Ron Ron Ron

Colne Valley Viaduct.

Crossing the Grand Union Canal.

(Note: the temporary pier will be removed at some point)

.

There are lots of companies globally, heavily involved in developing Sodium ion and other solid state battery chemistries.

It's one of the biggest sectors for technological investment, in the present day.

It’s rehashing old ground, but nobody said ESU decoders were inferior.

On 12/04/2024 at 22:14, Davexoc said:

 

 

………This is the HS2 - EWR access point bridge that will allow the maintenance trains in and out of the depot...

 

 

 

Sorry Dave, it isn’t a bridge to carry rail tracks.

It’s the new road bridge to take the diverted Perry Hill road over both the HS2 mainline and the access lines into and out of the depot, to/from the north.

I posted this same reply in the HS2 thread.

There’s a video on there showing that bridge from above.

Here’s a map of the (to be) completed layout, showing that new bridge (Perry Hill Overbridge).

You can zoom in for better detail…….

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7eb9c9ed915d74e33f2084/C222-ATK-CV-DPL-020-000016_0.pdf

.

6 hours ago, Damo666 said:

………JMRI detects it as a ZIMO but offers 5 possible models:

MX634 Version 40+

MX634C Version 40+

MX634D Version 40+

MX634F Version 40+

MX634R Version 40+

 

Would you (or anyone else) know which one is the most suitable candidate?

 

Or does it matter?

 

The suffix letters denote the type of connector interface for the particular model of decoder (MX634 in this case).

No suffix - wires no plug

C - 21-pin (special type with logic level outputs)

D - 21-pin

F -  6-pin on wires

R -  8-pin on wires

All versions of the same MX634.

As Kaput points out, Bachmann say MX634C as the Class 90 has a 21-pin connector.

.

Calvert HS2 and E-W Rail, inc. the HS2 Infrastructure depot.

A map of the affected area, showing the path of the diverted road....

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7eb9c9ed915d74e33f2084/C222-ATK-CV-DPL-020-000016_0.pdf

(You should be able to zoom in, for a detailed look)

.

On 12/04/2024 at 23:03, Davexoc said:

And I think this is the current state of the rail bridge to access HS2 from the depot going northbound...

 

It's not a rail bridge to carry the track.

That's the new road bridge which will carry the diverted north-south road (I don't know the name or B route number) over HS2.

The bridge is wide as along with the HS2 mainline, it will also accommodate the tracks leading into and out of the depot to/from the north.

You can see that bridge in this recent video.

It's briefly visible in the opening seconds, but skip to 6min 44secs and then to 7min 57secs, for a closer look.

The road has already been diverted along a temporary route, linking in to the new bridge carrying the road under E-W Rail.

.

On 12/04/2024 at 11:05, jamie92208 said:

That'coming along well.  Unlike some of the green tunnels this one actually serves two other purposes.  It serves as a rather long and oblique underbridge under a main road and also seems to serve as the aerodynamic vent entrance to the tunnels.  

 

Jamie

The main reason for the cut and cover section at the southern end of the twin bore Long Itichington tunnel, is that the tunnel has to be at a shallow depth along this stretch, as the track has to emerge at the right level to cross the nearby River Itchen.

You can see construction work on a bridge pier, next to the river, at 2mins 55secs into the video (Starting the video below goes straight there).

The bored tunnel would be too close to the surface to be viable, so it was either switching from bored tunnel to an open cutting, or to cut and cover for this section.

The former was not practical or desirable in that location.

.

Long Itchington Wood tunnel, south portal.

This end of the twin bore tunnel, becomes a cut and cover (green) tunnel for the last X hundred metres.

.

Can anyone explain why a cutting isn't sufficient for this stretch of line?

The Chipping Warden "green tunnel".

At 6 mins in, you get a glimpse of the nearby village, which is a long way from most of the tunnel that's been built so far.

The cutting has already been created.

Why fill it with goodness knows how many hundreds of millions of ££££'s worth of concrete tunnel?

.

Chilterns Tunnel South portal, where it all began.

Construction of the aerodynamic tunnel portals are well in advance.

Also, the 3 production plants at the site, tunnel sections, viaduct segments and the slurry treatment plant, are no longer needed and are due to be dismantled next.

(note: the last viaduct segment has already been made).

.

Speeded up Timelapse ....

This is how they do it......

.

A brief view of a viaduct segment being delivered from the on-site factory at West Hyde (next to the Chilterns tunnel south portal), to the Colne Valley viaduct.

A good view of progress on the chalk grassland landscape being created alongside the new railway, using the spoil from the 10 mile long twin bore, Chiltern tunnels.

.

On 07/04/2024 at 13:03, jamie92208 said:

..... It also shows the north end of Copthall tunnel some of which appears to have been covered over. 

 

 

That section of tunnel has been covered over from very early on, not long after it was completed.

I can't remember when, but it must be at least 6 months ago, if not a lot longer.

They haven't covered any more up yet, so maybe it was done early on as some sort of test or assessment.

. 

14 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Google maps is updated frequently at no cost to reflect changes (and I’m not just talking about new roads) to the road network - when was the last time your car manufacturer supplied a free update?

 

Also google maps can show live traffic information and can warn you of delays ahead plus offer you alternative routes - can your built in car system do that?

 

Car manufacturers have a history of being slow to update the latest trends into their vehicles - plus deliberately make it hard / expensive to update things like Sat-Nav’s…

 

We get over the air map updates sent to our cars, every so often.

Most older cars have to have their sat-nav updated at the dealership.

Those cars that have Google Maps embedded in their car operating system are always up-to-date.

A small number of manufacturers are using the Google Android Automotive operating system (not to be confused with the Android auto app).

Volvo, Polestar and Renault (on their EV only Megane e-tech) are an example.

.

11 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

Wow! Looks like a Bond film setting?

The infinity pool on the roof garden is something else.

We had lunch at one of the restaurants up there, a couple of years ago.

We watched the F15’s passing by at eye level on their way back in.

Yes, those are trees on the roof gardens…..

4 hours ago, WIMorrison said:

@Ron Ron Ron Unfortunately a z21 doesn't have a CDE connection which is why I didn't mention it , and I don't know if NCE does. 

I see that Roco list a B-Bus to CDE Booster adapter

Cat no. 10789

https://www.coastaldcc.co.uk/products/roco/z21-booster-adapter
 

https://www.z21.eu/en/products/z21/connections-z21/1246:793:1354:image:child:image

.
 

There is a NMRA standard for Command Station outputs to external Boosters (Power Station in Lenz and NMRA speak).

That is the  “Power Station Interface”, the output of which is a “ Control Bus”.

The usual indication is connections labelled as C, D, E.

However it isn’t mandatory and some manufacturers use their own arrangements for either direct connection to Boosters, or routing the signal via their cab/ data network (e.g. LocoNet or ECoSlink).

The other option is to use Boosters that read the DCC signals off the track (Power Bus) output from the DCC system’s built in, primary Booster and use it to generate their own track (Power Bus) output.

Sorry that doesn’t answer your specific enquiry.

I’ve no idea about the z21 and NCE booster connections.

.

.

13 hours ago, WIMorrison said:

 But with the TXS ‘solution’ only fitting a minority of the models on sale, plus a limited range of sounds, they are not a solution that will match the needs of the majority of modellers.

 

The level of control offered by these decoders is also poor when compared to ESU or Zimo.

Quite so Iain, but my point was that if sound can be provided at a much lower premium (over non-sound), then the uptake would be much higher.

p.s. TXS isn't that bad either, especially considering the low purchase cost.

.

17 hours ago, Andy Keane said:

Does anyone know what the sales figures look like for recent RTR locos, DC vs DCC vs DCC sound? I guess the sound fitted stock generates enough sales to convince manufacturers to provide these features but does it remain a minority sport?

For sound fitted out of the box, the added cost over non-sound DCC (£100 plus or minus £20) is bound to dampen the uptake.

RTR DCC sound fitted at anything from £260 to £360 per loco is certainly going to restrict the market to a degree.

If the cost difference was very close, I imagine there’d be very high proportion of sound equipped sales.

When you break down the comparative costing of Hornby’s TXS sound decoders, the sound element is only adding approx. £25  compared to a non-sound decoder (Bluetooth capability also adds another (approx.) £15 to the cost).

.

I thought "Chuff" was used as a euphemism for backside?

Puts a different light on the idea of a fragrance with that name.

🤣

46 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

....... I wonder if they will start fitti g out the track on this section that will be about 20km long. 

 

Track laying is a long way off, by all accounts.

They haven't signed any contracts yet for the supply of materials or the infrastructure and logistics.

. 

14 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

Nicholas Sunshine has just posted a long video showing OOC and the surrounding area. ……..

A few of points about that video.

He completely ignores, or doesn’t notice, the work going on to create the mainline side of the station.

Some initial foundations are already clearly evident.

He mentions the logistics tunnel, but appears to think it runs to the Victoria crossover box and not the Euston end of the OOC station box.

When looking down into the crossover box, he makes no mention that you can see tail end of TBM “Anne”.

Does he even realise it there?

There’s also no mention of TBM “Emily” when he notes the down tunnel portal, at the bottom of the adjacent ventilation shaft.

Also surprising that having spent time extensively covering Willesden, he doesn’t take a good look at Atlas Rd, where you can clearly see the logistics tunnel entrance.

.

2 hours ago, Trainnoob said:

.....I'm personally happy with Computer control but preference wise I want a physical interface to control the trains from, ......

2 hours ago, Trainnoob said:

.......I don't need fancy bells and whistles I just want a DCC system that control trains with Sound and also a few accessories.....

.....as mentioned above I'm looking for something with a physical interface.

1 hour ago, Trainnoob said:

I don't want to pay alot money for an expensive controller that does the same stuff my old cheap DCC++ could do. However I really want something with a physical interface because it feels pointless staring at a screen to control trains.......

If you can get past the "physical interface" bit and are definitely looking for sound, then the most inexpensive DCC system is no system.

i.e. not a physical hardware based system, but a virtual one...as in something along the lines of Hornby's Bluetooth based HM7000 / HM DCC system.

(North American modellers can look towards the similar BlueRail Trains based, Soundtraxx Blunami system)

If already in possession of a smartphone and/or a tablet (e.g. iPad), then all you need to get started is a suitable power supply.

The virtual DCC system is "free".

Downsides...

Only works with Hornby's own range of Bluetooth fitted decoders, out of the metaphorical box.

Sounds available are currently only limited to prototypes that Hornby offer in model form.

Sound project rollout is slow but steadily progressing.

Non-sound versions of the Bluetooth decoders, have yet to be released, but are in the pipeline.

The expansion option, by linking with a physical DCC system, to control other (non-Bluetooth) DCC locos and accessories, is currently limited to DCC systems with XPressNet interfaces.

If you can put up with those limitations in the short term, this is the least expensive and easiest way in DCC, particularly with sound.

It would save you the risk of buying a DCC system that may end up being the wrong choice, or one you don't particularly get on with.

In addition, if you eventually decide on a physical hardware based control system, there's no money lost and everything remains compatible.

Food for thought ?

.