Forum menu
Diesel trains are a rare sight on the East Coast line.
You may think that, but you are wrong. it is now close to 50% diesel on express services, add in freight, and the diesel engines are well in the majority.
VTEC have 14 diesel HST sets, and 30 electric Class 91's for the express services.
South of Peterborough, electric is more prevalent due to the amount of outer-suburban electric units. North of P/boro, you'll have Hull Trains, Grand Central, Cross Country and East Midlands who all run diesel trains.
They are spending quite a lot of money electrifying the great western line.
Yes, electric to Bristol/Cardiff, but the majority of express trains will have a diesel engine too for when they go past Bristol. They dont publicise that.Efficient is not a word to use for the use of such rolling stock - every 120 miles between London and Bristol they are carrying 20 tons+ of dead metal, which will only get used if the train carries on past Bristol. It;s a farce forced upon them by the Government department who have told them what train they are to have.
South of Peterborough, electric is more prevalent due to the amount of outer-suburban electric units. North of P/boro, you'll have Hull Trains, Grand Central, Cross Country and East Midlands who all run diesel trains.
That's the Midlands.
No, HT and GC run trains to KX, North of Peterborough, there are more diesel than electric trains, as Cross Country and other service jon the East Coast line to go North.
The point still stands, the express services from Kings Cross are nearly 50% diesel.
According to Virgin who operate East Coast the HST are 2/3 electric not exactly rare I suppose.
Interesting point on this. I am looking to get a big estate as next company car. 3 choices are e class merc, a6 and volvo v90. The volvo doesnt have a petrol engine (yet but the hybrid coming is £££££) the only petrol merc is the 350 amg bonkers version and the A6 is the same. I aint getting a superb before someone suggests that.... too utilitarian and looks awful. so to get a premium large estate i am forced to go diesel. This coming from a hybrid lexus i loved for 3 years, all because i need a big boot.
Why does it have to be 'premium' estate?
The EU released Air Quality directives in 1996 with limits for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air in 1999.
In 2001 Gordon Brown reduced the tax on diesel cars, despite a 2010 compliance target for the 1999 limits, it's no wonder that the EU has acted
Is this the one and only Maggie aprieciation thread on STW??
Drac - Moderator
Why does it have to be 'premium' estate?
Because he wants one?
Pretty much sums up the UK attitude to cars and driving. 🙁Because he wants one?
Would the company pay for a T6 Multivan 2.0 Tsi, Steve?
Personally I'd rather drive a Grand Scenic Tce, S-Max 1.5 petrol or Touran Tsi than any big diesel.
nickjb - Member
Pretty much sums up the UK attitude to cars and driving.
Bobbins. There's nothing wrong with wanting to own a luxury or premium object, no matter what it is, car, bike, watch, or a pair of moleskin trousers.
I aint getting a superb before someone suggests that.... too utilitarian and looks awful. so to get a premium large estate i am forced to go diesel
Not really forced though is it? You choose your own criteria.
[i]every 120 miles between London and Bristol they are carrying 20 tons+ of dead metal, which will only get used if the train carries on past Bristol[/I]
20 tonnes, I'm guessing you're just referring to the diesel (generator) rather than the whole engine?
Personally I'd rather drive a Grand Scenic Tce, S-Max 1.5 petrol or Touran Tsi than any big diesel.
Cupra 290 ST would be my choice. 🙂
Glad to see the government is finally going to take action on this. Diesel should have been heavily restricted years ago. The noise they make is another form of pollution as well
-
Yes, electric to Bristol/Cardiff, but the majority of express trains will have a diesel engine too for when they go past Bristol. They dont publicise that
They do - I knew about it.
It;s a farce forced upon them by the Government department who have told them what train they are to have.
I assumed it was lack of funding to electrify the rest of the track?
I was having a similar chat with the guys in the garage when I picked my (shame) diesel Mondeo up yesterday.
They told me that the so called ultra clean diesels (BMWs were quoted) do chuck out less N and black smoke, but the gases they chuck out instead are horrible, eye stinging things. No idea what they are but if they upset them so much, they can't be good for the environment either.
The sooner we can move on from the internal combustion engine the better, although I do find it strange that we've had to turn to France for the building of the new Hinckley? Surely we have enough capable people on this island to build it ourselves?
do chuck out less N and black smoke, but the gases they chuck out instead are horrible, eye stinging things
Generally it's the NOx that are irritants. The SCR converts these into N and water. N is pretty inert, it's 70% of the air around you.
Oh and there used to be a problem with sulphur dioxides in diesel smoke but now ultra low sulphur diesel is everywhere it's less of an issue afaik.
So not sure what they are talking about.
The sooner we can move on from the internal combustion engine the better, although I do find it strange that we've had to turn to France for the building of the new Hinckley? Surely we have enough capable people on this island to build it ourselves?
We did have a working design (Westinghouse AP1000) and the necessary people, but sold it all off. So now we're going to build a design that isn't operating anywhere in the world, and in Finland is ten years late and three times over budget.
I can't find it on the Net but a journo on a German channel was claiming diesels emit gases other than CO2 which are also greenhouse gases and that the total greenhouse effect of a diesel was as high as other fuels, but with carcinogenic ultra-fine particles (that get deep into the lungd) that LPG and petrol engines don't produce.
On another French programme the journo compared a particle filter with a sieve. If you sieve soil most goes through, just in small lumps than if you throw it off the shovel.
Trust me Molgrips, they were very adamant that some of the emissions coming out of the new low emission diesel engines are nasty (although not tested via the MOT emissions test) and they really don't like working on them because of this. I believe them as this is their job 6 days a week.
Trust me Molgrips, they were very adamant that some of the emissions coming out of the new low emission diesel engines are nasty
I'm sure they were but I want science not assertions of garage mechanics 🙂 They may be right, but I need more data.
Seems plausible to me that eye-stinging fumes from an SCR equipped engine would be ammonia. So perhaps not all the ammonia is used in the catalysis process, but because there's no emissions test for it they don't care.
[quote="ransos"]1. Pump up tyres the tyres
2. Remove the passenger door mirror
3. Optimise emissions performance for the test vehicle speeds and gear change points
4. Disconnect the battery
5. Tape up panel gaps
6. Use low viscosity lubricants1: yup, to the max plated pressure, which isn't actually that high. 38 psi on mine, tyres are rated to 56 IIRC.
2: nope
3: yup, but without mucking around with driveability too much
4: nope
5: nope
6: nope
A lot of the loophole have been plugged over the last few years. I've heard of one manufacturer who used to run two space savers on the driven axle to minimize rolling resistance. These days it's "as the car comes out of the showroom" and "in the state it's in when you turn the key". So AC is on, DRLs, heated window in some cars and so on.
Some manufacturers who have continually over egged it have paid massive fines over the last 10 odd years. Many are also in a flat panic over the VAG thing as they *know* they have some nasties hiding in the ECU and they have only a few windows to fix it.
This is all made possibly by the terrible standards.
[i]This is all made possibly by the terrible standards. [I/]
Testing regime, not standards.
Standards, Regimes, Protocols.
Doesn't matter.
They are all badly written, full of loopholes and bear no resemblance to what the customer actually does.
Which is why companies (and newspapers, and people on here) can bang on about diesels exceeding emission limits by a million percent. And suchlike.
Except they don't. They hit the targets if you test "properly".
A lot of the loophole have been plugged over the last few years. I've heard of one manufacturer who used to run two space savers on the driven axle to minimize rolling resistance. These days it's "as the car comes out of the showroom" and "in the state it's in when you turn the key". So AC is on, DRLs, heated window in some cars and so on.
That's what the SMMT say, and they would, wouldn't they! This report says different:
On another French programme the journo compared a particle filter with a sieve. If you sieve soil most goes through, just in small lumps than if you throw it off the shovel.
Yup you sieve soil to let the good bits through leaving stones, weed roots and grubs behind that you don't want.
Just go for a walk or bike and you'll see what diesels really emit. Clouds of black stuff at the traffic lights grand prix from even the most resent diesels. Hoof it and they're filthy, and lots of people hoof it. A brand new T6 went past me on the way up the Aubisque recently foot to the floor with a grey haze in the air behind it.
[quote="Ransos"]That's what the SMMT say, and they would, wouldn't they! This report says different: https://www.transportenvironment.org/sites/te/files/publications/Real%20World%20Fuel%20Consumption%2 Um, 3 year old report, based on 4, 5 and 6 year old data.
Just go for a walk or bike and you'll see what diesels really emit.
No, you won't. It's not as if all polution is visible, you should know this!
Edukator - Reformed Troll
Just go for a walk or bike and you'll see what diesels really emit. Clouds of black stuff at the traffic lights grand prix from even the most resent diesels. Hoof it and they're filthy, and lots of people hoof it. A brand new T6 went past me on the way up the Aubisque recently foot to the floor with a grey haze in the air behind it.
Ignoring the pedantry that molgrips has beaten me to (well, maybe not pedantry as NOx vs smoke tends to be a trade-off)... If it's been chipped it will probably emit far more nasties - the the extent that if 1% of people chip their cars (or have faulty ECUs/injectors) that could easily wipe out the benefits of newer engines (if they performed similarly to test) on the other 99% of vehicles. It's particularly bad on diesels as to get more power you just chuck more fuel in until it smokes intolerably.
Having said that, riding along a suburban road on a cold morning when everyone's car is idling to get some heat in to defrost the windows, despite a lack of smoke there is a pretty formidable choking smell.
or outside a railway station with the constant rattle of 50+ idling taxi engines...
Um, 3 year old report, based on 4, 5 and 6 year old data.
So the problems quoted have all been fixed since then? Do you have a neutral source?
My point was that despite particle filters the pollution under full load is still visible - it's very fine soot that's getting through the filter. I find it hard to believe a T6 on plates indicating it was weeks old had already been chipped or whatever; people here are wary of junking the EGR and remapping as there's a new emissions test from 1/1/2017 (unless it gets delayed which wouldn't surprise me as it will put about a third of diesels off the road).
My point was that despite particle filters the pollution under full load is still visible
Hmm doubt that's always the case. Some cars might've had them deleted or something, but I definitely see far less brown soot clouds when pulling away than I used to.
The fine haze under full load, perhaps - but it's better than loads of black smoke I suppose.
The fine haze under full load, perhaps - but it's better than loads of black smoke I suppose.
Not necessarily - it's the fine particles that do the damage to your lungs.
[quote="ransos"]So the problems quoted have all been fixed since then?Fixed, or tightened up, or clarified. Or completely torn up and (shortly) to be completely redone. Mostly, yes.
[quote="ransos"]Do you have a neutral source?Of course not. No one in this is neutral. Everyone is either trying to enforce the regulations, work round them as best they can or ensure they get funding next year.
Of course not. No one in this is neutral. Everyone is either trying to enforce the regulations, work round them as best they can or ensure they get funding next year.
I wouldn't rely on the SMMT, or lobbying by Greenpeace, but I would have more faith in an independent report.