HST's on 3rd rail lines.

[TheKnightWho]

HSTs have been used on the sleeper due to Class 57 reliability issues but aren't comfortable and usually result in FGW paying compensation to passengers. Sleepers are limited to 75mph max speed anyway to allow passengers to get a dood nights sleep.

That seems a little ridiculous. I've been on sleepers in China that go up to 155mph (Z trains), although they're EMUs, although they have loco hauled sleepers that go 100mph as well (T trains).

There is an extensive "FGW 57/3 Unreliability" thread on here regarding traction cover for the Night Riviera ..... should keep you busy for a while!

Thanks!

 

[Murph]

That seems a little ridiculous. I've been on sleepers in China that go up to 155mph (Z trains), although they're EMUs, although they have loco hauled sleepers that go 100mph as well (T trains).

Not really, it's just what's appropriate for each situation. For a sleeper, slower is clearly better for passenger comfort, as long as the journey gets reliably completed between roughly midnight and breakfast. The size of Britain means that 75mph is a fairly good speed for it. A huge land mass like China can clearly benefit from higher speeds on sleepers over much longer distances.

If there was market demand for something like an Inverness-Plymouth sleeper, then higher speed might be more appropriate/required.

 

[jimm]

That seems a little ridiculous. I've been on sleepers in China that go up to 155mph (Z trains), although they're EMUs, although they have loco hauled sleepers that go 100mph as well (T trains).

What's ridiculous about it? Why would we need trains on our very limited network of sleepers to run like a bat out of hell? Other trains running at night aren't going to be going above 75mph anyway, so it makes life a lot easier for pathing, especially if there are diversions/fast lines out of use for overnight engineering work, etc, never mind the comfort aspect.

And your typical journey between most Chinese cities is a sight longer than even London-Inverness, so a bit more speed probably doesn't come amiss over there.

PS: I'm not sure you've got the Chinese train categories right. I thought Z-trains were the ones limited to 100mph, while the high-speed sleeper stock is a version of the D-train.

Not that any of this has anything to do with HSTs and third-rail...

 

[TheKnightWho]

What's ridiculous about it? Why would we need trains on our very limited network of sleepers to run like a bat out of hell? Other trains running at night aren't going to be going above 75mph anyway, so it makes life a lot easier for pathing, especially if there are diversions/fast lines out of use for overnight engineering work, etc, never mind the comfort aspect.

And your typical journey between most Chinese cities is a sight longer than even London-Inverness, so a bit more speed probably doesn't come amiss over there.

PS: I'm not sure you've got the Chinese train categories right. I thought Z-trains were the ones limited to 100mph, while the high-speed sleeper stock is a version of the D-train.

Not that any of this has anything to do with HSTs and third-rail...

Obviously all of those things are true. My point is that limiting to 75mph for comfort reasons seems arbitrary and unnecessary. If it's for pathing then that's an entirely different reason and one I can get behind, but considering it wasn't in the original post I'd appreciate you didn't condescendingly try and put me down as though I'm being stupid.

And yes, I've got the categories correct. Z-trains are the sleeper versions of the D-trains, both limited to 250kmh. The highest speed locomotive powered sleepers are T-trains, which are limited to 160kmh but can go up to 200kmh on certain lines if they're being electrically operated. Amongst a number of other journeys (including a Z-train from Beijing to Harbin), I've travelled on a T-train from Xi'an to Lhasa that was electrically powered until Xining, before changing to a diesel loco for our onward journey. That particular train had come from Guangzhou, and I know for a fact it operated at 200kmh at points along its 55 hour trip; I was on it for a "mere" 29 hours.

Of course the situation is different in China anyway, where a 12 hour train journey is considered normal, and some stretch up to 70 hours. A lot of the time they'll have sleeper berths and seats, and many people will use them for "short" hops of a couple of hours between regional cities and will opt for seats. Of course, some go for seats for 20+ hours, but that tends to be when there's no other option (you have to book a seat on a particular train, and on some journeys they sell out very quickly) or they're simply poor.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Another good reason for lower speeds is that it saves fuel.

 

[455driver]

It would be much better if the sleepers went at 100mph so people would get a chance to go to sleep so wouldn't mind being turfed off the train at 03:00, after all speed is everything! :roll:

 

[infobleep]

I don't know about the speed but the train jerking as it arrives and departs a station can wake me up. No speed is going to stop that. Still it's all part of the charm for me.

 

[TheKnightWho]

It would be much better if the sleepers went at 100mph so people would get a chance to go to sleep so wouldn't mind being turfed off the train at 03:00, after all speed is everything! :roll:

Clearly it would be relevant if there were delays due to diversions, TSRs or several other things.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't know about the speed but the train jerking as it arrives and departs a station can wake me up. No speed is going to stop that. Still it's all part of the charm for me.

You would have thought that if anything would benefit from being an MU it would be the sleepers... I suppose it's not really an option until they can be EMUs though.

 

[ainsworth74]

Clearly it would be relevant if there were delays due to diversions, TSRs or several other things.

They often do run faster than 75mph to make up time if possible.

 

[najaB]

They often do run faster than 75mph to make up time if possible.

Aren't the Scottish sleepers cleared to run at up to 110mph in case of diversions or to make up time? Or is it 100?

Edit: Thinking about it, the Mk.2 carriages would limit it to 100mph.

 

[43074]

When travelling overnight speed is really an irrelevance, as long as you can depart from your destination at a reasonable time in the evening and arrive at your destination at a reasonable time the next morning it doesn't really matter. Considering the distances involved 80mph is quite adequate on the Night Riviera.

 

[Rich McLean]

They often do run faster than 75mph to make up time if possible.

The NR doesn't currently, due to Bogie Mileage. Max Speed is 75mph

 

[RobShipway]

Personally I would be happy if the train rain at 60 - 75mph, that way I can then see about getting breakfast at 5 - 6am the next morning where there is a better chance that something would be open, than say at 2 - 4am having done 75 - 110mph on the route.

 

[jimm]

Obviously all of those things are true. My point is that limiting to 75mph for comfort reasons seems arbitrary and unnecessary. If it's for pathing then that's an entirely different reason and one I can get behind, but considering it wasn't in the original post I'd appreciate you didn't condescendingly try and put me down as though I'm being stupid.

And yes, I've got the categories correct. Z-trains are the sleeper versions of the D-trains, both limited to 250kmh. The highest speed locomotive powered sleepers are T-trains, which are limited to 160kmh but can go up to 200kmh on certain lines if they're being electrically operated. Amongst a number of other journeys (including a Z-train from Beijing to Harbin), I've travelled on a T-train from Xi'an to Lhasa that was electrically powered until Xining, before changing to a diesel loco for our onward journey. That particular train had come from Guangzhou, and I know for a fact it operated at 200kmh at points along its 55 hour trip; I was on it for a "mere" 29 hours.

Of course the situation is different in China anyway, where a 12 hour train journey is considered normal, and some stretch up to 70 hours. A lot of the time they'll have sleeper berths and seats, and many people will use them for "short" hops of a couple of hours between regional cities and will opt for seats. Of course, some go for seats for 20+ hours, but that tends to be when there's no other option (you have to book a seat on a particular train, and on some journeys they sell out very quickly) or they're simply poor.

Why not try to see the bigger picture before posting using words like "ridiculous", instead of claiming I'm being condescending. As others have pointed out, you could run faster sleepers in the UK right now, but you would reach the destination in the middle of the night, rather than at a reasonable hour. Where is the sense in that?

As for Chinese train categories, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. It's a while since I went there but several other sources, such at seat61.com, are quite clear about the various categories of train currently in operation and that the high-speed sleepers are a D-train variant, with Z-trains and T-trains having top speeds of 100mph and 87mph. Or are they all wrong?

 

[TheKnightWho]

Why not try to see the bigger picture before posting using words like "ridiculous", instead of claiming I'm being condescending. As others have pointed out, you could run faster sleepers in the UK right now, but you would reach the destination in the middle of the night, rather than at a reasonable hour. Where is the sense in that?

As for Chinese train categories, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. It's a while since I went there but several other sources, such at seat61.com, are quite clear about the various categories of train currently in operation and that the high-speed sleepers are a D-train variant, with Z-trains and T-trains having top speeds of 100mph and 87mph. Or are they all wrong?

Or perhaps you can read my posts and not be so condescending. Assuming I'm advocating timetabled 125mph sleeper services (when I literally just asked why they're limited to 75mph for comfort) just makes it look like you're looking to find a problem. Clearly I'm talking about making up time. Dare I say obviously? Trying to worm out of your, yes, ridiculous assumptions won't make any difference to that. You have ignored the fact that I've accepted pathing reasons, but a) don't seem to understand the concept of lost time, and b) don't seem to understand that I had an issue with the original justification and provided a counter-example, I didn't say we should run high-speed sleeper services arriving at 3am. You changed the goalposts for a) by bringing up pathing (which I accept, but is irrelevant to my actual point even if it's a good answer), and you've just ignored b).

And with the train categories you literally have the speeds wrong. There are speed increases all the time in China, and so they're often out of date. Looks like I was wrong on the Z-trains being a variation of the D-trains, but that isn't really the point. Seat61 doesn't even mention speed, and there are two things wrong with that source on Wikipedia: those speeds are a rule of thumb rather than absolute (there is huge variation in the lines, and the difference in train category is often a difference in the way the stock is outfitted rather than anything else), and they're slightly out of date from what I can tell.

And before you start (condescendingly) telling me I'm wrong, Wikipedia is routinely out of date when it comes to Chinese railways. There are few editors updating and it's changing so fast.

 

[jimm]

Or perhaps you can read my posts and not be so condescending. Assuming I'm advocating timetabled 125mph sleeper services (when I literally just asked why they're limited to 75mph for comfort) just makes it look like you're looking to find a problem. Clearly I'm talking about making up time. Dare I say obviously? Trying to worm out of your, yes, ridiculous assumptions won't make any difference to that. You have ignored the fact that I've accepted pathing reasons, but a) don't seem to understand the concept of lost time, and b) don't seem to understand that I had an issue with the original justification and provided a counter-example, I didn't say we should run high-speed sleeper services arriving at 3am. You changed the goalposts for a) by bringing up pathing (which I accept, but is irrelevant to my actual point even if it's a good answer), and you've just ignored b).

And with the train categories you literally have the speeds wrong. There are speed increases all the time in China, and so they're often out of date. Looks like I was wrong on the Z-trains being a variation of the D-trains, but that isn't really the point. Seat61 doesn't even mention speed, and there are two things wrong with that source on Wikipedia: those speeds are a rule of thumb rather than absolute (there is huge variation in the lines, and the difference in train category is often a difference in the way the stock is outfitted rather than anything else), and they're slightly out of date from what I can tell.

And before you start (condescendingly) telling me I'm wrong, Wikipedia is routinely out of date when it comes to Chinese railways. There are few editors updating and it's changing so fast.

I wasn't trying to find a problem. You described the 75mph speed as "ridiculous". I disagree. So I said so. So did other posters.

How much time do you think they might need to make up? The Night Riviera is allowed eight hours westbound and seven-and-a-half eastbound. An HST can cover the same run in just over five - and the HST isn't going much faster than 75mph though much of the West Country either. There are similar running time differentials between London-Glasgow and London-Edinburgh day trains and the sleepers.

And the Scottish sleepers are among the most punctual trains around, with 96.9 per cent recorded for the last month of First Group operation, which doesn't exactly suggest terrible timekeeping problems or a pressing need to change operating speeds.

As we have agreed, the distances involved in China make for different ways of doing things... such as sleeper trains travelling at speeds above 75mph.

Other sites mention those speeds for the different categories of train, but they could all just have copied it off Wikipedia.

 

[Wookiee]

Maybe slightly off-topic, but I was reading an older thread that mentioned HSTs in 3rd rail areas which referred to the Sectional Appendix showing what stock could run through a given station - can someone tell me which bit of the Sectional Appendix contains this info?

 

[Murph]

Maybe slightly off-topic, but I was reading an older thread that mentioned HSTs in 3rd rail areas which referred to the Sectional Appendix showing what stock could run through a given station - can someone tell me which bit of the Sectional Appendix contains this info?

Try looking for classes 253 and 254, which is what HSTs are in their DEMU numbering (not shown on the trains for a very long time now, and the prototype was 252, and 255 has also been used to refer to the "Challenger" configuration of shortened HST). Not sure about other appendices, but the Scottish one refers to them as 253/254, if memory serves.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I wasn't trying to find a problem. You described the 75mph speed as "ridiculous". I disagree. So I said so. So did other posters.

How much time do you think they might need to make up? The Night Riviera is allowed eight hours westbound and seven-and-a-half eastbound. An HST can cover the same run in just over five - and the HST isn't going much faster than 75mph though much of the West Country either. There are similar running time differentials between London-Glasgow and London-Edinburgh day trains and the sleepers.

And the Scottish sleepers are among the most punctual trains around, with 96.9 per cent recorded for the last month of First Group operation, which doesn't exactly suggest terrible timekeeping problems or a pressing need to change operating speeds.

As we have agreed, the distances involved in China make for different ways of doing things... such as sleeper trains travelling at speeds above 75mph.

Other sites mention those speeds for the different categories of train, but they could all just have copied it off Wikipedia.

I described it as ridiculous as it seems like an arbitrary limitation in case of delays, which do indeed happen. It's as simple as that. There have been times when the sleepers have had to be delayed in departing due to loco or stock problems, and in those cases it helps to be able to make up lost time. Even if it's only 3% of the time, that's still money that needs to be shelled out.

Regarding the speeds - those will almost certainly be copied from Wikipedia, as almost everything seems to be these days. The primary sources are all in Chinese and mostly from 2 or 3 years ago. I certainly clocked myself going faster than 87mph on a couple of T trains using GPS, although one was an hour late and possibly trying to make up lost time on a Shanghai-Nanning run (20something hours I think). The other was bang on time though, which was the aforementioned Xi'an to Lhasa. Definitely limited to 120kmh from Xining onwards, but the views more than make up for it.