Jim’s “out and about with GBRf” thread

[big jim]

Just a coupe for today, Donnington to stafford, an appropriate military based loco up front!

 

 

[Iron Horse]

Thank for the tones Jim

 

My daughter rolled her eyes and said "is that the man you know"............she then went on to say "it was pretty cool though"

 

Now if I could only work out how to up load a video!!!!!!

 

Cheers and stay safe

[beast66606]

4 minutes ago, Iron Horse said:

Now if I could only work out how to up load a video!!!!!!

 

Create a YouTube account, upload to there and post a link here

[Iron Horse]

Does this work

 

 

[Phil Mc]

28 minutes ago, Iron Horse said:

Does this work

 

 

 

Yep !!

 

Cheers,

Phil.

[big jim]

Some from today, they have been having us away early from the gateway to only end up sitting at the junction with the mainline, no bad thing as there are a few things booked to pass by

 

mega early today that we saw the Iport train! 

 

Then a Wolverhampton to Immingham steel 

 

and a couple of light engine GBRF 66s

 

 

same again tomorrow then something very different next week 

[phil-b259]

On 04/01/2021 at 18:03, ColinK said:

There is a thread somewhere on RMweb for the ugliest loco, if that milling machine is eligable it would be the clear winner.

 

OTP rarely is designed to look good.

[big jim]

Some from today, had us out as far as burton this time so a couple of different shots of things passing by

 

 

[big jim]

Some from last night, possession at bilbrook, had to run round in Wellington again 

 

 

and that was that, something different Monday to Friday next week, got a course to do, hopefully be able to report back as the week goes on 

 

[big jim]

So this is what I’ve been doing today, class 196 traction course, certainly a ‘different’ unit to learn, all computer based inside, very much like a 170 unit outside though

 

 

couple of days static training then handling turns later in the week to crewe and maybe Stratford upon Avon 

[Chris116]

This is probably a very silly question but why would a freight operating company be training its drivers on passenger trains? 

[big jim]

It’s for fault free mileage accumulation on the units, they have to achieve a certain number of miles of fault free working before being accepted so we are driving them between Tyseley and crewe every night (2 trips new at to crewe) so they can be handed over from the manufacturer to the TOC 

 

 

[CovDriver]

Great pics Jim I'm glad I won't be signing them anytime soon I'll be learning the 172 units first.

What is view like from the cab I hear it's not a lot just the legal requirement. 

 

Cheers 

 

Colin 

[Tangoman69]

Jim

 

you give a terrific insight into the modern railway and thanks for that, it enables me to use your photos as a guide to my modelling.

Could I ask that where and when possible, could you snap 66’s in ice & snowy conditions?

I’ m looking at heavily weathered examples for my ploughs

 

Regards

 

Karl

[Shedmaster]

2 hours ago, big jim said:

So this is what I’ve been doing today, class 196 traction course, certainly a ‘different’ unit to learn, all computer based inside, very much like a 170 unit outside though

 

 

couple of days static training then handling turns later in the week to crewe and maybe Stratford upon Avon 

Hi Jim,

 

Lovin your pics as always, very much appreciated...

 

Seeing this has just reminded me of a situation we used to have at Bedford, as EWS Drivers, Not me personally but my colleagues...several years ago now.

 

My EWS colleagues would be booked to turn up at Bedford and relieve Thameslink Drivers, in order to take their 377’s directly out of service to wherever they went for mods at that time. There were often issues where Bedford men wouldn’t accept the relief as it was seen as infiltration into ‘their’ work. However, our EWS Drivers were there on contract to the manufacturer, not the TOC, which took a while to explain at the time.

 

Tell you what, a ‘Saltley Seagull’ had nothing on a Hither Green man!

 

Hope you find the unit work interesting, I just know you’ll be busy with your camera!

 

Best Wishes,

 

Shed.

[big jim]

It happens quite a lot, freightliner for example did/do the TPE mk5 and nova acceptance, training etc, I actually had an interview to be an instructor on it the day before my GBRf interview and got the job but as history shows I obviously went for the GB job

 

covdriver, after so long driving locos with loads of room in the cabs it’s certainly strange getting back in a gangwayed unit, yes not much visibility compared to a loco and less than say a 158, an ingenious set up with the gangway door and centre partition though, I really can’t see how they will get ERTMS in them if that ever happens, every inch of space is used in the cab

 

Things I did like were the DSD pedal plate/footrest can move up and down height wise and the seat in very adjustable, if you can’t find a comfortable position then there is a problem! 
 

bits I don’t like, very awkward handrails and steps to get into the cab and no hold over button on the brake!

 

We get into the real nitty gritty tomorrow, moving it round the yard, trying various driving modes and then faults and failures, we had a couple today even without moving but they are easy enough to find and rectify as it’s all displayed on the driver interface screen, those who had already learned them said the computer is the hardest thing to get your head around but I found it quite enjoyable, I think it helps being tech savvy (ish) and it’s helpful knowing class 70s as they are computer lead certainly helped, despite being a different beast completely the basics of how to scroll through the computer and fault find are there, similarly signing 168/170 previously gave me a good grounding to the outside of the unit and what to look for isolating cock wise, there are things I’ve got to get out of my head regards 2nd and 3rd gen units such as what will put a hazard light on as the 196 only has 3 incidences as opposed to 5 traditionally (and one of those is a new one!)

 

Looking forward to the rest of the week 

[Siggie in the east]

4 hours ago, Chris116 said:

This is probably a very silly question but why would a freight operating company be training its drivers on passenger trains? 

GBrF are also doing the fault free running of the new 720s on the GE, mainly out of Ilford depot.

 

Thanks

[big jim]

They are also testing them on the WCML, the path runs around the same time as the daytime 196 test train so it’s possible to see them both in the space of 10 mins around crewe 

[corneliuslundie]

Is it just me or does the class 196 win a heat in the worst looking train stakes? Both the design and the livery.

Jonathan

[TomScrut]

5 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

Is it just me or does the class 196 win a heat in the worst looking train stakes? Both the design and the livery.

Jonathan

 

I like the look of the 196 (and 197) but I don't think that livery does it any favours

[CovDriver]

3 hours ago, TomScrut said:

 

I like the look of the 196 (and 197) but I don't think that livery does it any favours

You know when you've been tango'd 

 

[Shedmaster]

18 hours ago, Chris116 said:

This is probably a very silly question but why would a freight operating company be training its drivers on passenger trains? 

Hi, 

 

Not sure you actually got an answer to your excellent question.....? 

 

Put simply, a TOC will have enough Drivers to perform its core work of Driving trains to cover the timetabled services. There won't be enough spare or additional capacity to release these guys n gals for any other form of work. Taking into account that to release these Drivers for training on new stock and then the actual testing work, these Drivers are then not available to do their core timetable work. 

 

The manufacturer/TOC therefore farm this testing/acceptance work out to the freight companies on a per contract basis so they do not jeopardise their core work. 

 

This can apply to other types of work such as Thunderbird Loco's, where you can find the TOC unit failures are rescued by non-TOC assets. It doesn't cost the TOC a working asset. 

 

Hope this explains things a bit? 

 

Kindest Regards, 

 

Shed. 

 

[Chris116]

23 minutes ago, Shedmaster said:

Hi, 

 

Not sure you actually got an answer to your excellent question.....? 

 

Many thanks for your very full explanation. In fact @big jim came back with the explanation about an hour after I asked my question. 

[St. Simon]

27 minutes ago, Shedmaster said:

Put simply, a TOC will have enough Drivers to perform its core work of Driving trains to cover the timetabled services. There won't be enough spare or additional capacity to release these guys n gals for any other form of work. Taking into account that to release these Drivers for training on new stock and then the actual testing work, these Drivers are then not available to do their core timetable work. 

 

The manufacturer/TOC therefore farm this testing/acceptance work out to the freight companies on a per contract basis so they do not jeopardise their core work. 

 

Hi,

 

It might also be an insurance / responsibility issue. If a train is being run by the manufacturer to gain mileage prior to formal acceptance by the TOC, but is being crewed by a crew from the TOC customer, who's responsibility / liability is it if something goes wrong?

 

It could be argued that the TOC has accepted the train as it being crewed by its own drivers and therefore the TOC responsibility. By having a having a freight operator (or even a different TOC) provide the crew clearly separates out the who is liable for what.

 

Simon

[TomScrut]

39 minutes ago, Shedmaster said:

Hi, 

 

Not sure you actually got an answer to your excellent question.....? 

 

Put simply, a TOC will have enough Drivers to perform its core work of Driving trains to cover the timetabled services. There won't be enough spare or additional capacity to release these guys n gals for any other form of work. Taking into account that to release these Drivers for training on new stock and then the actual testing work, these Drivers are then not available to do their core timetable work. 

 

The manufacturer/TOC therefore farm this testing/acceptance work out to the freight companies on a per contract basis so they do not jeopardise their core work. 

 

This can apply to other types of work such as Thunderbird Loco's, where you can find the TOC unit failures are rescued by non-TOC assets. It doesn't cost the TOC a working asset. 

 

Hope this explains things a bit? 

 

Kindest Regards, 

 

Shed. 

 

 

And another spin on this, whilst not necessarily relevant to the exact scenario here, is where a TOC drives the trains on services, but somebody else has a responsibility to maintain them (such as LNER and Hitachi with the Azumas). In my example I believe Colas drive the Azumas to and from depots, which I expect would be something Hitachi needs to source as part of the service contract and therefore will probably tender the work out. Then LNER only need to worry about timetabled services.