Fast loco hauled runs

[43096]

There is something that gives reducing speed ceilings on both the overspeed and the ATP that relates to the tyre wear, so I presume the speed probe for the ATP is also used by the WSP or vice-versa. It doesn't affect power cars with the KB WSP mods but I believe almost none of the ex-GWR/FGW power cars had those mods.

Only 43053/056 of the GWR fleet had the superior KB WSP. Every other TOC modified their fleets.

 

[hexagon789]

Only 43053/056 of the GWR fleet had the superior KB WSP. Every other TOC modified their fleets.

So it was two PCs.

I always wonder why they didn't bother - cost?

 

[43096]

I always wonder why they didn't bother - cost?

Who knows? There's a good payback for it as it allows power cars to go longer between bogie overhauls: MML/EMT pushed power car bogie overhauls out from 488,000 miles to around 600,000 miles once they'd done the modification.

 

[Bevan Price]

I always look out for the big Mallard commemoration lineside sign when on Stoke bank. Feel it's a shame there isn't a comparable one at Wellington for City of Truro.

Why? The over 100 mph claim was just wishful thinking. Recent analysis suggests that it could not have exceeded around 98 mph.

 

[Harvester]

Why? The over 100 mph claim was just wishful thinking. Recent analysis suggests that it could not have exceeded around 98 mph.

Has there ever been an authenticated 100mph with steam down Wellington Bank? Clun Castle came close with around 98mph on the 9/5/64 special, but missed the ton due to adverse signals.

 

[Sheridan]

I was once told by an ex-driver that 'unofficially' - exceeding linespeed was tolerated to a fair degree, exceeding PSRs by more than a small margin not quite so much.

Excuse my ignorance, but assuming PSR stands for permanent speed restriction, what is the difference between that and ‘linespeed’?

 

[D1537]

I regularly used to time trains in my years following 47s and these were the highest speeds I reliably recorded (all between 1985 and 1988)

1. 47463, 1M14 - 112mph between Stafford and Crewe. I was on the same train, with the same driver who was well-known for his, er, attitude to speed limits two days later with 47491 and it "only" managed 101.
2. 47542, 1V94 - 109mph between Reading and Slough
3. 47452, 1M73 - 108mph between Thirsk and York
4. 47643, 1M40 (diverted) - 107mph between Reading and Slough
5. 47515, 1M41 - 105mph between Slough and Reading

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Back in the VXC days when voyagers were new and 1V96 ran from Glasgow Central to London Paddington you could tell when Old Oak drivers were on their way home as I would often see 132-133mph displayed on the shop TMS screen between Didcot and Reading.

As a young mid teen speeds above 100mph were common between Woking and Basingstoke/Winchester behind 50s and on 442s and REPs

Excuse my ignorance, but assuming PSR stands for permanent speed restriction, what is the difference between that and ‘linespeed’?

A PSR or permanent speed restriction will be a brief reduction in the speed limit compared to the linespeed. Newark flat crossing is one example of a PSR as the crossing speed limit is 110mph but the linespeed is 125

 

[hexagon789]

Excuse my ignorance, but assuming PSR stands for permanent speed restriction, what is the difference between that and ‘linespeed’?

Historically a line was treated in the Sectional Appendix as having a 'linespeed' either over all or part of the route. Only where linespeed was lower would it be physically marked on the Sectional Appendix and this reflected the physical situation into the 1950s - where only Permanent Speed Restrictions were marked except on the LNER.

For example - my 1977 ScR SA has for the Edinburgh-Glasgow:

Linespeed: Edinburgh-Polmont - 75mph (Except Edinburgh-Glasgow High Speed Trains may run at 90 except where otherwise shown); Polmont-Glasgow - 100mph.

The diagram does not show where the linespeed applies within those sections only where it doesn't and lower PSRs apply. Does that make sense?

I believe its only been since the 1990s that linespeed has become obsolete in Sectional Appendices and the diagrams show the continuous range of speeds.

 

[Sheridan]

Back in the VXC days when voyagers were new and 1V96 ran from Glasgow Central to London Paddington you could tell when Old Oak drivers were on their way home as I would often see 132-133mph displayed on the shop TMS screen between Didcot and Reading.

As a young mid teen speeds above 100mph were common between Woking and Basingstoke/Winchester behind 50s and on 442s and REPs



A PSR or permanent speed restriction will be a brief reduction in the speed limit compared to the linespeed. Newark flat crossing is one example of a PSR as the crossing speed limit is 110mph but the linespeed is 125

Historically a line was treated in the Sectional Appendix as having a 'linespeed' either over all or part of the route. Only where linespeed was lower would it be physically marked on the Sectional Appendix and this reflected the physical situation into the 1950s - where only Permanent Speed Restrictions were marked except on the LNER.

For example - my 1977 ScR SA has for the Edinburgh-Glasgow:

Linespeed: Edinburgh-Polmont - 75mph (Except Edinburgh-Glasgow High Speed Trains may run at 90 except where otherwise shown); Polmont-Glasgow - 100mph.

The diagram does not show where the linespeed applies within those sections only where it doesn't and lower PSRs apply. Does that make sense?

I believe its only been since the 1990s that linespeed has become obsolete in Sectional Appendices and the diagrams show the continuous range of speeds.

Thank you both, that all makes perfect sense!

 

[Rescars]

The data panels still read 140, and the ASL goes up to 150!



Yes, I remember reading of that one. ISTR a guard of the time remarked that Hoole only knew 2 driving techniques - full regulator and full-on brakes!

Perhaps the guard preferred a more sedate trundling life at 25mph on a loose coupled goods?







Presumably the run on Sir Nigel Gresley in the latter 1950s that touches 112, at which point Alan Peglar (who was on the footplate) told the driver to ease off. To be fair the infrastructure wasn't in quite as good nick as pre-war, so it was probably wise.



I was once told by an ex-driver that 'unofficially' - exceeding linespeed was tolerated to a fair degree, exceeding PSRs by more than a small margin not quite so much.

I recall an incident in the late 70s when the guard of a WCML express applied the brakes part way down Shap because he considered the driver was going too fast and "as guard, he was in charge of the train". I believe it led to quite a row between the representatives from ASLEF and the NUR - never mind what management had to say.

 

[hexagon789]

I recall an incident in the late 70s when the guard of a WCML express applied the brakes part way down Shap because he considered the driver was going too fast and "as guard, he was in charge of the train". I believe it led to quite a row between the representatives from ASLEF and the NUR - never mind what management had to say.

Not uncommon, i believe it was referred to as 'giving a splash' - ie making aught brake application to draw the drivers attention. The guard of the train in the Eltham Well crash felt the train was going too fast on approach to the curve and gave a couple of 'splashes' to try and draw the drivers attention but sadly without effect.

Ultimately I understand the guard is responsible for the safety of passengers and as you say in charge of the train, so I don't see how anyone could argue that the actions of a guard in attempting or succeeding in controlling a somewhat overspeeding train would be overstepping their authority.

Once electrified some pretty high speeds were often obtained down Shap, after all the 87s could climb the gradient at 90mph quite easily with the full 455-tonne train so going a bit quicker than that downhill wouldn't pose a problem

 

[XAM2175]

Ultimately I understand the guard is responsible for the safety of passengers and as you say in charge of the train, so I don't see how anyone could argue that the actions of a guard in attempting or succeeding in controlling a somewhat overspeeding train would be overstepping their authority.

Indeed. The unwillingness of guards to 'overrule' the driver was cited as a weakness in CityRail's risk management plans in the investigation of the Waterfall accident in New South Wales in 2003.

 

[Rescars]

Thanks for your responses. Presumably in these circumstances, the guard would only have personal feelings and route knowledge on which to rely - without the benefit of a speedometer or any view of the road ahead (at least since the demise of duckets or periscopes from guard's compartments).

 

[hexagon789]

Thanks for your responses. Presumably in these circumstances, the guard would only have personal feelings and route knowledge on which to rely - without the benefit of a speedometer or any view of the road ahead (at least since the demise of duckets or periscopes from guard's compartments).

If drivers could estimate speed reasonably accurately with experience without a speedo to refer to, I don't see why a guard couldn't. After all there were ways of figuring out the speed such using the rail joints (in pre-CWR days) or timing the mileposts.

I think also simply travelling over a route several times you'd get a feeling for how the train rode if certain sections, so I think a guard would notice if it felt particularly rough/fast at some points.

 

[Shimbleshanks]

A GPS unit ( not a phone app - an actual purpose made handheld GPS which is more accurate ) will generally be accurate to +/- 3% with a clean signal; combining that with the 3 mph margin before anything will trigger on the train, the GPS indicating 131 mph could be no more than 126 mph, maybe 127 mph on the train.

The signal can also waver a bit giving slightly out speeds briefly where there are buildings and trees around, so the 131 mph being indicated for just 45 seconds would seem to be consistent with that; I would therefore agree with you that it's probably his GPS. With my first GPS unit, which wasn't as precise as the ones we have these days, I once clocked a class 455 doing "145" mph near Worcester Park - so a corrupted signal can produce some quite spectacular and obviously incorrect results if the circumstances are right.

I lost faith in the speedo function on my phone after it claimed I hit 35mph on my pushbike on an entirely uphill route between Croydon and Purley...

 

[Crewe Exile]

Interesting thread. Back in my ‘bashing’ days I never really took speed measurements but there certainly seemed a near accepted protocol that a late running service could ‘try and get some time back’ through fast running. I do remember in particular a quite ‘lively’ ride behind a 45 (almost positive it was 140) between New Street and Temple Meads - you can just tell when you are going just a little too quick - at the time it was great fun!. ‘Roarers’ always seemed to get absolutely thrashed on the. WCML - they weren’t regulars on the inter city turns to and from Euston but seemed to be able to hold time well enough when they did appear - had a couple of great 85 runs between Carlisle and Crewe on such turns - ‘lively’ over Shap…