than the well publicised technical flaws of APT, which I believe could have been resolved, the costs of high speed operations had risen exponentially, beyond the capacity to provide revenue

[Pete the Elaner]

6 minutes ago, Pandora said:

From a serious  documentary about the APT in which senior BR officers were interviewed, statements from those officers and the the decision to cancel APT included the financial case of operational costs of an APT service, the financial case changed to negative, so it was more than the well publicised technical flaws of APT, which I believe could have been resolved, the costs of high speed operations had risen exponentially, beyond the capacity to provide revenue

 

That is only 1 point of view.

The APT's problems were resolved. It failed for political reasons, not technical ones.

If you were a senior BR official, would you admit that the APT was a management cock-up, not a technical one? I certainly wouldn't.

 

It was initially introduced into service before engineers were ready. The project had taken so long that management were keen to show their progress. The project costs had grown enough to attract attention to the project so management wanted to show its progress. It was therefore pressed into service prematurely with lots of media attention.

Because the issues with the new technology had not been resolved, they failed while the train was still very much in the public eye & this looked rather bad.

APT was withdrawn from service. Over the next 2-3 years, the issues resolved then the trains re-introduced.

The earlier bad publicity meant that it had the reputation of a white elephant so it was kept quiet this time around.

It ran successfully but could BR really re-introduce it so publicly or would it be better to disguise it?

The latter was chosen. The class 91s & Mk4s owe a lot to the APT. Mk4s were even built to be retro-fitted with tilt packs, but they are of little use on the ECML because it is quite straight.

 

APT was not just about tilting: it was also about wheel/rail interaction & better braking. How often do we hear about these last 2? It was investigating wheel/rail interaction which raised the project in the first place.

 

Anyway, that was electric. I thought this thread was about fast diesels? I only mentioned APT-E in the first place because it used turbines which ran on diesel fuel.

[Hobby]

I'd tend to agree with Nearholmer that  loco will often be built with a "bit extra" designed in so it isn't flogged to death. The Voyagers for instance could do 140mph but never do (officially). 

[Pandora]

On 09/03/2021 at 16:32, Hobby said:

I'd tend to agree with Nearholmer that  loco will often be built with a "bit extra" designed in so it isn't flogged to death. The Voyagers for instance could do 140mph but never do (officially). 

A BR official involved with ECML told me 89001 lagged behind the GEC class 91 as 89001 did not have the as much of the hidden up the sleeve  reserve of a 91

[Allegheny1600]

On 04/03/2021 at 18:54, Allegheny1600 said:

 

By the way, could your friend possibly confirm the process of verifying the speed record, please?

Would it be as simple as having an observer from Guinness along for the ride or something else.

Many thanks in anticipation,

John.

Dear @Pandora

 I repeat my question of a couple of weeks ago!

It does not seem a hard question to me but I am happy to learn.

Thanks in anticipation,

John

[roythebus1]

My son, the assistant fleet engineer for Southern Railway diesel trains claimed a speed record for one of his 2 car sets. they were testing a new brake material on the WCML and that involved emergency braking from 100 mph. They managed a top speed of just over 102mph. Not a world record, but he reckons a record for one of those units.

 

One point I'd make about the Russian and Spanish claims is that it proves the broad gauge doesn't necessarily give a better ride at high speed.   Ever been on a BR class 81 at 100mph? How they stayed on the road is still a mystery to me.

 

Edited April 22, 2021 by roythebus1