RMweb Gold rodent279 Posted March 6, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 6, 2020 43 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said: Just to put the record straight Eurostar did experience some problems. Apart from errant raising of pantographs due to finger trouble on the part of a Driver (a rare event which actually matched in rate of occurrence the original risk assessment() the real problem was with the retractable conductor shoes failing to lift when they should. Such was SNCF's exasperation with the slow pace of remedying this problem that they installed some nice big blocks of concrete at the French end of the Tunnel for the specific task of 'removing' any collector shoes which had failed to properly raise - the blocks were highly effective. (The need to raise the shoes was because they were out-of-gauge on SNCF and had a habit of producing unintended damage to/occasional demolition of certain items of infrastructure such as one particular type of ground mounted signal head. Am I the only person to find it slightly amusing that a piece of rolling stock built to UK loading gauge was out of gauge in France? 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
s182ggu Posted March 6, 2020 Share Posted March 6, 2020 On 05/03/2020 at 11:52, s182ggu said: Hi Can someone please explain, in layman's terms what the issue is with the pantographs on the 755s? Thanks in advance. One possible suggestion on Thursday - Thanks DY444, but otherwise nothing!! Is there some reason why the pan issue on the 755s cant be explained? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted March 7, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 7, 2020 13 hours ago, s182ggu said: One possible suggestion on Thursday - Thanks DY444, but otherwise nothing!! Is there some reason why the pan issue on the 755s cant be explained? A very good point. The fact that there was bridge strike with a pan could be indicative of several very different things although these are the only ones I can think of at the moment (in no particular order) - 1. Finger trouble on the part of a Driver - always a potential risk where 100% manual control of pan raising/lowering takes place. There should, in any case, have been a proper assessment of this risk before the trains entered traffic. 2. Inadequate lineside signage to indicate to Drivers when manual raising/lowering of pans should be carried out. 3. Failure of a Driver to comply with a lineside pan lower sign (possibly whiile distracted by some other fault on a new train). 4. A fault in the train's software which led to the software commanding, for whatever reason, inadvertent raising or failure to lower a pan. 5. Incorrectly sited, or not yet installed, or faulty operation of, lineside commanded (using a balise) auto control of pan raising/lowering. 6. A design fault in the actual raise/lower mechanism of the pan itself. 7. A manufacture/factory assembly, or maintenance, error in that raise/lower mechanism. I am not suggesting that any one of these, or a combination of them, either led to the incident or a possible reaction to it which has curtailed running on electric power - they are simply a list of reasons I could think of for a possible pan collision. There might be something totally different which has restricted running on overhead power supply. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete 75C Posted March 7, 2020 Share Posted March 7, 2020 7 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said: A very good point. The fact that there was bridge strike with a pan could be indicative of several very different things although these are the only ones I can think of at the moment (in no particular order) - 1. Finger trouble on the part of a Driver - always a potential risk where 100% manual control of pan raising/lowering takes place. There should, in any case, have been a proper assessment of this risk before the trains entered traffic. 2. Inadequate lineside signage to indicate to Drivers when manual raising/lowering of pans should be carried out. 3. Failure of a Driver to comply with a lineside pan lower sign (possibly whiile distracted by some other fault on a new train). 4. A fault in the train's software which led to the software commanding, for whatever reason, inadvertent raising or failure to lower a pan. 5. Incorrectly sited, or not yet installed, or faulty operation of, lineside commanded (using a balise) auto control of pan raising/lowering. 6. A design fault in the actual raise/lower mechanism of the pan itself. 7. A manufacture/factory assembly, or maintenance, error in that raise/lower mechanism. I am not suggesting that any one of these, or a combination of them, either led to the incident or a possible reaction to it which has curtailed running on electric power - they are simply a list of reasons I could think of for a possible pan collision. There might be something totally different which has restricted running on overhead power supply. As much as people like to think human error can be eliminated by advances in software, I think they're wrong. Human error will always exist and is a factor that can't really be planned for. The fact that I once ripped a pan off a brand new 319 bringing it out of the then new Selhurst inspection shed has absolutely nothing to do with it... 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Chris116 Posted March 7, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 7, 2020 (edited) 10 hours ago, Pete 75C said: As much as people like to think human error can be eliminated by advances in software, I think they're wrong. Human error will always exist and is a factor that can't really be planned for. The fact that I once ripped a pan off a brand new 319 bringing it out of the then new Selhurst inspection shed has absolutely nothing to do with it... Thinking you can eliminate human error by software is a total fallacy. It just moves the human error from the front line staff to the programmer of the software and those testing the software. Edited March 7, 2020 by Chris116 I must have been drunk on milk when I wrote it! At least some understood what I was trying to say! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted March 7, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 7, 2020 8 minutes ago, Pete 75C said: As much as people like to think human error can be eliminated by advances in software, I think they're wrong. Human error will always exist and is a factor that can't really be planned for. The fact that I once ripped a pan off a brand new 319 bringing it out of the then new Selhurst inspection shed has absolutely nothing to do with it... You're quite right Pete - and at least you did it with a nice shiny new train, real skill ;). All the pan collisions I know about which we suffered on Eurostar passenger services were in exactly that 'human error' category although they did at least prove the risk assessment (which had been 100% theoretical) was absolutely correct in predicting the number of pan collisions which would occur - all down to human error (and all French human error as it happened). We did have one pan collision which had never been thought because it was always the case that trains left North Pole depot would be on 3rd rail power. Until the day a Driver who had been moving a set around the depot before coming off didn't bother to changeover to 3rd rail. All was well over North Pole junction as there was overhead but of course it ran out as he was heading along the West London Line and the pan went overheight just at the right moment to hit a bridge. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
s182ggu Posted March 7, 2020 Share Posted March 7, 2020 Thanks to Chris, Pete75C and Mike for their comments. At least I don't now feel that I asked an inappropriate question!! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium stivesnick Posted March 7, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 7, 2020 Passing through Liverpool Street Station yesterday lunchtime - 2 x 754s present. 010 on the 13.30 departure and 002 on the 14.00 train to Norwich. Hopefully no more Class 321s on London-Norwich. Nick 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted March 7, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 7, 2020 46 minutes ago, stivesnick said: Hopefully no more Class 321s on London-Norwich Likely to outlive the 90s on that service 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlgoss Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 On 03/03/2020 at 20:45, beast66606 said: The planning consent was given on the basis that the existing facilities were made available for domestic use. A few years back there was talk of a platform 5 and 6 at Ipswich which would take some of that space I imagine> Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold ruggedpeak Posted March 9, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 9, 2020 Do Flirts have proper horns? One came through Stratford this evening towards Liverpool St and made a pathetic two tone squeak! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted March 10, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 10, 2020 9 hours ago, ruggedpeak said: Do Flirts have proper horns? One came through Stratford this evening towards Liverpool St and made a pathetic two tone squeak! Thats as good as it gets. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted March 10, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 10, 2020 (edited) A Basil has gone down at Beccles while working 2A04, Lowestoft - Harwich - 1Z99 en route from Manningtree, via Norwich to carry out a rescue Edited March 10, 2020 by beast66606 typo 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DY444 Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 (edited) On 06/03/2020 at 15:45, rodent279 said: Am I the only person to find it slightly amusing that a piece of rolling stock built to UK loading gauge was out of gauge in France? It's happened over here quite a few times too. When 319s first started running from the SR to Rugby via the WLL it became almost a standing joke that if a unit got back with all its shoes still attached then Selhurst depot would throw a party. More recently the first few 700s to reach Peterborough on test runs all arrived with fewer shoes than they started with. Edited March 10, 2020 by DY444 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold ruggedpeak Posted March 10, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 10, 2020 1 hour ago, beast66606 said: Thats as good as it gets. If it's barely audible against background noise surely that's dangerous? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted March 10, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 10, 2020 37608 was dragging 745008 to Bounds Green for tyre turning (developed flats during brake testing) as 645s are not allowed on their own power on part of the route - not sure where. 37608 failed at Stowmarket and was rescued by 66501 and the drag was then dragged to Ipswich yard. 90004 is now en route to drag 37608 and 745008 to Harwich and then bring 37608 back to Norwich. 1 1 3 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Simon Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 16 hours ago, ruggedpeak said: Do Flirts have proper horns? One came through Stratford this evening towards Liverpool St and made a pathetic two tone squeak! 7 hours ago, beast66606 said: Thats as good as it gets. Hi, They might have speed dependent horns like the Class 80x's do, i.e. a quiet setting below 100mph (for neighbourhood friendliness) and a louder setting over 100mph. Simon 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted March 10, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 10, 2020 2 hours ago, St. Simon said: They might have speed dependent horns like the Class 80x's do, i.e. a quiet setting below 100mph (for neighbourhood friendliness) and a louder setting over 100mph. I've heard loud horns at lower speeds, I get the impression its based on length of activation time, the longer the press the louder the shriek ! (and possibly also speed as you suggest) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold russ p Posted March 10, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 10, 2020 The horns sound to me like hand held gas horns certainly not melodic. Found something else very irritating with them today , the saloon window for whatever reason have a very fine mesh in them similar to heating elements in Ford windscreens and when you become aware of it you can't help but notice it 1 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted March 10, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 10, 2020 Tivetshall 10 March 2020 37608 and 745008 on 5Q43, 10:36, Norwich C.PT. T.&R.S.M.D - Bounds Green T&R.S.M.D (14:27) - 745008 for tyre turning, 37608 failed at Stowmarket 37611, Pegasus, and 755402 on 5P99, 11:15, Beccles - Norwich C.PT. T.&R.S.M.D (13:45) - 755402 failed at Beccles, loss of air 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SBB Crocodile Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 Looking at the extra comings and goings around Ipswich this afternoon the signallers were having to work very hard to keep everything going. Impressed. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium stivesnick Posted March 10, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 10, 2020 On 07/03/2020 at 13:17, stivesnick said: Passing through Liverpool Street Station yesterday lunchtime - 2 x 754s present. 010 on the 13.30 departure and 002 on the 14.00 train to Norwich. Hopefully no more Class 321s on London-Norwich. Nick Yep, spoke too soon. Class 321 on the 13.00 Liv St to Norwich today. 754 002 and 009 appeared later. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium DRS Crewe On A Mission Posted March 10, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 10, 2020 745009 has now been accepted for passenger use. So this should now be able to be seen on the Liverpool Street to Norwich and return diagrams along with the other Class 745s already in service. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted March 10, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 10, 2020 1 hour ago, DRS Crewe On A Mission said: 745009 has now been accepted for passenger use. So this should now be able to be seen on the Liverpool Street to Norwich and return diagrams along with the other Class 745s already in service. Basil 009 entered service on the 07:40, Norwich - Liv. St. today - I photographed it on it's first Northbound service run. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Goldfish Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 12 hours ago, russ p said: The horns sound to me like hand held gas horns certainly not melodic. Found something else very irritating with them today , the saloon window for whatever reason have a very fine mesh in them similar to heating elements in Ford windscreens and when you become aware of it you can't help but notice it Damnit Russ, I'm gonna notice that now! 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now