TheSlash
Established Member
Chaps and Chapesses.
I am writting this because i am enraged by an article shown to me in the Modern Railways magazine of May 2011.
It seems to lay the blame for RCF squarely on the shoulders of the Siemens Desiro.
I'm not fan of the unit by a long way, but that's because i'm sad and always oppose new things replacing older things that i had become a customed to.
The article suggests that the Desiro is reason for the increase in rail defects in the Wessex area.
What i take offence to is that all of the defect rails, barring the occassional and expected failure of new welds and similar, dates from the 60's and 70's. It's 40 years old and completely worn out. 0 sidewear sites aren't springing up from the increased wear of a Desiro, they are occurring because the rail is 40 years old.
As much as access allows, CAPEX works are targeting the sites that some might say are at risk, specifically high speed tight curves and areas around heavy braking/acceleration.
It was known long before the introduction of new stock that it would increase wear, but more in the Track Geometry areas than rail defects, because of the reaction of the track to air suspension.
Another thing that the author mentions but fails to satisfactorily address is the reduced surface contact area of the wheel profile. He jokingly refers to it as the size of a 5 pence piece, but realistically it's 25mm wide on a straight and level piece of track.
Finally i confess, i haven't yet read the full article, i threw it down in disgust at the comments made mid article to post my anger on here
I am writting this because i am enraged by an article shown to me in the Modern Railways magazine of May 2011.
It seems to lay the blame for RCF squarely on the shoulders of the Siemens Desiro.
I'm not fan of the unit by a long way, but that's because i'm sad and always oppose new things replacing older things that i had become a customed to.
The article suggests that the Desiro is reason for the increase in rail defects in the Wessex area.
What i take offence to is that all of the defect rails, barring the occassional and expected failure of new welds and similar, dates from the 60's and 70's. It's 40 years old and completely worn out. 0 sidewear sites aren't springing up from the increased wear of a Desiro, they are occurring because the rail is 40 years old.
As much as access allows, CAPEX works are targeting the sites that some might say are at risk, specifically high speed tight curves and areas around heavy braking/acceleration.
It was known long before the introduction of new stock that it would increase wear, but more in the Track Geometry areas than rail defects, because of the reaction of the track to air suspension.
Another thing that the author mentions but fails to satisfactorily address is the reduced surface contact area of the wheel profile. He jokingly refers to it as the size of a 5 pence piece, but realistically it's 25mm wide on a straight and level piece of track.
Finally i confess, i haven't yet read the full article, i threw it down in disgust at the comments made mid article to post my anger on here
- but presumably a Desiro weighs a lot more than a draughty old Slammer? So surely after 40 years of lightweight MK1's tip-toeing over, these old rails will inevitably suffer substantially increased wear, and subsequently more defects, when big heavy Desiro units have been pounding them for a few years?? Or am I talking trollocks?! I must admit I had no idea rails had such a long lifespan to be honest, I 'd have guessed at half that!
