Jump to content

Poor Old Bruce

Members
  • Content Count

    2,483
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,258 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't think anyone is blaming machines, just commenting that machines may have their limitations, just like people. Also that experience, conscientiousness and intuition are difficult to replace with a machine. Even the best computers are only as good as their programming and can only respond to the information they are given (this is not intended to suggest 'rubbish in = rubbish out' before that gets started, or to start a debate on the efficacy or otherwise of any programming systems). The immediate cause of the derailment is given in the RAIB statement. What led to that situat
  2. No need to speculate, the statement sums it up as track spread due to faulty/broken rail fastenings. Loaded 50t GLW wagons will create significant curving and track spreading forces, particularly with pedestal suspensions which allow little or no yaw freedom to the wheelsets. The only things you could speculate on are how long the fastening have been broken an why nobody spotted them. In fairness, the static track gauge would probably have been within limits without a train present. Observance of passing trains may have shown deficiencies but these days you try not to have people o
  3. There you go, you learn something new every day
  4. Not quite right. The Caledonian blue model isn't listed either.
  5. Another point to add interest is that a lot of the Hymeks on acceptance tests were in pink primer paint.
  6. AFAIK the practice of re-using old tender frames was a common thing on the LMS. Presumably it made sense to re-use a perfectly viable chassis rather than build a new one when it was just the body which needed replacing. This would apply to 'in house' builds rater than 'contractor' builds although that didn't stop the 4000 gallon tenders of the North British built Jubilees being swapped for the Fowler tenders on the Royal Scots. Several of the longer Deeley tenders were fitted with standard length Fowler style bodies when needed, leaving a flat area at the back, one of these survives with S&
  7. You are right about the unfortunate timing at Heck. If the coal train had been 1 miniute earlier it would have passed the collision point, a minute later and the express would have been at a stand. There may still have been a collision but hitting a train at a stand would be a bit different to hitting one doing 80 or 90 MPH. Conversely stuff could have ended up in the Aire and Calder Canal.
  8. That is not the case. In BR days, staff working with noisy equipment would have had a 'touch lookout' whose sole job it was to watch for approaching trains and physically prod the worker he was protecting to warn them to stand clear. Where more than one man was using a noisy bit of kit, they may have needed a touch lookout each if there was a significant distance between them. When working on a 'live' track, the Lookout would be the first man out onto the track and the last man off.
  9. Throw away or used for something else making what you have into the leftovers?
  10. Some locos fitted with Belpaire boilers in the 1920s retained their LNWR numbers for a while which means that the version as modelled by Bachmann did exist in LNWR livery but it was not in LNWR days. Bachmann have not done the round topped firebox version.
  11. It was at Rauceby between Grantham and Sleaford so not a million miles away from GER land. I presume it would have been 'tidied up' by now but it would be nice to know if is still there. Thanks for the answers folks.
  12. Would you like the cast version or the etched one?
  13. Modelex do one but it's much bigger.
×
×
  • 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.