A TPE Class 802 got up to 145mph - A record?

[Bletchleyite]

I'm genuinely surprised they don't have an overall, non-defeatable limit to 125 given that they are not allowed to run faster than that anywhere at present.

 

[irish_rail]

ASL has big draw backs , not least it takes away a job from the driver that leads to less concentration overall. It also is ineffective on downward gradients. Personally I never use it.

 

[Clarence Yard]

In regards to the driver not noticing the higher speed. I can also see the driver not being as conscious of the speed if they were trying to sort out an issue that had caused the speed limiter to not stay on in the first place whilst unaware that it wasn't functional. As in they knew they could attend to a problem with the TMS (being more "head in" rather than "head out" of the cab to use an aviation term) whilst knowing they had set a speed, in an area between signals and with no line speed changes they had to pay attention to but then got caught out when the ASL wasn't actually working.

I do wonder if a system like ASL is being used as a safety feature rather than a convenience should it be able to be disabled whilst the train is in motion at all? Not that it must be used but that a maximum must always be set, but that it also needs a second top limit probably the highest speed limit for the train?

No, he was on the flat “racing stretch” with very few spatial indications to give him a sense of the speed. There were no in cab distractions.

The ASL is a train safety feature and if you have ATP or ERTMS fitted, the switch off risk is completely eliminated.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Would that be a mistake in an individual train or the software for the speed limiter not being enabled when the driver put the speed set at 145 mph by mistake?

Under electric in both cases, I assume?

Absolutely. You can’t hit 125 on diesel, 802s peak at 122, downhill, and with a tailwind....

I know the driver concerned. Social distancing and spare at home means I haven’t heard anything direct from anyone regarding the incident although it has been mentioned in messroom banter and nothing official has yet been posted from management. I can confirm the driver self reported the incident at the time it occurred. I do believe the driver is still on active duty and investigation is focusing on how the train managed to hit that speed given that it was the driver that reported it and not the train however I cannot confirm this is indeed the case and at this time I do not know anything more.

This however to me is the second incident in my operating area involving a IET/AT300 where issues on the TMS have led to an incident. To me this is why DAS should only back up and not replace a drivers route and traction knowledge. Personally I am horrified that the potential for DAS where the computer tells the driver what to do to the point that the driver merely follows the computer instructions was actively being promoted as a potential in a “digital railway” seminar I have attended. In this same seminar a senior manager likened the operation of the doors on a train to those found at the entrance to Morrison’s Supermarket....

 

[Bletchleyite]

This however to me is the second incident in my operating area involving a IET/AT300 where issues on the TMS have led to an incident. To me this is why DAS should only back up and not replace a drivers route and traction knowledge. Personally I am horrified that the potential for DAS where the computer tells the driver what to do to the point that the driver merely follows the computer instructions was actively being promoted as a potential in a “digital railway” seminar I have attended. In this same seminar a senior manager likened the operation of the doors on a train to those found at the entrance to Morrison’s Supermarket....

Yet haven't DB been operating on the "Buchfahrplan" system (which is very similar, originally on paper but now electronic) for years without major incident?

 

[Randomer]

Yet haven't DB been operating on the "Buchfahrplan" system (which is very similar, originally on paper but now electronic) for years without major incident?

Isn't the German signalling system based on displaying the allowed speed for the line and any other considerations, like turnouts, though? Rather than relying on the driver's route knowledge of what speed they have to be doing in order to do something different if a change from the planned route happens due to whatever exigencies occur day to day?

To me this is why DAS should only back up and not replace a drivers route and traction knowledge. Personally I am horrified that the potential for DAS where the computer tells the driver what to do to the point that the driver merely follows the computer instructions was actively being promoted as a potential in a “digital railway” seminar I have attended. In this same seminar a senior manager likened the operation of the doors on a train to those found at the entrance to Morrison’s Supermarket....

Isn't that essentially the function of the ETCS part of ERTMS? Unless the powers that be intent digital railway to be something completely different than ETCS level 3 or one of its derivatives the two seem to go hand in hand. Could an argument be made that new traction with more extensive computer systems to go wrong or require setup might actually require greater knowledge overall but perhaps an equal or lesser amount of practical handling training?

I can see an argument for the UK going towards a DAS based driving style if the signalling system supported it i.e. with the introduction of ETRMS which is much more based on an in cab display anyway. I absolutely agree that it seems a potentially distracting system without this. The thing is that unless entire areas are completely replaced in one go, which seems unlikely on existent lines, drivers are still going to have to have the route knowledge required.

 

[cambsy]

In the 90’s, the 91’s would hit 135-140 mph on the ECML, on various stretches, Hitchin—Huntingdon,Peterborough-Stoke summit,Grantham-Newark Northgate. Doncaster-York, York-Darlington, are the main stretches, i have seen logs and experienced these sort of runs, though not officially allowed these speeds were safe in my opinion, the York-Darlington stretch was fettled up for 155mph running, for some special runs, , so a special shortened Mk4 set of 5 coaches reached 154mph on 2 days, also achieved same speed down stoke bank, carrying invited guests and the transport minister, so on the section where 145mph happened it was safe.

The one accidental time, i doubt very much would do anything to the track or overhead wires, and doubt the passengers would notice unless they were timing train or paying close attention to speed.

 

[Speed43125]

Isn't the German signalling system based on displaying the allowed speed for the line and any other considerations, like turnouts, though? Rather than relying on the driver's route knowledge of what speed they have to be doing in order to do something different if a change from the planned route happens due to whatever exigencies occur day to day?

That's right, Britain is relatively unique in that regard, expecting drivers to know the appropriate speed limit for any routing they sign with signals convey direction, rather than conveying the speed limit any turnout is subject to, as is generally the practice in Continental Europe.

 

[34D]

The fact that a track-geometry induced derailment was unlikely doesn't mean it was in any way safe. The railway isn't built or maintained for use at 145mph and the additional stresses of operating at that speed are significantly more than the 20mph excess over the PSR might have you believe. Would have been rather nasty for the knitting to suddenly come tumbling down all over the train, for example, or for the train to derail through a set of points that disintegrated.

Various bits of the ECML were engineered for 140mph back 35 years ago.

The fact that the diesel speed record happened here and was safe probably suggests to me that this was safe.

Time to stop this silly obsession with 125 and consider properly how and where faster limits can be deployed.

Respect to this driver for proving it is possible!

 

[Watershed]

Various bits of the ECML were engineered for 140mph back 35 years ago.

The fact that the diesel speed record happened here and was safe probably suggests to me that this was safe.

Time to stop this silly obsession with 125 and consider properly how and where faster limits can be deployed.

Respect to this driver for proving it is possible!

Was the OLE designed for 145mph? Has it been tested at 145mph in that particular location with an 802, possibly encountering a double 80x heading in the opposite direction at a closing speed of 270mph? Have the points been installed and maintained to the standards required for 145mph operation? What about the bridges, many of which will date from the original four-tracking?

Safety standards were less rigorous in the "good old days", yet even then one would have expected a variety of checks to be undertaken on the infrastructure before any high speed attempt. And the line would have been cleared of (most) other traffic.

There are no two ways about it - faster limits require in-cab signalling. The regulators, the unions and the industry will not have it any other way. ETCS will be installed here, albeit some years (if not decades) into the future. But you will not be able to increase speed limits purely by having in-cab signalling. It is one of many hurdles to overcome.

The usable length of straight and level between York and Darlington is about 35 miles. Going 140mph vs 125mph over that distance saves you 108 seconds, i.e. 1.5 minutes when rounded to an SRT figure.

How many millions of taxpayers' money is it worth spending to enable that sort of time saving? In fact 1.5 mins is probably optimistic, as you need to account for acceleration and braking. You would save far more time, at a likely similar or lower cost, by eliminating bottlenecks like Northallerton or Skelton Bridge first.

I highly doubt the driver intentionally risked their career and life (not to mention that of their passengers and fellow railway workers) to prove that yes, a 140mph capable train can indeed go 140mph (or a bit more).

 

[Ianno87]

Various bits of the ECML were engineered for 140mph back 35 years ago.

The fact that the diesel speed record happened here and was safe probably suggests to me that this was safe.

Time to stop this silly obsession with 125 and consider properly how and where faster limits can be deployed.

Respect to this driver for proving it is possible!

Possible for one single train.

Doing it again and again and again multiple times per day will quickly take its toll on the OLE. Or two 140mph trains crossing + sudden gust of wind brings the whole lot down.

 

[Jamesrob637]

Faster than anything regular in Switzerland or Austria. Do Railjet achieve 230 anywhere between Wien and Salzburg?

 

[43096]

Do Railjet achieve 230 anywhere between Wien and Salzburg?

Yes, line speed on the new line between Wien and St. Polten/Linz is 230km/h. I've been on RailJets that have done that speed.

 

[HarryL]

It does seem crazy that the mainlines in this country are still limited to 125mph. I do understand there's safety concerns in certain bends and such, but in straight stretches where it's safe, the infrastructure should be designed to allow trains to go at least 140 and when works happen to those areas, they should at the same time be getting upgraded to support that speed.

 

[supervc-10]

Upgrading the signalling is often cited as being the issue. Not really a technical one, but a cost one. Apparently trains need in-cab signalling over 125mph, at least under the regulations in the UK.

 

[Bevan Price]

It was some weeks ago now so the data will have dropped off of RTT. It won't have been that illuminating though I imagine as 145 versus 125 won't save that much time over a fairly short distance.

If anyone knows the exact date of the incident, they should be able to find timing detail here:

liverail 5630p

 

[themiller]

Some years ago, Virgin put forward a justification for raising the speed limit to 135 mph on the WCML for 390s by stating that the 125mph limit was put in place for HSTs with analogue instruments which had a tolerance on accuracy whilst, with the modern instruments on 390s, the variation was almost zero.. Thus HSTs (& class 91s?) may have been doing well over 125 routinely anyway and it can be assumed that the infrastructure was designed to take this into account.

 

[pompeyfan]

One of the arguments against conventional signalling and 140mph running is that drivers were alleged to have not had time to process a flashing green aspect. I always found it odd we didn’t run with either a GG - G - YY - Y - R pattern or a G - GY - YY - Y - R system for high speed.

 

[Ianno87]

One of the arguments against conventional signalling and 140mph running is that drivers were alleged to have not had time to process a flashing green aspect. I always found it odd we didn’t run with either a GG - G - YY - Y - R pattern or a G - GY - YY - Y - R system for high speed.

Not specifically just the extra aspect, but the fact that there's a point where "information" (i.e. signals) start to be passed so frequently that it starts to become "information overload" for the driver.

 

[Wapps]

Some years ago, Virgin put forward a justification for raising the speed limit to 135 mph on the WCML for 390s by stating that the 125mph limit was put in place for HSTs with analogue instruments which had a tolerance on accuracy whilst, with the modern instruments on 390s, the variation was almost zero.. Thus HSTs (& class 91s?) may have been doing well over 125 routinely anyway and it can be assumed that the infrastructure was designed to take this into account.

Does anyone know what came of this?

 

[Jamesrob637]

Some years ago, Virgin put forward a justification for raising the speed limit to 135 mph on the WCML for 390s by stating that the 125mph limit was put in place for HSTs with analogue instruments which had a tolerance on accuracy whilst, with the modern instruments on 390s, the variation was almost zero.. Thus HSTs (& class 91s?) may have been doing well over 125 routinely anyway and it can be assumed that the infrastructure was designed to take this into account.

Like my old Nissan in the 2000s which dated from the early 90s and whose speedo wobbled at high speeds.

 

[trebor79]

One of the arguments against conventional signalling and 140mph running is that drivers were alleged to have not had time to process a flashing green aspect. I always found it odd we didn’t run with either a GG - G - YY - Y - R pattern or a G - GY - YY - Y - R system for high speed.

The second option wouldn't be fail safe - if the yellow lamp failed you would get a G indication instead of a GY, so it's failed to a less restrictive aspect.
I think the issue with flashing green was that theoretically line side structures etc might make a steady green appear to flash. Presumably an extra green lamp was too expensive to fit for the minor speed gains (remember the 91's don't accelerate particularly quickly), and there's still the issue with ensuring the driver has enough time to sight the signals.

 

[ge-gn]

I highly doubt the driver intentionally risked their career and life (not to mention that of their passengers and fellow railway workers) to prove that yes, a 140mph capable train can indeed go 140mph (or a bit more).

This.

I don’t think anyone has mentioned the impact this could have had on track workers. If as a COSS I had set up a system using lookout warning to get my group and tools clear with ten seconds to spare based on 125mph, and one came barrelling through at 145mph, this would significantly reduce the warning time and could have resulted in a near miss or worse!

I think it’s highly unlikely the driver would have risked having that on his conscience intentionally.

 

[nlogax]

On a related note I see via this month's Modern Railways that 140mph is again being mooted for the York - Northallerton stretch of the ECML.

 

[Railperf]

On a related note I see via this month's Modern Railways that 140mph is again being mooted for the York - Northallerton stretch of the ECML.

I thought speeds over 125mph would only be allowed with some form on in-cab signalling!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I thought speeds over 125mph would only be allowed with some form on in-cab signalling!

ETCS will at some point be rolled out more widely than just an obscure branch line in Wales (yes, I know it was a trial and it's not that obscure ) at which point said cab signalling is there.

 

[HarryL]

Are the IETs not future proofed with an in cab signaling system in place ready to be activated by Network Rail?

 

[rebmcr]

Are the IETs not future proofed with an in cab signaling system in place ready to be activated by Network Rail?

Correct.

 

[Railperf]

Correct.

Are all Class 80x ETCS ready? Is the track infrastructure there ready to be activated.? I have not heard that it is.

 

[rebmcr]

I think only Class 80x are ETCS ready. Is the track infrastructure there ready to be activated.? I have not heard that it is.

Yes, I was indeed replying to a question about IETs.