|
Thatcham Crossing
|
 |
« Reply #735 on: February 18, 2015, 17:01:00 » |
|
II said: That's why I made my comment them being perfectly adequate for the sleeper schedule with its couple of extra coaches. I am wondering if that would still hold true over the Devon banks? I assume the loco-doubling will address that concern and also provide some resilience - provided that one loco doesn't fail with the banks still to be climbed! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
a-driver
|
|
« Reply #736 on: February 18, 2015, 17:20:32 » |
|
II said: That's why I made my comment them being perfectly adequate for the sleeper schedule with its couple of extra coaches. I am wondering if that would still hold true over the Devon banks? I assume the loco-doubling will address that concern and also provide some resilience - provided that one loco doesn't fail with the banks still to be climbed! Especially in leaf fall season. I don't know prone the Class 67 is to slipping. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TaplowGreen
|
|
« Reply #737 on: February 18, 2015, 17:49:26 » |
|
How old are the class 67s?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #738 on: February 18, 2015, 18:00:13 » |
|
How old are the class 67s?
15 years - introduced 1999 and 2000 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
TaplowGreen
|
|
« Reply #739 on: February 18, 2015, 18:02:24 » |
|
How old are the class 67s?
15 years - introduced 1999 and 2000 Youngsters!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Gordon the Blue Engine
|
|
« Reply #740 on: February 18, 2015, 18:55:59 » |
|
Class 67^s have a more powerful engine installed than Class 57^s, but of course they have less adhesion because of their weight and they are geared for 125mph against 95 mph for Class 57/3. One could question why you put 125 mph locos on sleeper trains, but maybe they will be regeared.
Worth noting that a Class 67 has almost twice the continuous tractive effort (ie drawbar pull) of a Class 43 HST▸ Power Car. So they aren^t complete wimps.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
a-driver
|
|
« Reply #741 on: February 18, 2015, 19:25:11 » |
|
One could question why you put 125 mph locos on sleeper trains
Because there is nothing else available and they can't continue with the 57's given their reliability. When it comes to overhauling the 57's they had to go to South Africa for replacement wheelsets. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
bobm
|
|
« Reply #742 on: March 06, 2015, 08:17:31 » |
|
So near, yet so far.
The westbound sleeper made it to Truro before being terminated due to technical problems with the loco.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
The Tall Controller
|
|
« Reply #743 on: March 06, 2015, 22:56:34 » |
|
Failed with a GSMR problem on the loco. Thinking it was initially the problem was just in the front cab, a spare driver was shoved in the back cab but it proved to be the whole loco.
A shame after a quite a rosy period of reliability.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JayMac
|
|
« Reply #744 on: March 06, 2015, 23:54:49 » |
|
A shame after a quite a rosy period of reliability.
Rosy, or rose tinted? I make it just 20 odd days since the last Night Riviera failure. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"A clear conscience laughs at a false accusation."
"Treat everyone the same until you find out they're an idiot."
"Moral indignation is a technique used to endow the idiot with dignity."
|
|
|
|
LiskeardRich
|
|
« Reply #745 on: March 07, 2015, 07:13:06 » |
|
A shame after a quite a rosy period of reliability.
Rosy, or rose tinted? I make it just 20 odd days since the last Night Riviera failure. That's about a 2000% improvement! It was at least once every night, if not both every night. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
All posts are my own personal believes, opinions and understandings!
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #746 on: March 07, 2015, 11:23:51 » |
|
It was touch and go with the down sleeper last night, but in the end a fault was rectified in the nick of time.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
thetrout
|
|
« Reply #747 on: March 07, 2015, 19:02:04 » |
|
FGW▸ haven't given up on the sleepers however! I think there is some determination here 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
bobm
|
|
« Reply #748 on: March 07, 2015, 20:12:30 » |
|
I'm booked on it on April 12th - and you know what a jinx I am!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Kernowman
|
|
« Reply #749 on: March 15, 2015, 22:37:48 » |
|
Looks like 1C86 1506 Pad to Pnz has hit both of the failed trains on its journey today. Doh!  And 1C87 (the 16:06 Pad to Pnz) is now running ahead of it. Might have been better to wait at Westbury than go round via Bristol, but hindsight is a marvellous thing! Reminds me of when I was on the 16.06 Pad to PZ in August 2013, it failed at Castle Cary and required fitter attention. Most passengers did a pair of units (2 x 150 I think) on the Weymouth back to Westbury for a following Pad service which was being diverted via Bristol. A few of us stayed on the stricken HST▸ , eventually a fitter arrived by road from Bristol fixed the problem and we were in Taunton an hour before everyone else  |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 16, 2015, 10:33:06 by Kernowman »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Click on the map to explore geographics
