rodent279

6 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Because no stock anywhere* had headlamps in the 70s until the arrival of the HST, which only had both headlamps lit when running at over 100mph. 

That's an indisputable fact-but it's not a reason for not having them. A reason for not having headlamps on steam locos would be that they weren't considered necessary, as the progress of steam motive power tends to be more audible and visible in the form of clouds of exhaust. A headlight would not need to be a high intensity sealed beam, just something that would make a decent substitute for a full yellow end-which would not be the most practical colour for a smoke box!

I like the idea of a Brit in BR blue with stainless steel arrows on the tender, brown smoke box and underframes, yellow bufferbeam, train reporting number box in the front footplate.

However, I'd be tempted to give them brown & grey lining as well- a single stripe of brown with a thinner stripe of grey either side. In my AU, BR inter city stock would be in the red & blue that the Research Department stock carried-I always thought this looked far smarter than blue & grey.

If going for electric lighting though, why not fit a sealed beam headlamp at the front, as well?

6 minutes ago, U36B said:

 

Well, the Mk1 did breed and by 1971:

 

Fascinating, looks like an exhibition train. Mk2b(?) M3168, Mk1 DW150353.

On 15/04/2024 at 14:33, leopardml2341 said:

The linked (German) site has an update as of 01/04 which reads.....

 

Re: Englischer Wagen

geschrieben von: kentishman

Datum: 01.04.24 20:49

Weitere Kommentare (ohne Übersetzung) aus der Newsgruppe BrCoachingStock, wo das Foto ausgiebig diskutiert wurde:

1. The September 1956 Railway Observer has a couple of paragraphs concerning "BR standard coach BCK W21164" which "has recently been to the Continent for trials concerning riding of vehicles". (Wagennummer und -Typ schon hier erwähnt.)

2. Keith Parkin, Supplement to his BR Mark 1 Coaching Stock book, relating to the ride quality of BR1 bogies:Page 26 - “E S Cox informed the institute of Locomotive Engineers that, in new condition, this bogie produced an excellent ride; it astounded both its owners and continental administrations when it came out near the top in competition with the best European designs in a series of very carefully conducted riding trials in 1956-7 over French and German tracks under the auspices of O R E.”
(Allerdings ganz erstaunlich: bei uns war der BR1-Drehgestell für schlechte Laufqualität berühmt!)

Last line translates to something like "The BR1 bogie was famous for poor ride quality!"

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

There was, in 1919, a plan put forward by a Mr A.W. Gattie for an improved method of goods handling, known as the 'Gattie transport system', which I've not found very much out about but would appear to have been some form of containerisation. it attracted enough attention to be the subject of a parliamentary inquiry, with a report published in December 1919. In a parliamentary debate, it was claimed that ' that the North-Eastern Railway Company asked Mr. Gattie to inspect their Hull Station and report on the possibility of installing his system there, and that Mr. Gattie reported that it would be necessary to clear away the existing station, thereby involving a capital outlay which the North-Eastern Railway could not undertake?' [https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1919-07-17/debates/724ebbb0-49cf-4f28-a666-a88f1a719fd9/GattieTransportSystem]

 

 

It also completely ignores the subtleties of the coal industry: that many small communities required relatively small quantities of several different types of coal, from different seams within one coalfield and from different coalfields. Such small communities, or the coal merchants who served them, could not afford to have money tied up in large stockpiles of coal. One man could unload an 8-ton wagon in a day's work, hence avoiding demurage charges; the wagon would be back on its way to the colliery within a couple of days of arrival. It would take the same man a whole week to unload a 50 ton wagon which would be out of circulation for that length of time, tying up capital unproductively. How could that possibly be more efficient?

 

What it all comes down to is that these big mineral engine fantasies depend on the MGR principle of operation, with a single large colliery supplying a single large customer. That was achieved in the 1970s, the customer being the CEGB, but by that time steam was dead. The conversion to electricity, with the National Grid, ought to have gone hand in hand with railway electrification - that's where governments chose to muddle through rather than tackling the problem.

 

But I remember those MGR trains thundering through the centre roads at Oxford station in the 1980s, Class 56 roaring away at the head. A better engine for the job than any Mountain you can devise.

This is true, and pre-national grid, coal fired power stations tended to be smaller, more localised affairs feeding a town, or several feeding a city, not big multi-MW affairs feeding large geographical areas, with a voracious appetite for coal.

Point is, it's a big scenario with lots of interdependent moving parts with complex relationships-you can't just look at one part of it and say "bigger engines", or "bigger wagons".

I think @rockershovel is right-Britain just wasn't big enough to justify changing the relationship between all those interdependent systems.

Imaginary locomotives like that really need imaginary railways to run on, so let's suppose that the two London - Scotland routes had, after the grouping mandated the use of

1. auto couplers of the US Janney type, which are stronger than conventional UK couplings
2. fully fitted freight trains

This reduces, possibly eliminates the need for slow, unfitted goods trains, limited in length due to coupling strength and loop size. Then there might be the work for such large, powerful locos.

Of course this would require a seismic shift in how coal traffic was handled-the tens of thousands of short wheelbase 10/12t coal wagons, largely privately owned, would have to go, and be replaced with fully fitted, preferably bogie wagons of say 50t capacity. This would require changing colliery & distribution yard track layouts to accommodate longer wheelbase wagons.

All this would require the cooperation of colliery owners and coal merchants, which is why it didn't happen. 

Then there is the tens of thousands of general merchandise vans, many of which were railway owned,  but still had to negotiate short radius curves in the thousands of small goods yards across the country.

So it would really require a concerted effort on the part of all the railways, colliery owners, coal merchants and other general merchandise carriers.  This requires government action, and this is another reason why it didn't happen. We preferred to just muddle through rather than tackle the problem.

Even if it had, I still somehow doubt there would be the traffic to justify a fleet of fast powerful 4-8-2's.

So they are running Mk1's with doors that don't operate and toilets that do, that passengers can't sit in, with mk2's with doors that do operate, and toilets & air con that doesn't, that passengers can sit in. One might ask what's the point? Is this to avoid fitting retention toilets in the MK2 stock, or fitting CDL in the MK1 stock? Or are they just trying to make a point?

They look more and more like the sad old drunk trying to pick a fight with anyone who comes close.

Ah yes of course .... Possibly self unloading cargo?

2 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

So ... FWIW, today's Jacobite report :

 

MkI doors locked out of use; MkIIs CDL fitted.

 

No seating allowed in the MkIs, but you can walk through. They really are towing empty coaches about.

 

Everybody in MkIIs; obviously fully booked.

Florence and her stewards patrolling, dissuading folks standing in vestibules taking photos through D/L windows. 

 

Those toilets in use on MkIs are retention tank fitted (they were last year - paid for by Net Rail). Didn't check whole train, but MkII toilets I saw were either locked out of use or 'do not use in station'(!?)

 

More to follow...

That seems like a laughably half @$$ed solution.

On 24/04/2024 at 14:28, Sitham Yard said:

Variation on buffer stops. End loading/unloading Melton Mowbray 2016.My photos.

I wonder what was unloaded there?

46 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

At times, the two machines on the Chiltern tunnels were getting 30 metres per day,each, double their design speed. 

 

There is some fantastic engineering going on. 

 

Jamie

That would equate to boring Chipping Sodbury tunnel in around 3 months, all other things being equal. It took something like 3 years back in 1897.

On 22/04/2024 at 17:12, jamie92208 said:

4 of the 5 TBM;s have phoned home today.

 

Sushilla on Northolt north has now completed 60% of her dive and is going at over 13m per day.   Caroline is a bit slower and is at 55% on 12m per day.   Emily on Northolt south is now at 205m and is starting to get speed up.   Anne, her partner in crime is at 53m so her tail will still be mainly in the open.  Mary Anne at Bromford seems to be having a go slow at just 4m in the last 15 days and is at 1980.

 

Jamie

Interesting reading these reports of tunnelling progress in the modern era. Looking at a book on the GWR Badminton line, which was built between 1897 & 1904 from Wootton Bassett to Stoke Gifford, the rate of progress was reported in Sodbury tunnel to be 5 yds per week, and in the shorter Alderton tunnel at 27 yds per month.

Point is, to be familiar  with using non-CDL fitted slam door stock, you have to be at least in your 30's, and then only in certain parts of the country.

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

 

InterCity made a concerted effort to fit all their stock with CDL by 1994 - a fact which was greatly helped by the introduction of fixed formations with DVTs / DBSOs limiting the number of stock which required fitment.

 

Of course with the traditional / unmodified HST fleet having only relatively recently been withdrawn from InterCity routes they were in fact one of the last of the former BR sectors to get rid of slam doors.

 

Network SouthEast didn't have the option to fit CDL to its huge fleet of Mk1 EMUs (particularly as they were well overdue for replacement) so passengers on many London commuter routes had to wait until privatisation started delivering new stock - and in some cases that was quite a drawn out affair with slam door units lasting well into the first decade of this century.

 

What was Regional railways made a good start with the replacement of 1st Gen DMUs by Pacers and Sprinters - but their problem was there simply wasn't enough new units built so you did get some 1st gen units or loco hauled stock limping on into the post privatisation era until TurboStar DMUs started arriving in substantial numbers.

So, to be used to using slam door stock on your own, not as a child with an adult opening the doors for you, you'd have to be say about 10-12 in about 2005, which would put you early 30's now. To be used to using non-CDL fitted slam doors on the mainline,  you'd have to be about the same age in about 1992, so 44-ish now.

So there will be plenty of parents of say 7-15 year old now who will have little if any experience of slam door stock, and possibly a few grand parents as well. That's exactly what one of the prime markets of the Jacobite will be-parents of kids who are HP fans.

5 minutes ago, SR71 said:

I'm in my 4th decade and remember slam door stock coming through East Croydon although admittedly I was sub 5. All the doors opening on a still moving train made a lasting impression!

You might remember seeing it as a toddler, but to be used to using it in everyday service you'd have to be 5-10 years older.

15 minutes ago, Reorte said:

When did all the Mk3s end up with it? I didn't think they were built like that and it was quite a late add-on, but I'm probably completely wrong.

Early 1990's I think. So 30 years ago, and to be used to them as a traveller you'd have to be in your 40's now.

1 hour ago, Nick C said:

That doesn't always work though - you can easily end up in "Think of the children" situations (especially when the more excitable media get involved) - just look at the various attempts on a regular basis to regulate the internet - It's easy for a paper or politician to say "let's ban the kind of encryption the bad guys are using", but you first need to listen to the experts when they point out that what's being demanded is impossible...

 

 

Exactly - the last slam-door stock in regular mainline use was withdrawn 20 years ago - a very large proportion of the population will never have come across them...

I think you'd have to be at least 30 to have experience of slam door stock in mainline service, at least 40 for that stock not to be CDL fitted, and probably in your 6th decade to have experienced a mainline railway where slam door stock without CDL was the norm.

34 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

  22 hours ago, GrumpyPenguin said:

Parents are also responsible for keeping their brutes under control & out of danger.

Parents may well be responsible, but does the "brute" deserve death or serious injury because of the negligence of another person misusing a door, or from a malfunctioning door? 

Anyone who thinks that it is not worth trying to mitigate that risk needs to take a look at themselves.

I'm all for personal responsibility, but time and again real world experience proves that it is not enough.

7 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

CDL was introduced for one very simple reason - it would remove an unregulated, irrational, decision process from the control of train doors, i.e. it would stop human beings doing something they shouldn't do and opening a door at the wrong time.   In consequence it would reduce the number of deaths which occurred every year due to the lack of something to prevent human beings stupidly hurting or killing themselves and others.  And somebody probably also put the usual method of costing such a step in improving safety against the cost of lives saved.

I think this is probably the most succinct explanation of the need for CDL that i have seen. It is a fact that people cannot be trusted to alway act sensibly, within the rules and with consideration for others. And it is a fact that equipment (I.e. manual door locking mechanisms) can an do fail. CDL, whilst I am sure not infallible, adds an extra layer of protection against either misuse or malfunction of slam doors. We need to remember that not all "door incidents" were caused by numpties who deserved to be removed from the gene pool.

The argument that "No-one has thus far been killed or injured" (ttbomk) on the WHL steam excursions is, as has been stated above, a shoal of red herrings. There is nothing special about that line or the trains that makes it exempt; rather, the opposite. The associations with the Harry Potter films, the fact that it stops on Glenfinnan viaduct, and the fact that a large proportion of passengers will be there for the Harry Potter connections (and therefore not necessarily familiar with trains, let alone slam door trains), makes it a matter of time before something untoward happens.

On 21/04/2024 at 22:06, Colin_McLeod said:

Maybe not visually looking like a model, but here is a prototype track cleaning vehicle. 

 

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/zZ1PFXXcCTKKRf6T/

 

Serious question - why would you do that on the real railway? Something to do with keeping track circuits working in a particular location?

And whose common sense are we talking about? The general public? Are they supposed to understand about line speeds and traffic density, and behave accordingly? 

Common sense is such a vague, undefinable quantity that it cannot be used to govern rules about safety critical situations. You only have to spend 5 min behind the wheel of a car or on a bike to see that most people don't use their "common sense". They just do whatever requires the least thought and the least effort.

26 minutes ago, BoD said:

That is fair enough if it were only you involved and happy to take the risk.  Others (the majority?) might prefer to have mitigations put in place to reduce that risk. I know you were speaking in more general terms, but  I wouldn’t like to be the one hit by a moving open door because someone else found fitting CDL ‘obnoxious’.

Or indeed having to be the unfortunate person having to scrape human remains from track, platforms, carriage sides etc.

9 hours ago, Morello Cherry said:

CDL not only helps protect passengers but also staff, it says something about WCR that they don't really seem to care about their own staff being injured by open doors.

 

Did the industry ever produce any figures showing how many railway staff going about their duties were killed or injured due to the misuse of, or malfunctioning of, slam doors?

5 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

I apologise if I’ve missed it in the 70 odd pages on here, but how many people have been injured in the 40 years of running steam on the West Highland?

Something like 5 deaths per year nationwide, and dozens of injuries, during the first 10 or so years, up to about 1994, from when the majority of pasenger trains started to have some flavour of power operated doors, or manual doors under the control of CDL.