In the dirt...

[Snapper]

This from Railway Eye:

http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2009/03/pendolino-at-maximum-tilt.html

 

[Pumbaa]

So how long before certain VHF services get cut?...

 

[Guinness]

Another 90 set out in a few weeks then?

 

[Chilled Phill]

Interesting point at the bottom as well.

Three Pendos "damaged at the hands of NR". Although, in this case certainly, "damaged" would be too weak to describe the '390' involved in this shunt...

 

[Mintona]

This happened at the start of January did it not? Or has it happened again?

 

[metrocammel]

Interesting point at the bottom as well.

Three Pendos "damaged at the hands of NR". Although, in this case certainly, "damaged" would be too weak to describe the '390' involved in this shunt...

Where's that gen from? As far as I'm aware it's going to be out of service for a few month, but it's not exactly terminal. In my books, 'damaged' would fit the bill there.

 

[kvbham]

I think it might have caused some loco-hauled services to come back from April 06 until further notice - it was on a sign.

 

[dave_wm]

From what I've heard, the 90+LHCS will be doing three return trips each day EUS-BHM this week, not sure if it will still run the Friday EUS-PRE.

 

[The Planner]

Its doing the 0745 Euston - Brum , 0930 return and the following services that set would normally do I think.

 

[kvbham]

Its doing the 0745 Euston - Brum , 0930 return and the following services that set would normally do I think.

In addition there also be ... 1330 BHM - EUS + 1731 BHM - EUS I think!??

 

[Benn88]

I'm considering going for this, could someone be so kind as to post the times for departures off Bham and Euston of this set in each direction?

I have to work from 6 onwards in Manchester, so I'd be going for one of the early runs...

Cheers for the heads up, and heres to many more pendo incidents*...

*Aslong as no one gets hurt!

 

[Death]

Interesting point at the bottom as well.
Three Pendos "damaged at the hands of NR". Although, in this case certainly, "damaged" would be too weak to describe the '390' involved in this shunt...

Hmm...I know that a lot of people consider Pendos to be boring lumps of plastic, but personally - Given they're the closest thing to the 370 APT-P on the network nowadays - I like 'em a fair old bit...Despite the tiny windows and the Gods-awful smell near the loos! hock:

Furthermore: Given how well 390033 (City of Glasgow) managed to hold herself together and protect all bar one of her passengers during the 115mph Greyrigg derailment...How on Earth have 006 and 008 been knocked out and (By the sounds of things) badly damaged by a low-speed shunting incident? Surely twenty minutes with a crane and a lick of paint is all that's needed to bring both units back into service? :?

Another 90 set out in a few weeks then?

From what I've heard, the 90+LHCS will be doing three return trips each day EUS-BHM this week, not sure if it will still run the Friday EUS-PRE.

On a similar note: Does anyone have an idea which (If any) runs this set might be doing along EUS-PRE and EUS-SOT/MAN on Friday 17th? Being the typical speed freak that I am and not being too fussed about clocking up loco haulage, I'd probabally want to avoid it if possible. Doing 110mph along the Trent Valley section insted of 140mph - Due to 90s and Mk-IIIs having no tilt capability - Would almost certainly drive me right up the pole! hock:

 

[driver9000]

Grayrigg was 95mph.

Derailments can damage the wheelsets, transmission etc and if bodywork has been damaged this will need to be repaired too, it takes time to get parts and with so many parties involved such as RAIB, the owner of the trains involved, insurers, Network Rail (or whoever owns the location involved) its a long winded process to argue out who will pay for it.

You wouldnt be doing 140mph along the Trent Valley even if you are in a 390, its 125mph max for tilting trains.

 

[Death]

Grayrigg was 95mph.

Ahh...I had it down as 115mph. Either way though...For a train to remain more or less intact after a 95mph derailment and tumble down an embankment is very good in safety terms (I doubt the 370 would handle the same as well) - And is a tribute to the build quality of the Pendolino, in my opinion! 8)

You wouldnt be doing 140mph along the Trent Valley even if you are in a 390, its 125mph max for tilting trains.

Hang on...Have NR been buggering about with the speed limits again?

I'm pretty certain that last time I passed through the Trent Valley, the speed limit was 140mph for tilting trains...And that was during the Trent Valley expansion works! hock:

I take it from the above that VT Pendos no longer exceed 125mph on any of their routes, then? :cry:

 

[matt]

I'm pretty certain that last time I passed through the Trent Valley, the speed limit was 140mph for tilting trains...And that was during the Trent Valley expansion works! hock:

I take it from the above that VT Pendos no longer exceed 125mph on any of their routes, then? :cry:

The speed limit has never been higher than 125mph.

 

[bluenoxid]

There was a flashing green system on the ECML to bring it in during BR times but we really will need in cab before venturing to such speeds.

Just to put into context, a train driver doing around 140mph will be required to process a signal every 12 - 13 seconds (4 aspect, half mile spacing) and adjust speed accordingly. In addition, signal sighting times are quite a bit, meaning that signals will have to be able to be seen from quite a distance (third of a mile approx).

 

[Death]

The speed limit has never been higher than 125mph.

It's never been higher than 125mph? I'm pretty darn certain that I've heard of Pendos hitting the 140mph mark somewhere in the West Midlands...And the Trent Valley section is about the straightest and clearest place of the lot IIRC!
(Besides...What about the APT-P and it's usual 165mph express runs to Glasgow? )

There was a flashing green system on the ECML to bring it in during BR times but we really will need in cab before venturing to such speeds.
Just to put into context, a train driver doing around 140mph will be required to process a signal every 12 - 13 seconds (4 aspect, half mile spacing) and adjust speed accordingly. In addition, signal sighting times are quite a bit, meaning that signals will have to be able to be seen from quite a distance (third of a mile approx).

Hmmm...As a strong advocate of 1,400mph running along the WCML, this is something I've been giving a degree of thought to over time.

What I've come up with so far on the ideas front is a simple addition to the existing signalling system (C-APT II, I'd call it. ) where information about signal aspects further up line is passed to trains wirelessly (An RFID rope running along the line would do the trick) and displayed on a sort of heads-up stuck wherever the driver can see it.
In short, it would allow the driver to see the aspects of the 10-30 signals in front of him (Preferably in real-time, but at 1,400mph updating at each signal would be "real-time" enough! ) along with any trains that are also in front of him, allowing the driver to plan and control his speed well in advance of any obstacles! 8)

I'd rather not spend tons of time typing out a full description, so I'll jump into Paint in a sec, do a quick bodge-up to try and demonstrate what I'm on about, and attach it to this post when done. Comments on this idea would be appreciated, though!

 

[90019]

It's never been higher than 125mph? I'm pretty darn certain that I've heard of Pendos hitting the 140mph mark somewhere in the West Midlands...And the Trent Valley section is about the straightest and clearest place of the lot IIRC!

Trains have been faster on speed runs, like 91110 getting the UK loco speed record of 162mph in 1989, but currently, for a train running a normal mainline service 125mph is the maximum.

(Besides...What about the APT-P and it's usual 165mph express runs to Glasgow? )

It did get the UK speed record at 162mph in 1979, but I seriously doubt it did this more than once or maybe twice.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Hmmm...As a strong advocate of 1,400mph running along the WCML, this is something I've been giving a degree of thought to over time.

So, the full WCML in about 28 minutes?
i doubt you'd get up to full speed before you reached the end of it

 

[Death]

Oh...So I'm not the only one who's up this late!

Trains have been faster on speed runs, like 91110 getting the UK loco speed record of 162mph in 1989, but currently, for a train running a normal mainline service 125mph is the maximum.

[The APT-P] did get the UK speed record at 162mph in 1979, but I seriously doubt it did this more than once or maybe twice.

Aww...That's a bit p*** poor for todays railways isn't it? If we were doing 165mph or so back at the start of the 80's, why on Earth have we dropped back to 125mph in the "oh oh's"? hock:

I'm starting to detect a severe level of incompetancy at the boards of VT, NXEC, XC and other "high-speed" operators. Our services should be doing at least 600mph by now!

So, the full WCML in about 28 minutes?
i doubt you'd get up to full speed before you reached the end of it

Show me a servicable 370 and a couple of hours at the Old Dalby APT workshops...And I'll show ye a train that would make even Satan **** himself in sheer terror! hock:

Anyhow...About that quick demonstration of my C-APT II approach to in-cab:
I had to just grab a random cab view photo because I didn't want to bugger about (Looks like it's from a Shed, even though I wanted to demonstrate this fitted to a 142!) but the image below shows the driver's display, and demonstrates how the driver can see what's coming up:

• Four clear signals - Giving the driver 60 miles of clear high-speed thrash (Safe speed 571.25mph),
• Double and single cautions - Standard procedure for warning of forthcoming danger aspects,
• Two danger signals - With display also showing presence of 2T69 somewhere between them (So no SPADs, please! )

Before anyone says: I can see why anyone in the cab of the featured train would rather the train wasn't moving at all...But this wasn't supposed to be a masterpiece. Just assume ye are in the back cab and not the front one!

Farewell...
>> Death <<

 

[90019]

Aww...That's a bit p*** poor for todays railways isn't it? If we were doing 165mph or so back at the start of the 80's, why on Earth have we dropped back to 125mph in the "oh oh's"? hock:

It only achieved 162mph on a test run, same as with 91110, they werent in service when they reached those speeds.

 

[ffcphone]

The poster querying the 140mph speed limit may well be getting his overhead wires crossed!

Like most of us, I seem to recall reading somewhere that VT were either considering applying to NR for line speed increases in the Trent Valley or perhaps had even gone as far as making the application. Either way, it didn't come to fruition. In cab signalling was required.

F

 

[87015]

90036 out today on this. More Voyagers than ever passing Leighton so presume a couple of them covering for broken Pendos aswell.

 

[Death]

It only achieved 162mph on a test run, same as with 91110, they werent in service when they reached those speeds.

Oh...I'd always thought those speeds had been achieved in passenger service. So much for the 200+mph WCML workings that I was really praying for... hock:ad::cry:

The poster querying the 140mph speed limit may well be getting his overhead wires crossed!
Like most of us, I seem to recall reading somewhere that VT were either considering applying to NR for line speed increases in the Trent Valley or perhaps had even gone as far as making the application. Either way, it didn't come to fruition. In cab signalling was required.

Hmm...Suppose in-cab would be needed where the signal can't be seen from any further than half a mile away, and that's depending on how fast the driver's reactions are.

On the other hand - Referring to the demo and description of my C-APT II system above - How would one go suggesting such a system to Network Rail? After all, the C-APT II system that I've got in mind would be pretty damn cheap to manufacture and install (Probabally about £35,- per vehicle if data is passed via existing ECTPS grids), and although it isn't the same as the ICS used on the TGV network, it'd still give the driver a good 100+ miles advance notice of an approaching danger aspect. Even the slowest of drivers would be able to stop a train safely from 950mph if they know of the impending danger aspect around 75 miles beforehand!

 

[Pumbaa]

90036 out today on this. More Voyagers than ever passing Leighton so presume a couple of them covering for broken Pendos aswell.

CSA this morning confirmed that they are looking at taking one of the spare Voyagers out every day on a confined EBW diagram.

 

[Ben]

CSA this morning confirmed that they are looking at taking one of the spare Voyagers out every day on a confined EBW diagram.

CSA? EBW? English?

 

[The Planner]

EBW is Euston Birmingham Wolverhampton.

 

[Ben]

Thank you.

 

[Pumbaa]

And CSA is Customer Service Assistant - mind you the title changes every so often when middle managers decide that they have to do something to justify the pay!

 

[Ben]

Ta.

 

[bluenoxid]

It's never been higher than 125mph? I'm pretty darn certain that I've heard of Pendos hitting the 140mph mark somewhere in the West Midlands...And the Trent Valley section is about the straightest and clearest place of the lot IIRC!
(Besides...What about the APT-P and it's usual 165mph express runs to Glasgow? )

Hmmm...As a strong advocate of 1,400mph running along the WCML, this is something I've been giving a degree of thought to over time.

What I've come up with so far on the ideas front is a simple addition to the existing signalling system (C-APT II, I'd call it. ) where information about signal aspects further up line is passed to trains wirelessly (An RFID rope running along the line would do the trick) and displayed on a sort of heads-up stuck wherever the driver can see it.
In short, it would allow the driver to see the aspects of the 10-30 signals in front of him (Preferably in real-time, but at 1,400mph updating at each signal would be "real-time" enough! ) along with any trains that are also in front of him, allowing the driver to plan and control his speed well in advance of any obstacles! 8)

I'd rather not spend tons of time typing out a full description, so I'll jump into Paint in a sec, do a quick bodge-up to try and demonstrate what I'm on about, and attach it to this post when done. Comments on this idea would be appreciated, though!

Oh right, so you would be flogging them ERTMS 2??? That'd be rubbish because ERTMS 3 removes this whole block signalling rubbish and give trains a protective cushion as they move around the network, which takes into account the braking distance and the setting of the infrastructure.

http://www.ertms.com/2007v2/what_levels.html

Does this RFID rope have pulleys on it? Is there a bell on the end? (I'm joking)