Perhaps it's already been reported but are the TfW units using the CAT engines or the Ford ones?Don't suppose it matters - they are moving to CAT engines instead going forward.
Perhaps it's already been reported but are the TfW units using the CAT engines or the Ford ones?Don't suppose it matters - they are moving to CAT engines instead going forward.
Though it may be related to that, not because of loading, but in that a road vehicle engine tends (other than buses) to be at the front and in a direct airflow as a result, meaning that even if the engine's water cooling system is inadequate it is still cooled by the flow of air (and indeed there are older air-only cooled engines like some VW ones). Under the unit there is far less airflow and it can be far more disrupted.
Perhaps it's already been reported but are the TfW units using the CAT engines or the Ford ones?
Don't suppose it matters - they are moving to CAT engines instead going forward.
Another problem with the taxi TX2 duroteq engine was you could leave home from cold engine start no problem and say you pop to either the supermarket or petrol station and after paying for goods etc returning to vehicle afterwards it would refuse to start! The engine would be hot or warm depending how long you were away doing your retail thing, whilst trying to start the engine it would occaisionaly start briefly intermittently churning out black smoke. Then say after 20 or 30 mins after calling the 'fourth emergency' service he would turn the key and if you were lucky it would start or baffle him if it didn't.
The manufacturers 'Mann & Overton' of Coventry denied catagoricaly there was a problem. The aforementioned were not isolated incidents, this includes the very, very long timing (lumpy & uneven tick over + over fueling) belt I earlier mentioned.
The Ford duroteq engine was shoehorned into the TX2, I'm not aware of any overheating issues with the traditional liquid coolant system, as you would expect a London taxi spends much of it's time in stationary and slow moving traffic and performed as you would expect it to.
I can only suspect that the Eng Mgt system associated with the LTI TX2 required a remap to resolve those issues?
With Ford running down the Bridgend plant, whats the future availability of this engine going to be?
But the TX2 engine isn't the same as the one in the 230s.
The TX2 is a 2.4 litre the 230s is a 3.2l - you can't cite problems on the 2.4 as the reason for the problems on the 3.2 - as engines they may be quite different. The 'Duratorq' name is used by Ford on all of its diesel engines.
Interesting - then where are the Cat rumours coming from? A shame really as there's only so long the units will be allowed to operate at such a low availability figure before the line will end up reverting to using 150s (Aware there'd be some transfer hassle to sort that out). Perhaps a raft redesign will fix it, we shall see.They confirmed on twitter the other day that there are no plans to change the engines on the MV units and they also said that the tfw sets are using the same engines as the MV units, albeit in a different way.
Isn't that the same thing? The same weight still needs shifting, whether or not the power is being converted to electricity and back or transmitted by mechanical or hydraulic means. DEMU engines may benefit from some smoothing and I guess it could have short-term electricity storage fitted to aid that but I don't know whether the 230s do.You're showing a lack of understanding about how the engine is being used. In road use it is driving a mechanical transmission, so whilst not the be all and and all, the weight may be relevant. In the case of the 230s they are providing electrical power to a gen set - so the weight of the unit isn't relevant, the ability of the engine to provide electricity is. [...]
Fevered imaginations of dizzy hot bus replacement passengers?Interesting - then where are the Cat rumours coming from?
You're showing a lack of understanding about how the engine is being used. In road use it is driving a mechanical transmission, so whilst not the be all and and all, the weight may be relevant. In the case of the 230s they are providing electrical power to a gen set - so the weight of the unit isn't relevant, the ability of the engine to provide electricity is. Either way it sounds like cooling is the main issue, effectively causing either the engine or gen set to shut down because they are getting too hot - that's not a failing of the engine per se, nor is it necessarily the fault with the use i.e. rail rather than road.
Interesting - then where are the Cat rumours coming from?
Not really, no - direct mechanical connection (even via some sort of gearing) provides an uneven load - think pedalling a bike with multiple gears as opposed to an exercise bike (which could be used to generate electricity, and to some extent they do)Isn't that the same thing? The same weight still needs shifting, whether or not the power is being converted to electricity and back or transmitted by mechanical or hydraulic means. DEMU engines may benefit from some smoothing and I guess it could have short-term electricity storage fitted to aid that but I don't know whether the 230s do.
Well the elderly hobbyists have managed to persuade First Group and the DfT that they are worth taking seriously, as has been well documented elsewhere today Though admittedly without van engines, but that was never on the cards for the latest use for the units.Who'd have thought a cut and shut noddy train with a van engine put together by a bunch of elderly hobbyists would be such a failure in real operations. Built, acquired and operated on the cheap. Is anyone really surprised?
Which is great news, and is being discussed here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/class-484-to-replace-class-483-on-the-island-line.192181/Well the elderly hobbyists have managed to persuade First Group and the DfT that they are worth taking seriously, as has been well documented elsewhere today Though admittedly without van engines, but that was never on the cards for the latest use for the units.
Absolutely irrelevant - Bridgend only produces the 1.6 Ecoboost petrol engine. Bridgend has never produced diesel engines.
It did, but not for Ford, Bridgend used to make the Volvo 2.4 litre engine for Land Rover and Jaguar.
Not according to this it didn't https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Bridgend_Engine_Plant#Jaguar_engine_plant
It produced for Volvo the straight 6 which was a petrol engine. Volvo's 2.4 diesel engine (a 5 cylinder unit) was never used by Jaguar who used the PSA Ford 2.2 4 cyl or 2.7 V6. Land Rover used BMW engines for a while, their own Td5 (not the Volvo one) and then Ford Duratorq's.
First of all I'd like to stand by my judgement of the ford durateq engine being crap. Thats from experience in two ford transit tourneo's used as high mileage taxis. Which both had cooling and cylinder head problens, admittedly both on 54 plate examples.
Secondly, I went through Bletchley yesterday on the 1430 departure from Euston to Glasgow, and went through Bletchley at approx 1500 hours. Do any of you know which tiddler unit was on the Marston Vale line then?
A southern unit prevented me from getting a carriage number.
And does that mean weight isn't relevant? Can you move 200kg as easily as 100kgwith an exercise bike?Not really, no - direct mechanical connection (even via some sort of gearing) provides an uneven load - think pedalling a bike with multiple gears as opposed to an exercise bike (which could be used to generate electricity, and to some extent they do)
If it were connected to an electric motor, yes, just as easily. It will just take a lot longer. Electric drives allow a uniform load on the engine driving them, how much they are connected to will simply dictate performance and thus how long they have to operate at that workload.And does that mean weight isn't relevant? Can you move 200kg as easily as 100kgwith an exercise bike?
Whisper it quietly but reliability this week has been good! We might even have ( nearly) three trains in service!
Yes you notice that on a 22x compared to a 18x. The 22x engines appear to stay at an almost constant rpm, while the 18x units with identical engines but mechanical transmission engine revs fluctuate with road speed - a bit like an old 3-speed automatic gearbox.If it were connected to an electric motor, yes, just as easily. It will just take a lot longer. Electric drives allow a uniform load on the engine driving them, how much they are connected to will simply dictate performance and thus how long they have to operate at that workload.
In other words, weight is relevant - but it has a different effect. It took some time but glad we got there in the end.If it were connected to an electric motor, yes, just as easily. It will just take a lot longer. Electric drives allow a uniform load on the engine driving them, how much they are connected to will simply dictate performance and thus how long they have to operate at that workload.
Failed again this morning with seemingly no trains available.
The service has just restarted with one train and i notice a couple of test runs on the books for later today. I might get a train this evening............................
PS Cancellations on Friday and Saturday due to staff shortages. No trains yet they still fail. FFS.