Back in the days before the traitor governments who came along and sold all the railways to private companies under the pretense of cheaper fares when in reality the opposite happened and ever since the railway fares go up daily.
As an experienced driver I wish they didn't say that in the training material. You need a couple mph to get enough force to press the pins in, this cleans the muck off them and you get far fewer coupling faults.
The BSI is basically an update of the older tight lock coupler. The tight lock is buckeye with an electric block underneath used on older electric units.
Actually tightlocks and Buckeyes are different, and don't like being coupled together. Look at the front of a 455 (as they don't have electrical boxes) and a slam door unit. 455s have tightlocks, slammers have buckeyes, and you'll notice they're quite different
Unique coupler. The only problem I have with this coupler and many across the UK/Europe and what have you is that there are so many different types of couplers and no commonly agreed upon standard. In the US all mainline operators, meaning freight (CSX, NS, UP...) and passenger(Amtrak...), use the "same" Janney/Knuckle couplers on their cars. I understand that on some passenger services trains like the L trains use a special type of coupler but they aren't connected to the main lines to my knowledge. Just seems poor for interoperability in my mind but if it works it works!
First of all, these are not unique at all. They are fitted with standard BSI couplers and are able to work in tandem with other multiple units fitted with them - classes 142, 143, 144, 150, 153, 155, 156, 158, 159, 170 and 172. A more common issue when coupling is the electrical connection blocks. I've seen Dutch ICM multiple units towing more modern SNG multiple units, despite the electrical connection blocks being completely different (here's the link: www.nicospilt.com/index2.html and look for "Filmpje: bijzonderheden langs blokpost Bunnik"). One could say that the UK are doing quite well with their connectivity (having 7 types of multiple units is quite good!), I can't say I've seen this being used a lot, apart from using a combination of 143 and 150/155/156 units to adhere to the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations. Usually, units are coupled within class, which is always possible. And for freight and some passenger trains, there's the normal screw coupling in use. So in the end, it's not really a problem.
From what I gather this is one of three types of main coupler for UK passenger train service. 1. Scharfenberg 2. Dellner (Swedish copy of the above) 3. BSI, as we see in the video. I'm not sure but the FLIRTs by Stadler may also be using a different type but I am unsure of this. But yeah, you're right, there should've been an agreed of the shelf standard to use on the UK rail network, with future proofing in mind.
To have to re-fit all the trains to a coupler (the Janney coupler) that's not all that common in the UK would be way too expensive. These trains don't usually need to couple with other trains that have different couplers, but in the off-chance they do, there are adapters.
It takes forever to couple up? In America we use MU cables and hoses and our couplers ain't so dam finicky. By the time this guy gets coupled up an American train is already leaving the yard with it's train.
@@rayhorner2965 We do use some Janney type couplers in the UK, our electric multiple units (until privatisation) all have Type H Tightlock couplers, and some of our locomotives and stock use Type Es. Though have fun trying to convince a national standards body, 3 different rolling stock leasing companies, and 20+ train operators that they should change the couplers on all their diesel multiple units just because.
I would think not as it (dependant on type and from my knowledge as a Brit) would require re-training of all staff and might not be good for running in multiple.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 82 วันนี้!! คู่เอก | ยอดไอคิว vs อับดัลลาห์](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hSsyTl_9bqs/mqdefault.jpg)
7:10 love the fact the BR logo is in the headlights.
Back in the days before the traitor governments who came along and sold all the railways to private companies under the pretense of cheaper fares when in reality the opposite happened and ever since the railway fares go up daily.
My knowledge of trains
📖📖📖📖📖📖
📖📖📖📖📖📖
📖📖📖📖📖📖
My knowledge of english
📖
This is so true
My english 📖📖📖📖📖📖📖📖📖📖📖
Your knowledge of English trains, however, has been increased by approximately 5.8 book emojis after watching this video.
"Gentle Contact" *Slams into the other train*
BR does not care about gentle from the start anyway,
As an experienced driver I wish they didn't say that in the training material. You need a couple mph to get enough force to press the pins in, this cleans the muck off them and you get far fewer coupling faults.
I remember in Chester station watching two trains couple. It was a lot of fun. Missed my train so i had to walk on the tracks, but that was worth it.
I just learn something I will never do =)
I asked my dad about the birds and the bees.
He told me to watch this video.
i don't get your joke
@@avi_perosn3931 You're too young
😂😂
Oh no.
lol
Why have I watched this knowing full well I will NEVER need to know this
Ok! Got it. I'm ready. Where's my train?
If all else fails more speed should help with coupling. 20mph should do the trick.
*FIVE MILES AN HOUR*
*TO CLEAR THE MAIN LINE*
*TO FUCKING CLEAR THE MAIN LINE*
*TO CLEAR THE MAIN LINE*
TO CLEAR THE MAIN LINE
TO CLEAR THE MAINLINE
Anyone else get this in their Recommended list on TH-cam? I wonder if any of these couplers and units they were fitted to are still in service?
Loads are still in service
Yeah, these units are still in service, although not with Wessex Trains.
Various units with BSI couplers are still in service today.
The BSI is basically an update of the older tight lock coupler. The tight lock is buckeye with an electric block underneath used on older electric units.
Actually tightlocks and Buckeyes are different, and don't like being coupled together. Look at the front of a 455 (as they don't have electrical boxes) and a slam door unit. 455s have tightlocks, slammers have buckeyes, and you'll notice they're quite different
Unique coupler. The only problem I have with this coupler and many across the UK/Europe and what have you is that there are so many different types of couplers and no commonly agreed upon standard. In the US all mainline operators, meaning freight (CSX, NS, UP...) and passenger(Amtrak...), use the "same" Janney/Knuckle couplers on their cars. I understand that on some passenger services trains like the L trains use a special type of coupler but they aren't connected to the main lines to my knowledge. Just seems poor for interoperability in my mind but if it works it works!
First of all, these are not unique at all. They are fitted with standard BSI couplers and are able to work in tandem with other multiple units fitted with them - classes 142, 143, 144, 150, 153, 155, 156, 158, 159, 170 and 172. A more common issue when coupling is the electrical connection blocks.
I've seen Dutch ICM multiple units towing more modern SNG multiple units, despite the electrical connection blocks being completely different (here's the link: www.nicospilt.com/index2.html and look for "Filmpje: bijzonderheden langs blokpost Bunnik").
One could say that the UK are doing quite well with their connectivity (having 7 types of multiple units is quite good!), I can't say I've seen this being used a lot, apart from using a combination of 143 and 150/155/156 units to adhere to the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations.
Usually, units are coupled within class, which is always possible. And for freight and some passenger trains, there's the normal screw coupling in use.
So in the end, it's not really a problem.
From what I gather this is one of three types of main coupler for UK passenger train service.
1. Scharfenberg
2. Dellner (Swedish copy of the above)
3. BSI, as we see in the video.
I'm not sure but the FLIRTs by Stadler may also be using a different type but I am unsure of this. But yeah, you're right, there should've been an agreed of the shelf standard to use on the UK rail network, with future proofing in mind.
@@gwyneddboom2579 still operators like tfw have 3 different couplers on their system
To have to re-fit all the trains to a coupler (the Janney coupler) that's not all that common in the UK would be way too expensive. These trains don't usually need to couple with other trains that have different couplers, but in the off-chance they do, there are adapters.
I enjoyed this,thankyou for uploading0
Hmmm … this “Automatic” coupler seems a lot more trouble than a manual coupler.😊😊
Lol you've clearly never had to manually couple.
学废了，请问从那里领到一对class153，我按耐不住了😂
This was filmed a Exeter TMD
It takes forever to couple up? In America we use MU cables and hoses and our couplers ain't so dam finicky. By the time this guy gets coupled up an American train is already leaving the yard with it's train.
Not really, an American train has to fire its horn 250 times before it can leave
also worth noting that this is a training video and thus has to cover all eventualities, majority the coupling works fine
You don't take anywhere near this long to actually couple, it's kind of funny seeing these comments from people who've never actually couple units
Way too complicated.
It isn't that hard
Would it be better off using America couple r?
No, why would you even suggest that?
@Ray Horner which type of American coupler? There are many.
Janney-design Type D coupler
@@rayhorner2965 We do use some Janney type couplers in the UK, our electric multiple units (until privatisation) all have Type H Tightlock couplers, and some of our locomotives and stock use Type Es.
Though have fun trying to convince a national standards body, 3 different rolling stock leasing companies, and 20+ train operators that they should change the couplers on all their diesel multiple units just because.
I would think not as it (dependant on type and from my knowledge as a Brit) would require re-training of all staff and might not be good for running in multiple.
Sorry i ment😊
Glad those aren't used in the U.S.
This has nothing to do with the U.S.