Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
In a previous post on the "OO" forum a comment was made that 9F's won't run on the main unless Network Rail changes it's mind about blind drivers. What is their objection to blind drivers on a locomotive that was designed to run on the rails they inheritated and did run succesfully for 14years of a service life and in preservation. Anybody know the reason why.

Ozzie21
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
Ozzie,

I am struggling for an answer. It does not make sense to me either.

The difference between todays track and that of 50 years ago may be something like this.

In the good old British Railways days of steam, the locos had very little springing. The track used to flex under the weight of the locos which were relatively rigid with only very little springing. Safe ride.

Now the track is very much stronger, rigid in fact, and the diesel and electric locos and stock are sprung more. Safe ride.

So you put a rigid loco on a rigid track: with no springing at all you ought to expect a rough ride. Hence you have to go more slowly for safety and avoid bouncing right off. Unsafe ride.

What has that got to do with 9Fs? I am not sure. Can anyone take the reasoning further?

Could it be that EU Regulations, to whom we must all do obeisance, make it illegal to have a flangeless wheel in case the the thing derails? Is it something to do with unsupported length at the crossings at high speed points?

Any body else know?

Colombo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
I belive the main objection is that now check rails on pointwork is raised above running rail level.
This raises objections in case of derailment...i.e.the flangeless wheel going behind the checkrail and derailing the whole loco.
Also due to the size of the driving wheels the 9F is limited to 50mph causeing pathing difficulties.
Hope this helps to clear the situation.
Pete.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Hmm! WHY raise the height of the check rail? I would have thought that it would have led to more derailments rather than less. Nines weren't limited to fiftymph in service days with eight to ten on you could easily get 70 to 80 mph on the flat with out any bother. I guess if they can't run on Network rails we will just have to put money into the GCR route and Waverly Route, join the the two together and run them there.

Ossie21

QUOTE (Pete S @ 31 Jul 2006, 00:57) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I belive the main objection is that now check rails on pointwork is raised above running rail level.
This raises objections in case of derailment...i.e.the flangeless wheel going behind the checkrail and derailing the whole loco.
Also due to the size of the driving wheels the 9F is limited to 50mph causeing pathing difficulties.
Hope this helps to clear the situation.
Pete.
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top