Revolution Trains confirms TEA tanker in N

[Glorious NSE]

Sounds like the Tiphook one's, apart from the description being black, they are pretty filthy though (still a 1980s paint job under the crud!)

[Glorious NSE]

I haven't studied the big red Murco tanks closely, but I know they are a very similar design to the Greenbrier ones we are doing.  I believe they were built by Arbel Fauvet in 2001.  I could be wrong, as I don't have drawings, but it looks to me as though the actual tank barrel is the same shape - it is just the absence of the "solebar" along the lower edge that gives them a slightly pot-bellied appearance.  The bogies are the same, and it appears as if much of the brake "gubbins" and discharge equipment is similar or the same too.

 

With this in mind, I wonder whether our models might lend themselves to a simple conversion - remove the solebar, reprofile the cradle support ribs, remodel the brake/discharge supports and cut back (or etch from new) a different catwalk and with the right markings I think a very passable approximation may be possible.  This, I should add, is only an idea and I am not vouching for its accuracy!

I think unfortunately there's a bit of "looks the same but really different" - the barrel end angles are subtly different for example, as well as headstocks/saddles and other bits being different....

 

GERS/Murco

 

 

EWS (with a bonus older TEA for company)

 

 

That said, one of yours simply sold in Murco paint would undoubtedly be far more convincing than Hornby's comedy efforts:

http://www.ehattons.com/25859/Hornby_R6472_Murco_TEA_100_Ton_Tank_Wagon_Tea_K_weathered_/StockDetail.aspx

[Glorious NSE]

Whilst on the subject of "nearly but not quite" - the Preston bitumen tanks also share the family likeness, but are slightly shorter and the lagging alters the appearance of the barrel quite a bit!

[Revolution Ben]

Hi Martyn,

 

Those bitumen tanks are lovely but are they used on many flows?  I know they run between Lindsey and Preston... anywhere else?

 

You're absolutely right about headstock differences between the Arbel and Greenbrier wagons; I agree any conversion would be something of an approximation but I think the fishbelly appearance without the solebars would create the right impression, and in a long and colourful rake of mixed wagons, particularly in N, could look effective.  It may be that a little surgery on the headstocks might be feasible too; as I say I haven't *really* studied the Murco ones.  I suspect Jo may be giving it some thought though!

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[Glorious NSE]

Couple of shots of EWS rakes in action:

60019 passing Washwood Heath in 2009, the EWS ones show up as lighter grey, the darker grey are CAIB TDA in this instance though (similar to the ones in Ian's post up-thread)



60020 at Stenson Jcn with 6E46 in April 2013 - The majority are EWS tanks, but 3 and 7 are older TEA (there's more towards the back too, including the last wagon) and wagon 5 is a green VTG patched one. There were a couple of CAIB TDA 2nd and 3rd from the back as well...




April 2007 - 60025 swings onto the York avoiding line on it's way to Jarrow, even with very little of the train in view the mix of EWS and a handful of older TEA is visible.


2011, and a change from 60s, the empties from Theale passing Didcot - this was again predominantly EWS with a handful of older TEA designs.

[Revolution Ben]

Hello all,

 

A question for drivers, or at least those who know more about the real railway than I do:  the tanker trains are obviously heavy, as they seem to be predominantly rostered for 60s (which, incidentally, is a good reason for doing these wagons in my book!) but in operation what's the difference in performance between the 60s and the 66s?  Do the 66s struggle?

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[Glorious NSE]

Those bitumen tanks are lovely but are they used on many flows?  I know they run between Lindsey and Preston... anywhere else?

I think that's your lot for those, and with the majority of the wagon being different, it's a tough sell! 

 

You're absolutely right about headstock differences between the Arbel and Greenbrier wagons; I agree any conversion would be something of an approximation but I think the fishbelly appearance without the solebars would create the right impression, and in a long and colourful rake of mixed wagons, particularly in N, could look effective.  It may be that a little surgery on the headstocks might be feasible too; as I say I haven't *really* studied the Murco ones.  I suspect Jo may be giving it some thought though!

 

I was a bit tongue in cheek before, but I do think even the stock model in the Murco red would look pretty close, a cosmetic upgrade kit for those that wanted to get closer still...

[Steadfast]

I suspect the international tanks are the Tiphook TIAs as Martyn said.

33707899053-4 TIA Bogie Petroleum Tank, ex 6B33 Theale - Margam, Margam Knuckle Yard 24/8/14

They've been running on the Murco flows for about a year now. Here's a few I've snapped, I'd definitely like to model one of them http://joalder.smugmug.com/RollingStock/T-TOPS-code/TIA-internationally-egistered-/i-vns2mqw

Hi Martyn,

 

Those bitumen tanks are lovely but are they used on many flows?  I know they run between Lindsey and Preston... anywhere else?

 

You're absolutely right about headstock differences between the Arbel and Greenbrier wagons; I agree any conversion would be something of an approximation but I think the fishbelly appearance without the solebars would create the right impression, and in a long and colourful rake of mixed wagons, particularly in N, could look effective.  It may be that a little surgery on the headstocks might be feasible too; as I say I haven't *really* studied the Murco ones.  I suspect Jo may be giving it some thought though!

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

"Project Murco" has had more than a little thought over the last few years! One of stumbling blocks to a kitbash or 3D print previously was the lack of a TF25 bogie. As more and more wagons are built, it really seems to be a modern equivalent of the widespread Y25 types. I don't know if the Rapido production setup lends itself to the production of parts, but a set of TF25s with their small diameter wheels would be a good step towards modelling the Murco tanks.

Whether something could be done based on the VTG tank moulding, I don't honestly know, though it is definitely nearer in dimensions than the Farish one. As a batch of only 30 wagons, I can't see a bespoke RTR ever appearing, but I'm unsure whether a 3D printed or resin body or a compromise based on the VTG tank would be more popular? Reasonably priced, I think either could work. Anyway, I'm digressing from the proposed model, must stop as this could lead to confusion!

 

Hello all,

 

A question for drivers, or at least those who know more about the real railway than I do:  the tanker trains are obviously heavy, as they seem to be predominantly rostered for 60s (which, incidentally, is a good reason for doing these wagons in my book!) but in operation what's the difference in performance between the 60s and the 66s?  Do the 66s struggle?

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

Every route has a maximum trailing load for each type of traction. One factor is gradients on the route. Another is the haulage capacity of the locomotive.

When considering the ability of a loco, tractive effort is far more important than horsepower. So, although the engine in a class 66 has more power than that in a class 60 (3300 vs 3100 hp), the higher tractive effort of the class 60 gives the ability to shift a far heavier load. A 66 may well start the same load, but it won't be able to get it up to the same speed as a 60. Therefore, over a known route, we should expect a class 60 to haul a longer train than a class 66.

A case in point, the Theale tanks from Robeston. Each TEA is 102t (give or take a few kg) fully loaded, the TDAs used are 90t. The train loads to 24 wagons, so for arguments sake we'll call that 24 TEAs at roughly 2400t. A class 60 will handle this load with ease. If a class 66 has to deputise, the train is only 17 or 18 wagons long. The class 66 could handle the 24 empties (about 600t) easily but that many loaded tanks are beyond it. There are several climbs on the route, Stormy, Severn Tunnel - Patchway, Savernake to name three. On a flat route the class 66 could probably shift 2400t, but these gradients will heavily restrict that trailing load. 

To give an idea of the power of a 60, 6B13, the loaded Westerleigh train loads to 29 tanks. When EWS/DBS were trying to do without the 60s, it took a pair of 66s to haul the train. Some of the Lindsey trains are now 32 tanks. Many of the Mendip trains are over 4000t. A year or two back a 60 dropped onto 6L21 to Dagenham from Whatley. This train has 44 102t wagons in tow, so nearly 4500t, a match for what is regularly hauled by the 59s. Hopefully this gives an idea of how the route can affect the train as well as the loco, though of course loops, terminal sidings etc can also limit train length.

My apologies if this explanation is a bit simplistic in places, it's something I'm still trying to get my head around fully and have tried not to miss any details out

 

jo

[eastwestdivide]

Is there a list of the "slogans" on the sides of these?

From a few of my own pics, I have:

[logo]VTG Working in Partnership with RailCare[logo]

[logo]VTG Railfreight delivers ....with less emissions

[logo]VTG   ......taking lorries off the road

 

and from earlier in the thread

[logo]VTG   ......supporting greener freight

Edited March 28, 2015 by eastwestdivide

[Revolution Ben]

Hi there,

 

There are six different "enviro" messages as follows:

 

"Railfreight delivers ……with less CO2", "……taking lorries off the road",  "Railfreight delivers ……with less emissions",   "Railfreight delivers ……with less congestion",   "……supporting greener freight" and "……caring for the environment"

 

There are 24 wagons in this batch, and each slogan is applied to four wagons.

 

For our triple pack, we are thinking of replicating different slogans on each side, so two triple packs, with one set of wagons rotated through 180deg, would allow all six types to be depicted.  It would of course mean the wagons having different numbers on each side (to match the slogans) but that's not new - I did similar with the NGS Snowploughs in  Railtrack and Network Rail liveries - the models were specified with different numbers on each side, so if you ordered a pair and ran them at either end of a loco they'd appear to be different...

 

What do those interested in these wagons think?

 

cheers

 

Ben A.
 

[mikeharvey22]

Hi there,

 

There are six different "enviro" messages as follows:

 

"Railfreight delivers ……with less CO2", "……taking lorries off the road",  "Railfreight delivers ……with less emissions",   "Railfreight delivers ……with less congestion",   "……supporting greener freight" and "……caring for the environment"

 

There are 24 wagons in this batch, and each slogan is applied to four wagons.

 

For our triple pack, we are thinking of replicating different slogans on each side, so two triple packs, with one set of wagons rotated through 180deg, would allow all six types to be depicted.  It would of course mean the wagons having different numbers on each side (to match the slogans) but that's not new - I did similar with the NGS Snowploughs in  Railtrack and Network Rail liveries - the models were specified with different numbers on each side, so if you ordered a pair and ran them at either end of a loco they'd appear to be different...

 

What do those interested in these wagons think?

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

Ben

 

I am all in favour of what you are proposing so that all six slogans are carried on the three wagon sets. I have done the same with some SNCF coaching stock using my own brass replacement sides so I have a different (fictitious) private operator livery on opposite sides of the same coach. The trains pass over the mainline in both directions showing a different train depending on direction of each set.

[rapidotrains]

I've just finished the latest Rail magazine (that I've received, which was published almost a month ago!). I'm amazed at how unprofitable freight is in the UK, though of course I understand the reasons for it.

 

How long can freight trains reasonably be in the UK?  What is stopping the freight operators from hauling a 1km-long freight train with two or three Class 66s on the front?

 

Most Class 1 (i.e. large) North American freight railways are approaching (or past) 60% operating ratio, which means that for every dollar of revenue, 40 cents is gross profit. And they have to maintain all of their own tracks and infrastructure whereas the UK freight railways just pay track access charges.

 

-Jason

[mikeharvey22]

Length has always been a problem on a heavily used mixed traffic railway, with 200km/hr passenger trains, 120 km/hr and 100 km/hr freights, and stopping passenger trains sharing the same infrastructure. Looping a 800 metre long train requires a much longer loop unless you want a virtually stationery train on the main as the locomotive reaches the end of the loop. The size of the island and typical lengths of haul allow a wagon set to carry a load every day, The smaller structure gauge means that wagons mostly carry less payload per metre length than Continental European wagons, but higher axleloads and creative bogie and body design have done much to counteract that. But at a cost in complexity. The payload per metre for bulk cargo comes nowhere near the North American potential. Loading and unloading terminals need to match train sizes too, and space is very often at a premium especially at the unloading end for things like aggregates and cement. So we end up with smaller trains.

 

I am sure I read the same article in Rail about freight profitability, and did not accept the conclusion that Network Rail would be better off without freight since the avoidable costs far outweighed the income from track access charges. Maintenance of the infrastructure would become a much more costly activity without the freight infrastructure in place. But freight profitability is very low as a proportion of turnover.

 

Time to get back to TEA.

Edited March 29, 2015 by mikeharvey22

[Great Western]

Pretty much the maximum length is 775m, however the real length is governed by the length of the longest loop on the route.

 

Great Western

[rapidotrains]

Pretty much the maximum length is 775m, however the real length is governed by the length of the longest loop on the route.

 

Great Western

 

What determines that maximum length?

 

We've had to deal with the headaches of 15,000-foot trains clogging up the mainline. At least they are a bit shorter these days but that means there are more of them!

 

-Jason

[ruggedpeak]

What determines that maximum length?

Jason

 

I'd agree with GW. I can only surmise, but consider the following observations (as a commuter) on the Great Eastern line towards Liverpool Street:

 

Container trains run to/from Harwich/Felixstowe towards the North London line, through Stratford, even at rush hour. This route requires them to approach Stratford on the Fast Down line, so they normally pass through plaforms 10 or 10a (bi directional)(platform 9 is the Fast Up). They have to wait for a path across the mainline to the NLL, a traverse that passenger services don't make. Passenger services pass the freights on the other platform. This limits the length of the train to the length of those loops, as the blocking of the busy main line out of Liverpool Street would not be acceptable. Platform 10a's loop runs from the western end of the platform (immediately before a junction) up to where the 10 and 10a lines merge in Maryland Station to the east. No idea what the length is, but the freight must fit within it to allow the Norwich fast trains (Class 90 and DVT) and other GE services mainline through.

 

Passenger services take priority, and the freight must not interfere as passenger delays lead to rail companies paying compensation, which will be clawed back from NR.

In addition there are other loops. It is common for a London bound 66 and containers to be sat in platform 1 at Witham station awaiting a path in the early evening. Witham has pasing loops on both up and down of specific lengths. I surmise that the freights cannot exceed these in case of a problem, as again compensation is payable were a freight to fail and block the line if it was too long to fit in a loop. If margins are thin no operator wants a bill for thousands of grumpy commuters! And the GE is not the most reliable line.......

 

Our rail system operates close to capacity, so long trains that block junctions etc would have a disproportionate adverse impact on network operations.

[ruggedpeak]

Couple of pics including 92 and Greenenergy wagons on the banner at the top of this webpage on GBRf website - wait for it to scroll.

 

http://www.gbrailfreight.com/services/petrochemicals/

Edited March 29, 2015 by ruggedpeak

[Revolution Ben]

Tony:  Interesting link, thanks for posting.  It seems from the look of the website that GBRf have adopted the Greenergy green and blue colours into their own branding...

 

 

Jason:  Britain is so much smaller than N America that basically all our railways equate to the commuter/inter-urban lines, with a little high speed passenger thrown in.  There is nowhere in Britain more than 70 miles from the sea, so for shipped freight road can compete.  Conversely, on "long" (by British standards) journeys rail can compete with air, and a lot of British cities have issues around parking/traffic etc, so for inter-city or even short distance journeys rail is an attractive option.

 

For these reasons, Britain has, essentially, a passenger railway with some freight, rather than a freight railway that allows the occasional passenger train.  So as you will see from the posts above freight trains that might cause disruption to the more important passenger services - by being too long for the loops, say - are not timetabled. 

 

Of course this analysis is a little simplistic and there are other factors such as the environment, the channel tunnel, and political dogma but the principle is there.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[Glorious NSE]

Jason, 775m is a "standard" length standard that Network Rail is trying to build new infrastructure to. Oddly enough I think we have had trains longer than that at one point - when the S&C was shut for an engineering blockade a few years back EWS ran what amounted to paired coal trains, at Carlisle they would couple two trainloads of wagons together (42 HTA's) and use both loco's to maximise the paths from Carlisle to Newcastle and down the ECML to Yorkshire, from memory there wasn't any issue with train handling (as expected, it's all buckeye couplered stock) but there was an operational issue in that there was almost nowhere en-route that you could stop a train that long without blocking something else!

FWIW I don't think Railfreight in the UK is inefficient compared to North America, rather it requires a lot of infrastructure for keeping out of the way of frequent passenger trains that the North American railroads don't want, need, or fund, which the UK operators effectively now have to (the UK network would look totally different if it was owned by the FOCs and didn't have passenger trains!) - and it also does that against the background of cut-throat competition between railfreight operators, which most North American railroads don't have to face in the same way, as the majority of customers are stuck with rail service being provided by the railroad closest to their plants.

Ref efficiency - consider one of the oil trains pertinent to this thread. FOC's bid for a hook and haul contract to move a daily 30 wagon train. Due to the distance involved we can diagram a 30 wagon train as a daily round trip, you'll need one loco assigned all the time, and two driver shifts as the round trip will take longer than one driver can legally take (trains only need a driver)

Okay in the states they could run a 90 car train on a 3 day cycle with 3 loco's, you need a 2 person crew in the states, you're effectively using the same number of loco/days but arguably less efficiently, you do use slightly fewer crew on the US version (you'll need 4 crew shifts not 6) - but the kicker is that for your customer instead of having to hire 32 wagons (30 plus a couple of spares) your customer now needs to hire 95 or so, which per car only carry a third as many loads to move the same amount of product, so 3x less efficient - also instead of funding two terminals that can take 30 wagons, you need to either fund terminals triple the size (but which get used less) - or fund a yard at both ends and a switching loco to shuttle the cars for loading/unloading...

[rapidotrains]

Interesting, guys. Thanks for the explanations.

 

I am once again reminded how different our railway industries are, and it explains the "root for the underdog" mentality I often see in regard to railfreight in the UK.

 

It's hard to sympathize, given how the freight industry here has done all it can to push out passenger services and the governments generally sit back and let them.  The Canadian - our flagship train - has been regularly arriving 10 hours late into Toronto because of freight traffic on the eastern 1200 miles of its journey and the fact that there are NO penalties to CN for delaying VIA trains. 

 

Finally VIA threw up its hands and said they can't operate like this. So our transcontinental passenger train is now only serving western Canada. 

 

To give you an idea of how much freight is handled here, you can sit beside the tracks at my local station and watch a mile-long freight pass by at least once an hour, usually with double-stack containers, oil or grain. All day and night. Every day and night.

 

-Jason

[mikeharvey22]

You get a feel for the dominance of passenger trains when you look at a day's worth of trains passing a particular point. If this link works it will show all the trains passing Warwick Parkway today.

 

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/advanced/WRP/2015/03/30/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt

 

The ones with ZZ in the TOC column are freight trains. OK its Monday so not quite so many early morning freights but you get the picture.

[roundhouse]

Just look at Banbury which has quite a healthy number of freight trains being a fairly main freight artery to Southampton Docks. However, its still a tiny amount compared to passenger workings these days!!

 

The tank train doenst appear ot run these days via Banbury though.

[Revolution Ben]

Hello all,

Last night we went through our pre-determined minimum order number, meaning that we can say for sure that this project will go ahead.

This is an amazing response and Mike and I would like to thank everyone who's shown interest and given us the confidence to proceed.  At some point in the next few weeks we will open an order book and those who have expressed an interest will be asked to pay a deposit.

There's no obligation at all but of course the deposit is the crowd-funding element that enables us to proceed to CAD and tooling, and also guarantees your model.

Once the models are all ready we will ask for the balance (as with the Pendo) and the models will be dispatched.  It's hard to know when this will be; the next step is for CAD drawings to be prepared, then sample models, and I suspect these will generate some more interest, however once we are ready to close the book and make our final production order there will be no need to delay, so it will be sooner rather than later.

 

On another forum someone asked whether all the liveries will be produced.  So far, as can be seen from the pie chart on our website, the uptake has been well spread, so all liveries bar the VTG conoco blue single vehicle have reached at least the minimum interest level to guarantee production.

We have now started preparing our research package; our trip to Kingsbury fuel depot enabled us to obtain dozens of detail photos:

 

Wagon worksplate:

 

 

Hazard panel:

 

 

Bogie:

 

 

Plus lots more of the brake gear, outflow equipment, walkways and top hatches.

On top of this, we also have been kindly supplied with a full set of drawings from VTG. These are just a small selection:

 

There are others tha show all the detail parts such as the walkways and brake gear and tank barrel shape - perhaps the most important thing!

This level of co-operation from VTG is fantastic because it means we can be sure the model will be as accurate as possible!
 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[steam-driven boy]

Hi Ben,

Excellent news, since my 'expression of interest' I've been learning through posts here and elsewhere the combinations these run in so on ordering there'll be a little variation - although total numbers will remain the same.

Have started a savings account dedicated to these and the Pendo's just in case balances required converge on similar dates

 

Regards, Gerry  8)

[roundhouse]

Hello all,

 

Last night we went through our pre-determined minimum order number, meaning that we can say for sure that this project will go ahead.

 

This is an amazing response and Mike and I would like to thank everyone who's shown interest and given us the confidence to proceed.  At some point in the next few weeks we will open an order book and those who have expressed an interest will be asked to pay a deposit.

 

There's no obligation at all but of course the deposit is the crowd-funding element that enables us to proceed to CAD and tooling, and also guarantees your model.

 

Once the models are all ready we will ask for the balance (as with the Pendo) and the models will be dispatched.  It's hard to know when this will be; the next step is for CAD drawings to be prepared, then sample models, and I suspect these will generate some more interest, however once we are ready to close the book and make our final production order there will be no need to delay, so it will be sooner rather than later.

 

On another forum someone asked whether all the liveries will be produced.  So far, as can be seen from the pie chart on our website, the uptake has been well spread, so all liveries bar the VTG conoco blue single vehicle have reached at least the minimum interest level to guarantee production.

 

We have now started preparing our research package; our trip to Kingsbury fuel depot enabled us to obtain dozens of detail photos:

 

Wagon worksplate:

 

Detail - worksplate.jpg

 

Hazard panel:

 

Detail - hazard sign.jpg

 

Bogie:

 

Detail - bogie2.jpg

 

Plus lots more of the brake gear, outflow equipment, walkways and top hatches.

 

On top of this, we also have been kindly supplied with a full set of drawings from VTG. These are just a small selection:

 

IMG_0783.JPG

 

There are others tha show all the detail parts such as the walkways and brake gear and tank barrel shape - perhaps the most important thing!

 

This level of co-operation from VTG is fantastic because it means we can be sure the model will be as accurate as possible!

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

Excellent news Ben.

 

 

It might have been mentioned before but will the walkways be etched or moulded?

 

 

 

Ian