Glorious NSE

Depends on your definition of "Down South" I guess - one has been working Felixstowe-Lawley St (via London) workings pretty regularly over the past months.

If that was true they wouldn't be able to do much of anything in this country!

Well, admittedly Reading to London down the Thames Valley isn't far off being flat (Brunel's engineering at work) - but Eastern Somerset definately isn't, and contrary to what the Great Western's advertising says the South West also has bad weather on occasion.

Agreed - but the current boss has only been in place a month or two so we'll see how that pans out. The "gone by Christmas" claims towards the start of the thread certainly didn't happen as we're still here! Some kind of heavyhaul presence in the fleet (beyond 6 loco's!) is needed anyhow, so it remains an issue that DBS's management have to deal with at some point - until then the patch and mend continues. Except that it shouldn't suffer - controlled wheelslip is part of the design as we've said above. Why can they handle a 4000t stone trains from Somerset to London on a daily basis irrespective of conditions but slip to a stand with a 2300t coal train? That makes no sense unless either: ( a ) they aren't working as they should ( b ) they aren't driven as they are designed to be driven - or ( c ) there is some other unknown factor at play

Nice Jo

A 59 is not at all like a 66 tech-wise though, the super creep system on the 59s is similar in effect to that you describe on the 60 but AFAIK unlike the 60 allows the wheel to enter a controlled slip (they call it wheel creep) under about 12mph, counter-intuitively the best adhesion is apparently just beyond the point (105-115%) where the loco starts slipping and the 59's are designed to hold the wheels in that sweet spot in low speed/high load/low traction situations. Or even reducing the power because the wheels start slipping?

All the published data i've seen suggests the 59/2 are actually geared the same as 59/0 and 59/1 though, the top speed allowed being more to do with the extra suspension dampers making a higher speed safe rather than different gearing to making a higher speed more likely - published specs seem to put gearing and T/E at the same across all three 59 types? http://www.therailwaycentre.com/New%20Loco%20Tech%20Data/Class59.html I'd be interested to know if any of the info on that link is wrong, there seems to be precious little out there on any tech differences between the batches. If they are the same it still begs the question of why they can't even handle a measly coal train in the North West.

Definately not conclusive, but hows this: http://ukrailrollingstock.fotopic.net/p28887754.html

Just to try and untangle, here's an update/expansion of a post I did on another thread, effectively in terms of the Cornish silver bullet flow there have been 3x generations of wagons involved, of which the Dapol one is the middle: TIA - Original "silver bullet" tank (1989) http://www.garethbayer.co.uk/wotw/displayimage.php?album=413&pos=2 ICA - Dapol's wagon (contrast to the TIA behind it in the pic - these were also circa 1989 built but not apparently used on the block train until the mid 1990s) http://www.garethbayer.co.uk/wotw/displayimage.php?album=293&pos=13[/url] TEA - Just to bring things up to date there was a 2003/04 build of brand new Imerys branded wagons which formed a third generation of silver bullets as seen in the earlier pics on the thread, the TIA had apparently moved on by this time but ICA could still be seen on the train mixed in with TEA and also working as standalone wagons. http://ukrailrollingstock.fotopic.net/p46201438.html The original TIA tanks have a much gentler vee shaped body and no conventional solebar frame, the ones Dapol are doing have a chunkier looking heavily vee'd tank with a conventional solebar frame. There is no kit or RTR model of the TIAs or TEAs in any scale AFAIK. ICA similar to Dapol's model (although with different branding) now work the version of the Irvine silver bullets that come through the tunnel from Holland, there are also flows within Scotland using the same ICAs. The ICA's also worked the Quidhampton flow before the modern TEA's (although back in the 80s there was a very random selection of other tanks on the duty!) As for the weathered version, here's a selection of my pics including some of the ICA's in their latter years of working from the South West, I reckon the "brown plus splatter" effect is pretty accurate, certainly one of the more convincing RTR weathering jobs out there & much better than the usual orange blast! http://ukrailrollingstock.fotopic.net/c1638692.html So in short, the real thing is not quite a go-anywhere-do-anything clay tank, but definately the most useful prototype to pick due to it's widespread usage, different paint schemes etc

Hmmm yes, these are the DBS maintained ones though not the somewhat carefully maintained Mendip pool of loco's...the super creep gear would certainly be non-standard kit for DBS to maintain...

No it won't. Which UK company can offer you a diesel where the "guts" have been in continuous incremental development for years (since the 1930s in "new broom" terms, or since the mid 1980s as directly comparable spec with the same series of engines) Which UK builder has tens of thousands of loco's working across the globe in every type of service from commuter trains to the most demanding of heavy haul duties, on terrain ranging from permafrost to desert, sea level to mountain range. EMD offered a loco straight from their tried and tested parts bin that they knew from years of continual experience would just come together and work - that experience, quantity of build and simplicity of design is what makes them cheaper rather than the exchange rate. No UK manufacturer has had years of continuous loco building experience since the 1960s, that's where to put the blame for the death of the UK loco building industry rather than "durned furriners". The "crumbs" that were ordered by BR (class 56, 58, 60) are nowhere near enough to support an industry over decades. Having said all of that - something that might theoretically change with the exchange rate though is where they are assembled...I thought with 250 machines on the cards from an early stage a UK production line might have been worthwhile. Anyhow, this US model railroader is hoping to get back to $2 to £1 days

Including some at the windows I think - this working always seems to have a window hanger or two!

I think it's an awesome idea - Freemo-type concepts are long overdue on the British scene. And yes, the benefit is that you aren't planning a mega-project that will be decades before you can see progress, but producing a number of smaller projects that are all acheivable in their own right and all usable individually or with the ability to be connected together has lots of advantages! I look forward to seeing this project develop.

Thanks Craig

Stretched Bachy TTA maybe?? Not the same by any means but it would get you a straight tank with leaf spring suspension!

As per Craig's pic/comments, the modern traffic uses straight barrel PCA's - there are also "Vee" tanks used only to Lynemouth - in model terms the Vee tanks are available RTR from Hornby so if you wanted a stand-in they might be do-able? Pics of both styles including some detail pics are at the following link, from a nice couple of hours at North Blyth a couple of years back - vee tanks are the ALCN112xx series, the straight barrel ones running to FW are the BAHS555xx series ones on the bottom of that page and onto the following one - there are a couple of late 80s pics from Gavin Judd in the collection as well which I believe were in the same train as the PAB shots linked to earlier, implying there was a crossover between the types not a quick switchover? : http://ukrailrollingstock.fotopic.net/c1262887_121.html Going off at a tangent for a mo, if anyone has decent pics of the "Rio Tinto" rebranded ones, either/both styles, i'm interested in them for the website, i'm unlikely to get that far north for a bit. Ta!

Interesting yes, but not an easy challenge to get the right effect of! Whilst I generally like micro layouts i'm not sure this is the kind of prototype that lends itself to that kind of thing! I think some terminals are much easier to photograph than others so by default get photographed more often, if you search for pics of Southampton Maritime and Millbrook terminals you will get loads of results, there should be some out there of Felixstowe also - here's three from a nice sunny day at Millbrook and one of Felixstowe North shot to be going along with. Millbrook (although a bit on the quiet side at the mo with the recession, it was even mothballed briefly) is easy to view from the platform/footbridge at Millbrook station. Maritime is viewable from the bridge accessing the port, you might get asked for ID there but enthusiasts are fairly common visitors as it also overlooks the small Freightliner maintainence depot there. Felixstowe North is shootable from public footpaths (and in fact a public footpath crosses all lines by the portakabin in the pic!) but for this shot you might need to do some work shoving through thorny bushes!

Very nice, and the SP&S (albeit in early BN guise) was one of the draws for me to get into US modelling, i've since moved East across the mountains to a midwestern theme, but SP&S alco's still does it for me. If anyone made a C636 i'd find it hard to resist. Loving that barge - anyone else notice the chequerplate "waves"

Ta for the corrections ref the hauliers. Their website reckons 1850 tractors and about 3000 trailers BTW, but that doesn't change the fact there's bigger fish out there... Another way of looking at it, to put the scale of potential out there I reckon there's in the region of about 300 Stobart group curtain side or reefer boxes out there(*)...so you could regard intermodal as equalling a little under 10% of the trailer fleet so far - plenty of room to grow that business! Having a traditional road haulier (yes I know, logistics provider) of such high profile taking rail seriously can't be bad for business either. (* TESU curtain side swaps seem to number a little over 200, the highest i've shot is #206...I reckon they probably need around 75 reefers for the Spanish train making assumptions that they are swapped at the UK end and not at the Spanish end where they have a couple of days at the moment)

There's a few international bulk flows via the tunnel now, china clay from Holland to Irvine (weekly), export steel from Scunthorpe to Ebange (Belgium?) which runs daily last time I looked - both of those I believe are DB Schenker trains throughout as is the Stobart reefer train from Spain I mentioned - that one is weekly at present but there's a lot of opportunity for developing it. Not sure what happens to the export steel coil from Margam the other side (Brian?) - not sure whether that's a similar international block train or whether it feeds into the SNCF wagonload network. With Stobart I believe being one of (if not the?) Europe's biggest hauliers there has to be more opportunity with that tie in. I'm told there's another domestic flow for Stobart on behalf of Coca Cola being trialled just today... So again, things are happenning. These aren't the kind of things that can happen overnight though, if they are existing flows in place with other operators or via other routes then there will be existing contracts in place and DBS will have to wait for those to be renegotiated before they get a chance at hitting them... Wagonload traffic is still the preserve of the national operator in each country (or their descendants) so until something can be done about opening that up to competition it won't get a lot better, although potentially in terms of the UK if you ended up with a big enough regular block between (for instance) Germany where DBS was the resident operator and the UK where they are also now the wagonload operator you could run a block train directly and short-circuit SNCF.

New DBS freight flows this year (new flows, not changes in FOC) - courtesy of the rolling list on the Freightmaster forum. - Sand from Angerstein to Lea Interchange (DBS) - Slag from Port Talbot to Lea Interchange (DBS) - coal from G-c-G to Onllwyn (DBS) - china clay from Aberdeen to Workington (DBS) - stone from Peak Forest to West Burton (DBS) - steel from Port Talbot to Dollands Moor (DBS) - MoD traffic to Donnington (DBS) - limestone from Hardendale to Port Talbot (DBS) - daily intermodal service from Thamesport to Birch Coppice (DBS) - daily intermodal service from Hams Hall to Mossend (DBS) Add - winning the Stobart/Tesco contract from DRS Add - winning a "one operator" contract for LaFarge which will see all their traffic move to DBS Add - winning the Humber oil traffic back Nope. DBS certainly can't be bothered to do anything in the UK anymore...

DBS started a new service with Stobart a month or two back doing just that, so not exactly zilch...

Like that pic across the river Jo.

It makes some sense in the very short term if they are paying leasing charges for that loco anyway and if it were otherwise standing idle, but leasing two loco's to do a job where one would work has to be more expensive in the longer term, even before taking fuel into account. To my mind, if they were talking of doing it long term they would have to be looking at trains being 50% longer to make it pay - for instance if they were talking of 2+48 on Humber oil trains. They did run 2+42 coal trains for a bit which worked except there was almost nowhere the train could fit into for regulation purposes! I guess they might be able to retime some of the 60 duties to work overnight to be less of an issue in that regard, but I doubt it's possible with all of them without impacting on use of other assets like wagons, access to terminals etc.

Pretty sure all of the usable ones have been withdrawn....and reinstated....and withdrawn....and reinstated...etc etc