East Coast Class 90?

[TGV]

Ha ha, of course you can!

Take a look here, proper loco!

Well if that ain't the ugliest loco I ever saw...

 

[captainbigun]

Aye, she's no looker, but she's a monster rain or shine when functioning.

 

[TGV]

I take your word for it, but I'll stick to my TGV's thanks! We don't need to re-gear to manage a puny 125mph...



Wonder what an Atlantique set would do on a KGX to Leeds run.... Other than not fit through the tunnels!

 

[captainbigun]

It'd make the OHL sulk long before anything else!

Still, the TGV test train was towed up HS1 to St Pancras recently. No approval for movement under its own power.

Don't forget the NL Eurostars operated to Leeds and then York for a while. They operated in classic mode so not the full power available.

 

[ainsworth74]

I take your word for it, but I'll stick to my TGV's thanks! We don't need to re-gear to manage a puny 125mph...

Wonder what an Atlantique set would do on a KGX to Leeds run.

Probably suck down so much juice that nothing else for a hundred miles would be able to run

But seriously you might have shiny TGVs but I'd like to see you do as good a job as we do on railway that was designed more than 150 years ago rather than your railway which is what 50 years old?

 

[TGV]

Probably suck down so much juice that nothing else for a hundred miles would be able to run

But seriously you might have shiny TGVs but I'd like to see you do as good a job as we do on railway that was designed more than 150 years ago rather than your railway which is what 50 years old?

50?!

Ummm.... 30. Je m'excuse.

A TGV on UK OLE? Ça ne marche pas.

 

[ainsworth74]

50?!

Ummm.... 30. Je m'excuse.

A TGV on UK OLE? Ça ne marche pas.

Exactly 30 years old! It's easy when you've got a purpose built railway that's only about 10 years older than I am!

Ich nicht sprechen Französisch. Es tut mir leid

 

[TGV]

Are you also an engineer captainbigun? Mechanical or electrical?

 

[Skimble19]

As said, that's the problem with trying to run a 21st century railway on infrastructure designed in the 19th century!

If EC did use a 90 I would assume it would be on the York semi fasts and would need:

1) Find, obtain, repair, refurbish and overhaul at least one Rake of Mkiii coaches
2) Find, obtain, repair, refurbish and overhaul a A Compatible DVT for each rake
3) keep to the following schedule, taking the 1601 rom York as an example:

York - 1601
Doncaster - 1624
Retford 1639
Newark 1654
Grantham - 1707
Peterborough - 1727
Stevenage - 17:57
Kings Cross - 1828

4) Find somewhere to stable and service. Do EC have the correct skills and facilities? (There is nowhere near York unless they run through to Heaton as you cant easily get to Neville Hill every night to maintain and stable) Can Bounds Green take the extra fleet?
5) Train up staff and drivers
6) Commision/test/work up said fleet
7) Publicise operations
8) Ensure sets have suitable or acceptable livery
9) Check timetbales and diagrams and crew rosters
10) Failure mitigation plans in place

then operate!

If an MK3 set were to be found and refurbished then I'd assume it'd be to Mallard standard, which would hopefully make it easier to get the EMT set done!

 

[captainbigun]

Are you also an engineer captainbigun? Mechanical or electrical?

Chemical and process by qualification. The sight of a grease gun makes me a bit ill, electricals is my bag.

 

[matt]

Various posts removed. Can we refrain from the personal attacks and agruments. ta

 

[RichW1]

19th century railways? I think not. The alignment maybe 19th century but much of that has been modified and I don't see wooden sleepers and separate track lengths without welded rail. I think there's a lot of excuses made for UK railways. They've done the best with what they've got which is great. Fact is signalling under-investment has been our biggest weakness as there's vast areas of 140mph running that could be achieved and capacity improved.

Also you can't compare tgv and our conventional rail. You have to compare like with like and in France they have 125mph sections using secondary intercity network trains but most is 100mph only.

Finally I don't see how a 90 will ever keep up acceleration or not because over 180 miles or more a 15mph speed differential is a lot and will more than make up for acceleration from a a few stations in 100 odd miles. In 4 mins a 91 would pull a mile ahead of a 90 doing 110 and I doubt better acceleration would pull even a mile ahead from a station, so add in the 180 miles or more duration of a journey and a 90 holding a 125mph time is nonsense. It'll hold to timetable time because of ridiculous padding and what's deemed as on time' which taken together allows about 15mins! Well given such slack well then obviously it would keep up. But in real time no chance.

 

[junglejames]

I take your word for it, but I'll stick to my TGV's thanks! We don't need to re-gear to manage a puny 125mph...

Neither do the 89s!
However what would a TGV be like if faced with a heavy freight?!! Could it cope as well as the 89 would have done? Thats if the power car could even move on its own!!

 

[E&W Lucas]

Finally I don't see how a 90 will ever keep up acceleration or not because over 180 miles or more a 15mph speed differential is a lot and will more than make up for acceleration from a a few stations in 100 odd miles. In 4 mins a 91 would pull a mile ahead of a 90 doing 110 and I doubt better acceleration would pull even a mile ahead from a station, so add in the 180 miles or more duration of a journey and a 90 holding a 125mph time is nonsense. It'll hold to timetable time because of ridiculous padding and what's deemed as on time' which taken together allows about 15mins! Well given such slack well then obviously it would keep up. But in real time no chance.

But the FACT is that they did previously. No one is talking about them on the non - stop runs, but on the stopping services.

You're not allowing for the poor lower speed acceleration on the 91, which on the semi fast services will struggle to reach 125 between some stations. Also, factor in signal checks, freight trains, etc. which you alluse to in your comments about capacity. In fact, that above all else would make 140 mph on the ECML a fantasy.

 

[TGV]

Neither do the 89s!
However what would a TGV be like if faced with a heavy freight?!! Could it cope as well as the 89 would have done? Thats if the power car could even move on its own!!

I was referring to the 90s of the topic title. And how would a TGV cope with freight? That's a weird question. I don't think the 89 coped well with it's own existence. Otherwise there would be a fleet of them now. For whatever reasons (and in true BR style I suspect finances and investment were one reason) the class was a failure and the sole example itself hasnt exactly been a picture of success. I also agree with the post above that the uk does not have a 150 year old railway. The west coast route had how much spent on it in the last few years? Was any of that reusing Victorian rails or signals? The pendolinos are as new a design as any TGV too. OK they don't do 300 or 320 km/h but they can't be that bad are they?

Back on topic though I think the question would be that in absence of available stock that would be suitable what is the operator to do? I presume that they are opting for these 90s as nothing else is available in the time scale or budget they have. The timings they can perform may not be 100% ideal but it sounds like making the best with what they can get?

 

[E&W Lucas]

xxxxx

 

[Nym]

Coloured lights have been used since the 1800s, 4 aspect is meerly an extention of this old operation.

But in the same way you could claim that newest way we move our families around is 125 years old. But it isn't. Just because the public face of our signalling system is still coloured light aspects, doesn't mean that the technology behind it is also 1930s.

It's an implementation of a standard, and the standard works well on the UK network.

In cab signalling does work better with moving blocks, but it's only really effective at increasing capacity on truely high speed lines, 125mph+.

Since the 60, 70, 75mph freight units have little difference in running under TVM430, ERTMS, MCB, ATP or any other automatic or in cab systems as to a system that could be implemented with mechanical axle counters and semmaphores I don't see how it can make much difference.

Yes, ERTMS should be rolled out, but only on main lines where linespeed exceeds 100mph and the benifits could be felt. Other lines, unless high capacity commuter corridors, would see little benifit.

Back slightly to the topic, the 90 will be pulling Mk4s, there is a spare Mk4 rake, and it's only the locomotives that need servicing, not the coaches. To save a bit of hassle, they could charter the pretendelino, but what benifit would be gained from this?

 

[sprinterguy]

I was referring to the 90s of the topic title. And how would a TGV cope with freight? That's a weird question. I don't think the 89 coped well with it's own existence. Otherwise there would be a fleet of them now. For whatever reasons (and in true BR style I suspect finances and investment were one reason) the class was a failure and the sole example itself hasnt exactly been a picture of success. I also agree with the post above that the uk does not have a 150 year old railway.

BR changed the specification for rolling stock to run on the newly electrified ECML after the 89 had been ordered, so it basically missed its' calling in life right from the start. As the sole member of a class incorporating a whole host of different technologies to anything else operating at the time, it was always going to run into technical difficulties, as has been seen many times before with one-off prototype locomotives and rolling stock.

Anyway, leave the 89 alone, it's the only example of a high speed, Co-co wheel arrangement electric locomotive we've got, which certainly means in theory that it should be more sure footed than the comparable 90s and 91s..It's just a bit short on spare parts to keep it functioning

I'd say that in many ways that the development of Britains' railways is very much hampered by the legacy of the Victorian engineering that put it there in the first place, when maximum speeds were much slower and trains were much smaller. Massive expenditure has to go into compromise projects like the West Coast Route Modernisation to come up with solutions that get round the problem as best they can. Not that such issues are confined solely to the UK of course.

 

[Hydro]

some folk are interested in the technical side and I'm happy to impart the info where I can.

I definitely appreciate this, as I too am interested in the technical side of things. I don't know an awful lot about AC electrics and like to fill in the gaps of knowledge when I can. I've had a flick through a technical book (British Rail AC Electric Locomotives or something similar) and I got a little hooked. I've had a poke around inside on the 86/9's when it was lying at Derby one day, but unfortunately couldn't see much at 1am by phone screen light.

 

[junglejames]

I was referring to the 90s of the topic title. And how would a TGV cope with freight? That's a weird question. I don't think the 89 coped well with it's own existence. Otherwise there would be a fleet of them now. For whatever reasons (and in true BR style I suspect finances and investment were one reason) the class was a failure and the sole example itself hasnt exactly been a picture of success.

Sorry, I thought you were refering to the 89 here.
The freight question was a lighthearted question. You mentioned how good TGVs were (which they are), and so i asked if they could handle freight like an 89 could.
You have been very harsh on the 89 though. As mentioned, the reason there arent a fleet of them is not down to the locos themselves. They coped very well with virtually anything. Lots of power, and plenty of oomph. The good acceleration of a 90 is mentioned here, well the 90 was slow compared to the 89.
Its unfair to call the 89 a failure as such. Unfortunately outside forces transpired against them.
The reason the 89 seems unreliable is, as mentioned, because it ended up being just a one off, and is itself a prototype. Brush had no reason to improve the loco or keep a shelf full of spares available once the order for the ECML went to GEC.

 

[Aictos]

Just thought I mention a small update on this, spoke to a very reliable source who's basically said East Coast have refused to confirm or deny this rumour.

Whatever East Coast want to do, they are being very secretive about it.

 

[junglejames]

Just thought I mention a small update on this, spoke to a very reliable source who's basically said East Coast have refused to confirm or deny this rumour.

Whatever East Coast want to do, they are being very secretive about it.

Another update. EC seem to have now confirmed they will be taking a 90 on loan. Possibly first on a trial basis to see how best to use them.
The 91s apparently going through another heavy overhaul, similar to the one they got 10yrs or so ago.
This according to the latest Rail Magazine.

 

[Crossforth]

So just as my local route is about to move from the East Coast to the West Coastway, a 90 is planned to appear. Great

Well I hope it does appear and that I get it for haulage when I travel to and from home.

 

[cj_1985]

Another update. EC seem to have now confirmed they will be taking a 90 on loan. Possibly first on a trial basis to see how best to use them.
The 91s apparently going through another heavy overhaul, similar to the one they got 10yrs or so ago.
This according to the latest Rail Magazine.

don't tke this the wrong way... while i understand accepting what is published in the press... RAIL is hardly the best place to look for facts...

if i were to read the same thing in one of the more reputible magazines i would believe it... but RAIL... friad not.

 

[junglejames]

don't tke this the wrong way... while i understand accepting what is published in the press... RAIL is hardly the best place to look for facts...

if i were to read the same thing in one of the more reputible magazines i would believe it... but RAIL... friad not.

Well thats why i used the words 'seem' and 'apparently'. As in, its looking likely, but still not 100%.
Reputable? Rail is one of the more reputable magazines. Not everyones cup of tea, but still reputable. Just for that comment im praying that this happens now. Anyway, Rail are only getting their info from EC and Eversholt.
Whilst EC have not actually been quoted, I somehow doubt Rail would claim EC have said something, when they havent.

 

[87015]

90027 going EC silver in the Toton paintshop shortly according to murmurs on the Farrow tour yesterday.

 

[junglejames]

90027 going EC silver in the Toton paintshop shortly according to murmurs on the Farrow tour yesterday.

Surely cant be true. Rail magazine said it would happen, so noway can it be true!!!

 

[the sniper]

don't tke this the wrong way... while i understand accepting what is published in the press... RAIL is hardly the best place to look for facts...

if i were to read the same thing in one of the more reputible magazines i would believe it... but RAIL... friad not.

Isn't the whole 'LIAR' thing just based on some bad gen that the magazine gave out in the early 90's or something... :roll:

Stick with your 'reputible' monthly mags if you like chap, but I haven't seen anything to prove that RAIL is anymore devoid of facts than any other publication nowadays.

 

[colchesterken]

two ways foward regear the 90s for 125 (several of them) run with shorter mk 3s could cobble up prob. 3 sets with refurbd dvt to contain disabled access and toilet

could ask the french very nicely if we could borrow back the chanel tunnel 1/2 sets
that worked well when GNER had stock shortage

also i have been a suscriber to Rail for years what would the team recomend to someone interested in all aspects of trains,trams,underground,steam and moden as well as history
getting fed up with them and HS2 .when they let me be fat controler I will find better things to spend £30 B on that will help out sooner than 39 yrs tine

 

[Skimble19]

Isn't the whole 'LIAR' thing just based on some bad gen that the magazine gave out in the early 90's or something... :roll:

Stick with your 'reputible' monthly mags if you like chap, but I haven't seen anything to prove that RAIL is anymore devoid of facts than any other publication nowadays.

I must admit I'm getting fed up at the amount of errors in each issue though.. do they not employ proof readers?!