Well, quite. The numbering system in Britain is a shambolic mess.Or how about just moving to the UIC standard numbering system? :P
We could always try putting a letter prefix on locomotive numbers. How about D for diesel and E for electric?
what letter would you use for battery and bi-mode?We could always try putting a letter prefix on locomotive numbers. How about D for diesel and E for electric?
Traditionally, bi-mode (i.e. electro-diesel) locomotives had an E prefix and were numbered in the electric loco range. The class 88s perpetuate this manner of classification under the TOPS scheme.what letter would you use for battery and bi-mode?
Or just use the UIC system, like everyone else does.We could always try putting a letter prefix on locomotive numbers. How about D for diesel and E for electric?
What would you then become?Or just use the UIC system, like everyone else does.
What would you then become?
92 70 0043 096-1What would you then become?
Well it’s got a nice ring to it.92 70 0043 096-1
ach well, NIH you knowOr just use the UIC system, like everyone else does.
Well that's so much simpler!92 70 0043 096-1
Well it’s got a nice ring to it.
Well that's so much simpler!
That's Numberwang!92 70 0043 096-1
The trainspotters amongst us are not going to like that flying past at High speed!I mean once you know what the bits mean it is quite simple!
The first two digits identify the type of vehicle (i.e. diesel locomotive, electric multiple unit, etc), the next two identify the country of registration the next bloc of four numbers and then three (i.e. 0043 096 in the above example) are up to the relevant country to use to identify individual vehicles as they see fit and then the final number is just a checksum.
It doesn't roll off the tongue to be fair but it's pretty logical!
So, to use an example pertinent to this thread, the first of the new class 69s assuming it is 69001 in UIC would probably end up being 92 70 0069 001-1 (I'm not sure how to calculate the checksum so that could be anything to be fair!).
It doesn't resolve anything at all about the jumble that is UK numbering though.I mean once you know what the bits mean it is quite simple!
The first two digits identify the type of vehicle (i.e. diesel locomotive, electric multiple unit, etc), the next two identify the country of registration the next bloc of four numbers and then three (i.e. 0043 096 in the above example) are up to the relevant country to use to identify individual vehicles as they see fit and then the final number is just a checksum.
It doesn't roll off the tongue to be fair but it's pretty logical!
So, to use an example pertinent to this thread, the first of the new class 69s assuming it is 69001 in UIC would probably end up being 92 70 0069 001-1 (I'm not sure how to calculate the checksum so that could be anything to be fair!).
Nicely explained there. Thanks.I mean once you know what the bits mean it is quite simple!
The first two digits identify the type of vehicle (i.e. diesel locomotive, electric multiple unit, etc), the next two identify the country of registration the next bloc of four numbers and then three (i.e. 0043 096 in the above example) are up to the relevant country to use to identify individual vehicles as they see fit and then the final number is just a checksum.
It doesn't roll off the tongue to be fair but it's pretty logical!
So, to use an example pertinent to this thread, the first of the new class 69s assuming it is 69001 in UIC would probably end up being 92 70 0069 001-1 (I'm not sure how to calculate the checksum so that could be anything to be fair!).
the checksum would be 2I mean once you know what the bits mean it is quite simple!
[...]
So, to use an example pertinent to this thread, the first of the new class 69s assuming it is 69001 in UIC would probably end up being 92 70 0069 001-1 (I'm not sure how to calculate the checksum so that could be anything to be fair!).
The trainspotters amongst us are not going to like that flying past at High speed!
It doesn't resolve anything at all about the jumble that is UK numbering though.
Nicely explained there. Thanks.
the checksum would be 2
(I'm not sure how to calculate the checksum so that could be anything to be fair!).
the checksum would be 2
We have a few conflicting carirage/loco numbers already - can anybody give an example of their respective UIC classifications?
Sorry, I meant carriage/unit. One example would be unit 444001, which conflicts with the DMSL in 385 001.
I'm not so sure it doesn't. It addresses the issue we have the moment where we have ranges in the hundreds for various different things. I.e. 1xx is DMUs, 2xx is DEMUs, etc but then have units which ignore that convention in some way (i.e. we now have 8xx for high-speed but 390 and 395s aren't in there). Under UIC those distinctions are handled under the type code which means that our existing choice of 395 for a high speed EMU is irrelevant as it would gain a 93 type code whilst a 331 would be a 94 type code creating the appropriate separation and "at a glance" distinction between them.
It is to be noted than in countries where the EVN system is in place, the whole 12-digit number isn’t used as the unit number. Digits 5 to 11 form the real number, the rest isn’t used as the true vehicle identifier. The EVN includes the vehicle number, not the opposite.Yes - I see what you mean.
However, the same could be achieved by adding a single digit on the front of our existing system, rather than an additional 5.