Search results

Here‘s a screenshot from the TWA order drawings, it shows that in the pre-existing condition it had vertical walls either side of the northern abutment:

This has been discussed in the forum before, I‘ll try and find the discussion, it started about post #532. I think they simply took adavantage of the fact that an additional arch had already been previously in use at that bridge, the embankment had been dug out and a third track laid for...

Then there’s what looks like the entire garden of that block of flats on the right has to be removed and replaced. Hope nobody has been digging too deep in their flower beds…

Why not just get the main ECML operator to run them? That way there’s no need for either Scotrail or Northern to worry about a micro fleet, just transfer the 802s and crews and they're practically the same as LNER 800s.

The necessary flat crossing would cause too many down direction conflicts, in fact I see that (according to the layout diagrams in the OOC station thread), the restored single line would only connect onto the future up relief. I doubt through services would ever run, for the same reason as...

Was that the story I saw on football focus? I wasn’t listening to the detail… :D

But when would it ever have been useful during the last 40 years or so? If there was ever any sort of long term anticipated need for an emergency connection to the main network, surely Benton SW would have been the one to preserve, as it was already usable in the early years, and more...

Yes, but the original question did include a specific requirement for passenger use. People often don’t seem to read the actual question…

Why did 325s ever get mentioned in this thread. They’re not exactly ‘suitable for passenger use’ are they?

Which was the location mentioned in post #8599 3 weeks ago, the discussion then meandered off towards Askham Bar, and eventually returned to the west. AIUI any APCO location has to be a significant distance from the end of the wires, to allow room for the manual procedure if auto fails...

Yes to the distance from St Pancras, it was discussed last month when first noticed. Post #7743 reads that it’s exactly how the electrification masts are identified. https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/mml-electrification-progress-updates.110445/page-259#post-7040625

They have a thread that they started this morning.

It’s 12 of 20 going to XC, the 2 with GC will eventually be returned increasing the stored number to 8. Can’t see them being useful to Northern in any case.

They should still be possible, it’s why they are having 2 platforms on each of the four “GW“ lines.

It is shown in the draft. There’s a direct link to it just been added in the Cambridge South construction thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/cambridge-south-new-station-construction-progress.141520/page-38#post-7083579

If the works at Middlesbrough for P3 ever go ahead, am I right in thinking the additional services would be extensions of the Kings Cross to York terminators, so nothing would need to be retimed?

That’s what I thought, but the most recent XC TAA didn’t seem to ask for any rights to ‘through to the NE‘ services starting at Southampton. Hence saying it was ‘unexpected’.

A bit unexpected, however the morning Reading starters would normally run empty from Eastleigh depot, so having an extended service at that time is relatively straightforward by modifying the ECS service. Still no sign of regular extensions to/from Southampton, but doing it all day at 2 hourly...

I thought it had been decided there’s no room for it between York and Newcastle. I’m sure that’s been the explanation in the earlier threads, I don’t believe it was expected to return.

You’d think it had never been suggested before. There have been numerous previous threads about XC fleet early replacement - they come round every few months, and they’re all about 10 years too early. I suggest somewhere in DfT there’s a plan to keep them in service for over 40 years…