Search results

Yes, the DMUs emit but, I can only go by what I see from my flat overlooking the platforms. The DMUs (in theory) shut down if they are staying more than 10 minutes. Whilst idling there seems to be little particulate emission that is visible to the naked eye. I am sure there is some. When they...

I hear what you say but I am concerned about Marylebone residents. In the 10 minute idling time of a DMU set versus the 22 minutes of a Class 68, which is more polluting? Certainly the visible emissions would indicate the latter.

Oh dear. You didn't read the full text. I'll make it clearer. .........Than the 165s. What is the modern alternative to these that will not involve running such a powerful and noisy loco as the 68?

We are terrified that the 68s will proliferate on this line. What are the alternatives for the shorter, non-Birmingham routes. eg Aylesbury, Gerrards Cross etc. Please give me hope that there are more modern, less polluting, less noisy replacements which will do the trick.

Thanks for the sympathy. Imagine that as a noise/vibration lasting for 16-23 minutes. Sixteen times a day. Now you realise why are desperate to find ways of reducing and, eventually, eliminating it.

This week was a little disrupted, so I'll give you a typical week. The people most effected are those who live and work to the north and east of the station. I'm only talking about the 68s here. The DMUs are a different matter. There are 16 trains a day, starting at 7.28 and finishing 20.20...

So, 13 pages and all I've got is: thanks for those who chose to respond to my questions in a helpful way: an enhanced knowledge of various hybrid locos: the difference between a DVT, an ETS and a DMU the start up and shut down routine for Class 68s: and the fact that there is nothing...

I haven't been conscious of any significant sound emanating from the small engine in the DVT when the trains are switched off. Maybe because it is under the canopy. At our next meeting with Chiltern I shall suggest that this is trialled and see whether we can achieve a meaningful reduction in...

Thanks. I got the bit about the walk, but I hoped the driver could walk down, switch off the EPS at the loco end, walk back and turn on as he passed the DVT end. Then go off for his/her cup off tea and all day English breakfast. Ah, Well. Just a thought.

OK. So why does the ETS not use that small engine instead of the main engine when in the station for the 25 minute stay, enabling the lower revs. to be used and, therefore, in theory, reduced decibels? Or have you already answered that and I missed it? More straw clutching.

Great explanation. Thanks. One other question. When a train comes in and the stay is long. eg the 15.38 arrival which departs at 16.15, it is turned off. That usually happens within a couple of minutes of arrival. It is then turned on again about 13 minutes before departure. How does the...

Thanks for the suggestion. I shall do that.

And these functions rely on the ETS load and there would be no light and heat if ETS turned off, even if loco was idling? Sorry to be dense. Perthaps you'd be kind enough to explain in laymans terms the relationship between DMU,ETS and locomotive power as they relate to each other and to...

Sorry, it's my ignorance but I don't understand. Why is the ETS needed? Why is it not possible for instuction to be given to turn off the ETS on arrival, and leave the loco running, thereby halving the noise and vibration whilst idling?

If the train is in the station for, say, 25 minutes and there is no switch off instruction, I thought that the ETS is not running? As I understand it the two can't be on at the same time. I think you are saying otherwise. Why would they be needed at the same time?

Nonetheless, there are times that the 68s idle at a different and "slower" speed. As I said, it doesn't happen often but is a blessed relief when it does.

Certainly there are occasions when we have noticed the level of noise suddenly drops. Doesn't happen every time. Maybe your suggestion above is the reason. As laymen we don't know the reason. Just wish it happened more often.

The start-up is only a few seconds whereas the idling is 17-29 minutes. I suspect that 1 minute idling produces more pollution than start-up. I have absolutely no quantitative proof of this and stand to be corrected. Having said that, you are right. The air pollution is a seperate and more...

That's the station, not the platforms. It's a lovely old building. No one wishes to change that.

For the record, in case it's not clear. The local residents have an ongoing and almost solely amicable relationship with Chiltern who, genuinely, have made a great effort to do their best to cut down idling times and listen to the other problems which the residents have and, wherever...