Bomag

The marketing blurb hasn't changes since we put a load of bridges up in this stuff in the late 1990's. Jury is still out as to the impact of strain and fatigue. What do I know though, I only have a M.Sc in structural engineering.

I watched both the Charing Cross and Bramhope tunnel episodes yesterday. The Bramhope tunnel one was great and the bit about William MaCalpine implied how much unstructured enthusiasm he showed in person. Unfortunately the lavish praise about the Ordsal bridge in the Charing X program was hard to take given that if you want to go to Man Pic from Leeds we have a slower, less frequent and much less reliable service than before. There was a funny bit where it suggested that weathering steel is low maintenance (if only!) .

As mentioned above Farish did two different version of the Class 31 at the same time one version (three models) covered the class from conversion to the late 80's the other (two liveries) for about 10 years from the mid 80's. I am still not getting your point - the inference seams to be that models of 1970's 'banger blue' locos sell better than 1980's liveries. but since banger blue was still a significant livery in the 1980's I would expect that somebody buying a railfreight livery version would also buy a blue version as well - I have both blue and RFG liveries. In fact I would not mind a sound RF version to round off the trio but I cannot fined one from from somewhere I trust with more than a 14% discount. Similarly, if they do a revised peak I would expect them to do versions with both the revised front and with head boxes, selling out the latter would not mean the 1980's version is not popular.

Sorry I don't understand, the fact that a model has a 'Next 18' chassis has no bearing on whether its a refurbished loco - 111ASF, 112ASF and 113ASF are sound fitted un-refurbished Class 31s (is 111ASF even a 31 or class 30?) - most retailers I checked has the refurbished railfreight locos at a higher price.

As a mainly ER modeller I would buy several V2 if an updated version is available (currently got a BR black and BR green version) but in no way could a V2 be considered as wide ranging as peaks which were ubiquitous in various parts of their life on the LMR/ScR from London to Waverley and St Enoch, Northern England from Newcastle to Holyhead and SW/NE down to Plymouth (and beyond?) . As much as I like my O6 and O7 I would not say that expect a second run. As for your other comment both the green and blue versions of the Class 31were the older model and the ones still available are the more expensive refurbished ones (although I cannot see a LL version only the two railfreight versions). As for the suggestion of more EMUs, I would love them 303, 305, 308, 309, 310/312. A bit niche though - looking forward to my 321s and 313s from Revolution, but the problem with EMUs is when asked many people say 'not those EMUs, my EMUs'. Even looking at 3rd rail EMUs there was limited types which were in all three divisions -CIG and VEP.

Your previous prejudice against peaks is showing. If you are looking for a loco which needs improving (or new) which covers multiple regions and can have multiple liveries and /or names then there is limited alternatives which have not be produced or announced. While there are a number of classes of a similar size which could do with a revamp e.g. V2, they have a less diverse usage and likely appeal. While the above is loco centric, if we are looking at other things we are looking at things like catering coaches (with Mk1 RB / RBR leading) and a possibly a RTP code 40 track system.

From Longworth/Harris allocations it looks to be DMCL 50240/50245 and TBSL 59095. They returned to NL on 2nd May 76 and the to the Gosforth in June

Until Liverpool Street was rebuilt/desecrated the one or two loco hauled services an hour to Norwich and Kings Lynn had no real impact on air quality. As they found when did loco changes at Cambridge and Ipswich even the slickest loco change would wipe out any reduction in journey time from extra 1000hp+ a Class 86 could provide (as said top speed was irrelevant it was ability to accelerate which was improved). They only did it for mileage accumulation under the wires and to release some of the SF 47/4s. Also doing loco changes on the up line at Colchester would have been a nightmare; the benefit if both Cambridge and Ipswich is that they had convenient crossovers, (in the station or south of the tunnel).

The list may be slightly out of date for which vehicles are owned by VSOE A combination of Arnold 5 Bell and upcoming Revolution Steel K covers the majority of the stock.

Other than the ones with VSOE (which don't mix with other rates) the only one seen near a mainline is PTB 232 (Car 79) on the NYMR dining train with an eclectic mix of the last original condition RF 324 plus on each of PFP and PFK Mk1 Met cams 321 and 328.

Avoided TINGS this year, 3 hours of mask wearing is not conducive to enjoying myself. Anything kit based with wheels/underframe has a high probably of having limited or no supply - its not a recent issue and not something which was likely to be fixed by it being TINGS. As an exhibition it is always been a bit up and down; 2018 was a bit variable but 2019 was more consistent. As for the returns/seconds, I know may who can only afford locos at these prices.

No they said that traffic was carried by canal - Bridgewater, St Helens etc canals had been operating to Runcorn since the 1760/70s. There was no mention of 'ship canal'

White and Blue was not related to PTEs, but being refurbished during the program from 1976-onwards. All PTEs paid for stock in their area to be refurbished but DMUs on non-PTE services were also refurbished. A couple of 105 power twins were refurbished in late 1980 (50761/50777/50794/50804) - as a test but apparently the cost was excessive - the white / blue livery had been superseded by then.

Beeching was responsible for the specification of the report which was used to justify the majority of closures. He is fully accountable for this. He, and to a degree the board, would have known the lack of statistical reliability of the data, with it being collected with a bias to provide the assumed outcome. The result was that the contribution of secondary lines to traffic on the wider network was underestimated; closing the lines resulted in lost traffic which the report assumed would be retained. It also completely ignored the network reliability impact of closures - e.g. the benefit of having a second route to Plymouth when a HGV gets wedged under a bridge. The majority of singles lines branch lines that closed, would still have closed - the number of secondary routes closed, particularly double track ones, would been reduced if technology had been used to reduce manpower costs.

The early 1980's Anglia stock was mostly Class 105 with a few odd balls mixed in. Very few 105s were refurbished and all them were LMR allocated. The late 1980's Class 101 were drafted in after B/G became the norm. CA allocated 101s started to get NSE livery in 1987

I hope its better than Saturday - expected the quoted Wells and the Class 24; got a DMU first up 'due to a wedding'. Switched to Wells and it was fine with a tea and pie and then tea and cake at the Haywood cafe.

This is consistent with what I was told. FDM provided less bandwidth than what was adopted for TDM due to the need to ensure signals were in-sync. Not my area but it made sense at the time. Apparently having the loco pushing reduced peak track loads; particularly when coupled with buckeyes (Class 90&91).

I did say when the DBSO was leading. The discussion I had was with one of our signalling engineers and a p/w maintenance wonk (Colchester I think) looking at if there was any impact on maintenance and fixing the damage being done by the 86/2 (trying to straighten the curves). The problems was that the spec for the refurbished DBSOs was still not set at that point. As described to me it was supposed to be a legacy issue of Polmont to speed up brake performance when pushing.

Intercity - ICE or ICS was a rarity on b/c stock 8 BFKs and 2 BSO, Plenty of variations of NSE, and Provincial. Not forgetting CIE, NIR and Israel.

The latest info I saw was that they were prohibited from running the whole line due to a dodgy bridge and P/W issues; I am not certain if they have any usable locos as well. Also the on going tussle between the the three groups (railway, bus, model engineers) is still ongoing. Happy to be corrected but there seems to be a consistent message.

From a discussion just before they were sent to Crown Point I was told that the DBSO had a brake actuator and that when leading the brake would be applied at both ends. I left RCEA before they were put in service so can't confirm.

DOG was less powerful than LNER Peppercorn A2 by about 1k lbf and the A2 was 8P7F so DOG would not have been 8MT (however, the power thresholds did change)

Except for a limited number of signs there is a saving which means anything lawful when the new regs come into force stays prescribed until moved, or removed.

1S76 only covers SE XC services, the longer SW sets carried on, in part, until the whole timetable was recast with the extra HST sets

When converted (1986) the RMBT were used on Kent and other SE XC services. However, by 1988 they were allocated to WCML services and 1991 GWR services