4mm Mark 1s

The Thameslink units have also managed a few 100mph runs on the Brighton line back before privatisation.

Chris

Interesting story about when the Networkers were introduced was that they were designed as wide as possible with mm clearances in some tunnels so BR solved this by gluing the ballast. In later years maintenance wasn't so great so some of the units got some scrapes on them.

Chris

The problem was with the TOCs, using main designers and contractors who had f*ck all experience of building stock to the UK loading gauge, whilst those workshops that did (over a 150 years in some cases...) sat idle or closed... As you say, the price for a botched privatisation.

If you tried a barrel roll with a Mk2D it would become a torsion bar! ;-)

Thanks David!

Greg.P.

David Costigan wrote:

Now f*ck off.

I would not call Bombardier (inheritor of BREL at Derby) and Alstom (inheritor of Metro Cammell) companies with no experience of UK train design. The problems for Bombardier was getting the GTO power system in their electric trains passed for safety and some problems with engines that power the turbo stars. For Alstom the new French owners ignored the UK designers and insisted on using continental bogies under their Cordias and some poor design of the placement of engines. Ironically they did not experience many problems with the GTO power system on their electric trains but still had it with the bogies. The TOCs don't directly specify the trains as they are not the owners this is down to the ROSCOs who finance and order the trains. The DfT rail seems to be going back to the BR way of ordering trains but trying to keep them in the private sector, have a look at May's Modern Railways Informed Sources article. You can also visit

for a presay of May's article.

Chris

The parent company was the problem, not the workshops, they were non UK companies - another part of the botched privatisation, BREL should have been kept intact.

The problems for Bombardier was getting the GTO power system in

Exactly, they didn't understand the UK railway system, it's safety regime, and it's 'culture'.

Ironically

They order the stock, if they refused to order from non UK owned railway workshops / companies...

As I said, the botched privatisation...

The DfT rail seems to be

They have to, there is no public sector!...

Jerry,

My apologies if I have upset you; I understand that this News Group is for the friendly interchange of information and ideas. I put into the discussion on Mk 1 coaches the details of a book which is, in my view, a good reference source. Greg asked me if I had the ISBN number of the supplement, which I provided - not only to Greg but also to anybody else who might be interested. Clearly you have read the Emails, and your response is an (electronic) expletive. I think this is totally unreasonable behaviour, and I really do fail to see why you - alone of all the users of this group - have clearly been offended and felt it necessary to respond in such a manner.

David Costigan

It could never have stayed as BREL for a number of good reasons:

1 Not large enough compared with international competitors. 2 Only strong in coaching stock with no in-house expertise in power systems. Anyone remember the international train BRELs attempt to break into the international market. No presence in locomotive construction or wagon construction.

The ownership changed in the late 80's before the railways themselves were semi-privatised. Before that the UK market was distorted with the quasi subsidisation of BREL which resulted in cost cutting in competitors products notably the 156 and mk4 coaches.

All the UK companies had the same problems when the Networkers were introduced and the Dutch when the 323's were introduced. The only peculiarity was the third rail DC AC track circuits.

Part of this was the order delay introduced by privatisation, York works closed because of this, and then the failure of Alstom to make their EMUs and DMus to work reliably quickly so we got German trains that compared with UK trains worked out of the box with no major problems.

The last is more of an accounting trick to keep the cost off of the public account than anything else.

Chris

Christopher A. Lee wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

SR surely?

4REPs Southern Region

Presumably the BR people were thinking more of the 442 (and possibly

319, I'm less sure of that), which has a design speed of 100mph on 3rd rail; the mk1 stuff was never meant for more than 90.

Robin

Didn't stop them testing the REPs at 3 figure speeds

And the French have tested a TGV at 357 mph, but that hardly means they can do that in regular service. Thing is the 442s can do (have done)

100mph day in day out in regular service, and were doing so at the time the Eurostar was being built.

Robin

Same traction gear between them, and the high speed tests were done by 4TC less REPs by all accounts.

The issue of running on third rail at high speed is not one of power, but one of maintaining reliable electrical contact with the third rail. After all, were it simply an issue of running gear, Mk1s were good for

100, and Mk3s for 125. What mattered for building the 100mph capacity on 3rd rail into Eurostar (and 442 and 319) was providing an adequate set of shoegear and shoe suspension. For a one off test, I'm sure a REP would do it (and then some, they were powerful beasts), but in the same way that 300mph in a TGV is possible as a once off, it is not reliable day-to-day, and such a REP would be eating through shoegear from arcing and mechanical damage at an unsustainable rate.

Robin

"Martin" wrote in news:fv425l$dq1$1$8300dec7 @news.demon.co.uk:

You miss my point, SR in that they set up a system that has in essence kept pace with changes in demand and technology over the last 80 years or so without needing any real fundamental change. Yes, I accept that 600V became

660V and then 750V etc but the basic underlying technology that they put in place all those years ago has stood the test of time. Nowadays getting something to last 8 years is somewhat of an achievement.

LSWR if we are being pedantic. The Thameslink units and Wessex units have also reached the ton on third rail well before Eurostar design.

Chris