Search Forum
Blog Entry# 4266006
Posted: Mar 19 2019 (19:41)
3 Responses
Last Response: Oct 29 2019 (19:49)
3 Responses
Last Response: Oct 29 2019 (19:49)
#AlternateTheories
In the process of LHB-fication a trend can be seen. That said, if a train has more than one rakes (Ex: Gitanjali Express has 4 rakes), then many times only one rake gets LHB first and other rake(s) continue(s) for months before being converted to LHB. In this constraint do you think that a train should be LHB-fied only when there are enough coaches available to convert all of it's rakes at the same time?
**Below are the potential issues of part LHB-fication I can think of-
1)...
more...
In the process of LHB-fication a trend can be seen. That said, if a train has more than one rakes (Ex: Gitanjali Express has 4 rakes), then many times only one rake gets LHB first and other rake(s) continue(s) for months before being converted to LHB. In this constraint do you think that a train should be LHB-fied only when there are enough coaches available to convert all of it's rakes at the same time?
**Below are the potential issues of part LHB-fication I can think of-
1)...
more...
NO vote
Yes. all the rakes of a train should get LHB together
59%
26
Some issues are there. but we don't have any alternative
0%
0
Some issues are there. but they are negligible and can be ignored
5%
2
No issue at all. I am fine with part by part LHB focation
36%
16
Any other opinion (Please comment)
0%
0
Can't say
0%
0
Part LHBfication is better, much better than waiting for all rakes, or else the process may take months to complete, a very good example being LHBfication of JBP SMNH
That's fine, agreeing with you. But another mismanagement from IR is also there. Suppose Train A has two rakes, out of which one rake has been converted to LHB. But instead converting the other rake with priority, some other Train B is given LHB. Isn't is bad?