150222
Member
- Joined
- 9 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 1,002
I am aware that pacers can work in multiple with sprinters. Could they, if the need ever arose work in multiple with 170's or any other class with BSI couplers?
I am aware that pacers can work in multiple with sprinters. Could they, if the need ever arose work in multiple with 170's or any other class with BSI couplers?
BSI was working towards that. Even back in BR days though, NSE deliberately specified their DMUs to be incompatible with Provincial's - clear case of tribalism.
A universal specification would be a wonderful idea.
Mechanically they can couple but not electrically. If a 14x was to assist a 17x then the pin blocks would be retracted and the couple button would not be pressed. Brakes would be isolated on the failure and restricted to 5mph. This would be a last resort though.
A universal specification would be a wonderful idea.
I wonder how NSE got away with the decision that 165/166s were to be incompatible given that BR wanted standardisation and the ability to interwork.
Amazing that similar classes can't work together (e.g. 221 + 222s)
They both work with 153s though, so would a "Pacer +153 + 170" combination work?
I wonder how NSE got away with the decision that 165/166s were to be incompatible given that BR wanted standardisation and the ability to interwork.
So what is the actual reason that a 14X can't work with a 170? If It's electrical then how can a 15X work with a 14X. And a 15X with a 170?
No. This is due to the way the multiple working and other circuits are wired through the train, you can't simply put something between electrically incompatible vehicles to overcome the issue. The whole train must be compatible. As far as I know the problem lies with the pin blocks themselves, the modification undertaken to enable BR era types to work with 170s involved changing the order the pins were in.
Going back to the references to 170s working with 15x DMUs, only those required to work with 170s were modified, so for example a Scotrail 156 can work with a 170 but a Northern 156 couldn't.
Same with the 159s IIRC
Could it also (even if electrical compatibility be overcome) be the more fundamental reason that the 170 is capable of 100mph and is more powerful than a 15X range?
The mechanics and "bogies" might not be keen on accidently dragged up to 100mph....
didn't they deliberately specify different couplings for the 159s so that they would be less likely to be borrowed by regional railways? Another example of how the Integrated BR that everyone fondly remembers actually ceased to be a long time before privatisation.
Could it also (even if electrical compatibility be overcome) be the more fundamental reason that the 170 is capable of 100mph and is more powerful than a 15X range?
I was surprised to learn a few years ago that when, for example, driving a 170 with a 153 tagged on the back, there is nothing to stop the driver taking it beyond the 153s limit - and exactly that has happened at least once under Central Train, resulting in a very knackered 153.
I was surprised to learn a few years ago that when, for example, driving a 170 with a 153 tagged on the back, there is nothing to stop the driver taking it beyond the 153s limit - and exactly that has happened at least once under Central Train, resulting in a very knackered 153.
Really? Wow, I'd assumed there'd be a limiter around a couple of mph above their specified speed!