Talk:British Rail Class 172

Trains: in UK / in London / Passenger trains Low‑importance

	Trains Portal

	London Transport Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject London Transport (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Passenger trains task force.

This article lacks references.

Question

According to the barking - Gospel Oak Line User Group they have been told that a 2 car version of this class will be used on the GOBLIN 62.49.61.203 21:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry forgot to log in Wilmot1 21:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speed

Can we have a reference for the speed? - I can't find one but I head that it's 75mph and not 100. 82.36.81.159 19:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably htey will be the same as the normal 170's (ie 100mph), otherwise i could mean they will have diffrent gearing ??? Pickle 17:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

8 or 9?

Do we know the reason for the 9th London Overground unit? Are they giving the GOBLIN an extra unit or do they have some other use planned for it? At the moment the article seems to contradict itself. --DanielRigal (talk) 17:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is only going to be 8 London Overground units according to Bombardier. Unisouth (talk) 10:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mechanical transmission?

Talk on uk.railway that this should in fact be "hydro-mechanical" a la Voith. Can someone check this and provide a reference? 86.132.142.153 (talk) 19:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea.

However I have removed it (for now)

"The Class 172s will have mechanical transmission rather than the hydraulic transmission that is fitted to the Class 168, 170 & 171."

I don't think it's my responsibility to find out who added it and ask them were they got the info from.

Certainly I would like to know either way.213.249.232.187 (talk) 16:43, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The sets (Class 172/0) are the latest development of the Turbostar family and incorporate a diesel-mechanical transmission" according to Ian Allan Rail Guide 2011, page 83. I don't know whether the transmission is fully automatic or semi-automatic but, either way, I expect there would be an improvement in fuel consumption compared to a diesel-hydraulic. Biscuittin (talk) 18:21, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ZF brochure (pdf) can be downloaded here [1] and transmission details are on page 4. There seem to be three types - ZF Ecomat (6 speeds + torque converter), ZF AS (12 speeds + dry clutch), ZF EcoLife (6 speeds + torque converter). The Class 172 apparently has the ZF Ecomat (with torque converter) so I think the transmission should be described as hydro-mechanical rather than just mechanical. Biscuittin (talk) 09:28, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the Class 170/171 the torque converter will be in use during the entire acceleration period, until lockup into direct drive occurs at cruising speed. I suspect that, on the Class 172, the torque converter will only be in use briefly during gear-changing, so I would expect a significant improvement in fuel economy. Biscuittin (talk) 09:45, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Differences

It would be useful to have a section explaining the difference between a 172 and a 170 or 171. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:49, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

172/1s and tripcock

The article says that Chiltern Railways will have 172/1s and later that CR's trains will not have the tripcock. The RH panel says 172/1s will have tripcock. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.7.49.185 (talk) 21:36, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible change to the title of this article

This article is currently named in accordance the Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways naming conventions for British rolling stock allocated a TOPS number. A proposal to change this convention and/or its scope is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Naming convention, where your comments would be welcome.

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/east-westlink/
Triggered by \brailway-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 10:52, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 21:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on British Rail Class 172. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090913165925/http://www.old-dalby.com/present.htm to http://www.old-dalby.com/present.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:33, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on British Rail Class 172. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:24, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on British Rail Class 172. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110924201533/http://www.londonmidland.com/news/latest-news/london-midland-launches-93m-train-fleet-for-snow-hill-line/ to http://www.londonmidland.com/news/latest-news/london-midland-launches-93m-train-fleet-for-snow-hill-line/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:56, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in British Rail Class 172

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of British Rail Class 172's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "TRC1":

From British Rail Class 120: "Class 120, 179". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005. Retrieved 24 February 2016.
From British Rail Class 151: "Class 151". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 8 November 2005. Retrieved 1 February 2016.
From British Rail Class 129: "Class 129". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005. Retrieved 24 February 2016.
From British Rail Class 128: "Class 128". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
From British Rail Class 143: "Class 143". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
From British Rail Class 155: "Class 155". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
From British Rail Class 122: "Class 121, 149". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
From British Rail Class 124: "Class 124, 180, 181". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005. Retrieved 24 February 2016.
From British Rail Class 141: "Class 141". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
From British Rail Class 144: "Class 144". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
From British Rail Class 142: "Class 142". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005. Retrieved 1 February 2016.
From British Rail Class 156: "Class 156". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
From British Rail Class 158: "Mechanical And Electrical Coupling Index". Rail Safety and Standards Board. Archived from the original on 21 December 2013. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
From British Rail Class 150: "Class 150". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
From British Rail Class 153: "Class 153". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
From British Rail Class 508: "Class 508". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 24 July 2008. Retrieved 31 January 2016.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:10, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]