Search results

Was thought about but later confirmed as not happening in the medium term, I think this was by @Bald Rick.

W10 and W12 are the same height, and are actually a few cm lower than W6A at the vehicle centre line, so it needs the same vertical height, but over the entire width. Then there’s also the dynamic envelope for the top/outer corners, so it needs flat bridge decks rather than arches, but if the...

Posts from 2024 suggest a possibly different timescale. The siding was reported being installed in the early summer of ‘24, but the decision not to use Hillhouse temporary platform was not publicised until November ‘24.

It was assessed in detail after the Ufton Nurvet HST collision/derailment and they reckoned seatbelts wouldn’t have helped. One of the main points is that in GB almost all trains are assumed to carry significant numbers of standing passengers, and at risky points in journeys, such as...

Liberal Democrats - yet another organisation who haven’t thought through why a national or long distance Contactless scheme wouldn’t work. A fairly regular topic in these forums.

From the article - “More of this so-called "piling work" is scheduled…” So are they trying to suggest it’s something else? o_O

Seems each time it happens we also have another thread like this one. A forum search finds 27 threads with Cable Theft in the title. Fibre optics will usually be mentioned as an obvious solution, but they can’t transmit power to point motors.

If trying to draw rail maps based on historical ‘nations’ why not try fitting it into the period when Northumbria included Edinburgh? It’s a good seven hundred years closer in time than when the Roman Wall formed a border… :D o_O But even then, Scotland and England as we know them did not...

The platform edge will also have to be over 3m from the new footbridge supports. But I’m sure the main reason is to give the best overall track alignment and minimum curvature along the new bit at the eastern end and over the bridge. I’m sure it was also discussed earlier this month, and it’s...

You mean they can only do what DFT tell/allow them to do, surely? Thats the usual forum assumption isn’t it?

:oops: Misread…

There were 14 pages about this very subject in Dec 2024, if anyone’s getting a feeling it’s a repeat: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/trivia-bleakest-terminal-stations.277888/

Why isn’t there a government policy on airport provision? If this is such a potential basket case, shouldn’t the DfT or CAA come out and say so?

Thanks.

Is that the bridge that’s intended to be dismantled and fully overhauled then reinstalled on higher piers to give OHLE clearance?

That’s exactly what they did on the ECML, apparently a lot of bridges in Northumberland were modified to increase clearances for 125 mph HST running, because the track had to be properly ballasted, and cant increased. So they generally allowed for future wiring as well.

There are public versions of the sectional appendix available on the NR website here, you need to scroll down a bit beyond all the stuff about the staff version, to ‘pdf copies’. There’s a combined volume for the whole DC area, ie Kent/Sussex/Wessex...

One of the stupid decisions made over the years was to stop including those leaflets explaining new rules and signs etc with letters about vehicle tax and MOTs etc. I’m fairly sure back when they were a very regular thing people kept up to date with changes more easily...

They could always use TfW&B as a shorthand…