rodent279

On the subject of sounds playing for layouts at exhibitions, it is possible to live stream to a YouTube account, which bystanders can tune into and listen to via headsets.

What the BBC reports as "test" may not actually be a test.

Dies that mean it was largely a commuter railway?

Yep, I suppose if the WSR remained in BR ownership then a preserved S&D might be plausible. It would certainly give steam and diesel enthusiasts a spectacle!

I guess a preserved S&D of any reasonable length might come at the expense of another nearby real-life preserved line. Would there be room for a preserved S&D and the WSR, and the ESR, within an hour's drive of each other? Would they be able to compete for footfall, funding & volunteers?

Settle & Carlisle, right? Yep

None of it. It's not especially scenic, not in the same league of the S&C or the Cotswold line, just average southern England green fields,woods and rolling hills. Enthusiasts are attached to it, but its a Railway that never really served a purpose that couldn't be fulfilled by other routes, even if they are a little less direct.

Oh I think the idea of a Hughes-inspired 4-8-2 thumping along the WCML with a nice hefty payload is fascinating. But I guess the lesson is that it wasn't small locos that was the problem, it was our restricted infrastructure, and that extends to more than the physical bulk of it, it's the length of passing loops, radius of curves etc.

What, us Brits going abroad and leaving a mess? Never! We shan't admit it Carruthers, we shall carry on as if nothing had happened.

I'm sure it's been discussed before either on this thread, or on the Imaginary Railways thread, but it's interesting to imagine what a UK railway system with a loading gauge more like that on the European mainland would have evolved in terms of motive power? Even if we did have the larger loading gauge of our European friends, if we still retained the short goods loops and multiplicity of collieries, good yards etc., with sharp radius curves, and a large private owner wagon fleet wedded to the short wheelbase 4 wheel open or covered wagon with no continuous brakes, there's still little point in evolving impressive beasts like the French 4-8-2's, German Br01's, Br44's etc.

Use it while you can

Effectively a class 40, but a lot more modern looking, especially in the bogie area.

Wasn't large areas of forest removed to build Elizabeth's navy? And I guess later on a lot of forest was used for pit props.

Hadn't realised what a well travelled engine 563 is. Here it is in Toronto in 2011.

I'm OK with Belgian styling. Polish 3KV styling is ok as well. (Would be rather interesting seeing one of these exchange traffic with a WCML electric, at a multi- voltage Rugby, along the lines of Venlo.)

If we want Imaginary Locomotives for it, I'd have 3KV DC electrification with some Italian E428, E646 etc electric locos. Easy to make them dual voltage for compatibility with the MSW electrification. Imagine some of these thumping along on a freightliner, or on a Newcastle- Poole!

If a connection to the WCML at Rugby had been easier, then retention south to at least Banbury might have been useful, maybe even single track with passing loops. But was there ever enough traffic to justify it?

Originally, TF were orange seats.

But it was a North-South connection from the GC to the Midland, so southbound traffic coming off the Midland onto the GC would need to reverse, or a North -South connection built from the Midland to the GC.

But major upgrades of existing main lines carrying revenue earning traffic are not cheap, or easy, either. Edit: EWR is perhaps the nearest equivalent to our imaginary scenario of a freight only GC being upgraded to a passenger/high speed line, and that is effectively a new railway being built that just happens to be on an old formation. So the size of the task can be gauged from that.

No, and I'd be interested to know. Best I can suggest is a lengthy trawl through Flickr, noting the last dates white stripes appear, and the first dates they disappear. I'd guess a few lasted until the late 80's, possibly early 90's.

In other words, it's a hardware standard, not a software standard. So it's entirely possible to have two trains with identical coupler & MU jumpers that can physically couple, but can't talk to each other to operate in MU, or in some cases, even to brake each other. A bit like the RS232 computer peripheral standard-it is a hardware standard, not a software standard, so just because two devices had RS232 ports did not mean they could always talk to each other.

Class 68 & Nova sets next?

Can't help thinking that if that had been a viable proposal, it would have happened. The GC was a bit of a problem child though, because it didn't really connect to any other railways south of about Nottingham, all to way through to Woodford Halse. There were connections to the Midland at Loughborough (during/post ww2?), & at Leicester (sometime in the 1960's?), but these were not designed for the exchange of traffic in quantity. There was no connection to the LNW at Rugby, so overall, the opportunities for diverting significant quantities of freight traffic would have been limited. Remember also that the WCML electrification was intended to create a mixed-traffic electric railway, not a purely passenger one. The electric locos were designed to be equally at home on 100mph passenger as on 60-75mph freights, so there would have been a desire to do the opposite, and push freight traffic onto the WCML.

Didn't BR call it CEM - Component Exchange Maintenance? Which is how it should be really, diesels & electrics should not need complete strip down & rebuild every 5 years, like steam locos did.