EbbwJunction1
Established Member
No, that was in 1981 ... and I've told you before not to speak about that. Remember, no-one else knows apart from you and me!!
No, sorry.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Railway General Knowledge.
- Thread starter 150222
- Start date
No, that was in 1981 ... and I've told you before not to speak about that. Remember, no-one else knows apart from you and me!!
No, sorry.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
t_star2001uk
Member
- Joined
- 23 Aug 2011
- Messages
- 724
Was it Crossrail...
Open Floor if correct..
Open Floor if correct..
EbbwJunction1
Established Member
Still no, I'm afraid.
Yes, it was ... well done!
It was a leaflet publicising the proposed cross London rail ink, a version of which would later become the Crossrail scheme. This is an introduction by Peter Parker, British Railways Board Chairman:
"The link across London would provide through trains, cut-out inconvenient interchanges between train and underground or taxi, and thus save valuable time. It would help commuters from the outer suburbs of London and Inter-City travellers alike. It would make a journey from Peterborough to Portsmouth or Watford to Woking as straightforward as the London Underground already makes a ride from Barnet to Balham.
We are publishing this during difficult economic times for the country. But it is essential to maintain the impetus of forward thinking as part of [our] strategy for changing our services to meet new demands."
Open tunnel noted.
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
I am pretty sure it will have been the LMS in the mid 1930s as it is common knowledge that the 08 is descended from an LMS design and they did have diesel shunters before the war.
Given that so few people were making diesels at that time, and that many of the early diesels were made by English Electric, I will offer them up as the likely manufacturer.
Given that so few people were making diesels at that time, and that many of the early diesels were made by English Electric, I will offer them up as the likely manufacturer.
That'll do nicely, the LMS D3/6, built buy EE in 1935. Even then they already had 0-6-0, two suspended traction motors and an EE 6KT engine nailed down. Strange to think a design that old is still in squadron service.
You shunt
You shunt
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
Thank you.
Remaining on the shunter scene, many will remember the three "master and slave" class 13s at Tinsley.
Which other European country currently uses nineteen "master and slave" shunting locomotives which, like the 13s, consist of a pair of identical locomotives of which the slave has had the cab removed - but has also been shortened by just over three metres?
Remaining on the shunter scene, many will remember the three "master and slave" class 13s at Tinsley.
Which other European country currently uses nineteen "master and slave" shunting locomotives which, like the 13s, consist of a pair of identical locomotives of which the slave has had the cab removed - but has also been shortened by just over three metres?
t_star2001uk
Member
- Joined
- 23 Aug 2011
- Messages
- 724
They have been used in Belgium....
Open floor if correct
Open floor if correct
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
Does Belgium currently use nineteen of them as per the question...?
Keep trying...
Keep trying...
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
Not Albania.
theageofthetra
Established Member
Its not something silly like Ireland is it?
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
Not Ireland, no.
Think... which European country is likely to require heavy duty shunters on that scale?
Think... which European country is likely to require heavy duty shunters on that scale?
krus_aragon
Established Member
Mountainous Swizerland?
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
Closer to home than those two...
theageofthetra
Established Member
France?
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
Theageofthetra has command of the yard. It is indeed France.
There are 19 pairings of class BB64700 + BB64800 in use, both halves of which were converted from BB63500s.
64701 to 64719 are the locomotives andb 64801 to 64819 are the shortened cabless slaves.
There are some images of them on this Google search page:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=...64.img..0.4.190...0j0i10k1j0i24k1.MoM-AlKSc3M
There are 19 pairings of class BB64700 + BB64800 in use, both halves of which were converted from BB63500s.
64701 to 64719 are the locomotives andb 64801 to 64819 are the shortened cabless slaves.
There are some images of them on this Google search page:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=...64.img..0.4.190...0j0i10k1j0i24k1.MoM-AlKSc3M
theageofthetra
Established Member
Sorry completely forgot I had this one- open floor as I don't have a question available.
If I might thus take up the "open floor":
As at the eve of Grouping, 31/12/1922: in which (pre-1970s) counties of England, did the Midland Railway (including undertakings in which the Midland was an acknowledged "Joint" participator), not have any trackage? (There's one county in which yes, or no, answers, might be seen as equally valid; will be treated accordingly.)
As at the eve of Grouping, 31/12/1922: in which (pre-1970s) counties of England, did the Midland Railway (including undertakings in which the Midland was an acknowledged "Joint" participator), not have any trackage? (There's one county in which yes, or no, answers, might be seen as equally valid; will be treated accordingly.)
martinsh
Established Member
Cornwall, Devon, Sussex, Kent, Berkshire, Northumberland, Durham
Oxfordshire ?
Are you including the ridings of Yorkshire as separate counties ?
Oxfordshire ?
Are you including the ridings of Yorkshire as separate counties ?
I meant to state -- but forgot; sorry ! -- that I'm regarding Yorkshire as just one county.
I count three more "Midland-less" counties, fair-and-square, besides those which you list -- not including the "maybe / maybe not" county, which fair enough, you don't list. I'm thinking throughout, actual Midland- or joint-with-owned trackage; not running powers.
theageofthetra
Established Member
Isle of Wight, Rutland, Surrey East & West Sussex?
By my understanding, "back then" IOW was part of a mostly-mainland county; which was also Midland-less, and has not yet been mentioned. Rutland contained stretches of the Midland's Syston -- Peterborough and Manton -- Kettering lines.
Maybe arbitrarily, I'm reckoning Sussex and Surrey as complete counties, taking no account of "East" and "West" bits. martinsh has already submitted Sussex. By my reckoning, Surrey was another Midland-less county.
Two more counties to name !
theageofthetra
Established Member
Hampshire then but I am sure Isle of Wight was separate from Hants and successfully objected to it becoming part of it in 72.
Wiki tells me that IOW was part of Hampshire till 1890, after which it became its own administrative county: my mistake, IOW another on the 1922 Midland-less list. Hampshire named -- one more county to go -- so far three from you, eight from martinsh.
theageofthetra
Established Member
Suffolk?
No -- Suffolk contained Norfolk & Suffolk Joint (M & GN / GER joint) route between Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft.