Zomboid

I suspect that it wouldn't have taken long for an Edwardian channel tunnel to be electrified, in the manner that some of the crossings of the Rockies were. Or perhaps we'd have ended up with some Cab-Forward loco designs.

That kind of thing has been done elsewhere - the ATSF's CF7s for example, though I'm not sure what could have been reused and how much of the "rebuilt 40" would actually be a new loco. In the American rebuildings that I'm aware of, one of the most significant reused components were the trucks, which is one of the first things you'd junk on a 40/ Peak.

I think with a proposition like that, you really need to be actually committed to making it (maybe have about 3 of the carriages in various states of completion) before a commercial manufacturer will announce the stock. You will then down tools, and about a year after you would have finished your carriages had you carried on, the commercial version will be cancelled.

Design processes that I've been part of need several people to sign the decisions off. Everyone who had to put their name to what's been done has my sympathy. I have had to do similar things, where everyone involved is saying "this is rubbish, but the alternatives are worse", but you just know that in 20 years time someone without the background knowledge it's going to look at it and say "what the flippin eck were they thinking?". And by then better solutions will probably be available. Maybe sense will prevail and the line to Swansea will be wired so this offending balise can be consigned to the dustbin of history before that happens here!

Clearly not. The present situation is ludicrous enough that every possible solution to avoid it will surely have been investigated, and the resulting situation is the least worst option within the fixed parameters. I feel sorry for whoever had to sign off on electric trains being unable to use an electrified siding, but there it is. No viable alternatives existed.

I don't think that's really right. Certainly in 1955 Alco were major players in the diesel game, both domestically and for export. And Baldwin had some successes too. Not to mention Beyer Peacock proved capable of building decent diesel locos (hymeks), though perhaps not to make enough money from it. BR itself built plenty of successful diesel and electric locomotives & units at the old steam erecting shops, too. Was the issue with NBL not simply that they were also making dodgy steam locos by that point, and anyone expecting new technology to result in a positive leap in quality was being a little over optimistic?

Presumably so, since 387s don't need to summon a locomotive to push them in/ out.

Not sure that idea will survive the laws of physics. British electric trains are limited to 320A (or thereabouts), and if you put full power on with two locos then they'd draw 640A. The characteristics of a 3 phase drive as against the old tap changer or chopper control mean it'll be a bit different on the speed/ current graph, but two locos will draw more current than one.

Taking the leap to diesel power is probably a big enough step. To go from steam locomotives to a proto-HST on the highest profile trains in one step is probably a bit much. One that might make sense now in hindsight, but probably not at the time.

That would have been a huge philosophical switch though. I assume that the long distance carriages would be taken off to be serviced and reformed for whatever they were doing next away from the station. If the idea had been to introduce fixed formation trains at the same time then that would have been something different. The diesels would have needed to become a much bigger proportion of the service before they'd do any rebuilding, but that may have come sooner to KX, and if it were successful everywhere else too.

What did you call an actual Crompton when one showed up from Southampton?

I'm surprised those LNER designs are so single-ended. I can't read the dimensions, but based on proportions they look longer than a steam loco, which would make turning them a right nuisance as they won't fit on a turntable. Putting two pointy cabs on the second design would avoid that whole issue, and make turn around times much faster.

You're right, though with the A4 being such an iconic shape that the LNER was rightly proud of its understandable that they'd look at whether it could be applied in this context. I think the answer was "no", but worth having the outline drawing done to be sure.

Doubt it. Anyone with decision making power at the time that such things as oil firing steam locos were being considered will be long dead by now.

I doubt the engine etc are original, especially after the ETH conversion, but there are an awful lot of bits of 45132 which have D22 stamped on them.

Without wanting to go too far off topic, it's not an either/or. HS2 is needed for the reasons that it's needed (WCML capacity primarily), and proper electrification of major routes is needed for completely different reasons. Both things are investment in the rail network, but they're not otherwise related.

Does that really stack up? A Western had 2700hp installed and weighed 108 "long tons" (whatever those are), whilst a 50 also has 2700hp and weighs 115 "Long tons" (why can't we just use SI units?). 47s weighed about the same and had 2750hp (initially, and the derating wasn't to do with the electrics). By the time you've coupled up enough of a train to justify 2700hp that's going to be a negligible difference.

Hydraulic transmission on units in the sprinter era obviously made sense, but in the vast majority of the world it never really went anywhere with locomotives, presumably for good reason. The Southern Pacific tried a few but never ordered any more. As we see now with 22xs and 80xs, some of the 73/9s and even deltics, distributing electrical power around is relatively easy and means you can get much better performance with an engine out (either broken or for economy reasons when full output isn't needed) than a hydraulic arrangement where each engine is tied to a final drive. The Maybachs in the British hydraulic locos sound magnificent, but they don't really offer anything else that's especially useful which a DE doesn't. And presumably it would have been possible to connect a generator to the output of those prime movers too...

Presumably the AM1s (which were originally LNWR units) may have, being overhead AC units and lasting until 1966.

The fact that freight was often unfitted after about 1920 is one of the great missed opportunities of British railway history.

I would imagine that a cardboard bus would do. At least until such time as a charity shop gets something they don't understand and sell it for 50p.

The cynic in me says that they don't. What's really going to happen to a musician hanging around in the highly restricted area that is an F1 paddock? Is one of the pit stop guys really going to go at a pop star with a wrench? Having bodyguards is part of the image, and bring surrounded by an entourage means bigger chance of being noticed than just an individual.

Which is why the early 30s & 40s American locos were heavy and big and not especially powerful (needing 4 or more units to replace one of their steam locos). The 1937 E units had 2x 900hp engines, which isn't a great return on 142000kg.

My only experience of the Southern Pacific is catching a few glimpses of the former SP (now Caltrain) route into San Francisco from the BART. If I did the UK my main interest would be the LSWR/ Southern from about 1910 to 1940 Which I guess makes me consciously historical.

Have a look at some stations where such things happened (ideally on your preferred railway company's network if there were any - which I'd guess is the GW) would be my suggestion (Machynlleth perhaps?) You seem to have space for pretty much any junction arrangement you like.