Night Riviera - merged posts, ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[Super Guard]

HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) have up to 450V AC transferred through three-phase cables (hence why you shouldn't plug your phones into those luggage rack sockets at 125mph)..

Sleeper has 1000V DC^▸ (Direct Current), which is wired differently.

2 power cars could haul the sleeper every night, but the 57 needs to be running to provide the train supply.

[Super Guard]

Agree: I'm sure it's been discussed on the Coffee Shop forum before (I can't find it at the moment, due to our 'search' software being discomnadgerated  ), but it's because the two are currently completely incompatible. 

I take what I said about the lightbulb back... 

[JayMac]

What is the difference in the wiring between the sleepers and HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s?

HST power cars deliver 3 phase AC current at, I believe 415v, direct to the various systems (aircon, lighting, heating) that the HST Mk3s use. Loco hauled Mk3s receive 1000v (not sure whether AC or DC^▸ (Direct Current), I suspect the latter) from the loco, converted to usable voltage by motor generators on each carriage to provide the 'hotel' power.

I think. And stand to be corrected by anyone more knowledgeable.

[ellendune]

What is the difference in the wiring between the sleepers and HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s?

HST power cars deliver 3 phase AC current at, I believe 415v, direct to the various systems (aircon, lighting, heating) that the HST Mk3s use. Loco hauled Mk3s receive 1000v (not sure whether AC or DC^▸ (Direct Current), I suspect the latter) from the loco, converted to usable voltage by motor generators on each carriage to provide the 'hotel' power.

I think. And stand to be corrected by anyone more knowledgeable.

Then rewire them so that the motor generators deliver 3 phase 415V, with all the hotel ssytems working at 230V AC (i.e a single phase of the 415V).  Include the wiring for a 415V through cable.  All the carriages are returned to service operating from the 1000V supply. 

When the changeover is made remove the 1000V jumpers, disconnect the generators from the 415V main and fit the new 415V jumpers.  The Motor generators and 1000V wiring can then be removed at a convenient time if necessary.   

[stuving]

What is the difference in the wiring between the sleepers and HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s?

HST power cars deliver 3 phase AC current at, I believe 415v, direct to the various systems (aircon, lighting, heating) that the HST Mk3s use. Loco hauled Mk3s receive 1000v (not sure whether AC or DC^▸ (Direct Current), I suspect the latter) from the loco, converted to usable voltage by motor generators on each carriage to provide the 'hotel' power.

I think. And stand to be corrected by anyone more knowledgeable.

Then rewire them so that the motor generators deliver 3 phase 415V, with all the hotel ssytems working at 230V AC (i.e a single phase of the 415V).  Include the wiring for a 415V through cable.  All the carriages are returned to service operating from the 1000V supply. 

When the changeover is made remove the 1000V jumpers, disconnect the generators from the 415V main and fit the new 415V jumpers.  The Motor generators and 1000V wiring can then be removed at a convenient time if necessary.   

The first thing you need is the control cables that connect the two power cars.

Then 415/240V AC (or 400/230 V)  looks a good choice for a power, as it is what the world outside the railway works off. But the on-board equipment won't have been designed for that, which will make it more difficult. Heaters for 850 V can't easily bye run off lower voltages unless they have as lower-voltage elements wired in series, and then it depends. Lights are usually 120 V, and need to be run via the back-up battery float-charge system. Anything than can run off AC can be fed by a transformer, but the prevalence of DC in train supplies means that's less common than you would expect.

But really, is is so difficult to find a locomotive that works - reliably? There's no new technology, uniquely demanding environment, or other features of this sleeper service that make it harder to meet than on other railways, are there?

[TaplowGreen]

But really, is is so difficult to find a locomotive that works - reliably? There's no new technology, uniquely demanding environment, or other features of this sleeper service that make it harder to meet than on other railways, are there?
[/quote]

.....hear hear.

[LiskeardRich]

Surprising news of the week.... Tonight's down hauled by Pendennis Castle is running on time!

[Palfers]

And the up was early to ladbroke grove then 8 late in to padd

[Rhydgaled]

But really, is is so difficult to find a locomotive that works - reliably? There's no new technology, uniquely demanding environment, or other features of this sleeper service that make it harder to meet than on other railways, are there?

Apparently, it is rather difficult to find a diesel locomotive for passenger that works in this country. The only diesel LHCS^▸ (Locomotive Hauled Coaching Stock) fleet that appears in the Modern Railways 'Golden Spanner' contests is Chiltern's 67+mrk3+DVT^‡(resolve) sets, and they are bottom of the INTERCITY table, although in the latest figures did acheive a 32.7% improvement in reliability from the previous year. According to a topic on RailUK forum, Arriva Trains Wales had a spate of failures with thier 67-powered Y Gerallt Gymro service a while back. I suggested that perhaps the small fleet means the maintenance staff take a long time to get to know the stock well.

If you want to blame the class of locomotive used, there are not many other options other than old locomotives similar to the 57s used now. I think the only post-privatisation diesel locos suitable for passenger service are the class 67s and class 68s. Of course there are lots of relatively new class 66 locomotives, but using them for the sleeper would have the same result as using class 43s (IC125 power cars), no power to the coaches (for a different reason, class 43s supply incompattible power, but 66s won't provide power at all since they are freight locos).

If size of fleet is the problem, perhaps allocating a load of 57s and introducing some daytime LHCS services to free up DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) for other parts of the franchise will get the maintenance teams up to speed and improve reliablity.

[autotank]

I saw the down sleeper last night pass through Twyford and was surprised to see it top and tailed with a DRS^▸ (Direct Rail Services Ltd) 57 on the back. Are they now basing a spare 57 at Penzance to deal with failures?

[a-driver]

I saw the down sleeper last night pass through Twyford and was surprised to see it top and tailed with a DRS^▸ (Direct Rail Services Ltd) 57 on the back. Are they now basing a spare 57 at Penzance to deal with failures?

A fitter travels with the sleeper every night.  The 57 on the back is basically a mobile source of spares should..... when the front one fails. 

[TaplowGreen]

I saw the down sleeper last night pass through Twyford and was surprised to see it top and tailed with a DRS^▸ (Direct Rail Services Ltd) 57 on the back. Are they now basing a spare 57 at Penzance to deal with failures?

A fitter travels with the sleeper every night.  The 57 on the back is basically a mobile source of spares should..... when the front one fails. 

What a desperate way to operate.

[tomL]

I saw the down sleeper last night pass through Twyford and was surprised to see it top and tailed with a DRS^▸ (Direct Rail Services Ltd) 57 on the back. Are they now basing a spare 57 at Penzance to deal with failures?

A fitter travels with the sleeper every night.  The 57 on the back is basically a mobile source of spares should..... when the front one fails. 

What a desperate way to operate.

Would you rather they don't try at all? Just leave it where it fails?

[IndustryInsider]

If size of fleet is the problem, perhaps allocating a load of 57s and introducing some daytime LHCS^▸ (Locomotive Hauled Coaching Stock) services to free up DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) for other parts of the franchise will get the maintenance teams up to speed and improve reliablity.

I really can't see how that would make much of a difference.  You might get a slight improvement in Class 57 reliability, but because you'd be running more trains with them, the reliability and resilience of other parts of the network would suffer.  The Class 57 are essentially 15 year old pieces of equipment bolted on to a 50 year old bodyshell and basic design.  They've pretty much had their day!  Ditto using HST^▸ (High Speed Train) power cars which would be at best a stop-gap measure that might mean they soldier on for a few more years, but they're also well past their sell-by date (personally I don't see them staying on the Cornish services beyond a couple of years before Class 222s arrive).  I don't want to sound too negative, but I worry about the reliability of the re-engined Class 73s to be used on the diesel sections of the Caledonian Sleeper services for the same reasons.

The Class 67 would be a much better bet, though they haven't exactly covered themselves in glory reliability wise either - though much better than the 57s of late and the figures are much better when they're not being used on push-pull services I suspect.  The perfect solution (if enough of them were to become available, via the current order or an addition to the current order) would be the new Class 68s - assuming they prove their reliability.

All of this only goes to prove the vulnerability of using a single power source, when there aren't anywhere near the number of rescue options there used to be, which I've been banging on about on here for years!   

[chrisr_75]

Why not take the approach formerly used on the Scottish sleepers in using an otherwise redundant loco (engine & gen set ok, ETH fitted, but no longer suitable/required for providing traction, a class 57 perhaps?!) to act as a mobile generator for train supply, and use a modern, reliable freight loco for traction purposes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_25#Train_Heating_Units

The additional drawbar weight would not be an issue for a heavy freight unit such as a class 66?