New Trains to get Longer Numbers

[Metr0Land]

The Republic of Ireland is in Europe. And they could very easily operate international trains, though I don't know how often they actually show up in Belfast.

About 4 times a day on the Enterprise service, however the pool of locos is quite limited. Since the introduction of OTMR in the UK, ROI locos crossing the border need OTMR and it's only fitted to some of the 201's

[D854_Tiger]

The real fuss will be when they get round to cars and we have to drive on the right.

[Legend]

The real fuss will be when they get round to cars and we have to drive on the right.

 

I understand they are going to do this in a phased approach with Trucks and Lorries switching ahead of cars , to cut down the amount of cars that will actually be left to switch

[APOLLO]

Interesting article here

KarTrak, an innovation originally built for the rail system, was quickly discarded by train operators. But without it, we wouldn’t have modern barcodes.

 

https://tedium.co/2017/09/05/kartrak-railroad-barcode-history/

 

And while we are on about it, consider the multitudinous American railroads (including Mexico & Canada). They interchange literally thousands of freight cars daily, passenger trains cross the USA using several railroads, locomotives run through on other companys lines (Mexican & Canadian locos can be seen daily in Chicago etc). They have a VERY simple numbering system, and apparently it works.

 

This European system is far too complex,

 

Brit15

[Zomboid]

Or alternatively, the American system tells you much less about the item.

CSXT 687149 tells you that the owner is CSX, but to know if it's a boxcar, autorack, tank etc you'd have to know the number ranges assigned to such things from just the number. Obviously someone looking at the car in question could tell a few things, but not all the information that a UIC number would tell them.

 

A self describing index system (to those educated in the meanings) seems like quite a good idea to me, particularly for people who have to use the system on a daily basis.

[brushman47544]

As an aside , it is possible to make things easier to identify the vehicle number , in Germany I've seen examples where the full UIC numbering is either in smaller font than the "internal" vehicle number , or also in light grey text with the "internal" number in black.

 

I've seen similar examples, where the "national number" part of the UIC number is underlined or in larger numerals. Some countries also include what they call the old number (even on new stock) struck through, as shown on this modern SNCB coach   62226 . You can also see the UIC number in small numerals half way down the bodyside, with the traditional loco number in large numerals as well.

 

 

The Remain side were quick to claim all our airlines would be grounded if we left the EU, without a deal, but the body that allocates European slots of necessity includes eight European nations that are not in the EU and also allocates slots for heaven knows how many airlines (from half way round the world) that overfly Europe and are never likely to be part of the EU.

 

The idea we were ever going to be excluded from that was just silly and also ignored the fact that most of the biggest low-cost airlines operating here are EU owned and always likely to be.

 

Completely off topic but the airlines issue re Brexit has nothing to do with slot allocation, air traffic control or the like, with is run by Eurocontrol not the EC. That's about aviation safety (including maintenance) and certification. Once out of the EU, the current EU-wide regime will cease to apply and the UK will need to set up its own regime and have that recognized by every country UK airlines fly to.

Edited January 24, 2018 by brushman47544

[D854_Tiger]

I've seen similar examples, where the "national number" part of the UIC number is underlined or in larger numerals. Some countries also include what they call the old number (even on new stock) struck through, as shown on this modern SNCB coach   62226 . You can also see the UIC number in small numerals half way down the bodyside, with the traditional loco number in large numerals as well.

 

SNCB DD Buseels Midi 2015.jpg

 

 

Completely off topic but the airlines issue re Brexit has nothing to do with slot allocation, air traffic control or the like, with is run by Eurocontrol not the EC. That's about aviation safety (including maintenance) and certification. Once out of the EU, the current EU-wide regime will cease to apply and the UK will need to set up its own regime and have that recognized by every country UK airlines fly to.

 

 

The CAA's contribution to the European Aviation Safety is huge though, we are world leaders in aviation safety, and according to my neighbour, who works in the industry (pilot), enough to even maybe lay claim that possession is nine tenths of the law.

 

The EU Safety Agency also includes non-EU members like Iceland, Norway and Switzerland.

 

One other strength of the UK's CAA is that it is not publicly funded, unlike the EU Agency, so it's contribution would be missed in funding terms by the EU, leaving another fiscal hole.

 

I would be highly surprised if the UK pulling the plug on the EU would ever lead to any change in the aviation sector, most especially when some of the biggest losers would be EU owned airlines, such as Ryanair, Easyjet and Jet 2.

[Steven B]

So who's going to be the first to cross 90 70 0098 807-7 (or should that be 90 70 0099 907-4?) from their ABC Combined Volume?

 

 

Steven B.

[Glorious NSE]

My guess is they will carry both types of number the new one being added as an afterthought.

 

I can remember even TOPs numbers being shortened on units in the past.

There are already fleets of wagons in the UK which already carry both a domestic number and a UIC number on them, as the rules changed for wagons a few years back.

 

And yes, it was customary for Southern region EMUs, at least after the 1980s renumberings, to carry shorter 4 character versions of their proper TOPs numbers (first digit of the 4 was the last digit of the class number, second usually reflected subclass etc) - 5824 would have been 455824, 1864 would have been 421864 and so on...

 

Or alternatively, the American system tells you much less about the item.

CSXT 687149 tells you that the owner is CSX, but to know if it's a boxcar, autorack, tank etc you'd have to know the number ranges assigned to such things from just the number. Obviously someone looking at the car in question could tell a few things, but not all the information that a UIC number would tell them.

 

A self describing index system (to those educated in the meanings) seems like quite a good idea to me, particularly for people who have to use the system on a daily basis.

Yes, and even if you're a CSX employee that happens to know what type of car CSXT687149 is likely to be, there can be a BNSF687149 which won't be the same type of car, and a UP687149 which will be something different again, and so on...

 

The only thing the American system tells you is who owns it (and as railroads accrete fallen flags who have accreted their own fallen flags, even that may not be obvious without looking it up - for example BKTY and CHTT are Union Pacific marks!)

 

[Glorious NSE]

The full number is generally in use on modern wagon stock

 

For example

 

today I photographed a stone from Tunstead - Norwich Trowse consisting of 17 MWA all with 81 70 5892 xxx-x numbers. It's only likely intercontinental travel was when it was delivered.

But it's utterly logical on such stock - if there was a huge downturn in demand for box wagons in the UK they could be redeployed anywhere in Europe.

[Welly]

But it's utterly logical on such stock - if there was a huge downturn in demand for box wagons in the UK they could be redeployed anywhere in Europe.

As have several Class 66 locomotives...

[Fat Controller]

As have several Class 66 locomotives...

Along with Classes 86, 87 and 92.

[Talltim]

and 77s

[beast66606]

and 77s

 

and 8Fs

[Talltim]

and Dean Goods

[jonny777]

So who's going to be the first to cross 90 70 0098 807-7 (or should that be 90 70 0099 907-4?) from their ABC Combined Volume?

 

 

Steven B.

 

 

I have long maintained that railway stock numbers ought to be in barcode form, so that spotters would only need to buy a scanning app for their phones, and scan the train in as it passes. 

[eastwestdivide]

I have long maintained that railway stock numbers ought to be in barcode form, so that spotters would only need to buy a scanning app for their phones, and scan the train in as it passes. 

Barcodes - soooo 20th century. RFID tags are the way to go. Less susceptible to muck, especially on the leaf spraying trains.

[Zomboid]

As have several Class 66 locomotives...

Several GM locos of very similar appearance to 66s were built for service in continental Europe too, and maybe a situation will occur where we'll want to import some.

 

Other diesels that I can think of which have seen service here before being exported are 20s, 58s and 59003.

[iands]

Barcodes - soooo 20th century. RFID tags are the way to go. Less susceptible to muck, especially on the leaf spraying trains.

RFIDs would make life far too easy. A bit of muck over a Bar/QR Code would still provide "a challenge".

 

Regards, Ian.

[Glorious NSE]

Several GM locos of very similar appearance to 66s were built for service in continental Europe too, and maybe a situation will occur where we'll want to import some.

We have done, some of the GBRF fleet are former continental machines.

[Coryton]

If you're going to have an interoperable system the size of the European railway network, then by necessity you need some form of interoperable database.

It's going to be complex to set up a workable index system to cover something so big. But actually what is proposed looks rather user friendly once you're familiar with what each part of the scheme means.

It's exactly that same as TOPS really, just on a larger scale. With TOPS, you know that the first 2 or 3 digits are the class, and the remaining 3 are the unique identifier within that. It'll be the same, just with more information contained within the scheme, every part of which will be useful to someone, and they won't have to consult a database to know some important stuff about the thing they're looking at.

 

The scheme is not new, and already applies to the UK. The "proposal" (though I don't think it's a proposal, it's what's going to happen) is that all "new" vehicles will have to display the UIC number rather than it just existing in a database.

 

The scheme has been in use in Europe for a long time. So far as I know it was originally for wagons and coaches, but not locomotives (which I presume required special arrangements to travel outside their own country). It was then extended to locomotives and multiple units.

 

....... and there's nothing that says all the numbers must be the same size, when painted on a loco, so the traditional number could be in a larger type-face.

 

I would imagine this is true, but without reading what the UK regulations say, we don't actually know that, do we? The article on the web didn't say either way, though it did talk about underlining the TOPS bit of the numbers. Just because other countries permit two numbers doesn't necessarily mean that the UK regulations are written that way. (And maybe the rule is changing for other countries too for new stock?)

 

Several GM locos of very similar appearance to 66s were built for service in continental Europe too, and maybe a situation will occur where we'll want to import some.

 

Other diesels that I can think of which have seen service here before being exported are 20s, 58s and 59003.

 

I believe there are quite a few hoops to jump through before a UK engine is permitted to run overseas. You don't just stick it on a train through the tunnel and once it gets to France set it free and off it goes. The time may come when everywhere has ETCS and full inter-operability. But we aren't there yet and 

I don't think having to paint a new number on would be a lot of extra work on top of what else is needed.

 

My view, for what it's worth (not very much) is that unless an item of rolling stock can just be taken through the tunnel and run outside the UK with no or minimal extra certification, then insisting on a UIC number painted on the side is unnecessary. In any case why not leave it up to the operator? If they want it to be allowed to run outside its home country, they have to stick a UIC number on. If they choose not to put one on, it has to stay at home.

 

Going over to UIC numbers for freight stock makes perfect sense. But for 800's or a Parry People Mover, somewhat less so.

[D854_Tiger]

I have long maintained that railway stock numbers ought to be in barcode form, so that spotters would only need to buy a scanning app for their phones, and scan the train in as it passes. 

 

A six foot scanner if the code is to be readable as well.

 

Should go down well on the end of a platform.

[brushman47544]

I have long maintained that railway stock numbers ought to be in barcode form, so that spotters would only need to buy a scanning app for their phones, and scan the train in as it passes. 

 

Much better a QR code, which could be linked to TOPS so you get not just the number but allocation, train data etc. as well.

[Reorte]

A six foot scanner if the code is to be readable as well.

 

Should go down well on the end of a platform.

They'll like it in Newcastle

[JimC]

That new GWR style cast brass numberplate is going to be heavy.... !

 

 

 

Installation on other GWR classes may experience practical difficulties...

Edited January 24, 2018 by JimC