Search results

If you were actually involved in the business you would know the truth, but as you obviously aren't, you don't. I'll leave you to it.

Reports and studies that were required by the TWA process implemented by the Government; a process that, for the Chord, was extended for no real point by one objector. If NR didn't contract with the people who can support this process then they would have to employ them directly - do you think...

py_megapixel is correct - the original point was to remove crossing conflicts in the Ardwick area by re-routing airport-NE TPE services. Other alternatives were to create a new grade-separated route from Ashburys to the Castlefield corridor (which still required reversals - this required new...

At the north end of Preston? No small re-design, that.

My bad, read your post too fast to get all the words! Anyway, I can confirm that the 1976 view of the world turned out to be good for another 20 years in terms of decline in traffic. Crewe remdelling was done on a similar basis, hence it's troubles today. It wasn't until late into the 90s that...

*cough* all those routes are now electrified *cough* (bar Blackpool South, but that service barely has trains, let alone loco-hauled ones)

... and its looking like a better layout is the last thing you'll be getting at Crewe!

Not a first choice: RAIB Bromsgrove,

Crewe interlocking has flashing aspect sequences in it, strapped out post-Colwich and never re-instated.

"A loop has only one signal section - two signal sections or more is a slow line." - R. Sumner. As to loop entry and exit speeds, most freight can reach over 40mph (on the flat) in the length of the train, so 50 turnouts are a better choice, IMHO. Therefore the toe to toe length of the loop is...

Do we get to share your Degree? :-)

Have you read the SRT TSI? 500m2 and a tin shed is OK for a firefighting point outside a tunnel portal , but not for a evacuation and rescue point required to deal with an entire train load of lightly terrified passengers (c.f. 4.2.1.7.

Surely the ludicrous lengths of COVID-driven one way systems are a different question?

Said developer / promoter would also have to pay Network Rail's self-set Outside Party rates for activites that NR will only accept if NR do them, for anything that NR deems NR to need ... even if NR's own regulator insists otherwise. Despite PPF, if NR take against a scheme (or simply can't be...

Preston (Lancs) "new" platform 5/6, south end.

DfT Acceleration Unit? So its first job is to remove DfT from the development process then?

Error, sorry.

It's used as an early requirement to specify minimum levels of facilities - that's why the numbers are so low. That said, it all gets value engineered out of the window, normally by DfT, so ...

And in any case such doors / gates would have to withstand full crowd loading as well as aerodynamic loading, both of which aren't easy to design on a platform edge. Also, they would need to be clear of passing trains, so are likely to be slightly set back from the current platform edge - there...

However, a 5.1m island isn't compliant with the PRM TSI specifically with regard to areas for boarding. You would also have to prove the width for pedestrian flow densities in the blazing train evacuation case; your canopy columns are not going to help that.