All I was saying in response to a direct question is that, in general, the reason training requires an agreement is to deal with changed working hours and overtime necessary to enable the training to happen. Agreeing this isn't usually a problem unless there is already an industrial dispute. What about that is overblown, or did you mean to reply to a different post?
I was meaning the actual requirement for training in this specific circumstance seems to be OTT, when in reality it is no more than a minor reduction on pendolino / relaxation of non-tilting speed limits.
Are Avanti likely to start driver training by September? Who defines all the new braking points and is this worked out on computer or is it worked out by a senior team of driver managers and then validated before training commences. For the first section Weaver to Crewe and VV the info I received suggests that the MU profile will match EPS. It is only on the spur onto / off Runcorn where a combined EPS limits exists and therefore the 80x drops to PS of 85mph where EPS emains at 100mph.
I am sure Avanti have adequate plans, however as I do not work for them I cannot say. The drivers have to be competent for the route and signed off. They can’t just be sent out to find their way. If they will be trained by September or not will need to be confirmed by someone who works there.
The drivers themselves will work out what new braking points to use and everyone will probably do it slightly differently.
No. Still at factory
The timetable will have been designed around the sectional running times based on achieving all the speeds defined in the MU profile. Unless any train is running early, it will need to run as close to the MU profile as possible to meet the timetable without eating into the various additional engineering allowances. Avanti have publicly said the final profile is smoothed out from what is ultimately possible - primarily to avoid too many changes of speed for drivers . Behind the scenes calculations will have been done also to avoid excessive energy usage where only marginal time is gained.
It will interesting monitoring the performance of the 800’s under the new MU profile. I expect the times to vary quite a lot initially depending on the mindset of the driver. Even when driving within the ‘Professional Driving Policy’ driving styles vary a surprising amount. Some drivers focus on a smooth ride above everything else whilst others will try to extract every second from the performance of the train. Over time the difference between the two extremes will no doubt narrow. The ‘people’ perspective is often forgotten.
Okay great. As long as capacity is still there's that's a good thing.
Drivers will be seeing the signs now they are being uncovered in stages along the route. Even though not permitted to drive at them they will be able to see the speed changes…
There is if you look between Norton Bridge and Weaver. All commissioned and SA updated.
They are not in the publicly-viewable and downloadable pdfs (most recent on that stretch is dated 1 Jan 2025).
Aah apologies - the publicly accessible one must not have been updated.
No idea - I have only used the internal one so I am not aware how much of a lag there is. I will try and find out.
The WCML South is a very congested railway and only a slight delay from other trains or infrastructure issue causes more variance in timings than any difference in driving style.
Interesting that the TOC has been previously teaching a very cautious, over defensive, approach to driving and is now requiring a "harder" approach. This was one of the concerns. A whole generation of WCML driver has only ever known defensive driving with a TASS protected 390.
There is no suggestion any TOC will change their defensive driving approach. What I'm trying to say is that drivers adopt their own driving styles sometimes even more defensive than how they are taught. So when moving to a new TOC with new traction, the driver trainers find that they have to try and recalibrate them otherwise they will lose time on the schedules of the new trains that they operate. We are not taking about Avanti here either. I'm guessing everyone at Avanti on the 80x project has is even more cautious because the 80x have no speed supervision device and ORR are breathing down their necks to ensure that overspeeding does not accidentally happen.
The issue is with them following the tilting speeds rather than non tilting. The speed set is manual (apart from the 125 upper limit), so doesn’t stop them getting the limit itself wrong.
