Steam at speed

[Hector]

Sorry, could not resist...

 

A fine sight. No fuss and bother, just a thoroughbred doing what it was built to do.

[Titan]

So, I'm afraid that I am stating categorically that that series of runs was a one off, not to be repeated for the foreseeable future.

 

 

So unlike your original response it was a 'three off' rather than 'strictly a one off' and trying to categorise the three completely separate runs as the same event does not get you off the hook!

 

So, once again, sorry, It is very much the case she did do 90mph more than once, even if it is 75mph now. (And more than likely misinformed youtube captions.)

[PhilH]

To be pedantic a single series, the collective, is singular, so can be categorised as a one off.....

 

We're talking at cross purposes...the event, or the series of runs, will not happen again. Bittern is not passed for 90 mph at this time, as your post seemed to suggest.

[t-b-g]

It is nice to see a steam loco really giving it everything and creating plenty of visual and sound effects but is also very nice to see one purring along at 90mph without even appearing to be trying!

 

I do, from time to time, wonder just how quickly an A4 or Tornado could get from Kings Cross to Edinburgh with a decent water supply on board to remove the need for stops.

 

The line is so much better than it was 60 plus years ago and I am sure that even limited to 75mph, a good amount could be taken off the pre war streamliner timings.

 

If you remove the water stop times on the Tornado "Top Gear" run, the actual running time was very close indeed, with a train much heavier than the pre war ones.

[Bon Accord]

Who remembers this particular run with 60009? The date was 26th February 1995 and the driver was the indomitable Trevor Barnett on what was - as I recall - his last steam run before retirement. The descent of Wellington Bank was particularly notable, just a pity for the Western fans that it (just) eclipsed the descent by 7029 some 30 years before!

 

[ben racey]

To be pedantic a single series, the collective, is singular, so can be categorised as a one off.....

 

We're talking at cross purposes...the event, or the series of runs, will not happen again. Bittern is not passed for 90 mph at this time, as your post seemed to suggest.

and finishes on the main line at the end of this month, I understand.

 

Regards

 

Richard.

[Southernboy]

Bon Accord: Lost for words with that offering :)

[Titan]

To be pedantic a single series, the collective, is singular, so can be categorised as a one off.....

 

We're talking at cross purposes...the event, or the series of runs, will not happen again. Bittern is not passed for 90 mph at this time, as your post seemed to suggest.

 

Whether a series can be categorised as 'one' is irellevent, because the video you were describing as a 'one off' was only the Ebor streak, and  was not a series of runs, but one single run that you described as a 'one off'

 

But you are right, we are getting a bit too pedantic, at the moment it is 75mph only. I wonder how hard it is for the drivers to hold her back?

[PhilH]

e

and finishes on the main line at the end of this month, I understand.

 

Regards

 

Richard.

That's right, December 30th, Kings x to Lincoln

[Titan]

Actually one other thought about high speed - in the modern railway pathing is not the easiest, and there is advantage in going faster beyond just thrilling the enthusiasts - it may mean it is possible to run a train that would otherwise be too slow. There must surely be a case for allowing all 8P pacifics to run at up to 90mph if the engineering requirements were met.

 

An example - although not steam if you will forgive me - The Deltic Preservation societies Main Line Debut was restricted to just 9 coaches even with Deltic power, as the only way it could be pathed was for it to have a train it could rapidly accelerate to 100mph and keep it there. Now whilst I am not suggesting steam should be allowed 100mph, even 90mph may open up more possibilities. And if old diesels can be run at the speeds they saw in service why not steam?

[PhilH]

Spooky. I was at a mainline steam company conference the other week in which we had a presentation on the future of mainline steam. Not a good prognosis regarding main routes such as the ECML or London - Bristol, we are just too slow. It was suggested that one way forward was to raise the maximum permitted speed from 75mph to 90mph.

 

It is a very difficult and costly job to keep a steam engine fit for main line running at 75mph let alone 90 mph as a norm. Whether loco operators would be either interested or capable of maintaining Class 7 or 8 locos to this standard is a moot point. Along with the next generation of electronic gizmos which are going to have to be fitted to locos in the future it remains to be seen whether it will be financially viable or not.

 

It seems likely that more destinations using secondary routes will have to be found, which might mean that the value of the most powerful locos to tour operators could be diminished if they are not allowed over these routes.

 

One thing is for sure, there are very challenging times ahead.

[Guest Belgian]

Couldn't resist sharing this video of 6024 at speed through Warrington in 1998. Phenomenal stuff.

 

 

 

Feel free to add more

Sorry to spoil the party, but DO NOT 'FEEL FREE' TO ADD MORE (unless it's your own work).

 

It's theft, pure and simple if it is someone else's copyright and the clip you have posted 'for free' prevents the copyright owner - whose corporate identity is shown on the clip anyway - from recovering his costs.

 

You may well have Karl Jaunsey's permission to post that clip, and, if you have, you should state that you have it in any event. Even if you have bought a copy of his programme you are not permitted to reproduce it.

 

I used to produce a series of railway videos called RailScene until too many people started copying my hard-won shots and giving them to their mates - or, worse still, selling the copies they made to their mates, thus doubly stealing from me. As a result, it became uneconomic to continue the business so RailScene ceased to be. Today there are fewer professional railway movies because YouTube has made it even easier to steal others' material and pretend it's your own.

 

Only post material that is your own  - and say it is - don't steal.

[big jim]

Sorry to spoil the party, but DO NOT 'FEEL FREE' TO ADD MORE (unless it's your own work).

 

It's theft, pure and simple if it is someone else's copyright and the clip you have posted 'for free' prevents the copyright owner - whose corporate identity is shown on the clip anyway - from recovering his costs.

 

You may well have Karl Jaunsey's permission to post that clip, and, if you have, you should state that you have it in any event. Even if you have bought a copy of his programme you are not permitted to reproduce it.

 

I used to produce a series of railway videos called RailScene until too many people started copying my hard-won shots and giving them to their mates - or, worse still, selling the copies they made to their mates, thus doubly stealing from me. As a result, it became uneconomic to continue the business so RailScene ceased to be. Today there are fewer professional railway movies because YouTube has made it even easier to steal others' material and pretend it's your own.

 

Only post material that is your own  - and say it is - don't steal.

 

the video's on you tube so is free to share surely?

 

the youtube user/owners channel is called psov mainline and the guy is called karl so i'd say he's pretty much got permission to post vids on there!!

[Pacific231G]

Sorry to spoil the party, but DO NOT 'FEEL FREE' TO ADD MORE (unless it's your own work).

 

It's theft, pure and simple if it is someone else's copyright and the clip you have posted 'for free' prevents the copyright owner - whose corporate identity is shown on the clip anyway - from recovering his costs.

 

You may well have Karl Jaunsey's permission to post that clip, and, if you have, you should state that you have it in any event. Even if you have bought a copy of his programme you are not permitted to reproduce it.

 

I used to produce a series of railway videos called RailScene until too many people started copying my hard-won shots and giving them to their mates - or, worse still, selling the copies they made to their mates, thus doubly stealing from me. As a result, it became uneconomic to continue the business so RailScene ceased to be. Today there are fewer professional railway movies because YouTube has made it even easier to steal others' material and pretend it's your own.

 

Only post material that is your own  - and say it is - don't steal.

Big Jim is right. Before accusing others of theft you need to review the difference between posting content, for which you do need rights, and merely linking to existing, freely available content such as that on YouTube or Flickr, for which you don't.

The ECJ confirmed this in an appeal judgement in February stating that  "The owner of a website may, without the authorisation of the copyright holders, redirect internet users, via hyperlinks, to protected works available on a freely accessible basis on another site."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-26187730

I believe that the situation would be different if the material you were linking to was behind a paywall (though it would have to be a rather weak paywall) or more likely in a members only area of a website. There might also be a breach if you link to content that you know or believe to have been posted in violation of someone's rights. 

[Titan]

Agreed, these are just links to youtube, not copies. If the owner is getting any revenue from advertising he will get it just the same irrespective of whether you click the link on this page or youtube itself. Indeed posting here is probably doing them a favour as they will actually get more hits and more revenue...

[great central]

Spooky. I was at a mainline steam company conference the other week in which we had a presentation on the future of mainline steam. Not a good prognosis regarding main routes such as the ECML or London - Bristol, we are just too slow. It was suggested that one way forward was to raise the maximum permitted speed from 75mph to 90mph.

 

 

 

The joint line from Werrington junction-Lincoln is now a 75mph line, Lincoln-Doncaster may well be the same but I don't sign that so can't be sure. Pacifics across the fens at 75mph? It was a regular diversion in steam days.

The 'main lines' are struggling for capacity and, if not already, being electrified to increase speeds but there's a decent number of secondaries with lower speeds surely?

If anything they could provide more vantage points as they sometimes have more stations.  

[beast66606]

Sorry to spoil the party, but DO NOT 'FEEL FREE' TO ADD MORE (unless it's your own work).

 

It's theft, pure and simple if it is someone else's copyright and the clip you have posted 'for free' prevents the copyright owner - whose corporate identity is shown on the clip anyway - from recovering his costs.

 

You may well have Karl Jaunsey's permission to post that clip, and, if you have, you should state that you have it in any event. Even if you have bought a copy of his programme you are not permitted to reproduce it.

 

I used to produce a series of railway videos called RailScene until too many people started copying my hard-won shots and giving them to their mates - or, worse still, selling the copies they made to their mates, thus doubly stealing from me. As a result, it became uneconomic to continue the business so RailScene ceased to be. Today there are fewer professional railway movies because YouTube has made it even easier to steal others' material and pretend it's your own.

 

Only post material that is your own  - and say it is - don't steal.

 

To clarify my disagree.

 

I sympathise with your piracy issues but linking to a YouTube video is not theft I'm afraid (as has been pointed out) - whilst not in it for money, many of my videos are also stolen but it's easy to not care too much when my livelihood doesn't depend on it.

[avonside1563]

Sorry to spoil the party, but DO NOT 'FEEL FREE' TO ADD MORE (unless it's your own work).

 

It's theft, pure and simple if it is someone else's copyright and the clip you have posted 'for free' prevents the copyright owner - whose corporate identity is shown on the clip anyway - from recovering his costs.

 

You may well have Karl Jaunsey's permission to post that clip, and, if you have, you should state that you have it in any event. Even if you have bought a copy of his programme you are not permitted to reproduce it.

 

I used to produce a series of railway videos called RailScene until too many people started copying my hard-won shots and giving them to their mates - or, worse still, selling the copies they made to their mates, thus doubly stealing from me. As a result, it became uneconomic to continue the business so RailScene ceased to be. Today there are fewer professional railway movies because YouTube has made it even easier to steal others' material and pretend it's your own.

 

Only post material that is your own  - and say it is - don't steal.

As the clip and link originally posted is to a freely available clip on YouTube published under the standard licence and, apparently, posted by the producer of the footage, I do not believe there has been any infringement of copyright nor is there any intention to steal the creative licence and pass this off as my own.

[PhilH]

The joint line from Werrington junction-Lincoln is now a 75mph line, Lincoln-Doncaster may well be the same but I don't sign that so can't be sure. Pacifics across the fens at 75mph? It was a regular diversion in steam days.

The 'main lines' are struggling for capacity and, if not already, being electrified to increase speeds but there's a decent number of secondaries with lower speeds surely?

If anything they could provide more vantage points as they sometimes have more stations.

 

Unfortunately what happened in steam days has no relevance to what happens on today's network.

 

Along with obvious factors such as weight restrictions, gauging is probably the factor which determines which routes can be used for steam hauled journeys. At the same conference referred to above we had a very interesting insight into how they determine whether a steam loco can pass over a particular route or not.

 

Basically, the loco of your choice is physically measured. These measurements are fed into the computer which also has a programme written to determine factors such as overhang on curves etc. (again this was interesting inasmuch as a steam loco is deemed to turn about its centre point, diesel and electric locos are deemed to turn about their bogies) Anyway the result of all off this is that a profile of the loco is arrived at, this looks like a section through the loco but includes in the shape width over cylinders, overhangs on curves, even a calculation allowing for vertical movement of the loco.

 

Now, the vast majority of the network, if not all, has been measured about every 3 metres, this include measurements to lineside obstructions such as platform edges, tunnel sides, bridge clearances etc., etc. Again, these measurements are fed into a computer program which converts these measurements into graphics.

 

The next step is for the route to be selected on the computer, and the loco (note not loco class, individual loco in case there are detail differences) . The program then pits route versus loco and runs, and I'm led to believe that as this is a small department within Network Rail they aren't blessed with super computers it's kind of left overnight chugging away on Windows, and it then should throw up any gauging conflicts.

 

We were shown a portion of this program running, mile after mile of good clearance and then, in one particular spot on one particular platform, a conflict....game over for that loco on that tour. I can't remember the exact figures but I think the minimum clearance allowed before a conflict is called is something like 40mm.

 

Anyway, if anyone is still awake, that's how it's done, and that is probably why what would seem to be good choices for routes for steam specials cannot be selected.

[Guest Belgian]

the video's on you tube so is free to share surely?

 

the youtube user/owners channel is called psov mainline and the guy is called karl so i'd say he's pretty much got permission to post vids on there!!

Yes, they are Karl's videos so he has the absolute right to put them where he wants to. 

 

BUT, that doesn't give anyone else the right to copy them ( = steal them)

 

JE

[Guest Belgian]

To clarify my disagree.

 

I sympathise with your piracy issues but linking to a YouTube video is not theft I'm afraid (as has been pointed out) - whilst not in it for money, many of my videos are also stolen but it's easy to not care too much when my livelihood doesn't depend on it.

Thank you.

 

You are absolutely right to state that linking to a YouTube video is not theft, and I agree entirely with that.

 

What is theft is copying it and reposting it.

 

It may seem to be a thin line, but the reason a video producer will upload one of his own videos to YouTube is normally to illustrate what he has for sale. Thus it will appear on his own YouTube channel (for which he will also be receiving some small income - it's 'monetarised' in YouTube-speak)  and he will be hoping potential customers will see it and thus order his products.

 

If someone steals it by copying it and re-posting it elsewhere for his mates to see it he will be depriving the guy who put it up on YouTube of his potential income, not to mention the 'praise' the thief is hoping to get by posting it (see the 19 'likes' Avonside1563 has garnered on this thread).

 

Theft is theft and those who support it are equally guilty. I fully exonerate you Beast (and I mean that in the nicest possible way), because you have answered truthfully and correctly. Thank you again.

 

See David B's post 21 above for the right way to do it - it takes you to the owner's site.

 

JE

[coachmann]

If Karl and his partner (Mr.Richards?) upload their production video's on Youtube, I cannot understand why when it undermines the sales of their videos at retailers. I was surprised at how much is on Youtube. In one direction some inform me as to what i have been missing and I can go out and buy the DVD, but in another they appear to be uploaded by folk who do it routinely and are happy to be praised for the effort as if it were their own material.

[Guest Belgian]

Big Jim is right. Before accusing others of theft you need to review the difference between posting content, for which you do need rights, and merely linking to existing, freely available content such as that on YouTube or Flickr, for which you don't.

The ECJ confirmed this in an appeal judgement in February stating that  "The owner of a website may, without the authorisation of the copyright holders, redirect internet users, via hyperlinks, to protected works available on a freely accessible basis on another site."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-26187730

I believe that the situation would be different if the material you were linking to was behind a paywall (though it would have to be a rather weak paywall) or more likely in a members only area of a website. There might also be a breach if you link to content that you know or believe to have been posted in violation of someone's rights. 

I've highlighted the relevant bit. It does not give anyone the right to copy the material.

 

JE

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...It seems likely that more destinations using secondary routes will have to be found, which might mean that the value of the most powerful locos to tour operators could be diminished if they are not allowed over these routes.

 

One thing is for sure, there are very challenging times ahead.

But even on the secondary route limited to 75mph which the steam loco is currently permitted, with growth in traffic it will be increasingly necessary to have the acceleration and uphill speed capability to match the current traction on that route, in order to fit into available paths. And that's all about having enough power to haul enough of a load within these demands to secure a profit. Which may mean that class 7 or 8 power output is the only thing capable of hacking it, and maybe - quelle horreur! - will have to be altered (or built new) to fit within the dynamic envelope described in your post #44.

[avonside1563]

Thank you.

 

You are absolutely right to state that linking to a YouTube video is not theft, and I agree entirely with that.

 

What is theft is copying it and reposting it.

 

It may seem to be a thin line, but the reason a video producer will upload one of his own videos to YouTube is normally to illustrate what he has for sale. Thus it will appear on his own YouTube channel (for which he will also be receiving some small income - it's 'monetarised' in YouTube-speak)  and he will be hoping potential customers will see it and thus order his products.

 

If someone steals it by copying it and re-posting it elsewhere for his mates to see it he will be depriving the guy who put it up on YouTube of his potential income, not to mention the 'praise' the thief is hoping to get by posting it (see the 19 'likes' Avonside1563 has garnered on this thread).

 

Theft is theft and those who support it are equally guilty. I fully exonerate you Beast (and I mean that in the nicest possible way), because you have answered truthfully and correctly. Thank you again.

 

See David B's post 21 above for the right way to do it - it takes you to the owner's site.

 

JE

At what point have I 'copied' the video? To further clarify, what has happened is that putting the url link to the video on youtube into the original posting has caused the video to 'appeared' in the post. I do not posses a copy of this footage and neither have I done this for personal gain or glory, purely to share an interesting piece of footage with fellow enthusiasts.

 

EDIT: If you have an issue with the original posting please feel free to report it to the moderators.