Edwin_m

He actually isn't there is most (any?) of the overseas slots. Some local expert provides the personal input and Tim Dunn reverts to being a voiceover! With costs and more recently Covid issues this is perhaps unsurprising, but is done very well and not really noticeable until someone points it out (on another forum in my case).

In this situation the person operating the ground frame would give hand signals to the driver. However if poor sightlines made this difficult, there might be a shunting signal worked from the ground frame.

It reminded me of Paris St Lazare.

One old H&S chestnut was the alleged banning of Christmas lights from offices due to fire risk. But I have actually seen a set of Christmas lights in an office catch fire. What's more it was within sight of the company safety officer, who had previously raised no objections.

It may be instructive to review the "Health and Safety Myths" produced by the HSE, which contain many examples of what is and isn't necessary to comply with H&S laws - and of when people quote them as a justification to do what they wanted to do for some other reason. https://www.hse.gov.uk/myth/index.htm

Something similar did happen, later established to be a sloping bridge that had a sub-standard clearance over the hard shoulder. Warning: this link spontaneously starts a very noisy video ad. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/m20-bridge-collapse-bridge-collapses-onto-vehicles-on-major-motorway-a3331036.html

In the case of the Midland Main Line, which I presume sparked this comment, I think it's entirely reasonable in this day and age for Leicester to have fast services to London, Derby and Nottingham. People don't want to hang around for an hour for a journey that may take less than half that. And if the frequency was reduced, I'm not sure what else the capacity could be used for anyway, as the MML will also have a half-hourly service to intermediate stations so doesn't suffer from the sort of issues the WCML has. Many HS2 services will be two units coupled at the maximum length of 400 metres, which is longer than any passenger train on the UK domestic network. Some will be a single unit at 200m, including most of those running through onto the classic network, although some may split and join to run at full length on the busier parts of HS2. I believe something like this has also been considered for Piccadilly. The local council wants the through option, but that would mean diverting the tunnel from the south to run further west and swing eastwards under the city centre to enter Piccadilly from the west and at an elevation that pushes the whole station underground. I think that re-design would delay the Manchester route by the best part of a decade as well as adding a lot of extra cost.

You are right that removing trains to Leeds and Newcastle would make room for trains from London to Nottingham and possibly other destinations. Derby would also get through HS2 service from London because the Sheffield trains would use that route. However stations between St Pancras and Loughborough don't benefit, and still need a reasonable service which dictates that service level out of St Pancras will remain as it is now. In the 2022 EMR timetable there are two non-stop trains per hour St Pancras to Leicester (continuing to Sheffield) plus two serving some intermediate stations (continuing to Nottingham). Further north there is still need for reasonable service between Leicester and Derby/Nottingham so again this will remain at current levels, raising some questions about capacity at Trent. So the service on the MML south of Nottingham/Derby is essentially unchanged. The HS2 line from Crewe splits for Manchester and Golborne. Somewhere beyond this on the Manchester leg there would be a trailing junction (as seen approaching from Crewe) with a line coming in from Liverpool. The exact route is under investigation and still to be announced, and it's unclear if it would go all the way to the city centre. But it would allow trains from Liverpool to run to Piccadilly, calling at the Airport HS2 station, without reversing. Although there's a proposal to make Piccadilly a through station with a tunnel under the city centre, it's more likely that Liverpool-Leeds trains would just reverse at new platforms to the north of the existing station and continue eastwards on another route to be determined. The route is a bit longer but much faster, avoids the slow and congested routes across Manchester and allows the airport to be served directly. With slick operation (such as having a replacement driver waiting where the rear cab will stop) reversal at Piccadilly wouldn't take much longer than a normal station stop. To complete the picture, a south to west curve would allow trains from London to use the new route into Liverpool as well. More details, to the extent of what is publically available, on the link below: https://transportforthenorth.com/northern-powerhouse-rail/

Mood music is currently the other way round. There is momentum behind Crewe-Manchester, not least because it also gives half of a new route between Manchester and Liverpool. The eastern leg is more difficult to make work - it misses Derby and Nottingham, Sheffield can only be served b y a long diversion off route, and as you mention the indirect route means the journey time from London to Leeds and beyond not much better than via the ECML. That is the thinking behind the latest proposals - keep London-Leeds/Newcastle on the ECML and spend the money on regional links such as NPR instead. But it won't relieve St Pancras, as something very close to the existing MML service is needed to serve the stations south of Derby and Nottingham that don't benefit from HS2.

I agree it was a missed opportunity not to at least make provision in the design for a Washwood Heath connection, so trains could transfer off HS2 to New Street and onward towards Bristol. This would of course require electrification from Bromsgrove to Bristol so wouldn't be immediately useful. However similar "touch points" are being incorporated further north including: for a high speed line towards Liverpool connecting from both Manchester and Crewe; for trains to exit Manchester Piccadilly onto a new high speed line towards Leeds; and as mentioned above to connect into the existing Leeds station from the south and also to use part of HS2 between Leeds and York. None of these reduces the cost of HS2 at all but allows future use by NPR services. It reduces the cost by avoiding a totally new line for NPR I guess. As to the East Midlands it is now being suggested that HS2 could drop onto the existing line at Trent Junction, allowing London and Birmingham trains to terminate in Nottingham. This would probably result in the dropping of the HS2 eastern leg north of there, but it's being sold as prioritising regional rather than London links. I personally hope that if something like that happens there will still be an HS2 section into Leeds, probably re-designed to prioritise trains to and from Sheffield and Doncaster.

I believe the Doric Arch was actually roughly where the ramps down to the platforms now are, so would have been very much in the way and also impossible to see if kept in position. It could perhaps have been relocated near Euston Road.

Pete Buttigieg (that's how he spells it, I just checked) is Biden's nominee to run Transport, and in his confirmation hearing said he was the "only the second biggest passenger rail enthusiast in this particular administration". But considering the state of transport in the USA, he probably has better things to spend his time on than reflecting on whether his relatives went into the South Wales scrap business.

If the driver saw it was the wrong way round they might think it wasn't worth bothering with taking it out, considering the other things they would be doing at the time. So the test is something of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

HS2 has indeed gradually become more integrated with the national network as it has developed. I happen to think this is the right thing to do, to include more places in the network and to add other services like NPR that can use parts of HS2 that aren't to capacity on day 1. If the numbers stack up they could operate Phase 1 and 2a entirely with classic compatibles, then order only captive units for 2b and cascade the compatibles from routes that are HS2 only to those additional services that involve through running (such as Newcastle). However if 2b needs any new compatibles then it might be best to order all compatibles, for the reasons I posted previously. HS2 seems very much against using double-deck stock, possibly because of dwell times or because existing designs have to have separate power cars and space for stairs so the seating is nowhere near double in the same length. But at least that option remains available if needed. There would be some scope to reinforce certain services from single to double units using cascaded compatibles, or even to deploy them on classic-only routes such as Great Western. But I suspect if the HS2 passenger numbers turn out well above predicted capacity then they will be worst on the London-Birmingham section which is already at maximum density. So it would then be time to start thinking about another route, such as an upgraded and part bypassed ECML which would be as fast as HS2 from London to the North East and possibly Leeds too (and another place to use classic compatibles).

I think the point is that if the token was put in the pouch the wrong way round, the driver would have to take it out of the pouch to verify it. Which may distract from other important duties such as observing the signal. If they don't do that then one layer of defence is lost. The interlock with the starter wouldn't prevent all possible accidents, for example if two trains were passing and the signalman gave each driver the wrong token so both starters were free. It's then possible that he would realise the error, recover the token from the train not yet departed and in a state of flusterment replace it in the machine and accept a train into the occupied section.

Most of the extra cost for a classic compatible fleet is in the design, therefore the same whether one train is ordered or 100 and a split fleet might cost more in capital as well as operating cost. The initial order will be all classic compatibles, and with the increased amount of through running proposed to the national network there may never be the critical mass to support a fleet of captive units. For brand new high speed infrastructure however, the extra cost of building to UIC rather than a British gauge is tiny. Most of the clearances are dictated by aerodynamic factors in any case. So almost certainly this is a worthwhile risk mitigation, in case the situation I described above doesn't come to pass. For example one way to increase capacity might be to ordering a fleet of captive units (maybe even double deckers) to a proven standard European design for London-Birmingham/Manchester and re-deploy the classic compatibles to other HS2 routes. The study into station locations looked at numerous sites around Manchester. I read the report but I'm not sure if it's still online. The final choice was between Piccadilly and a site extending roughly between Salford Central and Salford Crescent. Exchange would clearly have been more convenient than the latter site so I'm sure it was considered and ruled out - probably not enough space.

The Electric Spine was one of those schemes that got announced as part of that big programme (though "programme" probably conveys too much of a sense of coherence). My personal theory is that the Coalition parties couldn't agree on much else in the way of transport policy, so when some good news was called for they would just announce another electrification scheme, based on the flimsiest of assessments and costings. At the time the Electric Spine, or at least the part that ran via Bedford and Leicester, made very little sense as a freight scheme as it was promoted. Using the then planned MML electrification to Sheffield would have given access to precisely zero intermodal freight terminals, so it would also have needed electrification onwards at least to the ECML at Doncaster or the Doncaster-Leeds line at South Kirkby. Due to limited capacity on the double track through Market Harborough, the alternative route via Corby would probably have had to be electrified too, if much electric freight was to be operated. There is now at least a terminal near East Midlands Airport that would provide some reason for freight to use the route, but electrification of both EWR and MML north of Kettering or Market Harborough has been cancelled.

I was thinking the strange truncated building on the right (of the "right way round" image) was some kind of problem with the camera. But on checking other online images I find the building was actually missing a corner as shown - perhaps cut back when the railway was built?

Looks like it's being hauled by an 08 or similar shunter, suggesting either a short-distance move or a line that's not very busy.

As far as I can see there are two effects of Covid on society in general and the rail network in particular. Firstly many people can't travel due to restrictions, or don't wish to because whatever they would have wanted to go to is closed, or they are just afraid of catching it. I think that effect will fade away during 2021 as vaccination becomes widespread. The rail network nearly collapsed in 2000 after the Hatfield derailment, when there was a perceived (but turned out not actual) risk of similar accidents and the network was crippled by speed restrictions. But passengers came back quite quickly once the situation was resolved. The longer term impact is likely to be a permanent shift towards working from home instead of commuting, possibly also a reduction in business travel due to people meeting remotely instead for cost reasons (though I think many companies were already doing that after 2008). Somewhere between the two is the likely medium-term reduction in leisure travel due to some attractions not having survived the pandemic, but which ought to be replaced eventually.

I've seen other articles by Ian Jack, though not recently, and he does seem quite knowledgeable about aspects of our industrial history particularly around Glasgow. Good point about "commuters" - it literally means those who have their fair "commuted" by buying a season ticket, so by that test some of the three-day-a-weekers probably don't qualify either. I would regard it as describing those that travel to and from a workplace, not those travelling for other purposes such business meetings elsewhere. My own view is that we'll see a bigger drop in peak demand than off-peak as many office workers work from home at least part of the time, and some may just come in for meetings during the day which might even add to the off-peak demand. In the long term that might result in a more healthy railway as the peaks will be reduced relative to the off-peaks, but some of the trains and infrastructure that are only needed a couple of times each day might end up redundant.

Both switch blades are open on the first points beyond the level crossing on the unoccupied track, suggesting a trapping function which may mean the route in the foreground is a goods line and the one diverging behind the box is passenger.

What did they have to do to get seven cats to stay in the same pose long enough to take that photo?

The original plan was for HS2 to take over the surface alignment of the Ruislip line, but they then decided to put it underground but the line would need to be closed to locate ventilation shafts on the formation. At some stage the shafts were moved so the track could remain. More recently there was some talk of using it to take away the spoil from digging the big hole for the station, but they now seem to have decided to build an underground conveyor to load it onto trains at the former Wembley Euroterminal instead.

I believe Chiltern are very interested in keeping the option open of terminating some of their services at OOC. Interchange to HS2 may not be so important, as passengers doing that would be doubling back on themselves and north of a certain point would be better off heading directly for Birmingham. But there are other connections to be made, particularly Heathrow. It also helps get round the limited platform capacity at Marylebone.