DK123GWR

18 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

This message has now self-destructed.

So messages may experie too?

26 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

Yet the Power Car carries something a little simpler to permit recovery from the sharp end - presumably that's always been a more likely necessity !!?!

It would be if it were running as a set. At any rate, requiring a barrier vehicle 'in front' of the power car when running alone would make sighting signals (or anything else) very interesting indeed.

Would the load on the front axle be too high without the leading wheels?

3 hours ago, westernviscount said:

 

Ha ha, I think even if I correct myself to M6 it could still be said getting near Birmingham is a miracle depending on time of day ;-)

You could try the M42. You can't get very far from Birmingham on that.

22 minutes ago, montyburns56 said:

Thought that you could only run your Hornby L & M coaches with your Rocket model?

 

You'd find it hard to couple them to your 08 though!

This post is not about the SSR (though if one were needed, there is no doubt that Lundy would have played a crucial role in providing it).

For context, the island of Lundy is much larger in my reality than in this one (the name is by far the greatest similarity). It has developed its own rail network slightly larger than Sodor's (though the places it serves are often larger or of greater importance than those on Sodor). Its legal status is similar to a Crown Dependency, and as a result it was exempt from nationalisation under BR (though the railways have been owned by the island's government since 1923). Its initial plan for modernisation looked something like Riddles' but unlike on BR it was kept to (electrification was considered cost effective due to the very heavy freight traffic from the west of the island to the east and to Britain, which uses a route similar to the South Devon Banks). The use of diesels on Lundy is minimised, as the skills to repair them in the event of a failure do not exist.

This creates some interesting posibilities for trains to London and cross-country services to the North. One of my suggestions is the development of an HST B unit (above). This would connect to a flat fronted driving coach (to control the electric loco on the eastbound journey), then the rest of the coaches, then a pointy driving coach on the end (to control the diesels when heading west). There may be an additional flat-fronted driving coach inserted at some point along the train, allowing it to divide if necessary. The trains would work pointy driving coach first from their start point towards Lundy. At the first stop on the island, a Bournemouth-style operation would occur, with the diesels uncoupled and an electric attatched, the diesels waiting to take the next eastbound train.

Of course, this would probably require significant modification the the HST's multiple working system and a new variation of Mk3 coaching stock. It would also have been developed before Polmont, and the associated nervousness around high-speed push-pull trains.

One thing I'm unsure of is how to put it into TOPS. Firstly, is it one locomotive or two? Given the trouble that occurred when HSTs were considered MUs, I would suggest two separate locomotives would be better. The second is whether the B unit (or the whole lot, if it were classed as a single loco) should be a sub-class of class 43 or a new class entirely (42 had fallen out of use by this point, and all the other warship TOPS classifications were re-used for HST vehicles (41 for the prototype, 43 for the production series).

I can't think of a time and place on the real network when these would have been useful. Perhaps the most plausible situation that would create a need for them (certainly more plausible than the situation for which they were imagined) is that London-Bristol had been electrified in the 1980s, where they might have been useful for trains continuing beyond Bristol.

2 hours ago, montyburns56 said:

 

Is that BR's version of a Light Pacific?

Hate to be a pedant, but 0-6-2s aren't pacifics...

1 hour ago, ScottishRailFanatic said:

“Greg?”

”Yes Phil?”

”When they said ‘small mixed traffic locomotive’, do you really think they wanted it THAT small?”

”It’s a small mixed traffic loco. They never said how small it had to be.”

Very much a work-in-progress, but this is also bordering on the ridiculously small for a tender engine:

This locomotive was not 101, but was a 'sibling' constructed in an attempt to resolve a number of problems with the original design. However, after suffering damage to the coal bunker, it was decided that it would be simpler to modify the locomotive to use a wagon as a tender than to repair it (the backstory applies to both model and imaginary prototype).

19 minutes ago, ScottishRailFanatic said:

I don’t know if any of you have heard of a certain gravity-powered aerial ropeway at Forterra in Claughton, but it seems to be an ingenious idea. While the technology has been around for about a century now, it’s still a great concept, and it led me to wonder: if large freight consists were kept at controlled speeds through air or vacuum brakes, could the need for bankers be removed entirely with a similar (much larger) rail-level system if installed on the likes of the Lickey Incline and similar locations?

It would restrict capacity as you would need a heavy freight path to be available in each direction simultaneously, and of course delays to trains in one direction would prevent the train travelling in the other from using the incline. I imagine that bankers are much more useful.

Also, how dare you suggest we use fewer locomotives on this thread? Go away and imagine a new locomotive for banking duties on the Lickey Incline while you think about what you've done!

The banner has been replaced by a new format which remains prominent without negatively affecting functionality. Thanks for taking into account the comments by users and working to address them.

1 minute ago, AY Mod said:

 

I would say there's some ad-blocking in play.

Not as far as I'm aware. And I always get adverts down the side.

11 minutes ago, melmerby said:

As an example this is what I get (full screen snip 1080p display):

 

 

 

My equivalent:

24 minutes ago, Kris said:

I assume that it is this. 

 

 

I understand the reason for having the advert but when this appeared a 6/7 line gap also appeared at the top of every page the advert appears on. Can this gap at the top of the page be removed? 

Yes, that's the banner. I hadn't noticed the gap but that if that could be removed it might allow us to see the content more easily without altering the advert too much.

It's a large pictorial banner.

Over the past few days, I have noticed a banner advertising WOR Plus at the top of all pages on RMweb. While I appreciate that there will be good commercial reasons for advertising this prominently, I have found that on my PC that only a few milimeters of content below the green banner linking to the exhibitions survey is visible when a page loads. This means that upon loading most RMweb pages are virtually indistinguishable from each other upon loading. This has caused me some difficulty while attempting to navigate the site, especially across multiple tabs, or when opening notifications (since this is done from the top of a screen, it is difficult to see when the new page has loaded.

This issue may not affect all displays (I suppose that replies to this thread will be the best way to gauge this), but if it is a widespread issue then perhaps it would be a good idea to reduce the size of the advert slightly to make navigation slightly easier.

Many thanks.

17 minutes ago, JimC said:

I think there are issues.

Express tank engines were never popular, and there were big question marks over them in the 30s after the River accident.

Then there's the whole weight adhesion thing. If something the same power as Gordon has a decent factor of adhesion with empty tanks then its going to be very heavy with full tanks, or if a reasonable weight with full tanks then very slippery with empty ones.

There's also the tiny locomotive fleet. Gordon's express passenger trip may not be very long, but he's got to run all the services. There's going to be a lot of those thirty mile trips in a day, and a swift turnround at rush hour too. Pretty intensive working. Not going to want to stop for water until at least mid morning - I don't recall water troughs. Not in the books anyway.

 

 

Might tanks also force the boiler size (and hence power) to be reduced?

5 minutes ago, ScottishRailFanatic said:

Always up for a Sudrian spin on things, and the Castles/Landmarks are something I'd never thought of. A stroke of genius on your part, far superior to the muddle of one-offs and prototypes the island ended up with. Think we need a banker for Gordon's Hill though, or we'll be met with even more dangerous situations than Busy Going Backwards!

Sudrian bankers courtesy of @Corbs (I think his Gordon's Hill is a bit bigger than Awdry's):

Is this a typical price for a Triang Princess nowadays?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/274836646573?hash=item3ffd8a6aad:g:1RsAAOSwH3lgy2Sd

Long ago I had a City of Truro given to me. The locomotive is plastic, presumably an Airfix/Dapol kit, and is propelled by a metal tender, which is a poor runner. There are a few issues with it: the pickups need tweaking (and more need adding), the gear train needs to be cleaned and lubricated, and the commutator needs cleaning too. Usually, this means that the motor brushes would also benefit from being cleaned. However, the motor does not appear to allow access to the brushes. Based on the images below, can anybody identify the motor and confirm whether there is a way to access the brushes. I have also included a photo of the chassis undertray, which appears to have branding on it (though searches for "A K's model City of Truro" and similar have yielded nothing so far).

As a further question: the motor is currently held together by the shaft only. The top part of the casing (including the part at the non-commutator end) are currently free to pivot and to slide backwards and forwards on the shaft. Since the tender body screws into the top of the motor casing, the body is free to move in relation to the chassis (and often ends up sat at an unusual angle). Is this supposed to be the case? What appear to be glue marks on the motor casing at the commutator end could suggest not. Thanks in advance for any advice on maintaining this mechanism.

How about a GWR outside valve gear 4-6-0 with no firebox and a dome which carries stone in the tender?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p05rm2lf

I certainly do spot something new every time I pass this. Usually, it makes me wonder if the artist has ever seen a steam locomotive.

39 minutes ago, Ruffnut Thorston said:

The listing has been updated a bit…

I did tell him it couldn't be older that 14 years, so I don't know where he got the 15. Oh well...

1 hour ago, DK123GWR said:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/363437587378?hash=item549e917bb2:g:qPwAAOSwt6Fgy2u1

 

Let's deal with the description one bit at a time:

"Flying scotsman" - Yes it is. Well done.

 

"Model" - Hmm... I prefer the Triang one.

 

 "rare." - probably because nobody bought this piece of junk to begin with.

 

"Condition is "Used"." - How does one 'use' this?

 

"Dispatched with Royal Mail 2nd Class." - I suppose this might be true.

 

"Stunning piece" - I'm glad you think so. We may have different standards to each other.

 

"made of pure tin" - Unless your chemistry is better than your history, I doubt that you have a clue what its made from.

 

"but not a tin" - And nothing to do with Tintin.

 

"very old" - I must be ancient by your standards: I'm 18!

 

"but mint cond" - 100*0=0. A "mint" piece of rubbish is still rubbish.

 

"rare one" - It might be more rare than your use of the word rare, but thanks for reminding us that you were the only one foolish enough to buy it in the first place.

In response to a question about how old it was, the seller said:

"Hi I honestly not sure was bro7ght from a house clearance and they said they'd had it for over 25 years but this is all I no and have been informed hope that helps thanks"

I have informed them of the results of the detailed forensic investigation which I undertook (see photo above) to determine the approximate age of the... thing... and have suggested that they update the listsing.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/363437587378?hash=item549e917bb2:g:qPwAAOSwt6Fgy2u1

Let's deal with the description one bit at a time:

"Flying scotsman" - Yes it is. Well done.

"Model" - Hmm... I prefer the Triang one.

 "rare." - probably because nobody bought this piece of junk to begin with.

"Condition is "Used"." - How does one 'use' this?

"Dispatched with Royal Mail 2nd Class." - I suppose this might be true.

"Stunning piece" - I'm glad you think so. We may have different standards to each other.

"made of pure tin" - Unless your chemistry is better than your history, I doubt that you have a clue what its made from.

"but not a tin" - And nothing to do with Tintin.

"very old" - I must be ancient by your standards: I'm 18!

"but mint cond" - 100*0=0. A "mint" piece of rubbish is still rubbish.

"rare one" - It might be more rare than your use of the word rare, but thanks for reminding us that you were the only one foolish enough to buy it in the first place.

10 minutes ago, Sophia NSE said:

The reason I haven't used my trusty multimeter is.... I haven't got one!

 

It would probably be best for someone with some knowledge (definitely not me!) to take a look at it. Weirdly before resoldering the pickups it was the other set of drivers that were picking up

Unless it would stop you from eating, get one! They are unbelieveably useful.

On 12/06/2021 at 11:29, GoingUnderground said:

European Sleeper services are currently undergoing a renaissance with new services being introduced partly as a way to reduce the emissions from aviation. It will be worth watching their progress.

Which might spread to the UK over the next few years...

https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/luxury-edinburgh-paris-rail-link-20826070