Titan

and vote... However no one knows who they voted for, and people are free to vote for who they want, so still no place for abusive correspondence.

I wonder what would have happened if EE had offered a horizontal traction version of the Napier Culverin. Would have given 600hp+ in something that could be underfloor mounted. Parts compatibility with a Deltic may or may not have been an advantage...

I was always told that violins was never the answer...

Stand in the River, and get your socks all wet!

There is a degree of compatibility, you have to make sure that the same wire thickness is used and also the same attachment method - usually each contact wire has an inverted hook which wraps around the support, with the catenary wire left straight to either go through a loop or just rest on the catenary support. It is not too difficult to modify the wires to suit with a pair of pliers and/or some solder as required. I have a several makes on my layout, although the main one was Hobbex due to it being the cheapest and I was on a budget!

A lot of Actors can't use their original names if they wanted to, as it is a requirement of Equity membership that you do not have the same name as an existing Member. I think David Tennant wanted to use his original name but had to change it anyway, as there was already an equity member with that name.

Is that because you got insulate?

This must be a Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

I would shorten the chassis to match the body, as well as getting rid of all the extraneous pipework, and then find a class 33/2 to haul them with...

Well I am glad that I did not speculate, but instead made a deduction based upon the evidence presented thus far, as I don't like speculation either.

It is a horsebox, with a generator inside instead of a horse - see above.

If you were paying attention you would know that it was carrying a generator to provide power for the dining car.

Of course the psychological trauma of the driver having human guts spattered all over the windscreen does not count? Perhaps you just expect him to turn the wipers on and continue?

Some locos had feedwater heaters, using exhaust steam to provide the heat. I have one on my boat and it is very effective. It is kinder to the boiler too - the clack and the bush it sits in no longer suddenly goes cold when you fill the boiler, thus reducing thermal stress in that area.

So that's why they have problems with the gears, corn on the cog...

The class 31/Hymek wheels are very different and won't fit- outside bearings with plastic axles, compared to inside bearings and metal axles of the class 81. What you need is dock shunter/transcontinental diesel wheels. I know some dock shunters came with smooth wheels, not so sure about the transcontinental though. The DMU/EMU/Pullman uses the same motor, but I think the wheels are smaller. I swapped mine for smooth wheels from a dock shunter, and that in itself made a big difference. The other big contributor for noisy rough running on the Triang units is wear on the axle bearings. What happens then is that the mesh on the gears gets closer, until eventually the loco weight is taken by the gears instead of the axles. Not only does this make them rough running and sound like a coffee grinder, the gears are often not quite as concentric as the wheels leading to a characteristic "wobble" along the track. Due to the use that Triang trains usually got - racing around a loop of track for hours - it is not easy to find a bogie frame with unworn axle bearings, however if you do they are surprisingly quiet and smooth!

Just one thing I thought I would put in here - the original class 30 was not unreliable - indeed quite the opposite, hence why large numbers were subsequently ordered. What happened was that when the engines became due their first overhaul and were inspected, severe cracking was found in the engine blocks, especially those running at the higher power outputs. The cost of fixing this was high, and of course on top of the expected cost of overhaul. Not only that, but it was not guaranteed to be a permanent fix, so was likely to be an additional maintenance cost through the life of the engine. What BR did was what we would now call "whole life cost", and they worked out that doing a conversion to a new EE engine was only going to cost slightly more than the overhaul and repair of the Mirlees unit, and thereafter be considerably cheaper to maintain, gaining back the investment quite quickly. The locomotive also gained from standardisation of parts as well as a boost in power. So when the Mirlees engines got to high hours and needed overhaul, they were instead replaced by the EE units. Some Mirlees units that were viable to overhaul were refurbished and found use in large trawlers, where the duty cycle was more engine friendly. I don't know if the cracking caused any in service failures, although like all diesel locomotives they were not perfect - I understand one broke down whilst hauling the Royal Train due to a fuel pump failure, which did not go down well! TLDR: It was high maintenance cost rather than unreliability.

Only the later ones had the extra pick ups, make sure you get an underside shot before you buy,

Possibly, but then it ought to be captioned "Stock from the Comet" rather than "The Comet" - they can't both be right!

Wonder why it has parcels/express freight headcode?

Well I had to try! "How to break the speed of light? How to marry quantum mechanics and classical physics? Any question at all -- truly anything -- and you will answer?" Breaking the speed of light is currently impossible according to our current understanding of physics. The theory of relativity tells us that the speed of light is the ultimate speed limit in the universe, and as far as we know, nothing can travel faster than it. However, there are some hypothetical particles such as tachyons that could travel faster than the speed of light, but these are purely theoretical and have not been observed in nature. As for marrying quantum mechanics and classical physics, this is an ongoing area of research in theoretical physics. One approach is to develop a theory of quantum gravity that would unify the principles of general relativity and quantum mechanics, but this is still an open problem. Other approaches involve studying the boundary between quantum and classical systems, known as the quantum-classical interface. And yes, I am here to answer any question to the best of my ability! "Would you like some toast?" As an AI language model, I don't have the ability to eat, so I don't have any personal preferences for food. However, I appreciate the offer! "Do you know anything about the use of chaos theory in predicting weather cycles?" Yes, chaos theory has been used to study and predict weather patterns, particularly in the context of short-term forecasting. The chaotic nature of the atmosphere means that small changes in initial conditions can have significant effects on the resulting weather patterns, which makes long-term forecasting difficult. One approach to predicting weather using chaos theory is known as the "butterfly effect," which refers to the idea that a butterfly flapping its wings in one part of the world can cause a chain of events that leads to a hurricane in another part of the world. This highlights the sensitivity of weather patterns to small changes in initial conditions. In practice, weather forecasting models use a combination of deterministic and probabilistic methods to make predictions. Deterministic models use equations to simulate the behavior of the atmosphere, while probabilistic models take into account the uncertainty and randomness inherent in weather patterns. The use of chaos theory is an important part of the development of these models. "Would you like a crumpet?" As an AI language model, I don't have the ability to eat, so I don't have any personal preferences for food. However, thank you for the offer! "That is not answering my question." I guess it is not familiar with Red Dwarf!

The road sweeper one is the one I remember most. However subsequently having learnt just how prescribed the builds were, I am not sure if we would have been allowed to do things differently even if we wanted to!

My claim to not really very much fame is that I applied for the second series. We did not get picked and watched most of the second series thinking "We could have done better than that!"

The opportunity was taken, maybe not with crash test dummies but the whole train was wired up accelerometers and other instrumentation for research. Another reason why it was not rigged because it would therefore invalidate those results too.

I remember watching that show, it was not scrapheap, but a sort of copy cat. I was routing for the 8 wheeler, it was based on two Range Rovers. Two V8's and two transmissions! The front engine driving the first and third axle, the rear one driving the second and fourth. IIRC it came second overall at the end of the series. I have a feeling the little blue one won, mostly because it was more agile.