Search results

Is the difference due to braking, ride quality or some other factor. This leads me to the question, would a single empty wagon, as is often the case, make the whole train unloaded, thus reducing the speed?

If you can see a train........it is too late!

Didn't I read in another post that the ability to use a new timber facility at Kingmoor to full extent, will be hindered by the lack of timber wagons?

Thanks for that.

My Grandson arrived back home about 16.30hrs 24.02.26 to say the barrier line at Stockport station was crawling with armed police (up to a dozen), Airport style magnetic security arches, a number of police vans and several additional ticket checks. Anyone any idea what was happening?

Tesco use curtainsiders when required.

Correct. But......a swap body arriving at the customer warehouse looks just like an HGV. It is up to the rail industry to ensure he doesn't notice any other differences.

Let me rephrase my comment. When the railway was private, the passenger received DR. Now the railway is state run he won't. That is what the passenger will see. The source of the money is immaterial to him. Good luck in convincing him otherwise.

Benefit or bribe, a private railway paid it, a nationalised railway won't.

Exactly the point. Reducing costs and subsidies will give the government the opportunity to proclaim the wonders of state ownership.

Given the lack of passenger trains forcing speed differentials, I would think there is capacity. However, there is a far more difficult problem. In order to justify the investment made, each overnight intermodal really needs to make a return daytime trip, doubling its utilisation. So the real...

The IDA wagon looks to be quite good in that department.

With railways returning to state control it is inevitable that the various benefits of privatisation are removed as the government begins to realise their cost.

That is a different question with a different answer. I am discussing the merits of rolling highway versus swap body/ISO container. I maintain the latter is the only sensible answer with the UKs tighter loading gauge. If there isn't terminal or line capacity then neither option will be used...

My posts are all based on the fact that rolling highway will not fit on UK railways without massive and prohibitive expenditure to improve the loading gauge. This just will not happen so the answer is to moderately improve the loading gauge to accept swap body/ISO containers. This has the...

I believe one of the UK rail loading gauges can accommodate such containers and several routes are cleared for them. I would support further expenditure on more routes as required.

If we get things right within the UK so that swap body/ISO container becomes more acceptable, the desire to bring complete HGVs across the channel on rolling highways also diminishes meaning the cross channel traffic also converts to swap body/ISO and will fit within existing UK loading gauge.

You still have the loading gauge problem which, in the UK is formidable and very expensive to fix. Another problem for rolling highway is the abysmal payload to tare weight ratio. Each 29 tonnes of payload requires 39 tonnes of tare weight of road and rail vehicles to carry it. A comparable...

As far as I am aware, rolling highways never make money wherever they are used. All rely on heavy government subsidy for environmental reasons. Similar levels of subsidy applied to swap body/ISO container trains would be more flexible and more achievable due to loading gauge problems.

Indeed it does, but NOT on our congested roads, emitting 25% of the CO2 as it does.