Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5,210 Excellent


Recent Profile Visitors

925 profile views
  1. EMD built 20 cylinder versions of their 645 engines for the SD45, but that was just a V20. The Sulzer 18 cylinder triple bank would be an entirely different matter, and would probably not work at all. The twin bank only just fits in a class 45, so a triple bank version would be too wide for UK railways.
  2. I'm not surprised when it comes to that vintage of electronics. If the batteries have died and the whole thing has been de-energised then there's probably order that things have to be brought back online to avoid problems. I'd be shocked if newer trains (375s, 450s etc) have any similar problems, being a decade and several generations of computing newer.
  3. Makes me wonder how a Sulzer 18LDA (3 banks of 6) would work. Or probably wouldn't. No chance one would fit in a locomotive (maybe for the North American market?), but perhaps in a boat or stationary generator application...
  4. But if the bus runs every 10 minutes, to how many people would use the train at lower frequency and with their origins and destinations probably further from the stations than they are a bus stop? Certainly the bus provision on the island at present suggests that there's enough demand on the Ryde - Newport - Cowes routes that a train service might be well loaded, but with the fixed infrastructure costs and no other users to contribute to them it might not actually work out to be economically viable.
  5. Though no such checks are required to use the Seikan tunnel. Obviously you wouldn't need passport checks as that is wholly within Japan, but it is a long undersea rail tunnel, so quite similar in a lot of ways. The perceived risks are no doubt different in Japan though.
  6. Good point, if luggage needs to be checked in that manner then that's a mark against on train checks. Though I don't believe it's necessary to x-ray bags for the much more numerous shuttle services, so whether the luggage checks actually add much real world security is questionable.
  7. That is simply a result of the UK immigration policy being to discourage such people from attempting to come. Let's not get into the rights and wrongs of that, just recognise that it is what it is in the context of international rail travel... A consequence is that lots of infrastructure is needed at international terminals (stations, ports, airports) to manage things, and that has the effect of discouraging anyone trying new international rail routes. If such routes would be sufficiently competitive with air on price and/or time to make the infrastructure worthwhile, then they'd p
  8. I don't know about the Eastern side of the island, but I remember the buses between Newport, Yarmouth and Freshwater being surprisingly frequent the last time I was over there. There wasn't a pandemic on then, though. Edit the #9 between Newport and Ryde runs every 10 minutes during the day.
  9. The UK Government decided that on-train checks were not acceptable, so they have to be done at stations. The exact grounds for that decision I don't know.
  10. Most people do not make that choice. St Pancras to Gare du Nord is 2h15 apparently, so if you add on the WCML from Birmingham (call it 80 mins, which is apparently the fastest journey time at present from New St to Euston) and allow an hour to deal with immigration at this hypothetical Birmingham terminal, then you've taken 4h35 to get from New Street to Gare du Nord. That's without considering that the journey probably doesn't actually start at New Street or end at Gare du Nord. The threshold for significant numbers of people switching from flying to the train is reputedly 4 hours, so it's un
  11. Let's not sling mud over politics... It is a bit of a political subject, but the way the UK chooses to operate its borders means that international rail travel requires a lot of special infrastructure at any station where the trains call. Combine that with the uncompetitive journey times from anywhere beyond HS1 (or indeed beyond Paris/ Brussels) and the economics collapse quicker than an England batting line up.
  12. It wouldn't be realistic to just start running the trains because the infrastructure connectivity is a bit weak, and the border controls that were require would need a lot of investment to provide them. I imagine paths through the tunnel and on the high speed lines are expensive, and rolling stock requirements go beyond the norm for domestic operation, so starting small (like Hull Trains' 170s) wouldn't be viable. Notwithstanding more recent changes, if we had chosen to join the Schengen zone then the border control requirements would have been negated, but that's not what the popu
  13. Something in the back of my mind says that re-engineering the 60s was considered (probably to include EMD prime movers), but clearly not progressed. Doesn't mean it can't happen in future though.
  14. Presumably because the 60s still have work to do, whereas the 56s were finished in their original form and could be bought for next to nothing. Plus I suppose GBRF only want 10 locos, or they'd have ordered more.
  15. Wouldn't Lille require a lot of infrastructure changes to become an international terminus? Having a proper hub-like interchange there would be no bad thing, provided the connections are adequate. But I'd expect most trains to continue to Paris or Brussels in any case.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.