Search results

This has just appeared on social media, perhaps ahead of the launch of the Class 99 on services to Scotland from Felixstowe and London Gateway Port at least, not sure the strictly speaking Liverpool can be included as I don't think it operates six days a week. MSC continue to operate feeder...

Port Salford phase one apparently is proposed to handle up to sixteen 775 mtr trains per day, whether this would be still be possible should ILPN be constructed is another matter. ILPN is if my memory serves me correctly is designed to handle 16 x 775mtr services a day (32 train movements) which...

Let us not forget that Freightliner is now owned by the worlds second largest global container shipping line, MSC being the largest and both have large order books for new very large containerships many of which will likely be deployed to services calling at UK ports in the future. I can't see...

The land they have acquired looks to be considerably smaller than the land the rail freight terminal and the article also confirms they need to aquire more land to build the stadium. There is also the question of the wider regeneration scheme proposed by the council which would have seen much of...

This post on social media this morning.

Grande Scandinavia is operated by Grimaldi, whereas I believe all the previous deliveries have been on a K-Line vessel, their next vessel being Michigan Highway due Portbury at 2000hrs tonight.

There is an image of the train with 99006 leading approaching Newton Le Willows on the Railways in and Around Merseyside. FB page.

Looks like it's well on it's way.

Here is one for the 28th May 2026. 1780079856 And another for the 28th May 2026 for 99006

There is a post today on the Railways in and Around Merseyside FB group which confrims "The most unexpected image of today! I went to record No 66185 on 4S38 Seaforth to Mossend 'intermodal' at Edge Lane Junction (Bootle Branch line) and right time, right place, GBRf No 99006 passes by on 0F24...

This one perhaps? https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/peel-revives-port-of-warrington-project/

I would not disagree with the principle but it's unlikely to be a barge as they have tried that a few years back and it ran into all sorts of problems which is why they switched to a small feeder vessel for the service to Port Salford further up the Ship Canal. However, that has not run for a...

Thanks for the update and clarification. That plan to re-align the road and extend the railhead received planning consent in October 2023 and at the same time there were plans to convert T1 to rail mounted gantry operation like T2, but I've since learnt that there was at least a three year delay...

Reports tonight of lots of civil works underway at Seaforth with heavy plant and portacabins in situ at the entrance to the existing railhead. Is this finally the start of the Seaforth railhead being extended. The works come as Maritime Transport Ltd, owned by MSC announce a multiyear contract...

Yes as I understand it the trains were delivered with ASDO but it was switched off as Network Rail needed to install the trackside equipment at the affected stations, that I believe has been completed, allbeit delayed. There are 53 units in total to operate all lines which I believe requires...

Starmer's denial as it stands does not make sense. The Independent article dates from 12th September 2025 and clearly alleges that Mandelson failed his vetting, so why did he not go and verify if the allegations were true? This then raises the question that if he did ask the question, what...

I don't know about 70% as I suspect it will vary from country to country, but yes broadly speaking it has a similar problem but European based operators have ways of overcoming it, if necessary by returning empty across the Channel and then picking up a load enroute back to their origin base...

I don't think the real competition for any Channel rail services are the ferries, as typically the trucks and/or trailers on these services are largely treated as single units whereas for rail to be competitive it probably needs to cater for multiple and regular box moves preferably to EU inland...

But why would you upgrade the Barking site for use with London Gateway Port twenty miles away which when the current announced additional berths have been completed will have a second rail terminal anyway? Using it to exchange different types of traction also does not seem logical with class 93...

Turning the question in a slightly different direction. What commodities do we import or export in sufficient volumes to sustain a service one or more locations in the EU which are not hazardous? If the purpose of the terminal is to offer an alternative terminal to the Le Shuttle facilities...