phil-b259

The other thing to consider in all this is the implications of Brexit. Once we leave the EU we will no longer be bound by the interoperability directives and would be free to do what we liked with regards platform heights. However until we have actually left, the designers of HS2 are legally bound to obey such directives.

I believe that platforms on the East London Line and Crossrail are also set at 1100mm precisely to allow level boarding. As you say this is incomparable with the clearances required by freight trains, but as neither of the aforementioned lines are going to carry such traffic it was not a problem. HS2 is also being designed for high speed passenger trains so the higher platform height is a logical continuation of this. It presents no fundamental issues with regard to rolling stock although when classic compatibles are using the classic network, there will be be a step up from platform to train.

When you post statements like this I have to ask whether you have been living under a rock for the past 10 years. Whether you regard HS2 as the optimal solution or not*, the statics PROVE that our existing railway lines are running out of capacity. For example a recent thread for example highlighted overcrowding on the XC core, yet stock lengths cannot be increased due to the need to platform share at Birmingham New Street. HS2 will allow very long, high capacity trains on the Birmingham - Sheffield / Leeds / NE axis to take some of the load away from XC thus mitigating the inability to extend the train lengths significantly. While obviously this does not, on its own, justify HS2, it remains part of the body of deviance showing how HS2 will be of benefit to travellers in the future. *Other solutions are of course available, but have repeatedly been rejected after through evaluation - however if you wish to advocate one of them instead of HS2 then please go ahead and do so. What is not acceptable is to stick your head in the sand and pretend that the underlying capacity issues - as alluded to by the SOS at his party - conference do not exist. As for ground works - it rather depends on what you mean. Any large scale works should indeed need to wait for the relevant legislation to be passed by Parliament, however things like taking soil core samples or making measurements are pretty non invasive things which do no harm and whose cost is minimal compared to the amount of money required simply to bring any large scheme (be it a road, airport or railway) to the stage were it can be presented to Parliament.

You will not see a company supplying points components to Network Rail referring to 'frogs'. The term means nothing to UK railway engineers and does not appear in any of the company standards. As such the reaction of most is that frogs are amphibians that live in ponds and have nothing to do with railways*. If a manufacturer comes along to NR and tries to sell them a "cast manganese steel crossing" on the other hand everybody will know exactly what the manufacturer is selling. What they might be called in the USA - as interesting as it is has very little relevance to the UK prototype, which is what Peco are attempting to represent in this product. *As an aside - you will not find any references to 'bulbs' in UK railway standards / catalogues either. Bulbs are things that you plant in your garden to grow flowers from - the things that emit light are always refereed to as lamps (be they LED, filament, paraffin, etc)

Let me assure you the term 'frog' does not appear in ANY UK track standards - past (Railtrack, British Rail, etc) or present (Network Rail), nor switch / crossing manufacturers catalogues / discussion papers / meetings or anything else to do with British Railway operations. I believe the same is true in the rest of Europe too - though I naturally am unable to check personally. The fact that the USA may use the term 'frog' on its prototype is interesting (and may indicate how the term migrated itself into the vocabulary of British modellers), but the fact remains that in this thread we are discussing Peco's representation of British track. As such we should be referring to its components by their correct UK terms and not start applying Americanism where it is inappropriate.

Hmm...... anyone else spot a problem developing here Yes I know they are probably measuring up the tail cable for size - but I have in the past come across contractors attempting to actually install a cable in such a fashion.

Pointwork. On the real railway, the two rails that move are know as 'switch rails', the fixed rails are called 'Stock Rails' and where one rail intersects another, the resulting piece of metal is called a 'crossing' - the modellers tern for this (the 'frog') being an invention by them and never used on the real railway. Combining different quantities of these elements is how we end up with ALL points / crossings. Thus the Permanent way engineers use the term 'Switches & Crossings (S&C) to describe pointwork. A bog standard end of points will consist of 2 switches and one crossing - while a bog standard diamond crossing actually consists of 4 crossings, but no switches.

Yes they are - or to be precise about it, the ORR expect charter operators to actively take steps to prevent it. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your point of view) the recent West Coast Railways saga means the ORR are taking particular interest in charter operations and have made it clear action will be taken over non compliance. While history has only recorded two fatalities (including the recent one at Balham) from people with their heads outside the carriage coming into contact with things, that is two too many as far as the ORR are concerned. While obviously the RAIB inquiry into Balham is on going its not inconceivable that stock operating past a certain deadline* will require window bars over the droplights or restrict the amount the window opens and be fitted with internal door handles plus a robust central door locking system** to prevent people the opening while the train is in motion. * The HSTs are the final remaining example of front line trains which require fully opening droplights so as to allow passengers to lean out and open the doors. Once they have been replaced with IEPs / refurbished for use in Scotland, the only trains with opening droplights will be charters or stuff used on a spot hire basis - which makes things easier for the ORR as no franchised operators would be affected. Hence the Tornado team looking ahead to the future and anticipating the stance the ORR may take in the future. ** Please remember that the only reason low tech (as in bog standards garden gate style bolt fitted to the inside of the door) type of secondary door locking is only permitted is due to the fact that (1) All passengers have an allocated seat (so thus won't be standing in vestibules - unless queueing for the toilet) and (2) there are a high number of stewards who can patrol the train and prevent persons loitering near them. As to the loss of common sense - its called progress. At one time sending children down the mines as thought to be perfectly fine, and no doubt there were plenty of people who didn't have a problem with that and bemoaned legislation stopping it. Or how about the fact that until recently it was thought to be absolutely fine to have train toilets that discharged raw sewage all over the track, the underside of the train and anyone who happened to be lineside. Yes as time gets on the gains from enhanced H&S get smaller - because you progressively remove the most dangerous situations - and thus end up with ever diminishing returns, however that doesn't mean you should sit back and say 'jobs done'. India may well still allow you to hang out of the Window, but its safety record is a LOT worse than in the UK - which should be of far more of a concern than whether you can stick your head out of a window.

Firstly given events at Balham a couple of months ago, loitering in vestibules is a big no no - and even with the internal doors open you won't hear much if you were sitting towards the centre of he carriage with the droplights down. The window glass is however not integral to the strength of a Mk3 - ir any other train come to that so can quite easily be replaced with windows incorporating a hopper style opening section at the top. Who knows, you might be able to get hold of some second hand if leasing companies begin scraping the likes of the 317s (which are simply a shortened Mk3 body, with the same sized windows I believe)

Can we have some more info as to how easy it is to get into the cab to fit loco crew. While the parts list implies it should be straight forward, actually having such info printed in the instructions would leave no doubt about the matter.

You won't get those tiny screws in Homebase - or any other DIY shop either. If you can find out the exact type then it may be some of the more specialist model retailers would have something available - but I would say the best bet is to get in touch with Hornby. They should be able to say exactly what screw is needed and may be able to supply one too.

To be fair if the A1 group can pull it off then there is no excuse for other charter operators following suit. The proposed spec includes:- The yet-to-be named new train will set new standards in a railtour market long dominated by difficult to maintain 60 years or older vehicles. As with all modern trains, it will be equipped with air conditioning, central door locking, controlled emission toilets, power at seat and persons with restricted mobility facilities. The passenger vehicles will also all be fitted with opening windows so those travelling can still experience the sound of Tornado working hard more clearly should they wish to do so and consideration is being given to equipping them with Wi-Fi. Although the final formation of the train is yet to be determined, it will include kitchen car(s) to enable high quality meals to be delivered to 250 First Class Dining passengers, a new support coach which will provide accommodation for the support crew and the locomotive’s day-to-day spares and consumables and a service vehicle with generator and staff accommodation. The train will also carry sufficient additional water to extend Tornado’s range to around 200 miles. The refurbished train is expected to enter service towards the end of 2019.

One obvious flaw - with water cranes the leather bag / pipe / hose has to actually go inside the tender / tank. This means if you cut it short enough to allow your motorised arm to swing over the filler it will look a bit silly when its not in use - but leave it long and your motorised arm will just be banging on the side of the loco / tender. then of course there is the little matter that locos are different sizes - so if you plan to have more than one type wanting water a shortened hose might leave a big gap between it and the tank / tender. So all in all not terribly practical idea for a true model - although the gimmick factor will no doubt ensure healthy sales.

Re the pipework - yes it is stuck to both the chasis under the cabs and the body under the side tanks. Together round the problem I made a discrete cut to the pipework between the body / chassis which allowed the body to be removed. Re-the speedo cable - the screw connecting it to the wheel has to be removed or again, a discrete cut in the speedo cable made which can be re-glued afterwards. You need to be extremely carefull in handling the body / chassis as it is very easy to snap the pipework while disengaging the two, or even working on them. To make matters worse the pipework, being factory fitted is not available as a spare - if you break it you will need to repair it off your own back. In short while Bachmann did a fine job in modelling the prototype correctly, it's a pig to take apart plus has LOTS of fragile detail. You tamper with it at your peril.

I believe it depends to some extent on the location of the tramway. The first thing to remember is that on sections shared with pedestrians or other motorised vehicles (or where they run alongside the same with no fencing securing the tram tracks from trespassers), trams are treated by law as if they were Buses. Thus trams are fitted with indicators and brake lights as per cars, and if an accident were to occur then it would be processed using motoring driving offences. Such sections do not usually have signalling as such - while their are tram signals associated with facing points and traffic lights, the onus is on the driver of the tram to ensure they can stop in the distance they can see to be clear. It therefore follows that Policing for on road sections is the responsibility of the territorial force concerned - in Manchester's case GMP On segregated fenced in alignments, were the public are trespassing if they go onto the track, then railway rules apply allowing higher speeds combined with a propper signalling system and while this in theory makes the BTP the relevant authority, in practice many operators will probably continue to make arrangements with the local police force instead. This mirrors the approch of most (if not all) heritage railways where the local force is the Policing authority. This may in part be an attempt to cut costs as the BTP is mostly funded by the railway industry itself through levy charged on those who make use of it and unlike regular TOCs, whose trains usually pass though numerous Policing authorities, a small system while within a single Police authority doesn't need the flexibility the BTPs remit provides

Which it will continue to do ad-infinitum. Microsoft have long since dropped any support for OS versions earlier than Windows 7 and rewritten the Windows Update software / web pages such that as such earlier versions of Windows will not be able to update themselves, however much they try. If you are lucky Microsoft may still have the various service packs available elsewhere on their site which you may be able to manually download and apply, or alternatively you may find the necessary updates now being hosted on various 3rd party update sites (which obviously comes with a risk that the software could have been tampered with or include viruses, etc). Either way the onus is clearly on you to do the digging plus of course no further updates will be issued so the security of the machine will continue to be compromised more and more as time goes by. Of course if the Vista machine is never connected to the internet and all files are scanned before bing transferred across then the risks of security issues is minimal.

Quite possibly they did (get to Reading in that is). The North Downs line is a bit curious in that up till grouping, it could be considered to be similar to the likes of the SMJR as an oddity in the LSWR dominated area. As such under the SR any SECR influenced would have diminished with the western section taking charge - not that disimilar to the GWR removing SMJR influences and replacing them with their own products.

They may have done - but it would not be a normal state of affairs. After grouping pre Maunsell ex SECR products rarely ventured west of the BML and ex LSWR products rarely ventured East of the same. Post 1959, phase 1 of the Kent Coast electrification may have released some H class tanks - but by that stage North Downs trains were in the hands of Maunsell moguls and Horsham duties were covered by M7s

Moves are well underway to fit the international platforms and approaches at Ashford with the KVB system of train protection so as to allow the new Eurostar (and other similarly HS2 compliant) stock to cal there. Ironically however, most of the money came from the very body the UK voted to leave back in the Spring (via some sort of grant towards rail interoperability across the EU IIRC)

True* - but with possessions, TOCS (and presumably FOCS) are the first to complain if things overrun or if the possession is booked for longer than is absolutely necessary. There was a lot to do in the Banbury job - hence why NR got on with demolishing Banbury South ASAP rather than carefully taking it down bit by bit (as demanded by lots of enthusiasts). The big problem is the tendency for things to 'drop off the radar once a signalling project is commissioned - as the signalling designers / project mangers tend to treat it as 'job done' once their new toys are up and working correctly. Removing redundant equipment (just as with routine maintenance) is simply not 'sexy' enough for the high ups to really be concerned with. Its also tends to be labour intensive (another incentive not to do it) Its not just railways that suffer from this though - Highways England can be just as bad about leaving stuff lying about. * And as a NR track worker, scrap or redundant equipment abandoned beside or within the 4ft because 'there hasn't been time to recover it' for years (currently got over a mile of scrap rail that has been sitting in the 4ft for over 4 years now 'awaiting recovery' - and occasionally damaging our signalling kit) is a big problem for us, even within NR

I believe that most Bulleid stock fell into the SOBT (Semi Open Brake Third), TO (Third Open) categories rather than the traditional BSK and SK types. Bachmann produce (in old tooling) the SOBT, CK and SO thus covering the variants produced in the largest quantities

Taking advantage of a road closure for Level crossing resurfacing to renew a barrier boom side arm (Apologies to Reigate residents for the traffic chaos) Lots of other work going on today at Redhill in the possession too (not pictured) including crossing renewals, IBJ renewals and sleeper renewals in the complex pointwork to the south of the station plus new signalling cables being run in as part of the Platform zero project. The tamping has been deferred to later as rail temperatures were reaching at least 35 degrees in the sunshine and there is too much risk of causing buckles to appear in such conditions.

The Felixstowe container trains are pretty much all going to go via the Bacon Factory curve in future and head across via Ely - Crossrail has seen to that. As such more passenger paths may become available, or it could be the new franchise are planning to do cleaver things with splitting and joining trains at Ipswich / Colchester. With the bulk of the regional fleet being Bi-mode and all from the same family of units there is lots of new flexibility which can be exploited.

To an extent train maintenance is not something you can plan to the nth detail. If reliability is a bit better than average and no tricky faults turn up then it may be that maintenance is completed ahead of schedule leading to a surplus of units. On the other hand if say there is a bout of sickness leading to staff shortages at the depot and you get a load of failures turn up all at once - or a collision / vandalism, etc means something takes longer to fix, it could be there is a shortfall of units. Equally in a situation where extra stock is needed to cover for a failure - it may be possible to send a unit out half finished and catch up later. So in the case you mention - there are lots of reasons why it may have been possible for LM to come up with a spare unit, seemingly 'on spec' - to know the truth you need to be privy to the relevant control / Fleet logs of the TOC. In general though, long gone are they days of having stock just sitting round 'in case' - the 313s being a case in point. The original BR order was so generous that there were enough available (after some timetable revisions on the GN section) for NSE to redeploy some on the North London Line and the Watford DC lines as well as their intended home. The same will not be true of their replacements on the Moorgate route.

Maybe that because there aren't any to be had - routine maintenance cannot simply be skipped because a show at the NEC is attracting more users than normal. On some occasions TOCs can strengthen services - but that needs months of advance notice and careful attention to fleet management so as to jiggle things to give maximum fleet availability - without jeopardising the weekday peak periods either side. The railway is a complicated beast - and just as passengers may criticise track workers for standing about doing nothing as they past (hint - your train might be getting in the way), criticising a TOC for not providing longer trains based only on your observations is a tad unfair as you are not seeing the full picture.