Etched Pixels

main line electric traction and suggests some design parameters. (see: http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/images/4/49/Er18900613.pdf ).  Crompton designed small 4-wheel locomotives for the London underground but these would be inadequate for main-line use.

From 1905 the  District Railway had pairs of short (26')  BO-BO locos for hauling LNWR trains (and later used for some circle services and to haul LTSR/LMS through services). They rain in pairs back to back and delivered 1600hp off 8 200hp motors. They were actually quite spacious inside, the length as much as anything being the space needed to make the bogies both fit.

They were also clerestory roofed

Interesting comparison

http://lurs.org.uk/documents/pdf09/oct/district_electric_trains.pdf‎

(Sorry you'll have to type the URL by hand, rmweb is in stupid mode and keeps randomly splitting it up)

Sorry, but I cannot let that go unchallenged. If future rail passenger traffic growth continues as forecast, reopening the LSWR route throughout (Okehampton and Tavistock may well already be rail served by then) may be the best option for freeing up capacity on the Dawlish route, e.g. for more local trains.

And this is precisely why any decision about routes will be longer term and rigorously analysed. The economics of delays and closures will get turned into models, the risk assessments on the coastal route will get turned into actual numbers and values and costs. The local service benefits will be computed and so forth.

It's also entirely possible at the end of this the answer will be none of the current three obvious proposals.

Pulling traffic off the roads is not always a win either. The civil service likes to factor in losses in fuel tax revenue as an anti- to building the railway!

The BBC report as well as covering diversions also says

"Damage to the track at Dawlish means that the line between Exeter St Davids and Newton Abbot is not expected to reopen until mid April at the earliest, and in the meantime buses are replacing trains."

but it's not clear if that is also from Patrick Halligate or elsewhere.

Alan

I think 1960 was pretty unkind with flooding, too. After all, the Up Riviera leaving St Davids "up the bank" with a West Country on the front, and headed for Basingstoke, must have seemed a very black day. But at least the Somerset Levels were still drained then, I believe.

Drainage on the levels is fairly irrelevant this time (except as a political football). There have been a few years that were unusually wet, but the heavy rains and damage over the past few years (think through all the heritage railway slips just as a starter) have been quite exceptional in themselves, and this year is simply off the scale. The levels haven't received that much water since records began, and by a large margin. If it's a one off them you can just relay all the cables, curse and get on with it, but the evidence on the weather science side is that it's not, it's part of an extreme weather trend.

If the computer models continue to show this is likely to become a new "normal" winter then there will have to be yet more major (and very expensive) work at all the known flooding problem spots, and many of the "doesn't quite flood" locations which will all become 'floods all the time' spots - Exeter, Dovey Junction, Yeovil, Quakers Yard, and so forth.

Time to spend the HS2 money on something a bit more sensible.

Alan

Only if the entire Dawlish - Teignmouth coast, to a width of (say) 100 yards disappeared into the sea, never to return, do I think that the inland route would attract a positive business case...!

In a sense there is probably a positive business case because already its an expensive piece of line to maintain, and global warming won't make it get any cheaper. There is also significant work going to be needed by the 2030s anyway. Viewed in the long term there is probably already a business case for moving the line inland (as opposed to via Tavistock) simply because that will cut the year on year repair bill, somewhat improve service reliability and lay the basis for electrification.

Pity we scrapped the 76's they'd have been good on the Devon banks ;-)

Alan

3- If the LSWR route were to be reopened and used as a diversionary route, I would feel much happier with the associated reversals, or even a change of trains, than I am with the idea of a substitute bus - if I want to use a bus I'll pay bus fares!

Big assumption is that they would bother. We have perfectly good diversionary routes here that involve a reverse and some hassle so FGW runs buses instead of diverting their trains. If there was an Tavistock diversion I imagine FGW would run busses instead of using it. So to "fix" the problem you've also got to fix the train operators.

Alan

Network Rail video - I didn't previously know the line at Bridgewater was tidal ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=b9X-FT1MXrQ

Alternatively, if all the posters that had contributed useful and informative posts got together with buckets and spades to fill in the gaps in this thread, your post wouldn't exist!

Apologies for the cynicism - I haven't had enough coffee yet.

Roughly speaking that is how Indian Railways tackles some of these kind of problems in Monsoon season. But in rural areas of India labour is cheap and plentiful so hiring half the local villagers to fill a hole with rocks works.

The debate about the route is rather like the debate about dredging on the levels. It may or may not have been a good idea, but in neither case is it the quick fix option. You have to fix it as best you can, learn and move on. For the new route (or for other clever fixes) you've then got time to cost it all and plan it properly.

I wonder if Dawlish Station could be put in a giant plastic bubble for example - or even the entire section of line be covered by a giant plastic pipe. Keep the view but keep the waves off ;-)

 We don't do 'back of a fag packet' in NR.

At least not since FGW changed livery ;-)

Your updates and insight are much appreciated btw.

Not in Cornwall, They're too steep.

Steep is fine (with a bit of levelling), modern trains do steep better than corners.

The long term weather predictions are a currently continuous series of storms until at least the end of February and quite possibly longer. Indeed this may be a new "normal" mode of wather for a UK winter. That isn't going to speed up repair either.

I don't think the "don't rebuild it option" is real - there's a small matter of nuclear goodies for the boys in Devonport, especially if the Scots leave the union. Moving it might be in the longer term. The costs go up year on year, the number of delays and lack of service days goes up year on year. The cliffs get more and more unstable.

At some point it's going to be cheaper to fix it properly.

The good new is Eric Pickles is now in charge of dealing with the floods, and I can't help thinking he'd fit that breach in the sea wall quite nicely ;-)

If it won't straighten I'd be tempted to paint it as recently bashed. Plenty of freight wagons appear to be considerably out of shape and it's rarely modelled!

Hi Alan,

 

Thanks for that. I've certainly mentioned that the centre springs should be helical, and asked them to raise the bottom of the bogie to give greater rail clearance, and raise the axle box mouldings so they line up with the ends of the axles. If they make the changes requested it should look ok I feel.

 

Cheers

 

Ben

I think so (well move the springs out a bit too) - some of the rest of the problem is down to wheel sizes, flanges and clearances and not really that fixable in N RTR.

Alan

Battery boxes look mostly better - but with a new oddity - the back of the battery boxes looks a bit weird. Looks like someone has now gone and hollowed it out. That's going to look a bit odd when you see the underframe from an angle.

Bogies look way better but I agree they don't seem to be quite right. Is it stretched to try and force the axles lower so that the wheel clears the solebars on curves ? In some ways its hard to tell when comparing with photographs at similar angles because the bogies are excessively wide so all the reference points are different. I am pretty sure the bottom of the bogie and the bottom of the springs is way too close to the rails however.

Having a close look at pictures of the real bogies it looks like its stretched horribly in the bottom area but not high up. How much of that is the incorrect wheel size and N clearances forcing the breaking of the bogie I don't know. The springs seem wrong too - there is no spiral on them and someone has added an as far as  I can see completely imaginary tapering cone to the bottom that just isnt present that way in reality. They also have the bar across at the bottom of the imaginary bit.

The springs in the centre should have

plate

about 3.5/4 turns of spring coil

lower plate

small section below which is a kind of tapering cone (but not like the one there)

Another obvious spot the bogie is putting the bogus into bogie is below the axle box

If you look at photos of K41s the gap under the axlebox where you can see through to the wheel is rectangular, on the model that whole area is so warped its square!

Gauging by the door in Fig 376 of Russell (Great Western Coach Appendix v2, p158) the springs are also much too close together. The distance between the outside of the springs on the photo is about 9mm, and of the door a bit over 8.5. Now while the door is a shade nearer, its a flat on image. The springs in the centre of the model are too close together.

Thats rather nice - echoes some of the foreign locos a little

I do think you need to streamline the tender to match ?

Ah yes found the one I was thiking of..

NSW 3801...

I did try 3D printing a Dalek but while there are various models of them none seem to scale down nicely for N.

Ooh those sunbathers must be cold... excellent stuff

Looking nice - I wonder if the innards of the Tomix track hoover would fit the railvac 8)

Bear in mind that for Royal Trains in the period it was not unknown to whitewash the coal...

Also of course be very careful interpreting images that included red lining - the photographic stock of the period can have more to do with the apparent visibility than dirt.

Alan

IMO there's a lot of scaremongering concerning coreless motors with a worm affixed directly to them

 

I wouldn't worry about it personally and I'm sure others would agree

 

Paul A.

I didn't worry about it on my B4. The Lawton motor bearings broke a couple of months later

So I would worry about it. It's only a case of having something each side of the worm to take thrust.

34theletter.. the question was

I've also been wondering what were the oldest main line steam locos in Britain during the final decade or so of steam.

But yes for the general case the oldest is the NLR steam crane tank 58865, although it spent that entire time at Bow Works, except for being trundled to Derby for scrapping.

Alan

51336 built 31/07/1877, rebuilt 1891, scrapped 30/11/1960

That must be a pretty good contender ?

Because there is so little available?

Not as far as I can tell. Most of them seem to be interested in "the railways when I was small" or "right now". Same to be honest the RTR folks say, same the heritage railway folks seem to say. Fortunately lots of fun pre-group stuff survived into the 1950s/60s !

Alan

As a small supplier I spend a lot of time talking to my customers. The simple truth is most of them don't model pre-grouping

Sometimes I forget the creative initiative railway modellers have for finding work-arounds. Adapting transfer lining is one I hadn't thought of Tony.  LNER white-black-white lining should be usable on any livery with similar lining such as the Caledonian and others.

Except for very fine lining you could equally just draw some (or get someone who can use a paint package to do it) and ask John Peck at Precision Decals to print you a sheet of it. His prices are basically by area and with careful thought you can get a lot of lining on a sheet providing you can cut straight.

I've also found vinyl cutters and the cuttable masking material interesting. You can accurately (0.1-0.2mm or so) cut a mask for painting bits. I have been experimenting and I have a badly painted N2 to test theory on by turning it from LNER to GNR. Just need the time as ever.