Ken.W

Why would you want to do that?

 

There seems to be an assumption at large that class 800s are under powered when running on diesel.

 

This is an incorrect assumption, the more correct assumption is that the class 800s are under powered when running on diesel but only when using diesel when they should rather be taking electricity from overhead wires.

 

This problem is being addressed (eventually) in other ways that does not involve diesel power.

 

In the meantime, it would appear that the DfT has already decided that GW will have to put up with this issue rather than providing the short term (expensive) fix of increasing the diesel power.

So, perhaps you could inform just when Aberdeen / Inverness are due to be electrified??

There seems to be a common assumption on here that the bi-modes are only for parts of the GW where electrification is delayed / deffered

The recent Inverness test run was, I've previously posted, up to 20mph slower than the HSTs! (which I heard first-hand from someone who was actually there!)

There's already been extensive talk of the problems that can occur if these can't keep to their booked paths over the single line sections to Inverness / Aberdeen, or coming onto the ECML southbound at Edinburgh.

Which at that speed is rather unlikely.

As though just to emphasize this further, last week there was a week long blockade on the King Edward Bridge between Newcastle / Gateshead (see thread Newcastle - whats going on).

The 'diversion' via the High Level Bridge instead is quite short, typically adding no more than 5 minutes - particularly as trains were changing drivers at the same time, the relieving driving waiting ready at the other end.

In order to maintain their booked path south of Newcastle however, most trains from Edinburgh were retimed to depart several minutes earlier than normal. Also trains to Aberdeen / Inverness were taking the preceding departure slot from Kings X to keep to their path north of Edinburgh

Not necessarily, the timetable / path is only confirmed 12 weeks ahead of the train running, so for a trip beyond May, you won't be able to book until after February. Once the path is confirmed, they can allocate trains to the diagrams and then allow the seating plan to be confirmed.

 

Simon

VTEC do have 6 month in advance reservations, excluding weekends /bank holidays

Rail Magazine reported that Virgin East Coast will begin Azuma service in December 2018.

 

https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/vtec-confirms-december-2018-start-date-for-azumas

 

I book the same position return seats in coach K ( it's my seat!!!!!) every week and have been hit with a sudden change to advance bookings. If you try and book a ticket from May this year, there are no seating plans or quiet coaches available on KGX-Edinburgh trains. A phone call to Virgin revealed that they have no seating plans beyond the end of April, and can only reserve a seat but the actual position cannot be chosen by the customer. Speaking to on train staff, the booking system is allocating the next numerical seat up as they do not know what trains will be running.

 

Doe this mean the new trains will begin earlier?

 

Mike Wiltshire

Erm, in a word, no.

They're presently said to be 3 months late, ie December, they were originally expected earlier.

And if they do turn up in 12 weeks time, errm, who's going to be driving them???

EMT need the ex-GC sets to supplement the existing HST & 222 fleet due to timetable changes imposed by Thameslink. It is not to allow a cascade of 222 onto regional services.

 

EMT are apparently in discussion with DfT as to what is used in 2020 and up to any new fleet coming on line and what if anything gets done if it’s HSTs.

 

VTEC reportedly having to consider life extension to some HSTs for services north of Newcastle as the OHLE upgrades to allow the full Azuma/IET timetable are delays/postponed so not enough juice on offer. This may see the need for shortened 91&mk4 sets done away with. All this is part of the early termination & replacement of the ECML franchise.

 

Some talk elsewhere of HST power cars hauling Mk4 stock to save expense of upgrading Mk3 trailers given the Mk4s are going to be redundant. Adjustments to cabling etc needed but easier /cheaper than new doors, toilets etc.

As I posted earlier, don't be so sure about HSTs mostly being gone from the ECML within a couple of years, though EMT are probably getting their pair back.

Not exactly just adjustments to cabling etc for HST power cars working Mk4 stock;

as I've posted previously eleswhere on here, HST stock and Mk4s are both incompatable for working with any other type of stock without significant changes.

To start with, other than the outer ends of the DVT and TOE vehicle (the one next to the 91), Mk4 stock couplers and gangways do not couple to anything else;

The DVT also controls the door interlock, so can't be dispensed with if re-forming sets

The kitchen/buffet vehicle controls the PA system including the auto-anouncement alerts

HSTs use a non-standard 415v 3-phase AC train supply system, Mk4s the standard 1000v DC system, so their power supply system would need to be replaced, not wiring adjustments, to run off HST power cars.

It's also said a Mk4 was given a full refurb and the condition was somewhat shocking, the work being said to have been erm 'rather difficult' and said to be easier to refurb the HST stock.

Basically, as other people's have been said, the standard convention is to use the TOPS code, and seen as the signs apply to the Class 800's and 802's, it was easier to write 80X instead. Of course, if in the near future there are Class 81x units which can convert (or indeed Class 80x units which can't convert), then we'll have to look at the signs again.

 

We can't use commercial terms / names for when naming stuff on NR (hence you'll never see North Pole Depot officially referred to as the 'Hitachi Depot' or similar), therefore we can't use IET or SET.

 

Simon

VTEC are planning on using the 'Azuma' brand on their stop markers for the 800s.

There's other non-standard ones, GN for their new sets have blue on white diamond signs, some of which say simply "FLU"

(the others are 'RLU' or 'ALL')

Yesterday, past a GW Power Car and 4 Mk3s standing on Craigentinny depot

Examples:

Within only a couple of years, most will be gone from the ECML too

.

Erm, I wouldn't be so sure on that one ......

Is that because they look good....taste good .....and by golly, they do you good?

 

Errr Oops !

Sorry that was a Mackeson's.

 

Coat Hat............

 

 

.

Or maybe rhymes with a silly jazzy name for them, and closely related to a lemon???

I won't. If you say you are about to be trained to drive these trains then it has to be assumed that up until then, you have no actual driving experience (or been breaking the rules). The performance is not an issue unless they are incapable of delivering the scheduled running times, which is not the driver's problem.

 

I would just call it unnecessary, and not even humour, just being derisory to something because it isn't an HST.

 

Jim

Railway staff in general are quite well renowned for talking to each other. So a lot of us, even without having been on one, have information about them first-hand from some who actually have.

There's also quite a number of other operational reasons a driver may have been on one without actually driving it (eg the recent Inverness test run had a VTEC driver route conducting). To suggest someone would break the rules by driving something they shouldn't in the modern climate's nothing short of ridiculous.

Talking of talking... I've heard from two others who've been talking to GW staff they've met at KX, who've said on the IEP launch at Bristol their HST driver were instructed not to pull away in more that notch 2 so as not to show up the new trains.

And they're known as Satsumas

I completely agree. Going slightly off-topic, are the 387s fitted with GW ATP? After years of absolute adherence (in my experience) to speed limits on the Western, some of my recent trips on semi-fast 387s have been unexpectedly exuberant (e.g. 113mph easily maintained between West Drayton and Slough on the Down Main). Or does ATP only apply to line speeds (125 in this case) and not to lower limits applied to specific types of traction (e.g. 110 for the 387s)? Either way, they are impressive performers.

If, as you say, the 387's limit's 110, then 113's 'within tolerance' for the speedo (or more like on it!), and don't forget, with or without ATP, anything that moves has OTMR

The HST had quite a few problems including a tendency for the power cars to detach themselves from the rest of the train. Obviously a thing you don't want to happen. I believe that it turned out to be because of the different suspension characteristics between the two types of vehicles. It was solved fairly quickly by altering the metallurgy of the couplers on the power cars. They were also blacked by the drivers for quite a long time. There will always be unflattering descriptions of new trains, especially if they are replacing a much loved older one.

 

Jamie

Or in this case, replacing a loved much older one

BR260 (2).jpg

 

My notes state that this picture of 91.009 was taken on Friday April 28th 1989, and is a train working south after a series of test workings between Glasgow and Carlisle.

 

Don't know if this is relevant to what you will have seen, Dave

Probably an early test run for the loco, or maybe it was testing a 91 into Edinburgh? Edinburgh was electrified from Carstairs first, and that date pre-dates completion of the ECML electrification.

Hi guys, thanks for the mail.

 

It must be post 91 as you can see from my terrible picture of the run north.

 

I, unfortunately cannot add anything other than what i was told about it being a record breaking attempt, but this may or even may not have been the case if it was for drumming up more orders etc.

 

Certainly interesting to see a 91 on the WCML though.

 

cheers

Dave

I remember there being test runs made with a view to using 91/MkIVs on the WCML too, but I believe their reliability (absence of) ruled that one out. Given the relative geography / curvature (and competitiveness) of the two routes it's rather unlikely for a record attempt to be made with an East Coast set on the West Coast route

The general dirt and weathering match in those two photos.

The stock doesn't. One's an RTC Test Coach and Mk3 sleepers, the others a MkIV set

I suspect that the considerably improved breaking/on board signalling systems of the "Classic Compatible" trains might allow them to achieve 125mph on at least some of the sections that currently require tilt.

Unlikely. The sections that currently require tilt do so for their curvature, improved braking and on board signalling does nothing to change that. Also their having all the on board signalling systems you like on them will make absolutely no difference until the signalling system on the line is replaced by in-cab signalling.

Plus their improved braking will make no difference to normal service performance until they get rid of TPWS (ie; again full in cab signalling)

Here we have a rather nondescript HST power car arriving at Paddington. Unnamed and unloved.

Historically, though, it could be argued that this is the most important one; more significant than the lauded 43002 (currently in something like its original livery), or 43198, the last one built.

 

So why 43159?

 

I understand that this was the leading power car, hence the one actually carrying the driver, that achieved the official world speed record for a diesel train. A record it still holds.

 

P1090353.JPG

 

Bet it doesn't get preserved.....

Meanwhile, on the East Coast....

Hmm, could have parked it better for the photo

Wires down at KX made this impossible today. Major disruption at KX until Sunday morning for OHLE repairs.

A pair of 313s managed to entangle themselves in the wires in Hornsey's Down platform.

Took half an hour from Finsbury Park into Kings X, 5 of the main-line platforms occupied by GN sets dumped after their services cancelled, so nothing else could get in,had to wait of other trains departing.

I tend to be rather cautious in re-reporting the media.  They have a habit of exaggeration and sensationalism.  

Personally, I'd tend to be rather cautious of re-reporting the media if they reported that the sun will rise in the morning

No need for copying media reports here (hint; check my avatar )

The track and point work particularly is now over 35 years old and in part life expired.

Not so much of the in part bit though, the present trackwork all dates from the re-modelling work at electrification.

Most of the work taking place is 'switch and crossings renewals', hence the week long total block.

'Interesting times' for the operators; presumably such freight that uses the route nowadays will be sent via the Newcastle and Carlisle?

Interesting point on the freight, presumably WCML then either N & C or S & C.

As  noted above, everything has to reverse direction in Central station. The possession limits at the west end platform ends mean no run-round facilities, and most freight probably wouldn't get in clear of the East Jn either.

Besides, most freight's banned from the High Level Bridge anyway, it's something like RA5 these days

There seems to have been mixed reviews of the 800 interiors, however it should be remembered so far that's been on the GW, from passengers still used to 'full fat' Mk3 stock.

It'll be interesting to see the reaction from EC passengers used mostly to slimline tilt profile Mk4s

Does anyone know if the ability to tilt was ever mooted for the contract to supply the new trains for GWR and the East Coast?  I seem to remember the BR Mk 4 coaches were designed with a loading gauge that would be suitable for tilting and to accept the retro-fitting of suitable equipment to do so.

 

I ask this as, I'm sure Hitachi has built trains for Japanese use that included their air powered tilt technology to run on the 3ft 6in lines. Over to the techs as to why not for the UK?

On the ECML, the general alignment is such that over most of the route the effect of tilt would be minimal, especially so long as speeds don't exceed 125 - and that won't be before full in-cab signalling comes along.

Any advantage of having tilt is probably much outweighed by greater passenger room / comfort by building to the full normal loading gauge rather than being constrained to the tilt load gauge.

Though I suspect the situation on the GWML is similar, others on here are better qualified to comment on that route.

And no, I never heard of proposals at any stage for them to be tilt compatible.

It was anticipated that the 91/Mk4s would operate at 140mph on the ECML (InterCity225 = 225kph = 140mph) but subsequently decided in cab signalling will be required for any increase over 125mph operation.

Hi all,

Just for information of anyone interested, or who may be traveling through, Newcastle this next week;

Tonight saw the start of major track renewals work, and a total block, Newcastle West Jn. - King Edward Bridge (KEB) - KEB South Jn for ~9 days up till next weekend (inclusive).

All trains to / from ECML South / Carlisle / Durham Coast will be required to use the High Level Bridge (HLB) during this period.

This also means a number of services will be unable to run through, although it is apparently only a short diversion;

The KEB has 4-tracks carrying services for the three routes mentioned;

On the route via the HLB, although some sections may appear to be double track, the junction arrangements mean that it's effectively single line throughout from Central station to KEB South Jn for accessing to / from both the ECML South and the Carlisle line.

Also it means North Main Line and South via HLB movements conflict at Newcastle East Jn.

Additionally, the proximity of the possession limits to the west end of the platforms, means all trains entering the station (inc from the North) will be slowed and do so on authority of position light signals under permissive working regulations.

All through trains will also, of course, have to 'change ends' / reverse direction (although VTEC ones are re-manned here anyway)

Three aspect signalling isn;t really a problem with 125 mph running (until you have to put the brake in and then subsequently get a green on the next signal and have to get back up to speed of course) and all it really does is limit line capacity - which might turn into a problem at the northern end of the section perhaps?

 

Interesting, and maybe not entirely surprising, to hear what happened north of Perth.

Exactly, while with signal sections ~2 mile in length 125 running itself isn't a great issue, however, getting checked is

With as I posted earlier a substantial increase in services on this section being planned, with VTEC, TPE, ScR, and a new Open Access operation all wanting more services, the chances of being checked for a train ahead increase, particularly where there's different stopping patterns (already common), or 'catching the barriers' as they've had to be raised behind it as they've been down too long with the number of trains in each direction (and with 27 of them to be controlled)

So pathing issues, and being able to achieve them arriving from the north, become even more critical.

Incidentally, the number of LC's is the reason for this section having almost as many signal boxes as the rest of the ECML put together

Further to my previous posts concerning the Inverness trial run, the more I hear of this performance was in fact quite dire, around 20mph less than an HST on the banks.

Opinion seems to be 'something will have to be done about them', whether that's uprating, or retaining HSTs

Also, regards the pathing problems I posted earlier relating to the Newcastle - Berwick section, with more additional services planned and 3-aspect signalling with 110 / 125running;

just to make this equation even more interesting, this (~67 mile) section also has 27 CCTV Level Crossings (and only 4 of which are in the ~20 miles south of Morpeth)

We're rivet-counting the on-board breakfast that GWR offer?

Makes a change from talking in circles about their performance on diesel, I guess...

Rivets in it???

Ouch that thought makes the teeth shudder!

I must admit that I’d missed the whole “uniforms” issue, but it seems http://railtube.info/2017/09/picture-paw-fect-all-change-as-jake-the-trainspotting-dog-models-new-virgiExceptn-trains-uniform-virgin-trains/ that Virgin have scrapped their recently introduced blue uniforms for red ones, amid a floridly-worded press release which appears to have been written by the Guardian - box ticking, much?

 

I’d always assumed that Virgin group uniforms would be red for female staff, blue with red piping for male staff, as a matter of course?

 

I don’t know what function the dog performs....

Except, they were told, and in no uncertain terms by the reps, that Drivers do not wear red!

There was even originally, a large red patch on the inside cuff of the right arm, which would be displayed if giving an 'all right' handsignal. So, you're on the lineside, SPT or whatever, a passing train sounds it's horn, you acknowledge the warning as per rule book and, the train stops!!

And, perhaps, the Guard-Dog?

The NER/ER regions were merged by the 1970s (1968 IIRC)

DMU sets in the North East didn't have set numbers, just the individual car numbers were used.

I also don't recall Heaton depot ever making attempts to keep fixed formation of sets together. They'd be split as required for maintenance purposes, and sets re-formed from spare / repaired vehicles to make up the required sets.

During latter days of DMU operation in the area, particularly when sets were drafted back in from elsewhere to cover for the early Pacer failures, some vehicles did carry set numbers I believe, but these were simply from there previous allocation in areas where these were used, they still wern't used here