Titan

Hmm. I can control the heating for my modest 3-bed semi from anywhere in the world*. However that is incidental, as long as I can turn it on when I am about 45mins from home. *that has usable mobile phone reception...

Just thought I would remind you what your point was since you seemed to have forgotten. That was at least 30 years of 'BRs changing environment' that they not only met the needs of, they were in fact 'required on the changing railway'. Please explain how a post explaining how they were essential to BR for 30 + years proves your above points? As for the strange type 2 comment, seeing as diesel locomotives have been built right down to 2ft gauge with 40hp or less, not to mention the hundreds of shunting locos, the idea that nothing could be built between the gap of a large shunter and type 2 is clearly a desperate clutching at straws...

Indeed it was designed with that in mind. Type 1 locomotives had to be capable of running over tracks of lower weight capacity as there was at the time a perceived need for them to cater for picking up freight traffic on light branch lines, or indeed any other lines where bigger locos could not run. So right from the beginning, up until the 1990's they were needed to do what they were designed to do, and it was no accident. Not only that, but as the track in question in the later years was not BR owned or maintained, it took some persuading to get it upgraded for the class 60's.

Ah, must be DHL!

But the current system requires no locos, so all of the locos required to run the service should be counted as extra vehicles. Now I am not sure how much it costs to build at least an extra vehicle per train in the form of a locomotive, compared to slinging the equipment under the floors, but it still illustrates the point that the cost of fuel is not going to be top of the list when it comes to overall expenditure, and other factors have much more influence.

There are costs that are much more significant than the extra fuel (diesel or electric) required for lugging a few extra tonnes about. Rail is the most efficient form of transport for moving heavy loads overland. So the few extra pence per mile, even over 30 years would be as nothing compared to the cost of building extra vehicles, and the facilities required to do all the train splitting and loco changing required, not to mention the on going costs of the extra time taken and additional staffing!

Looking at the specs, 1,600bhp for 110 tonnes in 1953 is not too shabby at all. Steam heat and vacuum brakes would have added to the weight somewhat mind! Looks like they would have made a good freight loco. Now if they had been ordered instead of 8F's and 9F's...

It was not a story, it was actually minuted in official BR meetings. When EE were still maintaining the power units, they had started to market the class 55 power unit as having a traction rating of 1,800bhp. Somehow this accidentally got to the shop floor and the overhauled units were supplied to BR set at 1,800bhp instead of 1,650bhp. When BR management found out about it they decided to let affected locos continue to run, as there did not seem to have been any effect on reliability, but instructed EE to make sure from now on all power units were set to 1,650bhp. So the most powerful BR loco was still a Deltic, officially or otherwise!

How is condensation handled in a steam heating system? There must be a way of dealing with it otherwise you eventually get a system full of cold water...

Because once the trains get past the congested bit from London, they split and go to two different destinations. Thus each destination gets its frequency doubled by having a longer train departing from London.

Well if you count unofficial ratings there were some Deltics that accidently got adjusted to something north of 3,600bhp...

3,250bhp, so not that one. Does sound like a trick question though. BR? As in British Rail? had? What does that mean, owned, operated by or what? Powerful? Power is measured in bhp or kW, so anything relating to tractive effort is out etc. etc. Does sound like some alternative definition of 'loco' is being used which is not the familiar one... I would not be surprised if the answer does not run on standard gauge, or maybe does not use a reciprocating piston engine...

Whilst the reliability helped, it was not the reason they were kept. There were a lot of train workings that only a pair of 20's could do, as larger locos did not have RA5 route availability. So not only were they needed, they were absolutely essential right up until the 1990's. They only got retired once the collieries and power stations with unsuitable track were either closed, or got their tracks upgraded to allow class 60 operation.

Dead right!

This is not quite true. The baby Deltic would have been too light had it been designed as normal, and would have struggled for adhesion. The superstructure was deliberately made out of heavier material in order to offset the light weight of the power unit. Unfortunately they overshot due to the steam heat boiler and other things being too heavy as you mentioned, and drastic weight saving modifications were required. Overall EE managed to really cock up on the Baby Deltic design as delivered. All the disadvantages of a high speed diesel and none of the advantages! It did have loads of space inside the loco as the 9 cylinder Deltic was tiny, so it was at least easy to work on. But at the time EE did not have a conventional engine in the type 2 power range. The 8 cylinder was not yet available with charge cooling so was 1,000bhp max, and the 12 cylinder was too heavy and too powerful. They were also looking to market the Deltic in more applications, and could traction rate a 9 cylinder turbocharged unit at 1,100bhp, so that is what they decided on.

More likely to use electric winches for ploughing. No need for any complicated OLE solution or similar, as long as you can get an electric cable to the field.

As the rigid conductor is not under tension, the supports need to be much closer together. I can't remember what the maximum spacing is off the top of my head, but it is not much and it might be that they are too close to allow the width of the road to pass between the supports. As for under the bridge only, you would also need a transition overlap between the conductor beam and the conventional system, with all the tensioners and anchors required for the contact and catenary. This needs to be done on a reasonably level section, the sort of gradient required between the bridge and the crossing - no chance!

Indeed. The LNER had already started to electrify before the war broke out using 1500V DC. Liverpool St - Shenfield would have been completed by the early 40's, Woodhead by the late 40's and by the time the DELTIC arrived on the scene a significant part of the ECML would probably have been already electric. If it was not for WW2 the DELTIC might never have existed - The drawbacks of petrol powered MTB's would not have been so emphasised without them going into full scale battle, and the need for a diesel engined replacement would not have been such a high priority. The LMS looked like it was favouring Diesel, and since most of the Midland region management that rejected the Deltic in the 1950's were probably ex-LMS men, even had the prototype been built it is unlikely there would have been any takers. So 'completely different' almost sounds like an understatement!

Rigid conductor has been passed for high speed. However I don't think it has been tried over a level crossing, and it would be very difficult to design a transition to contact wire in such a short space combined with a substantial wire gradient.

The problem affects the pan going up, as well as going down, so a problem on one side of the bridge will affect both lines. Normally the amount of deflection, or uplift as it is called would be considered the same at the same for 60mph as 125mph. However in special circumstances where clearances are tight then it may be possible to gain a few mm by doing calculations or dynamic modelling and justifying using different figures from the technical guidelines. It also depends on what supports are being used - if it is allowed to attach fibreglass bridge arms to the bridge, they are stiffer and restrict the amount of uplift.

Since when did they put assistant signalling designers in charge of OLE design? Actually I am probably being a bit unfair with that, but do be aware that there are actual OLE designers on this forum, who know what they are talking about.

I think you will find it has evolved, not changed.

So 3,300bhp in 1955 does not count?

You can't have air conditioning without dehumidifying the air - if you cool the air it will usually take it below the dew point temperature, and the water will condense out of it, leaving you with dry cold dehumidified air even if the only intention is to cool it.

Not according to this article: http://www.railwaywondersoftheworld.com/jubilee.html Another use for electricity in the train is in the ir-conditioning plant, which forces fresh filtered air, cold or warm according to season, into the compartment at a predetermined temperature.