Jump to content
Image restoration from pre-May 2021 continues and may take an indefinite period of time.

Going for the Record?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

I suppose it depends what preparation they did for the APT. If it was properly researched and predicted and any calculations needed were done and so on then that's responsible enough, but if someone just said "oh it'll be fine" then that's probably a bit reckless.

 

Probably the latter.

 

Lets "crank up" and whizz along a less than proven non production prototype on less than quality nick track in urgent need of a decent upgrade. 

 

I'm not saying life was more expendable back then.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Man in Seat 61 made a video of the record attempt.

(note Geoff Marshall being very loud in the background).

 

Even though it missed the record by 21 seconds, it bettered the APT by sticking to speed restrictions and was undone by a TSR at Carstairs that cost it 90 seconds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited by Ron Ron Ron
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Crisis Rail said:

 

Well looking back - doesn't it cross your mind that the APT attempt was bordering on recklessness?

Surely the whole point of the APT was that it could travel faster than a normal train on the existing infrastructure?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
11 minutes ago, Crisis Rail said:


Like the infrastructure at Hatfield? 

The Hatfield disaster was a direct result of inadequate track maintenance. A former colleague was among those in the dock. It, and the environment in which it took place, were in the Privatised era. APT ran on BR metals maintained by BR. No risks were taken. 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Crisis Rail said:

Like the infrastructure at Hatfield? 

 

The Hatfield accident was sixteen years later, under a completely different - and fatally weakened - infrastructure maintenance regime. The electrification of the line from Weaver Junction to Glasgow had been completed only 10 years earlier; this had involved not just stringing the wires but considerable rebuilding.

[Crossed with Olddudders.]

Edited by Compound2632
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Oldddudders said:

The Hatfield disaster was a direct result of inadequate track maintenance. A former colleague was among those in the dock. It, and the environment in which it took place, were in the Privatised era. APT ran on BR metals maintained by BR. No risks were taken. 


How can you differentiate between any   TOC? 
 

Rail fatigue isn’t fussy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

The Hatfield accident was sixteen years later, under a completely different - and fatally weakened - infrastructure maintenance regime. The electrification of the line from Weaver Junction to Glasgow had been completed only 10 years earlier; this had involved not just stringing the wires but considerable rebuilding.

[Crossed with Olddudders.]


Yes. But the WCML and generally BR were a mess till Branson. Brave to send something tonking down on ageing metals unfortunately and tragically Hatfield was the result no matter how you dress it up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 minute ago, Crisis Rail said:


Yes. But the WCML and generally BR were a mess till Branson. Brave to send something tonking down on ageing metals unfortunately and tragically Hatfield was the result no matter how you dress it up. 

 

That's doggy doo dahs

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 minutes ago, Crisis Rail said:


Yes. But the WCML and generally BR were a mess till Branson. Brave to send something tonking down on ageing metals unfortunately and tragically Hatfield was the result no matter how you dress it up. 

Do you have even the slightest idea what you are talking about? 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 minute ago, Crisis Rail said:


Your splitting hairs. 
What caused the fracture? 

 

Lack of maintenance - which wasn't the case under BR at the time of the APT-E, if you're going to rant at least get *some* of your "facts" correct.

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Crisis Rail said:

Brave to send something tonking down on ageing metals unfortunately and tragically Hatfield was the result no matter how you dress it up. 

 

Have you got any evidence for this position you have adopted and keep repeating? If not, please pipe down as it's an irrelevance.

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
11 minutes ago, Crisis Rail said:


Well as usual. Your the forum know it all. 
Point me in the right direction. 
 

lm listening. 

I am? Wow - fame at last. What I can say is that in the last days of BR I worked very closely with the men who had been Director of Civil Engineering and the Infrastructure Directors at InterCity and Regional Railways, not to mention the chap who I believe now heads up the Permanent Way Institution. To a man they all had concerns about Railtrack's attitude to maintenance regimes. They were sadly proved right. 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Friendly/supportive 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Crisis Rail said:


Well as usual. Your the forum know it all. 
Point me in the right direction. 
 

lm listening. 

 

You've only been successful in making yourself look completely bonkers.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...