For the Glasgow diagram. This is obviously the final time it's booked for a 225 set, but I'm sure there's an outside chance that a set may end up on 1S23/1E06 in the event of an Azuma failure and a set swap.
I wonder if that will happen .
For the Glasgow diagram. This is obviously the final time it's booked for a 225 set, but I'm sure there's an outside chance that a set may end up on 1S23/1E06 in the event of an Azuma failure and a set swap.
The only one I can hand on heart say is a HST is 1130 Aberdeen service.Anyone know which services from Edinburgh to kings cross today between about 1100 and 1300 will be 91/mk4 or HST (ie definitely not Azuma)? Thanks
Thanks. I just realised they are all diverted via Carlisle and only running once an hour anyway.The only one I can hand on heart say is a HST is 1130 Aberdeen service.
On a normal Saturday they didn’t use that many. You were normally on the older trains but the ones coming from North of Edinburgh will be HST until at least the end of November.Anyone know which services from Edinburgh to kings cross today between about 0940 and 1340 will be HST (ie definitely not Azuma)? Thanks
Thanks all. The 09.42 EDB to KGX is an HST. I just got on it.No MK4 in Edinburgh today. Diversions via Carlisle so will be all HST and 800
Rumours spread that 91109 'Bobby Robson' and 91111 'For The Fallen' are will be withdrawn from service after today.
Pretty certain this is not the case for two reasons. Firstly, if that was the case, I'm pretty certain that as with the 4 91s that have already gone, someone would have mentioned it on here before now (and LNER would probably have mentioned it on their Twitter page too as they've done with all the previous withdrawals). The other one is that neither 109 not 111 end up at Bounds Green tonight (109 ends at Heaton, 111 ends at Ferme Park) and the previous withdrawals have all been at Bounds Green. Then there's also the fact it's been mentioned a few times before by reliable people that no more 91s are being withdrawn until 2020.Rumours spread that 91109 'Bobby Robson' and 91111 'For The Fallen' are will be withdrawn from service after today.
They are, according to WNXX, to be kept intact for the foreseeable future at Bounds Green.So where are 117 and 120 now? are they going straight to scrap or hanging outside Wabtec opposite platform 8 at Doncaster?
Just curious, with spare 91s kicking around (partly failing though), could they start double-heading, or double-ending? I know it's never going to happen, but I'm curious as to feasibility? [Could get the advantages of the 90s acceleration but with the 91s top speed, at the cost of yet more maintenance...]
You cannot couple a 91 to the Mark 4 FO anyway as the FO has Tightlock couplers and the 91s have drop-head buckeyes.If you mean double-heading, eg 2 x 91s at the same end, this happens semi regularly when light 91s are required at Wabtec. My understanding is that there is no performance benefit as the enclosed 91 is dragged.
Regarding double-ending, which I presume to mean a 91 at each end and removing the DVT entirely, this won't happen for many reasons. Lack of storage space within the 91s, no TM compartment, first class coaches being open ended, etc. I'd doubt whether you can even run 2 x 91s within the same set without one of them being dragged due to TDM issues, though I'm happy to be corrected if that is indeed possible.
Plus, why would LNER even bother with the hassle. An interesting idea nonetheless.
Wasn't the TDM system able to control a class 43 at the other end of the train when the 43s were acting as stand-ins for the mark 4 DVTs which hadn't yet arrived? Doesn't prove that it'd work with a second 91 there instead, but does suggest that it might be feesible. I'm not sure if it actually happened, but there was a rumour that in the run up to IEP two class 91s were to top & tail a test train overnight on the ECML with both powering. The idea was to test the effect having two pantographs raised (one at each of the the train) would have on the OHLE. As I say I'm not sure if it actually happened, but if it did I'd be interested to see evidence if anyone has a link to a video.Regarding double-ending, which I presume to mean a 91 at each end and removing the DVT entirely, this won't happen for many reasons. Lack of storage space within the 91s, no TM compartment, first class coaches being open ended, etc. I'd doubt whether you can even run 2 x 91s within the same set without one of them being dragged due to TDM issues, though I'm happy to be corrected if that is indeed possible.
Plus, why would LNER even bother with the hassle. An interesting idea nonetheless.
Wasn't the TDM system able to control a class 43 at the other end of the train when the 43s were acting as stand-ins for the mark 4 DVTs which hadn't yet arrived? Doesn't prove that it'd work with a second 91 there instead, but does suggest that it might be feesible. I'm not sure if it actually happened, but there was a rumour that in the run up to IEP two class 91s were to top & tail a test train overnight on the ECML with both powering. The idea was to test the effect having two pantographs raised (one at each of the the train) would have on the OHLE. As I say I'm not sure if it actually happened, but if it did I'd be interested to see evidence if anyone has a link to a video.
Wasn't the TDM system able to control a class 43 at the other end of the train when the 43s were acting as stand-ins for the mark 4 DVTs which hadn't yet arrived? Doesn't prove that it'd work with a second 91 there instead, but does suggest that it might be feesible. I'm not sure if it actually happened, but there was a rumour that in the run up to IEP two class 91s were to top & tail a test train overnight on the ECML with both powering. The idea was to test the effect having two pantographs raised (one at each of the the train) would have on the OHLE. As I say I'm not sure if it actually happened, but if it did I'd be interested to see evidence if anyone has a link to a video.
I cannot believe mk4s bring scrapped already!!Interesting picture (not mine) from Flickr of Booths at Rotherham with some of the first Mk4s being scrapped...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jimbo...kj1TB-2gkixf9-2gkixbm-2gkj1JZ-2giNyPf-2ghoB4M
There was a pic of the T&T 91s in the railway press at the time. I think the DVT was replaced by the spare TSOE. I don't know if both locos were under power but it did hit 125mph.
Connected with Azuma introduction and the need for two pans to be raised when a pair of 5-car sets are running coupled, as I recall it.I think that was to test the overheads with two pantographs at speed wasn't it?
Why did they do that when 91114 had the 2 duplex pantographs that they could have easily done it with? or was it just testing having 2 pantographs up at either end of the train? I can only presume it's the latter.Yes, a double 91 (back to back) test was done, maybe in about 2013/14. Can't point to any evidence off hand, I'm afraid, but sure it was in a magazine around the time.
The latter. The aim was to test contact wire forces and “wave” and pantograph uplift running at 125mph with a pan raised at each end of the train to mimic Azuma 5-car sets running as a pair.Why did they do that when 91114 had the 2 duplex pantographs that they could have easily done it with? or was it just testing having 2 pantographs up at either end of the train? I can only presume it's the latter.