Pendolinos and WCML at 140.

[Journeyman]

On a slightly different note, why is the down track on the Bolton line 100mph, but the up track in the same place only 95?

I'm guessing it could be the gradients, curves or junctions you approach that influence that, so there could be something in the up direction that needs to be negotiated at a slower speed.

 

[Trackman]

On a slightly different note, why is the down track on the Bolton line 100mph, but the up track in the same place only 95?

@Joseph_Locke answered this a while back, something to do with signalling I think.

 

[MarkyT]

@Joseph_Locke answered this a while back, something to do with signalling I think.

Usually is. Braking distance or sighting probably.

 

[Aictos]

No. You might want to check your facts in this document - https://sacuksprodnrdigital0001.blob.core.windows.net/sectional-appendix/Sectional Appendix full PDFs/London North Eastern Sectional Appendix December 2020.pdf

Isn't the only place in the UK capable of such speeds HS1? I know I've reached the speed there recently although no idea on the line speeds.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Dec 2020 ==

Btw I did forget to add this to my last post so apologies but as the OP was discussing 140mph operations, I feel I had to add a gem here.

Was talking to a colleague recently who passed though Nuneaton and was told that Avanti run at 180MPH on the WCML, wishful thinking maybe?

 

[Bald Rick]

Was talking to a colleague recently who passed though Nuneaton and was told that Avanti run at 180MPH on the WCML, wishful thinking maybe?

Wishful would be one of the milder adjectives to use. It’s never happened.

 

[hexagon789]

North of York.

The test section with the additional signalling aspect was south of York, running northwards from Peterborough.

There are very limited opportunities for really fast running north of York with the exception of York-Darlington.

 

[Hadders]

Was talking to a colleague recently who passed though Nuneaton and was told that Avanti run at 180MPH on the WCML, wishful thinking maybe?

180km/h is approximately 110mph so I guess someone was getting km/h and mph mixed up.

 

[Bald Rick]

180km/h is approximately 110mph so I guess someone was getting km/h and mph mixed up.

I wondered that. Seems a bit odd though, as no one really uses kph in that context, and 180kph doesn’t fit a ‘round’ mph conversion (it’s 113mph, whereas 110 mph is 175, and 125mph is 200).

However, I wonder if there were some crossed wires. In normal circumstances, Avanti operate (very nearly) 180 trains per day through Nuneaton, most of them passing through fast without stopping.

With apologies to Mr Morecambe, roughly the same words, but not necessarily in the right order.

 

[Aictos]

180km/h is approximately 110mph so I guess someone was getting km/h and mph mixed up.

Maybe but they were so sure of themselves they were adamant they were right.

It nearly ended up in a argument between myself and a colleague when I explained that in cab signalling is needed for speeds above 135mph and that only HS1 had speeds faster then 125mph.

In any case, you would have thought someone working in the industry never mind the UK would know we use MPH not KPH.

 

[The Planner]

Maybe but they were so sure of themselves they were adamant they were right.

It nearly ended up in a argument between myself and a colleague when I explained that in cab signalling is needed for speeds above 135mph and that only HS1 had speeds faster then 125mph.

In any case, you would have thought someone working in the industry never mind the UK would know we use MPH not KPH.

Apart from on the Cambrian...

 

[6Gman]

Is there anything to actually stop the driver from pushing the speed up to 140mph, obviously all planned and authorised beforehand with Avanti and Network Rail? I can see the risk of doing this on the more curved sections, but on a clear straight run such as Crewe to Stafford or the Trent Valley?

I've never done Crewe to Stafford at the front end but from the amount of tilt I feel is it not rather less than "straight"?

 

[hexagon789]

It nearly ended up in a argument between myself and a colleague when I explained that in cab signalling is needed for speeds above 135mph and that only HS1 had speeds faster then 125mph.

Isn't it for speeds over 125mph, given the proposed Trent Valley 135mph increase never happened and nothing runs over 125 in the UK without cab signalling?

 

[Aictos]

Isn't it for speeds over 125mph, given the proposed Trent Valley 135mph increase never happened and nothing runs over 125 in the UK without cab signalling?

I say over 135mph because Virgin's Richard Branson went on record to say 135mph running was possible using existing lineside signalling.

I await to be corrected though.

 

[hexagon789]

I say over 135mph because Virgin's Richard Branson went on record to say 135mph running was possible using existing lineside signalling.

I await to be corrected though.

Fair enough, I suppose TASS is a sort of intermediate between just AWS/TPWS and cab-signalling which does provide more protection and may be enough for the extra 10mph

 

[swt_passenger]

Maybe but they were so sure of themselves they were adamant they were right.

It nearly ended up in a argument between myself and a colleague when I explained that in cab signalling is needed for speeds above 135mph and that only HS1 had speeds faster then 125mph.

In any case, you would have thought someone working in the industry never mind the UK would know we use MPH not KPH.

In cab signalling is required for speeds above 125 mph as mentioned earlier in this thread. The 135 mph proposal was effectively a Branson fantasy.

 

[Bald Rick]

I say over 135mph because Virgin's Richard Branson went on record to say 135mph running was possible using existing lineside signalling.

I await to be corrected though.

Richard Branson is many things, but an accredited Signal Sighting Committee chairman is not one of them.

 

[hexagon789]

In cab signalling is required for speeds above 125 mph as mentioned earlier in this thread. The 135 mph proposal was effectively a Branson fantasy.

That was my understanding, but I wasn't 100% sure how the 135 thing was proposed.

 

[SteelWeelApeal]

Are there any drivers here who regularly drive at 125 who could comment on what your experience of the signal sighting is like at that speed (purely out of interest)? Do you think you could safely see signals at 130 or 135? Or do you think 125 is a bit too fast already? I'd imagine it depends on curvature and weather conditions as well as speed.

I'd guess that there are straight sections where the signals would be as easy to see at higher speeds as the current curviest 125 sections. I noticed during a cab ride along GWML that on straight sections you could see them far ahead.

 

[Bald Rick]

Are there any drivers here who regularly drive at 125 who could comment on what your experience of the signal sighting is like at that speed (purely out of interest)? Do you think you could safely see signals at 130 or 135? Or do you think 125 is a bit too fast already? I'd imagine it depends on curvature and weather conditions as well as speed.

I'd guess that there are straight sections where the signals would be as easy to see at higher speeds as the current curviest 125 sections. I noticed during a cab ride along GWML that on straight sections you could see them far ahead.

To go faster than 125mph, BR trialled flashing green aspects on Stoke Bank. The issue is, I assume, differentiating between green and flashing green above 125mph, particularly when OLE masts / headspans etc are flashing past every second or so. You come round a corner - see a green flashing, but then realise actually it was just partially obscured sighting caused by masts etc, and then it’s too late to brake (in theory).

 

[popeter45]

I wouldn't be surprised if once any kind of in cab signalling is implemented on most 125mph mainline in the UK we could see the permitted max speed for line side signalling be reduced so something like 100-110mph