Supaned

The real Humboldt Industrial park also has an interesting operating quirk in that trains have to do a shove move to join the main line so the RBMN uses a caboose for this. I've also looked at Humboldt as a basis for a layout. https://www.hazletoncando.com/docman/park-maps/77-humboldt-industrial-park-map-1 This is a map of the park showing the spurs - not sure if you've seen it before? There was a really good article in Railpace magazine in June 2016 about operations in the park , and the RBMN's own newsletters often have photos and/or snippets of information about new traffic flows there - I seem to recall they were unloading steel coils at one point . https://www.rbmnrr.com/s/SpringMagWebVersion.pdf - RBMN newsletter featuring Humboldt https://www.rbmnrr.com/news Newsletter PDFs free to download at the bottom of this page - plenty of photos and ideas within.

thanks for the info. We shall see what we see then

So the question is, based on the formations , does the St Moritz - Zermatt train just have a loco back onto it at Chur to head towards Disentis and thus not need a portion shunt , and then the corresponding Zermatt - St Moritz tags on the rear of a push-pull set so they just drive the P-P set onto the arrival from Disentis and again negate the need for a shunt of the through coaches?

So does this mean the GEX section is shunted on or off the Albula sets? Re the Valser vans going to the MGB , do they have much freight traffic to need them? Intrigued on both counts , especially as I'm off over there in the coming weeks

Ripple Lane men by then, surely?

following on Twitter too. Excellent progress

All the technology in the world won't alter the basic physics that the point of contact between a wheel and a rail is very small and once there is insufficient friction between the two to grip , a slide will occur. Granted this is exacerbated by newer trains which are lighter in weight , disc braked and in some cases also fitted with regenerative or dynamic braking which is great in good rail conditions but more of a hinderance in low adhesion - I think my record for a slide so far is on the Up line from Worting Junction to Basingstoke - brake applied at Parlour Gate LC (4 signal sections earlier than the "normal" braking area, all wheels locked and slid, brake in emergency stopping not far off the signal protecting Basingstoke station. I then crept into the station at approx 10 mph and nearly slid out the other end....definately NOT a laughing matter. I'm not quite sure exactly what some technology that "detects" rail contamination is meant to do? if it reduces braking force on a train to compensate than you have additional risk factors associated with that when a driver applies the brakes and they don't work as expected , yet it could give some sort of speed warning which is then a performance issue, and in truth trains can slide at any speed if the conditions are that bad, so that's not really a solution either.

73004 in Bluebell blue would also be popular

That's also why 220/221/222 are so numbered , because they are DEMUs with diesel electric transmission and thus fit into the same 200 series as the earlier Thumper units.

Because the real things are DEMUS....

Sehr schon Genossen. Watching with interest.....(and maybe one or two UMs are watching too)

You still get an "E" indication at Ardwick Junction for crossing onto the Down Eastern from the Down Fast.

one presumes this is a result of WMR's CAF 196s still gathering dust at Tyseley, in turn causing the 170s to stay put for longer than intended? I agree that passengers don't really care why there isn't a train as advertised , merely that said train isn't running , but by the same token , if the DfT are to be believed , the rail network is bereft of passengers anyway, so surely the issue is academic on that basis?

Actually that video gives plenty of examples of the variety of paint schemes carried by the locos , so lots of choices for kits

Standard on Indian Alcos - I swear they fuel them on used tractor tyres

They started the OLE work to Oxford as part of the GWML scheme. Mast bases were in from Didcot as far north as Nuneham viaduct at least, and of course all of the bridges and structures had been raised in preparation. It would be a relatively quick win to wire to Oxford (and the sidings) - the semi-fasts and stoppers could then be 387s , with possibly 769s for the Banbury jobs, and IEPs run on electric to Oxford with only the Cotswalds trains needing to be diesel otherwise.

Wonderful photos and memories, thanks for sharing them with us, such an interesting period. I can add a little info to the mix. The GM&O F unit seen in Chicago was likely to be working their commuter train to Joliet, known colloquially as "The Plug" https://metrarail.com/about-metra/our-history/heritage-corridor-history There was an article in the Continetal Modeller a few years ago regarding a model of the formation. Some of the GM&O F units have lasted until fairly recently , having been rebuilt as F10s with HEP for MBTA in Boston then later moved to Metro-North for New York area commuter service, indeed MNCR 413 was originally GMO 880A, built in 1948. There was also a Conrail operated train to Valpariso IN which may well be what the Conrail GP7s were up to in the train shed at Chicago Union. The link here lists the units known to have worked on that train and indeed both Geeps tally: https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,1737467 A photo of the said train with a mixed pairing - very modelable.

Of course, that relies upon said gates being adequately staffed , not just left wide open as happens at New Street because the staff all go on their break at the same time......

To an extent perhaps , but there is rarely if ever any outcry about the cost of works to roads , they are just accepted as part of national infrastructure. There are people who don't drive cars and I've not heard of such folk complaining about money being spent on roads , yet plenty of people profess not to use the railway but DO object to government funding of it - why is that?

And for most of that period, the railway was the majority carrier of both passengers and freight with little in the way of viable alternative. Fast forward to 2021 and it's mainly a passenger carrying railway with some freight , in both cases nowhere near the levels of before, and that's without factoring in any pandemic related number reductions, and with a huge proportion of freight now transported by road because it's cheaper and more convenient for door to door service.

Speaking as one of the supposed "expensive" members of staff , you have to ask how exactly they intend to reduce those costs. I fully accept that pay increases of any kind are neither practical ,feasible or indeed morally correct in the present economic climate, but by the same token I fail to see how frontline staff should be in the crosshairs for the perceived excessive costs within the industry when in many cases the real issue lies elsewhere. We seem to be tarred with the "always on strike" brush , as referred to in the report and in earlier posts , but I'd counter that with the point that in my nearly 25 years of service I have yet to take a single day of industrial action despite being a trade union member.

And I've said this for a long time. The railway is either national infrastructure and a public service , or it's a profit making entity, but it's unlikely to be both - some parts will generate more revenue than others (eg a main line to London is likely to pull in far more revenue than a branch line in the North East , but as a public service they are equally as important). Despite all the talk and hot air about green credentials , very little is actually done about encouraging the use of rail for freight by way of incentive. Even the concept of using diesel trains for hundreds of miles under the wires because it's more operationally convenient should be discouraged by lower track access charges for electric traction and I'd argue some kind of tax incentive to buy/lease and use that electric traction as much as possible. Granted this would add time into freight train schedules in changing from diesel to electric power ( assuming no bi-mode traction) and the costs of staff to do so, but in the grand scheme of things these things are achievable with the right amount of willpower and appropriate management and timetabling. Expanding on this point , does for example , road tax actually cover the costs of the national road network in terms of upkeep and construction? Likewise with the National Air Traffic system?

I suspect that some cost cutting will come via DOO/DCO. As more new trains enter service with cameras and driver door controls , to me it's obvious what will happen. TOCs/concessions operating "legacy" rolling stock will continue with existing arrangements until such time as they get replacement trains, but in one swoop they could probably have a decent chunk of the network operated in that way, and of course that will be a condition of the concession contracts as they are let.

I was thinking more of a late 1980s era with red stripe railfreight 26s , especially as Heljan have one planned. In reality for 7mm the only locos that would need major surgery would be a 37 or 2 to represent examples without bufferbeam skirts and so on , but there would also be a need for much more kit building of wagons which is probably beyond my capabilities.

I like the twin spotlamps in that last photo of the 26. Seeing this layout and your previous Scottish one set me off on a tangent mulling over a similar thing in 7mm....however , I'm not sure I can quite justify buying a £600 Heljan loco to then have it chopped about and repainted to represent what I might actually need....