kenw

One cure for the red light jumpers, an incident I heard of at a level crossing I know, some years ago. The crossing's approached, on one side, on a long straight stretch of road. Each day as the signaler's closing the crossing for a particular train, there's a motor scooter approaching, which always runs the lights, forcing him to pause the barriers. One day, getting tired of this, the signaler continues to lower the barriers, the motor scooter still runs the lights and gets trapped on the crossing. It's a wide crossing though, with the two main lines and a departure line from the local quarry. The signaler clears the road for the approaching HST... Each day as the signaler's closing the crossing for a particular train, there's a motor scooter approaching, which always stops at the lights!!!

And at Wylam the LC with manually operated barriers is 'overlooked' by a signalman form a great height from a typically traditional NER overhead gantry 'box

It would need to run into the station, or adjacent goods line, in order to use the main to main just south of the station. The only other main to mains between there and Tallington are the emergency crossovers at Stoke Summit

Mine arrived Friday / Saturday. Assembled Monday evening, about 4 hours work. Good quality castings with very little flash, easily scraped off. Handrail knobs / wire, safety valves, whistle, and smokebox dart are required.. the dart's the handwheel type, though as a BR(NE) modeler I had a surplus supply of these from previous kits. (just mentioning so builders can be prepared). The only minor snag, although the instructions say to re-use the original body fixing screws when fitting the chassis, a slightly longer (8BA) one will be required for the rear fixing, though could be because I used the Electrotren 0-6-0ST chassis, don't know if the recomended 0-6-0T chassis' different. Although if that's the biggest snag, there's not much wrong!! Painted Tuesday, ran on club test track Wednesday, and general comments there that it's a nice model - from those that know more about industrials

Just been reviewing this thread. As that 'platform's' the 'Motorail Siding', it most certainly does have trap protection. There was an issue with 67s parking brake which led to an instruction for them to be chocked for several months (since withdrawn) The incident with the 37 was, I believe, from a main platform, and yes it was quite nasty. I seem to recall the HST driver (an Edinburgh man) only escaped his cab in time by being warned of the approaching runaway by NRN broadcast. With the severity of the gradient, if a northbound HST's running on only one engine, the signaller has to be warned in order to avoid if possible stopping it at Abbeyhill. It's also barred from taking a single yellow at Abbeyhill as if stopped at the next signal - the middle of Carlton Tunnel - it won't get out the other end

One day during the MP12 (basic driver's) course at Gateshead, which was on 47s, we're doing prep. on one on one of the stabling roads at the west end of the depot (which didn't have buffer stops)... The Instructor tells the guy 'in the seat' to start it up, so he presses the start button.. and the vibration sends the 40 it's standing on top of rolling off the end of the road! As well as needing to be chocked when stabled, IIRC, a failed 40 was prohibited from being assisted from the rear unless it was still able to maintain it's own reservoir air, or the train was 2-pipe air brake. And weren't they also limited to 60 light engine instead of the usual 75? 40s - overweight - under-powered AND under-braked!

Trans-Pennine DMUs may have worked to York then, tho I dont recall ever seeing one there. I think they mostly worked the Hull - Trans Pennine services. Certainly never seen them, or any reference to them, working to Newcastle. Before the class 40s they usually had an A3 on north of Leeds / York, and I've seen pictures of exLMS Patriots working into York on them. Also, up till closure in '67, many Newcastle services used the Leeds - Harrogate - Ripon - Northallerton route, bypassing York, and some also used the Durham Coast route via Stockton and Sunderland rather than the main line

The Trans-Pennine (DMU) units never worked the Newcastle services, these remained loco-hauled until introduction of 158s on the route. I believe 40s were mostly used on dieselisation, by the early 80s it was mostly peaks and 47s, with the 47s taking over totally as they were displaced from other routes by HSTs, until they were replaced by the 158s. With the re-organisation of trans-pennine services under TransPennine Express, and concentration of services on Piccadilly in Manchester, the Newcastle trains were switched to serving Manchester Airport (apart from one or two), and the Liverpool trains were to / from Middlesbrough. The services were then taken over by the 185s. The recent changes to services through Manchester to allow for the NW electrification and associated works, has resulted in the Newcastle services reverting to serving Liverpool.

Looking through this thread, it doesnt seem to have been mentioned yet, but there's been TWO complete 91 / Mk4 sets in the full livery since at least the start of the second week. On the Monday (8th) en-route from Newcastle to Kings X, passed two full liveried trains both heading the opposite way (so couldn't have just been the same one twice). Possibly two sets had been prepared for the launch? Saw both side by side in Kings X today. And one of the full liveried sets now has a grey loco

Strange, I was under the impression that 91110 had already been designated, as it's the UK loco record holder, and yes it is also this one that's in Battle of Britain Memorial livery. I'm fairly sure it's not the original vinyls though and they've been renewed. The Flying Scotsman DVT has certainly had the vinyls renewed, as when the right hand van door's open it's now the "Ying Scotsman" rather than the "Lying Scotsman" (The "FY" are now both on the door, rather than just the "F" as originally the case). This isn't the first unique livery for 91111, as it was the only IC225 vehicle to carry the full National Express livery. Also, it's curent livery still incorporates it's mouse, a carry-on from it's original InterCity name of Terrance Cuneo

Sorry, disagree there..... " In the meantime, just needs something more suitable for the routes they are doing now."

Yes, seem to recall that around the same time as the red / grey speedlink livery appeared, or following introduction of TOPS, the unfitted stock grey was discontinued, any unfitted stock repainted then being bauxite/brown, as brake status was then indicated by the TOPS code

Few, if any EC stations would take that length train, or have space to be extended to. Yes, I know these sets will have selective door opening, that doesnt help at Kings X when it's blocking the entire station throat

Which stations on the ECML would take 12 car trains???

On the future of the present EC fleet, it was intended when IEP was ordered that the entire fleet would be replaced. Since the announcement of the new Virgin EC franchise though, there's been speculation that 6 sets are to be retained for the planned extra services, though not yet of which type. As to the general future of the MkIVs, of the two obvious choices for cascading them to (MML and GEML) it was notable how quick they were in saying No Thanks!

Yes, that would I'd say be the case in a layout such as this. Feathers are used to be read which route is being taken from a greater distance for a higher speed approach, at lower speeds the theater box is normally used. Remember the signal would be released under approach control to bring the train down to a suitable speed. So feathers are more common in modern rationalised junctions with single lead crossovers and generally higher speeds. Not sure where you have the space problems, but remember they don't always have to be on the driver's side for various reasons such as sighting, or even, space. Especially in a more traditional layout such as this, the platform starting signals could all be on the platforms including the right-hand side ones. Just don't hide them behind a platform canopy or footbridge etc or your savings'll be lost having to put banner repeaters in! The colour lights exiting INV end of Goods loop, and from Yard Sidings could both be ground mounted, and possibly the colour light from GLA end of goods loop also. Hope this helps without costing you too much extra

The lines being non-bidirectional don't affect this, and in '87 it's unlikely they would be bidirectional beyond the station, it's still uncommon. It's down to approach speed as Signal Engineer said, and also to some extent turnout speed, JI (feathers) normally being used in higher speed locations, given this layout theatre boxes instead being most likely. The top two platforms are entered through a crossover, so unlikely that approach speed s high enough to justify a 'feather'. Also, for top platform, the KK routes via a slip so would be slow speed, the GLA route through crossovers likely being the higher speed so bit of minefield which way a feather would point - safer with a theatre box here. The bottom platform route, being approached straight, could have a feather, though as diverging route KK is again through slips, and GLA also via turnout, perhaps unlikely. Trap protection's required between goods loops / sidings and passenger lines, so yes it would. Trap protection would also be needed at INV end of loop (the headshunt serves this purpose at other end). If the loop is to be used by passenger trains then trap protection from sidings and headshunt is required, though traps are not normally provided on a passenger line so wouldnt be needed at INV end of loop. (note ;passenger trains, not stock) From the track layout, this appears unnecessary, so the locos would probably go out on departure lines before backing (well, changing ends!) into station. The facility to use the opposite lines could still be added for flexibility, though as these lines aren't bidirectional a 'limit of shunt' board would then be required to limit wrong direction movement. If this facility isn't provided then the 'subs' on the 4 INV direction departure signals would appear unnecessary. Having subsidiaries on inward signals 'A' would also give flexibility in allowing a train to enter an already occupied platform eg two DMUs

Posted this n the Hornby Warley Anouncements thread last week, regarding the P2.... I did notice in one mag review of Cock O' The North on release that the smokebox's a separate moulding from the boiler, so maybe a 'nose job' is probable at some stage, particularly with a possible tie-in there with the Doncaster build version as well as Prince of Wales? Or maybe an A2/2 version?.... ugh,..... just off to be sick.... On a more serious note, as I've already 2 kit-built A2/3s, would be unlikely to be interested in another. And if Hornby have designed the P2 for parts to be used for either streamlined or pacific variants....

Thanks, very interesting video of the mill being built... But watching it being built and to think just 20 years later it was all scrap... CRIMINAL!!! Quite frightening to realise your photos are now older than the mill actually lasted

Definitely among the "goings" part of this thread... The former Tyne Yard (TY) P.S.B. seems to recently have gone. Shown previously in post #63, mistakenly described as the hump control tower, although it did incorporate the hump control room in the rear of the building, the main building was the Tyne Yard signalbox and controlled the ECML area from Bensham (between Low Fell and K.E.B. Jns) fringing with Gateshead, to the former Relly Mill Jn. area (south of Durham) fringing with Ferryhill, and also the Norwood - Dunston route, which became the present Carlisle route on closure of the Scotswood route, as far as Swalwell Jn between MetroCentre and Blaydon fringing with Blaydon. It closed when the present Tyneside IECC took over signaling of the area as part of electrifation.

A useful item. I have though come across plenty of single-way pull points (as in the first example) with straight levers, not just the curved type as suggested here. (In fact I've never come across a lever type that pulls both ways). On this single-pull type, the lever only pulls the point when pulled in one direction, whichever way the points being changed, it's then returned freely to it's normal position. It's worth noting that the lever is always returned to normal after use, as if left facing the 'wrong' way when a vehicle passes through trailing against the point, as it changes the point the lever would spring back quite violently, hazardous to anyone stood near it. Spring points require the lever to be 'held over' by the lever while a movement passes over in the reversed direction, and were often used where vehicles entering by mistake could be hazardous. This type of lever was also used for catch points on running lines to allow emergency movements such as an assisting loco going to a failed train.

In BR days, when the EC sets were 8-car and XC ones 7-car, at line speed you could tell the difference... by the brakes! The speed's reduced for any brakes isolated, 10 below linespeed for one coach, and 20 below for two. 'At caution' beyond that 67s have special dispensation to run at 100 light engine when on Thunderbird duties

And, whilst four manufactured are spending time and money on a single prototype, three other regions are being ignored, so four manufacturers end up chasing quarter of the market, whilst three quarters of modelers get absolutely nothing. Sounds like an ideal recipe for business suicide to me!

See the signal diagram for Lough North in link from message 1 on this thread from here; http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/90914-signal-diagram-locking-bar/ Shows a multi-track level crossing with four gates, which overlap when closed across road, but which do not meet in middle when closed across rail, as O.P. was asking

Seem to recall a lot of criticism of the local councils at the time of closure over their haste in ensuring the trackbed was never going to be re-usable