6023

You'll have to explain your logic there, if you have to go under the wires regardless, why go to the expense of a 2nd mainline entrance ?.

 

Too late, you did Lol!!

Still you got the answer you were looking for - probably not the one you were hoping for (or anybody else for that matter) I think the "fall out" from the saga of the boiler may continue for sometime to come.......

I know that the Lads I spoke to were gutted that she's not romping along mainline metals, but realistic enough to know "that's life"........................ as Sidmouth has alluded to, maybe she should be going on tour to other lines............. BUT knowing what I was told (amazing how people open up when they know you're actively involved in preservation!) I doubt the majority of lines would touch her without cast iron guarantees.

 

A quick dash to Oxford and the wires are gone in all directions bar back the way you came. I'm assuming the service to Oxford won't be of the same intensity as it is through Didcot itself.

 

Ah I see, still don't see why that can't be done from Didcot plt 5 though, assuming the GWML uses 1 & 2 and the Oxford stoppers use 3 & 4, Oxford station though is a headache with it's layout though, and won't get any better with Chiltern arriving from Bicester soon.

I still don't think electrification is that big a threat, your generally on the reliefs east of Didcot anyway, and with limited stops west of there, any time advantage over HST's by better accelerating electrics would be minimal, otherwise there's no speed advantage over the current traction.

 

Why do the tours have to start from Didcot or even use the GW main line? Surely, all that is needed is a path during the night (or whenever) to get the loco out of Didcot and away to a suitable starting point. I can't believe that the lines are so busy 24 hrs/day that this isn't feasible. Or am I being a bit naive, not being a main line person?

 

If you take your steam engine out between the hours of 0001 and 0500 you can run it at 90mph down the GWML...!

 

Depends if your itinary involves using the GWML or a destination along it I suppose, I think the Didcot revelance is just the topic morphing away from 6023 and the Didcot site.

 

I don't think so. We'll hopefully vote to leave the EU in 2017 before too much of this silly stuff has been installed. Then we can get back to running our country's railways as we want - without foreign interference.

A bit out of date, but if you;re interested:- http://www.brugesgroup.com/BrugesRailwaysPaper.pdf

 

ERTMS is not an EU-led project, it's Network Rail looking to modify the UK Network! It can brought in whether we're part of the EU or not.

 

Personally I remain hopeful on ERTMS, especially if the equipment see's a big reduction in size, as would be needed for much non steam current traction as well as our own interests, certainly a 66 has no space for the Cambrian spec equipment, though reading modern traction forums, it seems the size has much to do with making it easier to live with while sorting out any issues, a more refined and smaller device is quite possible once reliability and experience is gained.

 

David - you apear to have omited the Cotswold line from your calculations. Whilst most do bypass Didcot some do call. I commuted from Moreton-in-Marsh to reading for 4 years and its one of the trains I used to catch - Padddington fast Didcot, Oxford and principal stations Hereford . calling at Didcot or not the Cotswold trains do take a path between Didcot and Oxford. I used to catch the 7.20 MiM and about once a week we would be kept on the up relief Didcot to Reading and fairly high speeds were achieved

I am not sure Chiltern trains will cause extra problems as they can use the up bay as FGW do now and there was some talk of allowing passenger use of the parcels bay. I did visit Oxford in November and was intrigued to see that the North Oxford down loop was being reinstated.

I wish Didcot Steam centre well but the wires may becme an issue

Dave

 

Why should the wires be a problem at Didcot? The NRM manages movements perfectly well at York.

 

In which case, there would also be no legal requirement to provide Open Access (another EU "interference"), so the UK can ban any type of traction and all non-franchised train operator it likes.

Be careful what you wish for....

(Incidentally, as you are clearly an expert on the subject, I presume you understand far better than most of us the capacity "Golden Goose" that ERTMS type systems offer - essentially, variable block sections based on train speeds, thereby enabling more trains to run, flighting of trains on single tracks etc. If anything, having a European standard probably reduces costs by curbing the British tendency to want to design our own version of most things, regardless of how much it costs and whether some "foreigner" already has a version which works - although, in the case of ERTMS, the later is a statement many would say isn't yet actually the case!!)

Steven

 

The 'electric spine' scheme is expected to see electrification stretch beyond Oxford to Bedford (via Bicester) and Nuneaton (via Banbury and Coventry) - I don't think electrification is necessarily a problem for steam however, as associated upgrades to increase track capacity are likely to be carried out at the same time.

Given the potential benefits of cab signalling and with ERTMS becoming increasingly popular outside Europe there's no reason to think the referendum result would have any effect on Network Rail's plans - both the ECML and GWML are due to be resignalled anyway. As for it's impact on the GWML, it shouldn't pose an immediate threat to non-fitted steam loco's as lineside signalling will initially be retained.

Chris

 

Pure harrumph from Mr. Petley.

PH

 

According to the railway press, Carnforth is to fit ERTMS to 2 class 37's shortly to try and get a foothold back on the Cambrian charter market. Charter trains are currently reliant on using Network Rail owned class 97's (converted 37's) over the Cambrian, if they are unavailable or there is no crew then charters can get cancelled at the last minute. Hopefully fitting it to steam or at least finding a solution to work with steam (perhaps including a diesel in consist initially) will follow. Many countries are using this signalling system and many of these countries also still run steam and other heritage traction. A solution is needed, perhaps we need to be looking to work with these countries rather than running our railway 'without interference'. Although I do not know a huge amount about it, this signalling could be very beneficial to steam (& our railways as a whole) as it will free up a lot of capacity, potentially make pathing of charters easier and running better on the day. The railway is evolving and has changed beyond recognition in the past decade - to keep pace with this boom in passenger numbers the railway needs to embrace modern technology - 1960's (& often even older) technology simply can not cope with the volume and speed of todays trains any longer. Anyone who has travelled on a steam charter recently will know how congested our railways now are and how a small delay can quickly spiral and have big knock on effects. We therefore need to look abroad to modern technology and embrace it, not bury our head in the sand and try and pretend we know best because we invented the railways 200 years ago.
This doesn't mean though the end of steam on the mainline. Steam is not the only heritage traction running on the mainline, many operators still use classes 20,31, 33, 37 , 47 & 73- not forgetting a Deltic and Western being used in revenue earning freight in the last few weeks. All these locos will need fitting with new technology. A portable and scaled down version is I believe being worked on, whoever comes up with a workable, traction type universal unit could make a lot of money!!

 

The biggest problem with 97/3 availability is DBS seem to be the only TOC who drives them and we are all familiar with their crew availability lately, nothing wrong with the loco's.

I can't see national rollout of ERTMS being viable without such a version of the kit, too many types of traction in everyday use that have no space for the current variant, the likes of classes 66 and 70 are enough of a struggle to get inside the UK loading gauge as it is.