locoholic

3 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Shall we start a new thread about HS2 (and nothing else)?

It's been tried already!

Aysgarth would make a better terminus than Redmire for the Wensleydale line. And maybe Mr Smith can foresee a time when Network Rail decides that mainline steam is just too much bother on busy routes?

I can understand the concerns of some regarding Smith's stewardship though: both Carnforth and Hellifield are eyesores.

11 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

I am surprised that our resident expert professionals have not commented on last nights programme.

Here goes from a non rail person with experience in other field of engineering  projects.

I thought that the two union people came across as very moderate and reasonable.

The comment on the authorities in Qatar being easier to deal with than those in Crossrail I found to be a revelation.

The overspends and delays at both Bond Street and Whitechapel are obvious to anyone who is a regular visitor to the areas.

However an exact figure was an eye opener. Ouch. How the hell did it get that far out of control .

I found the collective lack of willingness to take responsibility amongst the various senior managers alarming. But then I come from an era where you owned up to mistakes and rather than getting a bollocking were judged on how effectively you got the mistakes rectified and the project back on course.

Bernard 

 

Which programme, please?

10 hours ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

My personal thoughts are the word Research is an oxymoron rather like Democratic in several countries names!

Strictly speaking, one word cannot be an oxymoron, as it can't contradict itself. 

Back on topic, I'm guessing the latest anti-HS2 blast by fictional comedy journalist Jonathan Pie and Chris Packham will get people on here very hot under the collar. It even makes me wince, and I'm no fan of HS2, and that's without considering all the swearing. It is quite literally "fake news".

Excellent news.

41 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

 

I hope you are not advocating the Mussolini solution??? That did not end well either.......

 

This time they would ensure a happy ending by removing all the lamp-posts.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48995511

Am I being too cynical by suggesting that this review is aiming to shield politicians and civil servants from receiving the blame for rail-related cock-ups?

Having previously stated that the franchising system should be scrapped because it has failed, Williams seems to have bottled out of such a radical plan of action, and now simply proposes longer franchises, presumably to allow for longer, bigger failures? I guess he's been leant on by the money men and civil servants who, after the timetable change and electrification fiascos, are now completely allergic to the idea of radical change in the rail industry.

8 hours ago, Phil Bullock said:

 

 

You are in the right area John.... but try something a bit more radical....

 

Phil

In the right area...     was there a Peak called "Blackpool Tower"?

4 hours ago, cravensdmufan said:

Class 319 now converted instead of a 321. 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/business-48698044/hydrogen-trains-are-these-the-eco-friendly-trains-of-the-future

And yet again claims that hydrogen is totally green, without mentioning the massive amount of energy required to capture the hydrogen in the first place.

Of course, if the energy comes from solar or a wind turbine, that's fine (apart from the carbon footprint from manufacturing said devices). But if it comes from other means of generation, it's worse than just running a train on diesel.

On 8 June 2019 at 19:19, Bill Jamieson said:

I think there's a lot to be said for having only brief captions adjacent to the photographs, but those in Transition are perhaps just a bit too sparse! That said, the publisher's note included with the book indicates that more extensive captions will eventually be published online and I'm sure most of us who own the book will look forward to these appearing in due course.

Bill

 

I remember 40 years ago when I bought Decline of Steam I was annoyed by the lack of information in the captions. I was only 14. All these years later I've learned enough from other books to be able to guess most of the details in Transition, and I can just enjoy the images.

On 4 June 2019 at 14:12, adb968008 said:

Badly fitted, badly glued nameplates have destroyed many a good model.

Good source for spare parts on ebay, but a waste of a model.

 

I would imagine those who don't have that experience (probably the majority) would prefer a printed nameplate, indeed Bachmann recalled / remade 45048 because the nameplates weren't printed.. leading to that market for unnamed 45048 bodies once they were disposed of.

 

Personally though I would agree, I prefer the nameplate being in the bag to self attach, as otherwise Ive nameplates to remove as well as numbers and they fetch a few quid on ebay.

It should be easy for the printing to include the discoloured patches where the nameplates used to be - acting as a marker to use when glueing on the nameplate, or easily hidden by weathering for those who want the model to represent the period after the name was removed.

25 minutes ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Try and explain that to some of the Brexiteers.

Bernard

It's a good argument for English regional devolution. Absolutely nothing to do with Brexit.

45009 at Sheffield, 17 April 1981, working the Parkeston Quay Manchester train.

Does the strengthening of the Dawlish Sea Wall mean that train passengers will no longer be able to see the sea properly?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-48472901

1 hour ago, Ravenser said:

 

And at current prices that would be at least £350....

 

I think multiple units could be the first real casualty of the RTR price spiral. We may well have reached the point where a new 4 car EMU simply has too high a price point to be commercially viable.

 

Re-runs of multiple units from existing tooling will remain viable but it may be that the window of opportunity for new DMU/EMU models is rapidly closing

We've had all such doom-laden predictions before. I distinctly remember someone saying that no-one would make new RTR wagon models because the tooling costs were almost the same as a loco, but the sale price was much less. Then Accurascale made their lovely wagons...

43 minutes ago, 298 said:

 

 

(The EV thread in Wheeltappers is worth a look, in case the conversation about HS2 here goes off tangent).

You mean in case it actually returns to being about HS2?!

The latest book in the style of the Rev Awdry - "Hamish the Homesick Engine".

I think I've seen a King and Tornado at an SVR gala, and perhaps an A4 and a Duchess.

Shame that the Caley tank failed yet again, and had to be put on the naughty step at Winchcomb, shuffling around the station limits with a couple of wagons. All the trains seemed pretty full, which is good news for the railway.

How many decades is it since the UK had a government with a credible industrial policy and the willingness to acknowledge our national interests, let alone safeguard them?

Ravenscraig, Llanwern , Redcar...    every time  I think, "that's it, we've reached rock bottom now, the retrenchment will stop". Seems I was too optimistic.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-48327739

5 hours ago, Richard E said:

And we are now spending massive amounts of money upgrading the A14 between Cambridge and the A1 due to exactly the shortcomings detailed above. Which is better, build it adequately in the first place or build it twice to save a little bit of cost initially with that saving totally negated by the later upgrade?

You are quite correct - the original builders of the A14 between Cambridge and Huntingdon were very stupid not to build the road "adequately" in the first place. The Romans (for it was they) should have foreseen the likely growth of traffic over the next 2000 years and built their road as a six-lane motorway with grade-separated junctions, and to hell (Hades?) with the expense.

I trust this illustrates adequately the fallacious nature of your argument?

1 hour ago, Mike Storey said:

 

I hope you are not wasting your breath (or rather fingers). It is obvious to any railway person, but apparently not to people who claim to know better about "fizzicks" and stuff.

 

And there's another patronising, arrogant personal comment! Obviously simply being a "railway person" means that you are superior!

6 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Having recently experienced Platforms 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly and been engulfed in the zombie hordes that are the people waiting to board at Euston - doing nothing doesn't suppress demand it just makes the whole situation intolerable.

 

We have to recognise that London is a magnet for people - business, pleasure or simply as a means of getting somewhere further afield - transport systems need to be able to cope.

 

But it shouldn't be a the expense of the North, well the bit between Manchester and the Scottish border as our Scottish cousins seem to be doing a grand job of delivering extra capacity.

The situation is "intolerable" on the M25. In fact the situation is intolerable on most roads. Why should drivers have to scan the road ahead to avoid potholes damaging their cars? The housing situation is intolerable. I could go on. It is typical uncritical rail enthusiast thinking that a crowded platform means we need a new high speed railway. Railways soak up public money like nothing else except the NHS, and the benefits the NHS delivers are much greater and more useful to society as a whole. 

16 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

But you simply demonstrate a very unfortunate inability to comprehend, for someone who claims to be interested in railways, that high speed is part of high capacity (at marginal extra costs on a new build). Reducing overall speed, reduces overall capacity, in terms of efficiency. Add that to the scheme's ability to add extra capacity into existing main line routes, by diverting long distance express services, allowing essential extra room for short to medium distance services (the most overcrowded currently), plus freight, on the WCML, MML and ECML, and you have a good combination.

 

You are right only in that the argument has been robbed by those who wish the scheme to go away, but who have no cogent nor realistic alternative. There is a job to be done to convince people, with even less willingness to understand the real issues, that a new build is necessary. But that is not the fault of the company created to make it happen. It is rather more the fault of the "client", led by possibly the most ridiculous Sec of State for Transport we have seen since, perhaps, Marples.

 

High speed does NOT equal high capacity. There's the small problem that stopping distances increase almost exponentially as speed increases, so headways increase. It's the same principal behind Smart Motorways that limit speed, instead of telling drivers to speed up because the road is full.. Yet again you seem to think that trains are exempt from the laws of physics. And the "marginal" extra costs are highly suspect.

I have never said that there is no need for a new railway line to be built. I just think that the design of HS2 is wrong, and it should be part of the classic rail network. The current trend for trains to be restricted to one route is producing a network that has no resiliance and where nearly-new trains are sent to the scrapheap when other lines are desperately short of rolling stock.

The almost total lack of criticism of HS2 on this forum, and the personal attacks on those that do put their head above the parapet says far more about the mentality of the average rail enthusiast than it does about the merits of HS2.

6 hours ago, royaloak said:

So can all the anti HS2 posters please explain how you are going to relieve the congestion at the Southern end of the WCML and accommodate all the extra freights that the FOCs want to run! as there is a lot of suppressed demand at the Southern end of the WCML.

 

I await your viable alternatives with baited breath.

The demand can stay suppressed - "do nothing" is a viable option, just as should be the case at Heathrow.

I would prefer the addition of a new conventional rail line (with intermediate stations) from Old Oak Common to Rugby, and the quadrupling of the line from Coventry to Birmingham.