darren01 Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Sad another Dept gone I remember going round Old Oak common and now that’s all gone , Stratford gone , will their be anything left . I am so glad I spent the 70’s and early 80’s seeing all of what we had then , Paddington station platform 9 used to have a gaggle of spotters at the end of it , went up to London a few month ago and went down to platform 9 , not one spotter about . All this loss just to save a few pounds , it a crying shame . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 ......All this loss just to save a few pounds , it a crying shame . Not just to save a few pounds; it's because there simply is no need for it anymore. Sad but the cold truth. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
devondynosoar118 Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 On the up side the Potters Bar tunnel building site shown in the civil engineers film would make a great layout. Mainline trains, the cement factory traffic and a light railway should be enough for anyone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Would make a nice, cheap model. A couple of peco points, few yards of bent track, a load of woodland scenics "weeds" and a knightwing fuel kit. Brit15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted June 13, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 13, 2011 When did the TE roundhouse go then? I think it had been built as late as 1958/9 and was used for wagons when I went there in the late 70s early 80s. One time I went there on a coach trip shed bash, as we walked towards the shed a bog cart passed on a nearby embankment and a bloke was shoved out of a door by a load of football hooligans (I think that's what they were anyway); nice! Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach bogie Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 Not just to save a few pounds; it's because there simply is no need for it anymore. Sad but the cold truth. Don't totally agree. With two fueling stations and open air wagon repairs, clearly some of it was needed, just not the entire complex. retaining two roads, if that was technically possible, would have been the requirement. Unfortunately the local councils have other ideas for the land with redevelopment options drawn up many years ago and they do not include retaining any part of the TMD The current mainline is to be moved to run on the river side of TE (back where it was before Tees Yard was built) to give access for the new developments. The new river bridge at Stockton is in place. Only the bad winter snow, two Christmas's ago prevented the track being slewed to the new bridge in preparation of moving the main lines. With regards to the roundhouse it was up when I arrived in Teesside for the first time in 1990. I went to look for it the day I arrived. I allowed myself a couple of weeks settling in at work before having a weekend to go back and investigate. When I did....it was gone, only two walls and the turntable remaining. I was told at the time the concrete construction was contaminated and the structure had become unsafe. Mike Wiltshire Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach bogie Posted June 21, 2011 Author Share Posted June 21, 2011 Repair area finally gone now. Even remaining wall of roundhouse has gone, only turntable well indicating it ever existed. Jumping back on my soapbox as demolition of the 'not required' facility continued, there were open air repairs going on in the yard, with one poor chap using a grinder in the Teesside gales. He did not even have a workbench to use. The new outside repair area are having lifting jacks installed.. I hope they have subjected to several protective coatings ready for the NE winters. I wonder if they work well in several inches of snow? Yes, covered repair shops clearly not required! Mike Wiltshire Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium phil-b259 Posted June 21, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 21, 2011 I'm going to ask a question about freight. There are heaps of lorries going about their business up and down the motorways of Britain. Each has a driver and each uses fuel. The idea of a train is that many wagons or carriages can be strung together and transported by one prime mover with one driver. This should work out to be far far cheaper than the one driver, one engine story with a lorry. Why then is it not possible to construct wagons which are able to carry a lorry with it's payload? And run them in a train to a schedule from say London to Carlisle? Clearances presumably? But clearances were changed in the 1960s when the WCML was electrified so clearances can be changed although slinging up wires everywhere doesn't help. Is it time for a rethink? UK guage restrictions (electrification doesn't make any difference by the way as its the squareness of lorrys / containers that cause the problem) mean that it is vertually impossable to design a straightforward lorry carying wagon and even if you are sucessfull, then the road trailer cannot be the full height allowable on British roads. This is what has killed the piggyback concept (as its known) in the UK whenever its been tried as the distribution companies are unwilling to invest in bespoke trailers. There is also the staffing angle to consider in as much that you need a drivers and tractor units at each end of the journey (every trial so far has baulked at atempting to put the complete lorry on a wagon). Not only that with a whole load of trailers ariving all at once you need to have lots of tractor units and drivers ready to meet the train when it arives. The overall concept is a good idea though and Switzerland makes good use of it although in this case the larger loading guage combined with expensive motorway tolls and expensive tunnel tolls on the various alpine road tunnels make the whole thing far more more feasable than in the UK. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Not just to save a few pounds; it's because there simply is no need for it anymore. Sad but the cold truth. Don't totally agree. With two fueling stations and open air wagon repairs, clearly some of it was needed, just not the entire complex...... Jumping back on my soapbox as demolition of the 'not required' facility continued, there were open air repairs going on in the yard, with one poor chap using a grinder in the Teesside gales. He did not even have a workbench to use. The new outside repair area are having lifting jacks installed.. I hope they have subjected to several protective coatings ready for the NE winters. I wonder if they work well in several inches of snow? Yes, covered repair shops clearly not required! Mike, my point wasn't that facilities weren't required, but that the old depot was no longer required. You yourself said that only some of it was needed. It's clear from what you and others have said, there seems to be a need for some covered facilities, especially if work is going to continue there for some time. Retaining an old run-down depot, or rather part of that depot is likely to be a bad choice and it would be much better to erect new facilities. I don't know much about the work involved, but the appearance of those lifting jacks suggests to me, that some sort of new building should be provided. Unless they're planning to move out in the not too distant future? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
40044 Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Repair area finally gone now. Even remaining wall of roundhouse has gone, only turntable well indicating it ever existed. Jumping back on my soapbox as demolition of the 'not required' facility continued, there were open air repairs going on in the yard, with one poor chap using a grinder in the Teesside gales. He did not even have a workbench to use. The new outside repair area are having lifting jacks installed.. I hope they have subjected to several protective coatings ready for the NE winters. I wonder if they work well in several inches of snow? Yes, covered repair shops clearly not required! Mike Wiltshire Is it definate that some kind of cover wont be provided at a later date, even if only some kind of tin shed? I mean, those lifting jacks wont last long if they're left exposed to the Teesside weather either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckdancer Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 UK guage restrictions (electrification doesn't make any difference by the way as its the squareness of lorrys / containers that cause the problem) mean that it is vertually impossable to design a straightforward lorry carying wagon and even if you are sucessfull, then the road trailer cannot be the full height allowable on British roads. This is what has killed the piggyback concept (as its known) in the UK whenever its been tried as the distribution companies are unwilling to invest in bespoke trailers. Thanks for the reply. There may be a few points which can be solved although your first one seems to knock things on the head pretty firmly! Key to this is the emissions from one loco rather than a number of lorries so the Govt may be able to make it difficult to cost justify lorries where an alternative is available. There is also the staffing angle to consider in as much that you need a drivers and tractor units at each end of the journey (every trial so far has baulked at atempting to put the complete lorry on a wagon). Not only that with a whole load of trailers ariving all at once you need to have lots of tractor units and drivers ready to meet the train when it arives. If the destination has a large amount of parking available (an old industrial site - maybe an old marshalling yard for instance) then the trailers (if the prime mover isn't part of the scheme) can be parked to wait for pickup. The overall concept is a good idea though and Switzerland makes good use of it although in this case the larger loading guage combined with expensive motorway tolls and expensive tunnel tolls on the various alpine road tunnels make the whole thing far more more feasable than in the UK. Maybe a reduction on road tax might be in order if companies can demonstrate miles saved - or a rebate for being green. Maybe Global Warming is the best thing to happen to railways since their invention.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Pannier Tank Posted June 22, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 22, 2011 Sad another Dept gone I remember going round Old Oak common and now that’s all gone , Stratford gone , will their be anything left . I am so glad I spent the 70’s and early 80’s seeing all of what we had then , Paddington station platform 9 used to have a gaggle of spotters at the end of it , went up to London a few month ago and went down to platform 9 , not one spotter about . All this loss just to save a few pounds , it a crying shame . I remember driving into Paddington Station (1984( and parking up alongside Platform 9, bet you can't do that today. Old Oak Common was a favourite of mine, used to be able to walk around the depot most days of the week, happy days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach bogie Posted June 22, 2011 Author Share Posted June 22, 2011 The old 15-19 roads, where much of the wagon repairs were originally carried out, was a later addition. I understand it was originally added for DMU's but ceased to be used for that function long before I arrived in Teesside in the 90's A friend, with more knowledge of buildings/stresses etc than me, firmly believes that this section could have been retained, without any distress caused to the structure. If the roof of no 14 road had been removed, rather than demolished, the outer wall could have been retained. The outside crane being a particluar additional benefit Again, the site has more financial value for redevelopment, once the main lines are moved, than for continued railway use. Mike Wiltshire Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcb 3c Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I'm going to ask a question about freight. There are heaps of lorries going about their business up and down the motorways of Britain. Each has a driver and each uses fuel. The idea of a train is that many wagons or carriages can be strung together and transported by one prime mover with one driver. This should work out to be far far cheaper than the one driver, one engine story with a lorry. Why then is it not possible to construct wagons which are able to carry a lorry with it's payload? And run them in a train to a schedule from say London to Carlisle? Clearances presumably? But clearances were changed in the 1960s when the WCML was electrified so clearances can be changed although slinging up wires everywhere doesn't help. Is it time for a rethink? Way off topic of TMD -but don't see the logic of transporting 13 ton deadweight of lorry from one end of the country to the other . Why not just transport the containers only and swap them to lorries for the final delivery at journey end , as they do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Way off topic of TMD.... I agree. This subject is way OT from the OP. Maybe it should get a thread of its own? .....Why not just transport the containers only and swap them to lorries for the final delivery at journey end , as they do. Well, it's probably not the place to discuss this subject, but as you ask.... for UK mainland domestic freight, you would be introducing extra processes and a massive amount of extra cost and time into the distribution process. It doesn't just involve the cost of transportation either. The extra costs and inefficiencies will feed back right through the distribution and most likely the manufacturing chain, increasing the cost of production, distribution and transportation of products. This would apply to the vast majority of products and goods distributed by road within the UK. Where it could work and does, is on those long journeys from the SE and home counties to Scotland, although I'm not sure if the current services are still subsidised by government grant? From the environmental angle, it would be more sensible to pursue more energy efficient and "cleaner" power sources for the road vehicles, rather than follow convoluted and inefficient (i.e. costly) alternatives like rail. That's not to say rail doesn't have its place for the transportation of freight, because it does and does it well, but it would be crazy to try and use it where it isn't suited. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium phil-b259 Posted June 22, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 22, 2011 If the destination has a large amount of parking available (an old industrial site - maybe an old marshalling yard for instance) then the trailers (if the prime mover isn't part of the scheme) can be parked to wait for pickup. Which is a disincentive in itself as distribution companies won't want their expensive tractor units sitting around waiting for the train to show up, its a very wastefull use of assets. Same goes for the lorry drivers themselves, the logistics of having to arange a large number of drivers to be avaleable to meet the train at the same time is difficult (leaving the trailers to be picked up over time is a big no-no in the distribution industry) and potentally wastefull if there is not enough work to keep them busy duties between trains. So like I say while the concept is a good one, the traditional British focus on the monetary side of things (cost benifit ratios, utalisation factors, etc) means it won't work over here Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 So like I say while the concept is a good one, the traditional British focus on the monetary side of things (cost benifit ratios, utalisation factors, etc) means it won't work over here Phil, I wouldn't say "traditional British focus on the monetary side of things". It's just plain common sense and would apply anywhere. Where such practices are employed in other counties, there's generally a good financial imperative for doing so and journey distances are far greater than those on this tiny island. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcb 3c Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I think not too far away , we will see lorrys that drive themselves. Connect the sat nav to the steering and off you go,the technolgy is possible today. Inside lane will just see 'trains' of driverless lorrys at set distances. Possibly Mk. 1 Human drivers might pick em up at Motorway Marshalling yards to take them to final drop , and more importanly hump off the load! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium phil-b259 Posted June 22, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 22, 2011 Phil, I wouldn't say "traditional British focus on the monetary side of things". It's just plain common sense and would apply anywhere. Where such practices are employed in other counties, there's generally a good financial imperative for doing so and journey distances are far greater than those on this tiny island. Switzerland is even smaller yet they have one of the most extensive systems of "road trains" in the world. I'm sure that if you look at things on a strictly financial basis the whole road train set up is uneconomic compared to having lorries use the roads, even with the road tolls. What makes them viable is the input of the Swiss government who have factored in the enviromental costs of lorries going by road and decided it is worth spending money on such schemes including things like the Lötschberg Base Tunnel. In purely financial terms this investment makes no sense but that is not important to them becuause of the benifits to society at large that come from their policy, in social terms it does. In contrast the UK government and indeed business at large are far more focused on the money angle and by European stands the pass mark as far as cost - benifit ratios go, are high. Therefore UK projects, especially those with a strong "social / enviromental" benifit are less likley to get the go ahead than similar projects elsewhere in Europe. As has been pointed out by many the UK is very good at inventing things, but lousy at turning them into viable projects, mainly because of the pecieved 'cost' of the development process and the long time interval before costs can be recouped. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcb 3c Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Nipped out to TMD at lunchtime for last look . TMD may have gone but its a busy spot.In the 10 mins I was there , 2 passenger trains and and one extremely long GBRF freight train passed on running line. A long freight with EWS class 66 came into the yard. and four class 66's were parked up. Also the marshalling yard was full of wagons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium GraemeWatson Posted June 29, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 29, 2011 Nipped out to TMD at lunchtime for last look . TMD may have gone but its a busy spot.In the 10 mins I was there , 2 passenger trains and and one extremely long GBRF freight train passed on running line. A long freight with EWS class 66 came into the yard. and four class 66's were parked up. Also the marshalling yard was full of wagons. That it is. The hills are alive with the sound of ying-yings in the morning along with the sound of bird song in Thornaby. Glad to see "some" freight movement near me. Nothing as thrilling as what I recall of the 80s/90s and the brief, memorable sights of Thornaby TMD as I craned my neck out of the car window as a kid. Consider myself lucky to have seen decent freight movements from the local Steel and Chemical industries, when I got a little older which remain my key modelling interest to date. I've witnessed it's slow decline over the years, and the weeds and graffiti which inexorably marched all over it. Anyone seen the old tanker, abandoned lineside down the road from there, beyond the Tees barrage? You can see it from the motorway overpass. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcanman Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Hi, Thought it would be nice to remember TE in happier days. Here's a few pics from 8th Feb 1981 First, line up outside the shed with loads of 31s. There were 18 Class 31s on shed, here's one of them, number unknown Next, 40185 Last, unknown Class 40, possibly 40073 regards, Mal Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium GraemeWatson Posted July 6, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 6, 2011 Cracking photos there, Mal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.