Pandora

The first sticking point I can think of is the Tfl over-60's Oystercard, giving Londoners free travel on buses , tubes, trains from age of 60 years to state pension age. I think the Govt will be challenging Tfl over the potential for revenue if the scheme is temporarily modified such as an annual capping limit for free travel. I am quite certain the Minister raised objections to the scheme in previous funding talks.

The C range engines were used for far more than Rail, applications included Marine , Gensets, Earthmoving machinery, Oilfield plant, Army vehicles and Battle Tanks. Here is a link to LtCol Fell and the Rolls Royce connection to DHP1: https://www.paxmanhistory.org.uk/fell/fell11.htm The account claims RR had more than half of the UK market for high speed diesel engines in the power ranges required in such equipment. The link is an account of Fell written by his son who followed his father into engineering, due to the scarcity of published information , the account by the son is probably the best source we are likely to find.

Today, Wednesday 3rd August, a deadline to accept a £3.6 bn package from the Govt to fund a shortfall in the Tfl budget for the next couple of years has passed without acceptance by Tfl. Reporting of the reasons for Tfl not accepting the package are far from clear. Has anyone found the objections given by Tfl to not accept the package?

The Brunel Tunnel had a older sibling, the Trevithick Tunnel, the Tunnel did not progress beyond the stage of a drift, a low narrow passage. The drift was abandoned as unworkable after considerable progress had been made after great hardship suffered by the tunnelers. Here is a link: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-epic-struggle-to-tunnel-under-the-thames-14638810/

There is a hint as to the reason for building of DHP1 in the biography for Lt-Col Fell, being Rolls Royce in seeking export markets for their range of diesel engines in rail traction applications , required the presence of a locomotive in service with BR as an example of their products.

An account of DHP1 which reveals the connection between 10100 " The Fell locomotive", Lt Col Fell, Rolls Royce and Clayton. The name Rudston refers to Lt Col Louis Frederick Rudston-Fell. In addition we of his connection to the Yorkshire Engine Co 0-8-0 Taurus trip locomotive

A link to a biography of Lt-Colonel Fell, several anecdotes concerning 10100 of interest to historians .

The Fell Locomotive - British Railways No 10100 some notes by John Cove, formerly a Director of Davey Paxman & Co. This locomotive employed for the first time in its horsepower range an entirely mechanical drive. The gearbox was the brainchild of Colonel Fell and design of the locomotive was coordinated for his company Fell Developments Ltd via a committee that met at regular intervals as the project took shape. Paxmans were represented on this committee and I believe that Geoff Bone (Managing Director of Paxman, 1954-64) mainly attended meetings. However, I also sat on this committee but only briefly in the later stages when the performance of the locomotive was being evaluated. The engines were mechanically supercharged rather than turbocharged but otherwise operated on a somewhat similar principal to the Hi-Dyne engines in that they were very heavily supercharged for high starting torque but this was reduced to normal proportions as the loco picked up speed. The heart of the locomotive was the gearbox and this was the essential invention of Colonel Fell. The principle on which this gearbox operated is described in the previous article on this page. The locomotive was extensively tested and did prove the viability of an entirely mechanical drive for a locomotive of this power. However, in retrospect it is my opinion that a mistake was made in deciding that everything on board should be mechanically driven as this led to a complex and troublesome arrangement of long shafts driving auxiliaries such as the radiator fans. The positioning of the radiators at the ends of the locomotive also caused problems. Air supply to and from the trailing radiator which was partially blanked off by the attached carriage was marginal at best, and cross connections to compensate for this, coupled with the need to include cooling for four main and two auxiliary engines resulted in a very complex system that gave a lot of problems with air venting and overheating. Finally there was the problem of the AEC auxiliary engines and the Rootes blowers they drove to supercharge the main engines. In the station, with maximum boost required for starting the train from rest the noise from these was hideous, especially as it was added to the noise caused by the radiator fans and six engines also running. At that time a number of competitors were running various other prototypes on British Rail and when the Fell locomotive passed them their service engineers always made a point of ostentatiously blocking their ears! Despite the fact that the viability of its mechanical drive was proven the Fell locomotive did not succeed in producing further orders. An unfortunate accident caused severe damage to the main gearbox at a crucial time and this probably influenced BR's decision not to proceed with the Mark 2 version which Fell Developments Ltd proposed. The failure had relatively small beginnings. The gearbox suffered the failure of a bolt in its upper part. I cannot recall whether this was attributable to faulty design, materials or workmanship but the main point was that the broken bits passed all the way down through the gear train and rendered most of the gear wheels unfit for further service. The locomotive was returned to BR's workshop where it was built and stripped for investigation but that was effectively the end of the project. The Mark 2 locomotive was thus never proceeded with and I do not know how it would have turned out. My personal opinion has always been that the prototype locomotive tested was somewhat before its time and a Mark 2 locomotive could have been greatly simplified and improved. About the time the prototype was doing its test running large torque converters were becoming available in sizes to suit the Paxman engines. If the engines could have been fitted with these they could have had normal turbocharging and the AEC engines and Rootes blowers could have been eliminated. Then there would have been room in the centre of the locomotive for side mounted radiators and this would have eliminated the cooling problems. Such a locomotive would have been much quieter too. But it was not to be. John Cove April 2005 The notes refer to a Fell locomotive Mark 2. KR Models: do any drawings exist for the Mark 2?

I have received an e-mail advising my order from December 2020 has been received and is being processed. Has anyone received their Fell?

The information quoted accompanies the image from Flikr

Which Dynamometer Car did the LMS use? Recalling when Gresley was loaned the LMS unit to "assist the LNER in rectifying a few issues with the ex NER car", the LMS car was found to be far from accurate, to the embarrassment of the LMSR, design issues of hysteresis in the drawbar system of their unit gave some rather exaggerated performance figures for LMS locomotives under test

The 03 shunter was a development of the 04, I think it is correct that all 04 shunters had the cone exhaust. I struggle with the idea weight correction idea on the 03, if it was so crucial then surely all 03's would have been fitted or retrofitted with the flowerpot chimney. Did the 04 and 03 share the same cone exhaust? Internally is there a difference between the cone and flowerpot? What are the rainwater and stormwater dispersal arrangements for the flowerpot and the cone exhausts? Arrangements to stop rainwater entering the exhaust system via the flowerpot or cone causing flooding of the engine cylinders while the shunter is stabled?

The Halfway House Pub in a Railway Arch. Pub situated just to the right of the pedestrian arch of the road https://www.flickr.com/photos/matt1965/4657699720/in/photostream/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/matt1965/4657692962/ Recognisable as a former pub until about 10 years ago, but lost the evidence during the London Bridge remodel

Pass through the arches and there is the Southwark Park closed in 1915: https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1462041 During the remodel of London Bridge, Southwark Park became an access point for staff, not many signs of its original role as a passenger station

I was not a "Basher", but knew many of them, is it correct that by the late 1980s, locos were pooled at depots to operate a particular freight traffic, therefore it would rare to bash an Immingham NB 47 on a passenger working. I recall riding a class 20 tour when a 47/3 passed by on passenger train and hearing the gasp of drawn breath of the bashers, the bashers would have rather had the 47/3 than their day out behind the 20's

The Wellpark layout is interesting, do you have any more images to post? Has Wellpark been published in any magazines?

Yes, heat and cold trigger point detection failures which tend to occur when points are swung, if the points are not moved then less chance of an issue, in hot weather the signallers try not to swing points if they can avoid it, and, NR have installed monitoring and logging systems over the last 25 years, from a central monitoring office, they can see when points are starting to "play up" such as slowing down as they switch, and send out S&T to investigate in advance of a failure

Appears to be progress on the ECML, though many cancellations and late starts, the 0900 Edinburgh to Kings Cross departed right time then lost 52 minutes between Durham area and KX, arriving KX at 1428, the Azuma covered Peterborough to KX in 55 minutes, what is the speed at the time, are trains restricted to 100 or 110 mph or has full 125 mph linespeed been restored?

From NR Journey planner, for Tuesday LNER have announced what seems to be complete cancellation of mainline service south of York, far more than blanket speed restrictions: Weather warnings for extreme heat are in place across England on Monday 18 July and Tuesday 19 July. Monday 18 July: LNER advise that you only travel if necessary. Tuesday 19 July: DO NOT TRAVEL on routes south of York and south of Leeds to London Kings Cross as no trains will run. This includes to / from Wakefield Westgate, Doncaster, Retford, Lincoln, Newark Northgate, Grantham, Peterborough and Stevenage. There will be limited trains to other destinations and it's highly likely that they will be subject to significant delays because speed restrictions will be in place.

The media have exaggerated the national emergency of the heat wave, the real national emergency will during Winter when high energy costs lead to cases of hypothermia as those on low incomes struggle to afford heating of their homes

I attended a talk by a Historian / Chartered Engineer who had been commissioned to take detailed notes of the Tunnel as part of the refurbishment. He found the Tunnel had a lot of faults by Brunel, such the gauge would go too narrow and the workers would have to go back and chisel the brickwork away to open out the bore, drainage design was ill-thought, drainage consisted of vertical grooves chiselled t into the brickwork and covered over with slate and mortar, the vertical grooves soon blocked up and there was no means of clearing them out, a universal solution to problems were plugs of lengths of timber coated in pitch. Despite it all, the Tunnel had a good future, the refurbishment by shotcreting was an anti-terrorist measure, an explosion in the Tunnel would have brought in the Thames, the Thames would have surged along the East London railway line flooding as far as New Cross and beyond such as Lewisham

Is the sprue or bag of parts common to Class 44 / 45 /46? What of the first batch D11 onwards later Class 45 , as built did they have end doors for multiple working? if they had end doors would they also have multiple working wiring connectors?

I believe that railway passenger carriage air-conditioning in the modern sense was first applied by the USA and it was the design of the Blue Pullman that the American technology came to the attention of British engineers, the name of the USA engineer was I think, Karrier, who developed connections with J Stone of Deptford,

Heat emergency declared in England as temperature expected to hit 40C Trains may be restricted to 60 mph maximum speed commencing 18th July 2022. NR advising passengers not to travel. Has this ever happened on the BR network since WW2?

Tuesday and Wednesday saw myself travelling between KX and Leeds, the information given to me by the acknowledged experts is of 4 of 5 sets of Class 91 locos out working the 2-day Class 91 diagrams, no-one was aware of a reason for the 5th set not out on a diagram