Max speed on UK network

[cle]

I don't think it was ever official, and the railways were a lot quieter in those days - but I'm pretty sure in the earliest days of the HST on the GWML, speeds well above 125mph would be reached often. I recall some very fast Bristol Parkway and Newport timings.

 

[miklcct]

Virgin Trains did want an exception made for 135mph on a section of the WCML near Lockerbie but Network Rail refused anything above 125mph until in-cab signalling. Only other I can think of is on the Peterborough to Grantham stretch of the ECML which had an extra aspect (flashing green) added in the late 1980s to assist with testing of the class 91s. 140mph was not used in passenger service.

So why isn't in-cab signalling installed on the WCML and the EMUs running on it?

 

[dk1]

So why isn't in-cab signalling installed on the WCML and the EMUs running on it?

It’s all delayed delayed delayed. Have a ride on the Cambrian & you can experience it.

 

[43066]

The flat and straight ECML 'racetrack' between York and Northallerton has been the scene of several overspending incidents, including this one last year, where a class 802 reached 145mph!

The “racetrack” description of the ECML seems to have stuck, but always amuses me when it’s actually the exact opposite: straight and flat. Much more like a dragstrip!

The MML on the other hand…

 

[class26]

When you look at many of the mainlines at the moment that isn't an issue as a lot of the stations are on speed limits anyway. The section I think between Grantham and Peterborough has level crossing near Peterborough but could already be back at 125mph at that point (it was a long time ago). At the time Grantham was on a curve (and still is) and trains haven't recovered speed between the tunnels. Peterborough at the time didn't have platforms on the fast line.

I meant for 140 mph

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

So why isn't in-cab signalling installed on the WCML and the EMUs running on it?

That was the original Railtrack plan, but they also planned to use radio-based technology that didn't exist.
That (and other aspects of the WCML upgrade) was one of the main reasons which led to the collapse of Railtrack in 2000.
Meanwhile Germany and Austria have had in-cab signalling (LZB) for speeds over 160km/h (100mph) since the 1980s.

There's also another feature which is mandatory for high speed - Automatic Train Protection (ATP).
The in-cab systems (including LZB) give you ATP.
In the 1990s we experimented with ATP systems on lines out of Paddington and Marylebone, but did not adopt a national system.
Instead, we rolled out TPWS which provides much of the protection of ATP, but is not a full in-cab system.

ETCS integrates all these feature in a standard system, being adopted throughout Europe (and elsewhere, eg China).

 

[The Planner]

So why isn't in-cab signalling installed on the WCML and the EMUs running on it?

Money and the fact you are more likely to wait until the existing signalling system is life expired before renewing it.

 

[Kneedown]

Oh yes, the flashing greens where operational for many years but couldn't comment on 140mph running but before OTMR I could imagine it normal practice to go above 125 as it was with most linesoeeds.

Back in the mid 90's, when I was road learning Newark Northgate to Peterborough, there was many a 91 Driver who whipped the speed control round to 135, 140mph.

 

[dk1]

Back in the mid 90's, when I was road learning Newark Northgate to Peterborough, there was many a 91 Driver who whipped the speed control round to 135, 140mph.

Don’t blame them. Was such a buzz to make up time back then.

 

[Ianno87]

So why isn't in-cab signalling installed on the WCML and the EMUs running on it?

Money and the fact you are more likely to wait until the existing signalling system is life expired before renewing it.

And also everything else is designed for 125 because there's no point if the signalling is limited. So going to 140 requires upgrades to structures, OLE etc to take it.

 

[WAO]

Back in the mid 90's, when I was road learning Newark Northgate to Peterborough, there was many a 91 Driver who whipped the speed control round to 135, 140mph.

Wasn't there a "140 club" on the WR?

Those were the days...

WAO

 

[AM9]

126mph was achieved there in 1938. No flashing greens then!

Wasn't something apple green that flashed by?

 

[edwin_m]

Wasn't something apple green that flashed by?

Wasn't it garter blue?

 

[vic-rijrode]

It also requires that platforms along the line be gated, if I remember correctly.

So platforms on lines with a 125mph limit don't have to be gated, but on lines with a 140mph limit they have to be gated. I can't quite see the difference for an unfortunate person being hit by a train at 125mph as opposed to one going 15 mph faster - or am I missing something?

 

[Efini92]

Didn’t the APT-E get up to 160?

 

[Watershed]

So platforms on lines with a 125mph limit don't have to be gated, but on lines with a 140mph limit they have to be gated. I can't quite see the difference for an unfortunate person being hit by a train at 125mph as opposed to one going 15 mph faster - or am I missing something?

It's to do with the fact that the air turbulence caused by a 140mph train is significantly greater than that caused by a 125mph train. It goes up by the square of the speed, so it's not linear. So you would need exceptionally wide platforms to give sufficient room with a set-back yellow line.

 

[vic-rijrode]

It's to do with the fact that the air turbulence caused by a 140mph train is significantly greater than that caused by a 125mph train. It goes up by the square of the speed, so it's not linear. So you would need exceptionally wide platforms to give sufficient room with a set-back yellow line.

Thank you.

 

[waverley47]

Thank you.

Also about grandfather rights.

NR, and RailTrack, and BR all decided it was safe, and experience has suggested and confirmed repeatedly that the risk to the average passenger standing on a platform with a train passing at 125 is acceptable.

This risk is mitigated by yellow lines, hash patterns and announcements at busy stations.

If you were to implement 140 running, you'd have to reassess the risk as if you were starting to run trains on a brand new line at that speed. That risk assessment would inevitably conclude that an open platform with 140 running is unacceptable, even with said mitigations.

That doesn't mean that the current situation is unsafe in any way, and indeed has been proven to be safe by example of the thousands of instances of trains running at 125 through platforms around the network every day. However, it might be the case that for absolute safety with 140 running, you need expensive alterations to stations or dropping through platforms, which makes the upgrade not really worth it.

 

[AM9]

Wasn't it garter blue?

Yes I do believe that you are correct. Spoilt my pun though.

 

[Jozhua]

You're better ironing out any conflicts or bottlenecks before upgrading speeds too much. 140mph is a pretty minor speed boost for the likely cost of implementing it.

Agreed, when you look at the ECML and the number of places that are suitable for 140mph running, you will possibly save 5 minutes. But the known an loved congestion points (Doncaster as one) will take away that saving. If we had unlimited money it is best spend on say Grade separating Doncaster, so Northern and TPE passengers also benefit from better journeys than saving a few minutes on the LNER journeys. I know HS2 is now purely for the West. I suspect if all trains had a clear run through Doncaster it is probably better for the mainline then increasing the speedlimit elsewhere and a better investment.

HS2 shouldn't entirely be for the West, but this government is spineless/incompetent and HM Treasury has an idea that you should sit on the gold like Smaug and the more gold you sit on the better the governmenment. This seems a somewhat elementary understanding of government spending/borrowing, but thats basically how it works.

140mph on the ecml would probably come at the expense of a lot of capacity too, so I just can't see it being worth it, even considering that like three people live in the east of England...

 

[Western Lord]

I find it quite rare for 125 mph to be maintained over any long distance. Top Speed seems to hover around 122-124 mph

You can probably blame the metric system. I imagine that modern trains are governed to 200 km/hr (124 mph).

 

[XAM2175]

You can probably blame the metric system. I imagine that modern trains are governed to 200 km/hr (124 mph).

No. Not at all.

 

[hexagon789]

You can probably blame the metric system. I imagine that modern trains are governed to 200 km/hr (124 mph).

Hitachi IETs do work the speed set in converted km/h I believe, so a set at 125 rounds to 124mph (200km/h).

Otherwise, no.

Just most speed sets don't keep bang on the set figure.

 

[notadriver]

Indeed I

Hitachi IETs do work the speed set in converted km/h I believe, so a set at 125 rounds to 124mph (200km/h).

Otherwise, no.

Just most speed sets don't keep bang on the set figure

I remember on Electrostars the speed set kept the speed 2 mph below the set figure so between Tonbridge and Ashford 98 mph was the usual maximum.

I don’t think I’d be a speed set fan although I use cruise control a lot in my car.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

No. Not at all.

They will be with ETCS.

 

[XAM2175]

They will be with ETCS.

But, with the exception of Class 80x units as @hexagon789 has noted, it's not how things are now.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Re the comments alluding to Mallard - the 126mph claim was always a bit dubious; even Nigel Gresley only ever claimed 125mph was attained and the extra 1mph was more likely to be a blip on the graph roll due to the motion of the dynamometer car. There was however political pressure to officialise the 126mph ‘record’ to surpass the standing 125mph record achieved in Germany, which was more impressive as it had been achieved on the level, rather than downhill like Mallard’s run. (Plus the locomotive wasn’t damaged!)

I know my father is convinced there was 140mph running in daily service on the ECML when the IC225 sets entered traffic, he had a memorable run on the Scottish Pullman (1530 ex-Kings Cross) which pulled into York at 1703, a whopping 12 mins early against a tight non-stop schedule. Admittedly the sets were in their original 2+8 formation but it shows what was achievable with a clear run and a good driver.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Aug 2021 ==

They will be with ETCS.

ETCS will have a few interesting impacts on train performance, the assessment is that the braking curves are 15% longer than current defensive driving styles, on average. Not particularly conducive to good journey times if you have to pass through any sort of traffic bottleneck.

 

[Meerkat]

ETCS will have a few interesting impacts on train performance, the assessment is that the braking curves are 15% longer than current defensive driving styles, on average. Not particularly conducive to good journey times if you have to pass through any sort of traffic bottleneck.

Why?! That’s really silly. Is it just because the system can’t judge actual rail conditions so errs on the safe side?

 

[hexagon789]

Indeed I


I remember on Electrostars the speed set kept the speed 2 mph below the set figure so between Tonbridge and Ashford 98 mph was the usual maximum.

I don’t think I’d be a speed set fan although I use cruise control a lot in my car.

Same with most BR era speedsets as I mentioned - though that's more the tolerance than anything I think.

Re the comments alluding to Mallard - the 126mph claim was always a bit dubious; even Nigel Gresley only ever claimed 125mph was attained and the extra 1mph was more likely to be a blip on the graph roll due to the motion of the dynamometer car. There was however political pressure to officialise the 126mph ‘record’ to surpass the standing 125mph record achieved in Germany, which was more impressive as it had been achieved on the level, rather than downhill like Mallard’s run. (Plus the locomotive wasn’t damaged!)

The attained maxima as shown on the roll is not 126, it's 125.88mph - so 126 is rounded which ever way you look at it.

And as you say - Gresley only ever accepted that 125mph was attained, as the highest figure measured was sustained for only a matter of a few hundred yards.

If the Second World War hadn't intervened though who knows what might have been achieved, or if Alan Pegler hadn't told Bill Hoole to ease off Sir Nigel Gresley in 1959.

Or on modern infrastructure, bearing in mind the heavy reductions necessary in the 1930s for most junctions including Essendine at the foot of Stoke Bank, higher figures would likely be possible.

I know my father is convinced there was 140mph running in daily service on the ECML when the IC225 sets entered traffic, he had a memorable run on the Scottish Pullman (1530 ex-Kings Cross) which pulled into York at 1703, a whopping 12 mins early against a tight non-stop schedule. Admittedly the sets were in their original 2+8 formation but it shows what was achievable with a clear run and a good driver.

If that was on a 3h59 Edinburgh service - the schedule to York was 1h40 (113.1mph); 93 mins is 121.6mph - so very impressive. Possibly also before the acceleration rates were modified to mitigate against severe wheelspin issues in winter weather?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Aug 2021 ==

Why?! That’s really silly. Is it just because the system can’t judge actual rail conditions so errs on the safe side?

Usually seems to be the case, in fact 15% isn't bad given how conservative some automatic/computer systems are.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

It will be the cumulative effects of allowances for poor rail conditions, adverse weather, braking systems at the limits of tolerances, etc etc. All the things that a driver usually assimilates mentally through a simple running brake test and allows for as appropriate.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Aug 2021 ==

If that was on a 3h59 Edinburgh service - the schedule to York was 1h40 (113.1mph); 93 mins is 121.6mph - so very impressive. Possibly also before the acceleration rates were modified to mitigate against severe wheelspin issues in winter weather?

I’m not certain of the exact year, weren’t the original 3h59 schedules slowed down a little bit after a couple of years of experience? Certainly there were about 3 or 4 ‘Scottish Pullmans’ each each direction by the mid 1990s, some of them had more stops than just York and Newcastle.