Limping HST

[whole diary]

[pbc2520]

Yesterday's 1314 HFD^» (Hereford - next trains)-PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) spent most, if not all, the journey without the rear power car.  I joined at WOF, where it was about 13 mins late as a result.  It arrived into PAD still 13 mins late, unable to make up time and delayed the down train at Wolvercote.  Not bad for a one-legged HST^▸ (High Speed Train) in the Cotswolds and, between Twyford and Slough, even managed to top 120mph.. eventually!

For you delectation... 1359 WOF-PAD 2011-10-12

	arr		dep
Worcester Foregate Street			14:11:??
Worcester Shrub Hill	14:13:42		14:15:31
Pershore	14:24:03		14:25:42
Evesham	14:32:4?		14:35:16
Honeybourne	14:41:33		14:43:02
Moreton-in-Marsh	14:54:46		14:56:39
Kingham	15:04:09		15:06:57
Charlbury	15:15:30		15:17:18
Hanborough	15:25:07		15:26:32
(Wolvercote Junction 15:32)
Oxford	15:36:32		15:39:12
(Didcot Junction 15:49--15:50)
Reading	16:04:50		16:06:29
Slough	16:??:??		16:22:43
Paddington	16:40:13

(I see today's 0643 HFD-PAD was running 20 mins late due to a faulty train.. hopefully not the same one!)

[CLPGMS]

FGW^▸ (First Great Western) does appear to be going through a period of problems with HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train).  For example:

Monday 3rd October.
1750 PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-WOS^» (Worcester Shrub Hill - next trains) terminated at Oxford due to a train fault.  This also meant the cancellation of the 2059 WOF-PAD, much to the annoyance of Cotswold Line Promotion Group Committee Members who planned to return on it from Evesham after a meeting!

Sunday 9th October.
1545 Paignton to PAD developed a fault in the Taunton area.  After attention there, it got as far as Bristol T.M. and was replaced by another set.

Thursday 13th October.
0822 PAD-HFD^» (Hereford - next trains) departed on time but was 40 minutes late at Reading due to a fault on the train.

[JayMac]

Are problems arising as the stock begins to be winterised perhaps?

[Western Enterprise]

"even managed to top 120mph.. eventually"

Thats good going, if my memory serves me righ, on about 2,300hp ish ?

[pbc2520]

Your memory serves you right - at 2,280bhp the MTU^▸ (Motor Traction Unit) 16V 4000 R41R engine is slightly more powerful than the old 2,250bhp Paxman Valenta.  I was surprised too but if it's going to happen anywhere, it'll be on a nice long, straight and level section.

For today's 1551 PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-WOS^» (Worcester Shrub Hill - next trains), a 3-car turbo showed up, which passed a stabled HST^▸ (High Speed Train) at Oxford    I didn't manage to hear the reason given for this.

[pbc2520]

In fact, the figures I recorded on my computer actually give some inkling as to acceleration of an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) with one engine:

900.0 / (1318432391.007 - 1318432381.863);  (* 98.4 *)
900.0 / (1318432434.714 - 1318432426.249);  (* 106.3 *)
900.0 / (1318432484.184 - 1318432476.098);  (* 111.3 *)
900.0 / (1318432523.283 - 1318432515.664);  (* 118.1 *)
900.0 / (1318432568.820 - 1318432561.263);  (* 119.1 *)
900.0 / (1318432598.024 - 1318432590.646);  (* 122.0 *)
1800.0 / (1318432635.071 - 1318432620.008);  (* 119.5 *)

The long numbers are times in seconds that mileposts are passed, accurately recorded by eye against a mark on the window.  Each line records times at posts 1/4 mile apart (1/2 mile apart in the case of 1800.0 / ...) so the speeds are averages over the section.  As these times are absolute you can see the time over which speed was gathered: about 3.5 minutes to accelerate from 98mph to 122mph in these particular conditions.

Well, I found that interesting...