How fast do trains travel in the UK?

[Nym]

Imagine if the motor car was as slow as it was 35 years ago

For all known purpouses it is, you could do 70mph in most cars back then, and the most you can do now is 70...

In racing, 35 years ago you could have cars up to 200mph, same as now.

Look back 15 years and stuff isn't that much faster, McLaren F1 could hit 240mph, Bugatti Veyron SS can only do ~263mph

 

[Peter Mugridge]

So 35 years later no progress has been made apart from limited bits of the HS1 - quite a sad indictment.

Similar to Air Travel with the demise of Concorde.

We seem to be going backwards for the first time in recorded history.

Imagine if the motor car was as slow as it was 35 years ago

And at sea.

SeaCats are slower than hovercraft ( and a lot less fun to ride on ).

The QE2 would do over 30 knots without effort; the current Cunarders struggle to get above 20 ( even the QM2, although capable, rarely goes faster and is scheduled to do the Atlantic in 7 or 8 nights depending on crossing; QE2 did it in 5 and was capable of doing it in 4 ).

 

[Mike C]

OK:

• The British record is 208 mph, held by a Regional Eurostar formation somewhere on HS1
  

.

Nashenden Farm. 3313/3314 was the set number.

 

[Butts]

And at sea.

SeaCats are slower than hovercraft ( and a lot less fun to ride on ).

The QE2 would do over 30 knots without effort; the current Cunarders struggle to get above 20 ( even the QM2, although capable, rarely goes faster and is scheduled to do the Atlantic in 7 or 8 nights depending on crossing; QE2 did it in 5 and was capable of doing it in 4 ).

The last true Ocean Liner built to cross the atlantic in all weathers- not a cruise ship.

An interesting fact - she could go faster backwards than most others could forward.

Very few British modes of transport fall into the realms of being iconic...

The Flying Scotsman.....

Concorde......

Queen Elizabeth II......

E-Type Jaguar........

What a combination ...... where did it all go wrong

 

[bnm]

Another one for your list (Not many people know this !!)


In Jun 1979 an HST ran from Paddington to Chippenham, on a normal timetabled run, in 50 mins and 31 secs. This was an average speed of 111.7 mph, which was 5 mph faster than the much vaunted (by the UK media) Japanese "bullet" trains - the HST's effort was largely ignored in the UK media. No special "conditions" were set up in advance other than having Inspectors riding in the cabs of the train in question and the two preceding it down the main line. All speed limits were obeyed.
This record stood for many years.

It was later reported that the passengers were a bit disgruntled when the train sat at Chippenham for a quarter of an hour to "catch up" with the timetable.

The bullet trains now do 170 mph, whilst there is now no non-stop service to Chippenham any more. The fastest services are now 68 mins (down) and 64 mins (up).

..............and we call that progress..........:cry:

So the timetable for that non-stop to Chippenham in 1979 was 65-66 mins if you account for the 15 mins waiting time. The fastest services today stop at Reading and Swindon, so 68 mins is still pretty good if comparing timetables.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The last true Ocean Liner built to cross the atlantic in all weathers- not a cruise ship.

The QM2 is also a Liner.

 

[whhistle]

Not wishing to out-pedant the pedant, the OP asked how fast trains travel in the UK, not how fast trains running domestic services travel

If you don't wish to be pedantic, then don't?
Especially as the guy even stated how fast the Eurostars travelled anyway!

 

[Butts]

So the timetable for that non-stop to Chippenham in 1979 was 65-66 mins if you account for the 15 mins waiting time. The fastest services today stop at Reading and Swindon, so 68 mins is still pretty good if comparing timetables.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The QM2 is also a Liner.

Agreed however it was built in France (i know Concorde was anglo French), and arguably not quite as iconic.

 

[The Informer]

For all known purpouses it is, you could do 70mph in most cars back then, and the most you can do now is 70...

In racing, 35 years ago you could have cars up to 200mph, same as now.

Look back 15 years and stuff isn't that much faster, McLaren F1 could hit 240mph, Bugatti Veyron SS can only do ~263mph

Only 263 mph!!!

The aero effects at that speed must be unbelievable! The sheer amount of power required to push a vehicle through that sort of wind resistance is frightening. (Hence 1000bhp engine) Giant leaps in speed records are gone.

 

[Minilad]

The last true Ocean Liner built to cross the atlantic in all weathers- not a cruise ship.

An interesting fact - she could go faster backwards than most others could forward.

Very few British modes of transport fall into the realms of being iconic...

The Flying Scotsman.....

Concorde......

Queen Elizabeth II......

E-Type Jaguar........

What a combination ...... where did it all go wrong

Ahem...you forgot the Mini.
Proper Mini mind you not the BMW imposter

 

[martinsh]

Very few British modes of transport fall into the realms of being iconic...

The Flying Scotsman.....

Concorde......

Queen Elizabeth II......

E-Type Jaguar........

Relaint Robin ?

AEC Routemaster

 

[The Informer]

Ahem...you forgot the Mini.
Proper Mini mind you not the BMW imposter

Imposter it may be but you have too see and especially hear that british Prodrive World Rally Car version driven by Kris Meeke. Its awesome!

 

[Minilad]

Imposter it may be but you have too see and especially hear that british Prodrive World Rally Car version driven by Kris Meeke. Its awesome!

I prefer this little baby to be honest

 

[LE Greys]

And at sea.

SeaCats are slower than hovercraft ( and a lot less fun to ride on ).

The QE2 would do over 30 knots without effort; the current Cunarders struggle to get above 20 ( even the QM2, although capable, rarely goes faster and is scheduled to do the Atlantic in 7 or 8 nights depending on crossing; QE2 did it in 5 and was capable of doing it in 4 ).

A lot of it's about fuel efficiency. Hovercraft are excellent as amphibious vehicles, and very fast, but they drink fuel like nothing else on Earth. Going faster with ships produces drag to the square of speed, thus making it more efficient to reduce top speed by a couple of knots when there is no competition. The same with Concorde, which had an excellent lift/drag ratio at supersonic speeds, giving about the same seat/mile costs as a 747. However, the problem was a terrible lift/drag ratio at low subsonic speeds, which resulted in a lot of fuel being burnt when flying slowly. The XB-70, which could lower its wingtips at supersonic speeds, had the best lift/drag ratio of any manned aircraft, and was much more efficient at subsonic speeds. Unfortunately, the design never made it into civilian service.

As for train speeds, increasing the top speed is not very helpful unless you spend ages at that speed. The thing we need to work on in Britain is acceleration, and we have been very good at that. I remember hearing stories of how 313s used to knock the spots of Deltics leaving King's Cross, but a Pendolino would leave almost any suburban unit standing with a similar comparison.

 

[Butts]

A lot of it's about fuel efficiency. Hovercraft are excellent as amphibious vehicles, and very fast, but they drink fuel like nothing else on Earth. Going faster with ships produces drag to the square of speed, thus making it more efficient to reduce top speed by a couple of knots when there is no competition. The same with Concorde, which had an excellent lift/drag ratio at supersonic speeds, giving about the same seat/mile costs as a 747. However, the problem was a terrible lift/drag ratio at low subsonic speeds, which resulted in a lot of fuel being burnt when flying slowly. The XB-70, which could lower its wingtips at supersonic speeds, had the best lift/drag ratio of any manned aircraft, and was much more efficient at subsonic speeds. Unfortunately, the design never made it into civilian service.

As for train speeds, increasing the top speed is not very helpful unless you spend ages at that speed. The thing we need to work on in Britain is acceleration, and we have been very good at that. I remember hearing stories of how 313s used to knock the spots of Deltics leaving King's Cross, but a Pendolino would leave almost any suburban unit standing with a similar comparison.

Who cares about fuel efficiency people will pay more to get somewhere quicker. At the current rate we will all be on horseback in a few years.

Interesting "railhead" information on the relative acceleration speed of different units.

I can see Clarkson and co having competing units vying for the "Blue Riband" out of Euston

 

[LE Greys]

Who cares about fuel efficiency people will pay more to get somewhere quicker. At the current rate we will all be on horseback in a few years.

Interesting "railhead" information on the relative acceleration speed of different units.

I can see Clarkson and co having competing units vying for the "Blue Riband" out of Euston

Partly, it's a function of what passengers go for. Sometimes, speed sells. Currently, cost sells. Interesting that you mention the Blue Riband. The ships that held it used to be incredibly profitable, but often ended up being scrapped shortly after they lost it. The Mauretania was one of those, she ended up nose-to-tail with the Olympic in Rosyth only a few years after the Rex started beating her times. The other reason for this is that shipping lines tended to make an effort to get it back, and if this meant a new ship, the old one ended up being a lot less profitable.

It's a great pity that speed (and size with ships) doesn't tend to sell any more. Still, that's the way of the market.