Mike_Walker

16 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

A few memories of that area. When we took the panel up to Acton Wells I had finished my stuff by about 5am. Started to drive back north up the M1 but could hardly see the road in front of me through the fog so pulled off at the services and had a sleep for a couple of hours. 

The gang doing the base for the new colour light distant at Acton Canal borrowed a troley. Unfortunately the brake was faulty and they lost control of it. Fortunately it was derailed by the traps at Acton Wells and ended up about six feet from the main line.

Later during the commissioning of the passenger lines I went into South West Sidings shunt frame to see it signed out for the last time and to set the gang to work on recovery. The painters turned up to paint the box, so we informed them that we could demolish it quicker than they could paint it. The foreman said they would go to the next job on the sheet, Acton Lane. "Too late" said the the S&T inspector, "It's already been signed out."

Reminds me of how a couple of bods turned up at Cookham one day to survey the 'Box for "modernisation" and asked the BO clerk where it was.  A passenger overheard and replied "It'll be a big job, they demolished it twenty years ago!"

15 hours ago, simon b said:

The mk5 coaches would be a good way for Chiltern to modernise its fleet, I assume there is a solution for the cracking issue they suffer with? The extra driving trailers may just end up being used as spares for the fleet, or could they be stripped and their components used to fit out a few new mk5 coach body shells?

 

I can't see the 68's leaving Chiltern anytime soon, bi mode locos are a good Idea but you need alot of power to drag a train out of Marylebone. There being no easy way to fit OHLE without destroying Lords cricket ground, I doubt the small on board diesel would be up to the job.

 

In the Ideal world Marylebone could be setup for third rail out to Finchley Road, then switch to Diesel or perhaps in time overhead electrification for the onward journey. This setup seems to work quite well in New York's Grand Central Terminal, Siemens having recently supplied new tri mode "Charger" locos to run services.

 

 

 

 

Why would you want Chiltern to replace their Mk3s with their comfy seats and smooth riding with Mk5s which have a reputation for rough riding, ironing-board seats, structural and reliability problems.

As I've said before, there is no prospect of electrification in any form at Marylebone and in any case, modern regulations make the installation of new 3rd rail schemes almost impossible.  Chiltern have aspirations for a new fleet with battery capability.

However, Chiltern are only operating two daily diagrams with their 68's/Mk3s plus a single extra one-way trip on weekdays so they certainly don't need the whole Mk5 fleet.

13 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

The lack of toilets begs the question of what people are meant to do if stuck on a train for several hours. The choices would appear to be to soil oneself (bad enough for urine but much worse for a number two), use a bottle if it's pee time and hope nobody screams, let it out on the vehicle floor or force the doors open and detain. It's unrealistic to think people can hold it in indefinitely.

It does beg the question: would the toilets be useable if there was no power supply?  Gone are the days of a simple door with a bolt and a simple flush.  Today they are as complex as the rest of the trains!

3 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

Time moved on and many years later, the same DafT have raised no objections to Lumo ordering their IET's (803's) without any such diesel power back-up, relying on a battery back-up instead.

 

 

.

 

 

.

The DfT had no part in specifying the 803s, they were acquired by First Group for their open access operation.  They do have a battery capability to limp to a suitable place for evacuation should the main power supply fail.

6 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Not exactly.  It was stated that the headspans etc would be replaced - I think all the way from Airport Jcn o somewhere around Acton (can't be sure on thaht) but they weren't although some work was done.  Work is going on currently to convert the OHLE east of Old Oak Common (and possibly further out but I saw no signs of that on my recent trip to London) hence recent total weekend blockades of Paddington.  

 

The OHLE kit is being updated to the type used on GWML electrification although I don't know if this includes the TfL part at Westbourne Park and eastwards.  It is noticeable between Ladbroke Grove and Paddington that updating is being carried out on almost a piecemeal basis with the simplest jobs being tackled first - which makes sense although there is then a dufference in fittings from one structure to the next.  Some new bases are in posoition which is presumably where new structure will replace existing ones.   I have wondered if something connected with the work might have led to the problem with the overhead as i noticed a few dangling wires when I passed a fortnight ago?

 

As far as the incident was concerned somethings sound a bit OTT.  There's no need for an IET to lose power - it can run the diesel engines to maintain hotel power even if the line has not been cleared for it to run (but obviously it can't get past a dead 387).  There are plenty of pictures about showing lights still working on 345s but and no doubt unless it was load shed the PA system would worked after the initial loss of power and doors were opened on 345s to take avccount of their lack of toilets.  But no doubt they would eventually load shed leaving only head and tail lights illuminated and i doubt their batteries ciuld manage 3 hours for allm systems.

 

Clearly reaction on the part of NR appears to have been slow in getting to stranded trains although it might be a reasonable to ask who they actually have in that part of theh world who knows the area and is passed in track safety competence?  Some of that area needs a good knowledge of the roads to be able to reach access points (including the one at Ladbrooke Grove - great if you know how to get to it) and is also traffic dependent.  If a train was stranded at Ladbroke Grove that is nearly a 2 mile walk from Paddington and the best part of amile from access via Old Oak Common - all in the dark, not easy.  No excuse but it is never simple to get to trains wherever they are. 

Mike,  as I mentioned above, the 802 was able to maintain hotel power throughout and get itself back into Paddington but not until the OLE had been made safe and debris removed from the roof of the unit.

NR have very detailed maps which not only include details of the railway but also all the emergency access points to the railway which are easily accessible to all staff.

53 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

There was one like that on the D wn Relief at Reading (R132??) and it gave no indication of route for a route set to the Down Relief but an indication for all the other routes.

Quite a few like that have been installed in recent times.  Not sure I approve...

Questions are already being asked within GWR as to why a whole generation of electric trains have been provided by Bombardier (and others), 345s and 387s, that have no form of back-up supply to at least keep the lighting, a/c and pa working when the main power goes down.  At least the IET had auxiliary power available and was able to get itself back to Paddington once the OLE had been isolated, made safe, and removed from its roof!

31 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Before completely dismissing ASLEFs statements it’s worth remembering that a management / driver instructor will probably be less familiar with the line than a regular driver (though not to an intrinsically unsafe level)

 

Therefore it is certainly possible that a regular driver might be much more familiar with the OLE in the area and could potentially spot something amiss (particularly if it seems relatively trivial) and report it..

 

That in turn might cause the signaller to caution the following train and defects on the OLE be spotted / the line blocked to electric traction before a train pulls the whole lot down.

 

As I know from my own railway career, the value of ‘local knowledge’ of a particular area should never be underestimated when it comes to the ability to spot things which aren’t quite right - which is why this obsession with slashing staff and making those which are left cover ever wider areas is a mistake

In this case it was dark, the train would have been travelling at up to 60mph which would make it difficult to spot any OLE damage. 

GWR DMs are fully qualified drivers in their own right and are just as familiar with the route.  I understand the person involved in this incident was a former Bristol HSS driver of long standing, promoted due to his abilities and would therefore be very conversant with the route.  Please don't cast aspersions about the abilities someone you do not know.

Bear in mind too, that Driver-Managers at all TOCs routinely take the seat to maintain their own competency and licenses.  This has absolutely nothing to do with cost savings.  It is just another tiresome example of ASLEF trying to justify their indefensible (in)actions.

Yes, the 68s can be noisy especially when accelerating away from the High Wycombe stop with a down train - you can hear them right across town.

Strangely though, when they first appeared one was taken to Stourbridge Junction and allowed to run on a train in the yard for local residents, who had complained about the noise from 67s, to give their views and the general view was the 68s were quieter and acceptable.

After the northern section of our branch line closed in 1970, BR started making claims about how much the remaining section was losing.  The local passengers' group managed to get accountants within its membership to look at the books.  

This revealed some interesting "accounting".  Only tickets sales for journeys wholly within the branch (not even to the main line junction station) were counted against the branch, sales beyond (which were the majority) generated no revenue for the branch.  Also, rebuilding works carried out after the closure were being charged as an annual, 100%, cost!

Once these were tackled the branch was shown to be either breaking even or making a small loss.

Makes you wonder how such practices were used elsewhere to justify closures.

25 minutes ago, newbryford said:

Latest wibble is that they will be reformed into 7-car sets (dropping some DTs) and moved to Chiltern.

But not until sometime late in 2024.

I'd take that with a very large pinch of salt!  

Chiltern are under pressure to get shot of the 68s by Citizen Kahn and the neighbours around Marylebone.

Beacon own both fleets.  The locos are leased to DRS who sub-leased them to TPE whilst the train sets were leased directly to TPE.

At the end of the day, the deep pocketed UK taxpayer financed both as DRS, being part of BNFL, is 100% state owned although the locos are used commercially and will, hopefully, be redeployed on DRS's other work.

Wrexham & Shropshire took customer care to great lengths and was highly regarded in that respect and much missed.

It would have been most unusual for a W&S service to be cancelled without warning and I suspect it was probably as the result of a mechanical issue.  The fact you still managed to get to London earlier than expected proves the point about them being disadvantaged by being denied access to the WCML.

3 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

 Quote

• A kitchen in the main galley area of the first-class portion of each train. WSMR will introduce hot and cold food and beverages sourced sustainably and locally from business along the WSMR route. Furthermore, customers will have the ability to pre-order food before departure
via an app.

Which is not much different from what the first company offered with such disastrous effects on its bottom line!  If the new one goes down this route it will be making exactly the same mistake!

Having been somewhat involved with the setting up of the original Wrexham & Shropshire, I wish this new venture well but fear for its ultimate success.

The biggest issue the original company faced was that it was barred from serving the lucrative West Midlands market, Wolverhampton and Birmingham in particular, and not allowed access to the WCML and Euston due to protective clauses in the Virgin franchise agreement at the time.  It did not go to Marylebone simply because it was associated with Chiltern.  There were other issues; the high track access charge which came with the use of loco-hauled trains and the excellent on board silver service dining unfortunately lost a fortune due to the way it was conducted.  The biggest issue though, was despite market research that showed a demand for a through service to London from Wrexham and Shropshire, it simply failed to turn up and ride.  What the reason for this was isn't clear.  It might be that folk said "yes" when asked but didn't actually need to go to London or that the number of trains offered and journey time was unattractive.  I know of one resident of the Oswestry area who found it more convenient to drive to Wolverhampton and catch Virgin from there rather than W&S as it meant he could get a prompt service home when his business in London was concluded.  He was probably not unusual.

At the close of W&S I remarked to MD Andy Hamilton that the problem was: "They were trying to run a Pullman service at EasyJet prices to a market that didn't actually exist".  Andy thought for a moment and replied: "Agreed, but we gave it our best shot."

On paper, the new plan addresses many of the original short comings.  It will go to Euston, hopefully with a shorter journey time, but will still avoid calling at New Street although it will at Wolverhampton and Walsall whilst with just 5 return trips each weekday the frequency will be no better than the original W&S offering.  The use of Class 221 or 222 units should reduce the track access charges and I very much doubt the on board catering offer will go anywhere beyond a trolley service.

But the crucial question remains: Is there actually sufficient real demand to make such an operation viable?  

The Cumbres & Toltec has a balloon track at Antonito and has built another at its mid-point, Osier for turning trains.  There's a wye (formerly Biggs Junction) at Chama where the tail is actually the remnant of the old line to Durango and is long enough  to turn a train.  The other leg is the old Tierra Amarilla Southern down to Brazos, NM.

The Durango & Silverton has a balloon loop at Durango encompassing the roundhouse and a wye at Silverton that is used to turn entire trains.  This is a remnant of the former Silverton Railroad which climbed up to the mines above the town.

Have NR been doing their famous raised crane jib trick again?

Looks to me rather like Broad Gauge bridge rail.

32 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

It's interesting that David Jenkinson- who was a champion of period authenticity (qv Is Your Mutton Dressed as Lamb etc)- allowed himself a ten year window in which locos that couldn't have been seen at the same time were. 

I discovered the Grand Canyon Railway Depot (it's official name) durng my first visit to America in 1971. It had been closed to passengers since 1968  but the track was all intact (According to Wiki, the line remained open for freight until 1974 though I saw no sign of that and the rails were rusty ) I also noticed what seemed to be a branch heading south (away from the Canyon) into the trees  which I natutally had to explore. It turned out to be the turning Y that enabled complete passenger trains to be turned but I'd never encountered such a thing before.

It would be interesting to know how many trains the AT&SF ran on the sixty mile branch each day during its peak. I'd hazard a guess that it was one or two with maybe three freights a week. A bit more than Lucius Beebe's "Mixed Train Daily" (when short line and branchline passenger services were being kept open by US mail contracts) but not busy by our standards. 

I did also have a good look at the Grand Canyon that day!

For years the ATSF Employee Timetables and those of today's Grand Canyon Railroad contained the instruction:  "On arrival, trains will turn on the wye and reverse into Grand Canyon".  Given the location of the tail track in relation to the chasm I've always had this mental image of a train disappearing over the edge!  

I'm not sure how many trains the ATSF operated over the line but its "Grand Canyon" streamliner wasn't one of them.

47 minutes ago, Ray M said:

Leaning out of the window

Ha yes, thank goodness for preserved railways

Wow!  That's the most realistic modelling I've seen for decades!  🙂

 I mentioned earlier that I have been upgrading Bachmann clay wagons.

The Bachmann model has been around for more than a quarter of a century and is the only such RTR offering. Although now somewhat dated, it’s hardly been out of the catalogue in that time.  Its main weakness is the underframe which is clunky with heavy mouldings which include the brake levers in the main moulding – something unacceptable today.  Additionally, it has roller bearing axleboxes which BR did not fit until the 1970s, not much use to those of us who model the Duchy’s main industry in the steam era! 

Therefore, I binned the underframe (keeping the wheels) and replaced it with a Parkside kit, PC07.  This includes the parts for their 16 ton minerals so it has the 9’ wheelbase and Morton brakes but is unfitted.  It is also 16’ 6” long so 1mm has to be cut off each end of the solebars.  The mineral wagon buffer beams are of the wrong pattern so new ones were made from 3mm x 1mm plastic channel and cast white metal self contained buffers from MJT and drawhooks fitted.  Another change was to cut off the brittle plastic tie bars between the axleboxes and replace them with Cambrian etched brass examples which are of a better profile.  A rummage in my bits box turned up a vacuum cylinder and a piece of plastic rod and a etched operating lever to complete the underframe. The biggest omission on the body is the end door hinge bar which was again furnished from the bits box.  The last addition was the “door bangers”.  These are not on Bachmann’s model and I made them up from 1 x 0.2 mm brass strip, super glued in position.

The competed chassis was then painted dark matt grey (I never use matt black for such things as black quickly weathers grey in real life) then the whole wagon got a wash of diluted white acrylic to represent the distinctive patina these wagons quickly took on.

Now returning with a mixed goods.

I've replanted the vegetable plot with N scale veggies as the previous ones, sold as H0, were far too big!

The ex-PO mineral P205578 was based on one captured on film at Bodmin General by Peter Gray.

33 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

The fitting of auto-gear was for specific duties in South Wales and only applied to a small number of them.

Except 5572 spent some time in Cornwall working the Fowey auto.

First of my Beatties now has a crew thanks to ModelU.  Seen passing Helland Wharf with clay empties for Wenford Dries.

The clay wagons are Bachmann on modified Parkside chassis.  Having done all six in my fleet no doubt someone will now give us a hi-fi clay wagon!