Intercity Express Programme going ahead

[Chris125]

Okay, than someone needs to contact Video125 as there Video filmed in the days of GNER on the ECML actually shows the class 91 doing 140 mph down Stoke Bank and they state that this is normal for the service and has been since the class 91's where introduced.

I have the Flying Scotsman DEV and dont remember anything along those lines - they mention the double flashing green's used for 140mph testing, but there's no suggestion the train is actually doing that speed.

Chris

 

[HSTEd]

Speeds in excess of 125mph can only be done in the UK now with in-cab signalling.
Only HS1 and its stock (373 and 395) is so equipped (with TVM430).

140mph on parts of the WCML with Pendolinos (which are equipped with in-cab TASS) might be possible if NR ever raise the line speed above 125.

TASS uses entirely passive balises, which means that there would be no way to transmit a restrictive aspect to the train.

Virgin wanted to use 135mph running claiming that its within the ordinary tolerances for 125mph and they could use the TASS system to prevent them going over 137.5mph (125mph + 10%)

 

[RobShipway]

Speeds in excess of 125mph can only be done in the UK now with in-cab signalling.
Only HS1 and its stock (373 and 395) is so equipped (with TVM430).

140mph on parts of the WCML with Pendolinos (which are equipped with in-cab TASS) might be possible if NR ever raise the line speed above 125.

Somehow, other than the building of HS2 I do not see the line speed of WCML as I believe Network Rail has stated that the track for the WCML is at it's speed limit, hence one of the many reasons why HS2 needs to be built.

The ECML track though does have the ability to be increased above the 125 MPH limit, so why is this not being done? Is it totally down to not having TVM430 installed?

If it is down to not having TVM430 instale, then I cannot believe it and explains why people abroad think we are a third world country when it comes to our railway systems.

 

[A-driver]

I'd agree with that, having personally been on a Mk4 that has done 140mph - which I think has been concluded was done without permission. This was some time ago (2003) so I doubt anyone will get into trouble for it.

Out of interest how would you know that you were doing 140 and where abouts was this?

I find it hard to believe to be honest-generally speeding is taken very seriously and is something that drivers do not do as it's not worth loosing your job over. With downloads, un-announced back cab rides, ray gun checks etc I can't see why a driver would do that? Plus doing 140 on a 125 line is enough of a difference for the signal box to notice. You would be clearing sections far too quickly!

 

[Rhydgaled]

The ECML track though does have the ability to be increased above the 125 MPH limit, so why is this not being done? Is it totally down to not having TVM430 installed?

If it is down to not having TVM430 instale, then I cannot believe it and explains why people abroad think we are a third world country when it comes to our railway systems.

TVM430 is, I think, a French system. TVM is just one of several in-cab signalling systems which would allow the ECML speed limit to be raised above 125mph. In the UK, the system used would likely be ERTMS, which is being trialed on the Cambrian line. There were alot of teathing problems on the Cambrian, with some VERY long delays caused by the system. It clearly wasn't ready for a big deployment on a mainline. Hopefully the Cambrian pilot will allow them to sort it before it is rolled out on the GWML and ECML.

 

[A-driver]

I believe the ERTMS trials start quite soon on the ECML between Hertford north and Langley junction. As I understand it they are making the lines bi-di to allow one to remain for normal service and the other used for testing.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

TASS uses entirely passive balises, which means that there would be no way to transmit a restrictive aspect to the train.

Virgin wanted to use 135mph running claiming that its within the ordinary tolerances for 125mph and they could use the TASS system to prevent them going over 137.5mph (125mph + 10%)

So the drivers would still be relying on reading lights on sticks then?
In that case it's a dead duck (aside from the convenient NR position that it would undermine the case for HS2!).
Thinking about it there are only short lengths where 140 would be possible anyway (eg TV4, maybe Linslade-Wolverton after Bletchley is done).

So that means ECML South with ETCS fitted (2018) is the next possibility for 125+ running.

 

[ainsworth74]

The ECML track though does have the ability to be increased above the 125 MPH limit, so why is this not being done? Is it totally down to not having TVM430 installed?

That's only one factor and I'd say it wasn't even the main factor. To my mind the main reason why the ECML is (and will be for some time) a 125mph railway is that to run it any faster will rapidly eat into the available paths for commuter and inter-regional passenger services as well as freight services. If you run the ECML at 140mph then the overall capacity of the line will fall and seeing as the ECML is pretty much full at this point you're going to have to start cutting other services to get your higher speed.

So what do you want to cut first? OAOs like HT and GC? Or how about some FCC services? Or do we start taking freight off of the ECML (and probably back onto roads in that case)? Or how about returning Leeds to hourly? Or reducing Edinburgh to two hourly?

 

[jon0844]

Out of interest how would you know that you were doing 140 and where abouts was this?

I find it hard to believe to be honest-generally speeding is taken very seriously and is something that drivers do not do as it's not worth loosing your job over. With downloads, un-announced back cab rides, ray gun checks etc I can't see why a driver would do that? Plus doing 140 on a 125 line is enough of a difference for the signal box to notice. You would be clearing sections far too quickly!

I used GPS onboard. I know we've had many theads that argue GPS isn't accurate, but I beg to differ. The train doesn't happily run at speeds of up to 125mph for the bulk of the journey and then suddenly jump to 139/140mph for some miles, before going back to around 125mph.

It was north of Peterborough, but it was also at night and I cannot remember exactly where I was. My smartphone (yes, back in 2003!) had a map but didn't log the route for later analysis, which is annoying as I'd have been able to show exactly where it speeded up and slowed down.

I have no idea if a driver felt it was worth risking his/her job, or indeed if anything did happen (not that I reported it, but if there's any data logging then who knows if it was subsequently discovered?). I can't speak for their actions.

We'd left Edinburgh and not long after leaving, something happened that delayed us (from memory) about an hour. We were then very late on our approach back to London, which was late Sunday night.

We recovered a fair bit of time, presumably as the line was fairly clear of traffic and allowed for it to try and catch up. We slowed once we got beyond Peterborough (towards London) and I remember us overtaking a FCC service because it was the service we needed to get in order to get back to Hatfield (changing at Stevenage). I can't quite remember but think it was the last London-bound FCC service that night.

Assuming my GPS didn't have some weird and unexplained fit, I can't believe it was a totally isolated one-off incident. This was 9 years ago, but I am sure someone who worked for GNER at the time would know if this ever happened more than once with disruption at night, when the circumstances might have allowed for a clear run at a higher speed - legal or not.

It's fair to say that for there to be so many ways to check speeds, there are drivers that must be speeding - or else there would be no need to check!

 

[tbtc]

That's only one factor and I'd say it wasn't even the main factor. To my mind the main reason why the ECML is (and will be for some time) a 125mph railway is that to run it any faster will rapidly eat into the available paths for commuter and inter-regional passenger services as well as freight services. If you run the ECML at 140mph then the overall capacity of the line will fall and seeing as the ECML is pretty much full at this point you're going to have to start cutting other services to get your higher speed.

So what do you want to cut first? OAOs like HT and GC? Or how about some FCC services? Or do we start taking freight off of the ECML (and probably back onto roads in that case)? Or how about returning Leeds to hourly? Or reducing Edinburgh to two hourly?

Agreed.

The best capacity on a route is when there's the lowest speed differential between the fastest and slowest service (hence LUL running a train every two minutes because they are all at the same speed, but some main lines being at capacity with only a handful of services an hour).

If people want to speed up the ECML then what do they propose to do about the freight? Or the flat crossing at Newark (scrap the Lincoln - Nottingham service)? Or the flat junctions (e.g. the Norwich - Liverpool crossing over the main line)? Or the Pacers crossing over the ECML at Doncaster (on the Scunthorpe services)? Or the hourly North Berwick stopper? Or stations like Chester le Street/ Morpeth that are on the main line (would these have their stops cut to allow 140mph running?

To run at 140mph you'd need to do it for a long distance to make it worthwhile (no point in introducing all the technology/ stock etc for just a couple of miles), but to allow those kind of speeds you'd need to either abolish half of the local traffic on the ECML or build dozens of flyovers etc. Not worth it.

TBH, this is why I came round to supporting HS2, because there's no way you can run at higher speeds on existing lines - it needs a separate route (with no Pacers/ flat junctions/ unlooped stations etc).

 

[jopsuk]

If the ECML was 4-track from London to Edinburgh, no 2-track sections anywhere, with all-flying junctions and even fast through lines at stations (such as Peterborough's current layout has), then 140mph (higher, even) for much of the route would be feasible and desirable- and there'd be more scope for intermediate local services so the IC ones could have less stops. Sadly, there's no way on this planet that there's the money or the will to see the lenghty disruption this would cause to allow this to happen.

 

[junglejames]

When we're the 91s given their heavy refurb? Im pretty sure 140 has not been possible since then. Not sure if it was before or after 2003.

As for whats stopping 140 on the ECML. The numerous unguarded foot crossings are also stopping it.

 

[LE Greys]

If the ECML was 4-track from London to Edinburgh, no 2-track sections anywhere, with all-flying junctions and even fast through lines at stations (such as Peterborough's current layout has), then 140mph (higher, even) for much of the route would be feasible and desirable- and there'd be more scope for intermediate local services so the IC ones could have less stops. Sadly, there's no way on this planet that there's the money or the will to see the lenghty disruption this would cause to allow this to happen.

Indeed, if it could, it would probably be cheaper to build a high-speed line parallel with the ECML and absorb the traffic that way with the only disruption being around junctions.

 

[Aictos]

I believe the ERTMS trials start quite soon on the ECML between Hertford north and Langley junction. As I understand it they are making the lines bi-di to allow one to remain for normal service and the other used for testing.

The last time I looked at the presentation, the line between Langley Junction and Alexandra Palace via Hertford was going to be signalled using a PC to control movements as they do in the IECCs.

There is plans for work to make Hertford North's Platform 1 bi-di as Platform 2 currently is with the Down Hertford from Molewood Tunnel to just short of Langley Junction being used for ERTMS tests while the Up Hertford is used for normal service.

No testing will take part during peak service operation, I know a lot of work is ongoing to ensure the success of this from OHL works to resignalling to pointwork to lengthening a siding at Hertford.

However I "think" the trials start in 2013/2014, certainly nothing I'm aware of starting this year.

 

[ainsworth74]

Indeed, if it could, it would probably be cheaper to build a high-speed line parallel with the ECML and absorb the traffic that way with the only disruption being around junctions.

But that would still probably be prohibitively expensive