Search results

Biased, yes, but I'd offer this as a contestant for the "pinnacle" title... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJfDWtbioEM

I've done countless endurance runs, test runs and tech-rides in TGV cabs (including eurostar) and this is the best answer here in my opinion. I think as O L says, if you can take a fault-ridden DMU down an secondary jointed-track line in poor weather and make time, then not only have you earned...

I bet they're quieter than a TGV-R powercar on full juice!

It also functions if the carbons are too badly worn. Some designs of pan have the ADD pipe as part of the carbon itself, others have a copper pipe underneath the carbon at a set height above the carrier to prevent it running on the wire. The copper pipe will be breached by the contact with the...

We are using the term "fast service" with a little imagination here aren't we? EDIT: I've never been on one of those things before, so I'm not sure on what all the fuss is about.

... I wasn't guessing. Route knowledge. The number you're missing is 80 from just inside the portals then either 40 or 60km/h depending on the road you're on into SPI and 40 at the platforms.

...but everything on HS1 is metric. No miles, no chains. All km and signalled in km/h.

That doesn't sound right. The 250km/h is 155mph. They have only ever claimed 140mph (225km/h) maximum. I'm willing to be corrected with suitable evidence.

60 out of STP, then 200 starts just inside the tunnel mouth (acceleration permitting of course), then as stated, 230 from KP6 onwards. 300 from between Ebbsfleet Stn and Southfleet junction if you're in something that goes that fast. 270 through Ashford.

Negative. Class 373 gets 230 on TVM from Kp6 in London tunnel 1 and maintain it all the way in tunnel 2 up to Southfleet until 300 voie libre is indicated, unless stopping at Ebbsfleet of course.

230km/h for cl373 if you wanted a comparison (just over 140mph).

The answer to the question about the existence of legislation prohibiting new 3rd rail schemes was "no" in October 2009 when NR published their RUS electrification strategy. In section 3.1 it states that overhead AC electrification is "generally the first choice" when compared to 3rd rail DC...

We set ours to 14º.

Agreed. I've been trying to sell this idea on here for literally years.

Gotcha. Yes, having re-read it, I think the term missing in my head was adhesive weight.

Something in there doesn't sit quite right, but it could be me misunderstanding the text... You're saying a voyager has 22t per driven axle, or are you saying that because only two axles per vehicle are driven that each vehicle has 22t of load on driven axles - i.e. 11t axle loads? 22t per...

What angle of attack are they set at? The orientation of the aeros shouldn't be a problem in itself - they operate in both directions already. Effectively it would be like turning the loco around and the pan isn't a limiting factor there. Like you said, the only effect likeley is some...

It has been indicated to me that EC and whoever follows will have to live with the 91s for "quite a while". Of course, the plan which that information was given on can always change! A week is a long time on the railways... The BW pan is not too aero sensitive in my experience. The aerofoils...

The 91s are planned for a long future on ECML. The plan can always change, but that's the current plan. The pantograph on a 91 is a single point failure. The idea being to build in some redundancy. Running it either way aerodynamically is not a problem.

1. 373s were cleared for 125mph on ECML between Grantham and Knebworth 2. 3307/8 was indeed pulled to Glasgow Central with twin class 37s.