Bluebell Railway General Discussion

As I commented above the buckeye couplers seem to give the Hastings unit an exemption for crashworthiness. The derogation are all visible on the ORR website.

 

But on it's own, that would have allowed all southern region slam-door stock to carry on (apart from the 2-HAPs with the single buffer inter-carriage arrangements).

 

But you need central door looking, retention tanks for the toilets and control opening windows also which I think they are planning to do. To refit all the slam door stock which was past its use by date generally would have not been cost effective. Plus you need to get the derogation from ORR which I suspect look at the annual usage etc. The odd one off is a different risk category to day to day service with potentially overcrowded trains.

Sent from my SM-A526B using Tapatalk

 

Agreed, my point was that the derogation isn't "having buckeye couplers", so much as "having buckeye couplers and being sufficiently rare on the network as to not be a major issue".

 

I have no knowledge as to what the relevant standards are. However, the core of the group involved with maintaining the 4-VEP are experienced mainline people and I think it is very unlikely that they haven't done their homework as to what is and isn't possible.

Tom

 

Good point Tom, I should have said that. All I was trying to do was show that they were in fact doing exactly what ORR seem to require so to ne that indicates they know what they are doing !

Sent from my SM-A526B using Tapatalk

 

Off topic, but it seems almost unfathomable that the Desiros will celebrate 20 years in service next year… surely they’re brand new?

Simon

 

Yes the Ceps were OK. After some years travelling on the 0638 Ashford to London Bridge/Charing X and back on the 1738 in Haps, the Ceps on the 0657 up and 1710 Cannon Street back were luxury. The Veps and Cigs came later but in my view the Cigs were the ultimate in SR Emus. With he extra stage of field weakening the Greyhound Cigs were close to technical perfection. I remember that in one 4 week period that had a score of infinity ie no faults or failures at all! Tell me any modern unit that has achieved that.

 

We did once manage that with the class 171 Turbostar fleet. In summer too! Messes up the figures though...

 

For a Diesel unit that’s pretty good. I think that Salisbury were (are?) pretty good with their 159s. but then Salisbury had a good reputation for looking after their steam locos and they could nearly always find me the spares I needed when moving stocks around in 1966

 

If we’re after pace, then I think the REPs deserve a look in. Though they were admittedly not powered by EE507s.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Yes and they had more power and could easily reach 105 mph plus. The Ceps, Cigs etc had a maximum design speed of 90 but I timed both at 100 down Winchfield bank right at their limit

 

If the driver shut off the traction and just let it roll, that was definitely achievable (my dad was a Waterloo driver and I saw him do this on a cab ride during the school holidays). It was not unknown to switch of the cab so they didn't have to hold down the dead-mans handle while doing this! Still had the straight air brake available. Fortunately modern stock doesn't allow this by design.

 

A big infrastructure update covering what’s been happening over this winter:

https://www.bluebell-railway.com/brps/infrastructure-news/

Tom

 

Had a chance over the weekend to have a go at filming Steam Lights for the first time, also the first two Santa Specials of the day on the Sunday featuring 34059 'Sir Archibald Sinclair' and 80151. Short video...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/alts1985/53404050604/in/dateposted-public/

 

That’s an informative update and an impressive amount of engineering work. People often don’t appreciate just how much time and effort required to design, plan and procure these types of works, so very well done to the project team(s). I hope the winter weather is kind to you!

 

Sorry if I've missed it elsewhere, but is the work on platform 1 at Horstead Keynes just preventative, or with a view to making it operational? Presumably being the main Ardingly platform with access only from the north, it would only ever see use as a bay platform on gala days?

 

I think the plan is to make Platform 1 fully operational alongside 2 in order to allow 3 and 4 to be closed for renovation.

Regards,

Dan

 

Not sure about that Dan - since it doesn't give access to Sheffield Park heading south, so can't be used for normal through services. I think it is probably being done simply because it needs to be done at some point and is in the worst condition. The idea is though (@chrishallam) that it will be bought to a fit state for operational use, albeit that might only allow north bound departures - potentially a "gala days" sort of thing. The signalling to allow arrivals and departures in both directions already exists, having been put in place when Horsted Keynes was resignalled a couple of decades ago. (HK also already has the token instruments for the HK - Ardingly section).

Interestingly, the Chairman has trailed a couple of times in "Trackside" that the time is coming when the railway needs to make a decision once and for all about the Ardingly branch.

Tom