A number of discussions in the past have quoted Network Rail as saying there are no significant issues with OHLE in the tunnel. That's probably why it is in the electrification plan?

Paul

I'm sure there are huge difficulties in 'scaling up' Hydrogen production to the sort of quantities you'd need if a significant proportion of road vehicles used it.  Things like storage volumes needed,  safety requirements due to high pressures, the fire hazard etc.

IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly) Roger Ford did an article a few years ago and suggested the electrical energy required was off the scale just to separate the hydrogen, before you'd even stored or distributed it safely...

Paul

Easy mistake to make if you are in 'coach F' I'd have thought...

Paul

Speculation? - only in so much as it is based on the original rolling stock plan, which read 'First Great Western would introduce additional class 150 DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) vehicles for regional services around Bristol cascaded from London Midland'. 

Nobody has ever seriously suggested that isn't happening, it's the bit that refers to new units for LTV^▸ (London [and] Thames Valley) services that is looking like it's been completely cancelled.

Paul

I agree with this in principle, but not the timescale. The last few years it has been just about 3 weeks beforehand when the new fares have gone live - last year it was around the 7th or 8th of Dec. They haven't changed yet, I've been checking for the major upheaval in London fares if you don't use Oyster^▸ (Smartcard system used by passengers on Transport for London services) PAYG^▸ (Pay as you go). I'd estimate that the upload could happen this coming Monday?

Edit: 30th Nov could well be the date NFM05 data became available from 'The Manual' - AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) it isn't uploaded to the customer facing systems at the same time.

Paul

I thought they'd explicitly said the report will put forward only one fully engineered route (albeit with some local options), because of the huge issues with property blight in Kent when they proposed a number of different routes for the CTRL^▸ (Channel Tunnel Rail Link). 

So if it proposes for instance a route based on the existing Chiltern route , that will be the route, to all intents and purposes...

Paul

For a complex report anything around a year is good going. If they are straightforward they are much quicker. 

For instance I was reading a report about a fatality on a level crossing, and I think they were checking the visibility after waiting for the very same weather conditions to occur in the vicinity...  That sort of thing has to take time.

Paul

The cascade we are discussing will be triggered by the new build of 172s for LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise), LO and Chiltern. Although this was first proposed nearly 2 years ago, it was not planned to occur until 2010. That is the main reason why it hasn't happened yet, surely?

Paul

'The Railway' is large enough to self insure. Although they will have claim handlers to deal with third party claims by others, they won't be comprehensively insured against things like fire or theft. Their premiums would be just too high.  Because there is only one railway system, the premium charged for cover against cable theft would have to exceed the value of cable theft costs, IYSWIM

Other typical 'self insurers' are the Ministry of Defence, or large local authorities - the latter would never find an insurer willing to take on the risk of fire in all their schools for instance...

Car or house insurance only works because the risks are pooled by a large number of policyholders.

Paul

As I posted here last week, based on Modern Railways' article.  Note how the paper gets it completely wrong by suggesting that all 15 units (30 vehicles) were coming from LO, who only have 6 in use...

Paul

I think the Modern Railways story suggests that more 2 car units is the preference so that some of the 158s currently in use on diagrams 'other than Liverpool - Norwich' can be transferred onto that route, but they'll then operate with joining and splitting at Nottingham.  This is probably more beneficial than having 3 car trains that are pretty empty as they head through East Anglia.

Paul

The issue SN find themselves with is that they are also providing a certain level of service on Sat 26th. Presumably that will have to be paid at Bank Holiday rates as well.

I think the bottom line here is that the staff were paid extra for both days last time...

Something will have to give eventually, because the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) want a lot more services on 'Boxing Day' - otherwise every 6 years they'll have to deal with the Sat 26th and Mon 28th in lieu issue.

Paul

The famous Exmouth Junction prefabricated stuff is all rotting from the inside now though.  All the footbridges have been condemned, and there is a full replacement programme, as I discovered when reading a planning application for Woolston station's footbridge. (Woolston is a listed building believe it or not!) Modern analysis has found that when aggregates were in short supply, they went and picked some up from the local beach... 

They are apparently using standardised prefabricated steel footbridges for the 'access for all' works - Fratton, Fareham, Haslemere, Forest Hills, that I've seen recently, all have the same basic steelwork, with slight variations for the staircases - but they are clearly from the same catalogue.

Paul

Getting away from fares for a moment, how could NXEC^▸ (National Express East Coast) or GNER^▸ (Great North Eastern Railways) before them speed up the timetable? A quick glance at the mass of correspondence so far about the new ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) timetable for next December (on the ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) website) would suggest that the timetable is written by Network Rail, to meet requirements set by DfT^» (Department for Transport - about).

So Adonis saying that he can improve speeds is already down to DfT and NR^» (Network Rail - home page) to sort out, exactly the same as in the past.  As a recent example, the current WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) timetable was written by DfT as well...

Paul

Gillingham Tunnel nowadays, according to Network Rail's signage at the tunnel entrances...

By the way, another landslide this morning just north of Upwey (and those are some big embankments) has led to a SLW shuttle service between Dorchester South and Weymouth. I think FGW^▸ (First Great Western) are terminating at Dorchester West.

Paul