|
Btline
|
 |
« on: July 05, 2011, 17:54:35 » |
|
Sorry if I'm repeating stuff in the "COTSWOLD LINE REDOUBLING" thread, but I haven't got time to read all 88 pages of it!
Q1: What are the plans for new timetables in September and then December? I've heard something about hourly to Moreton. Will all Worcester trains be HST▸ , or is there still a shortage? What about 180s?
Q2: What on earth is that bridge at Charlbury? Poor old wheelchair users will need to travel about 3 miles to get from Platfrom 1 to 2. I thought NR» had a lift/bridge design that it used, or was this too expensive?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
willc
|
|
« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2011, 18:05:29 » |
|
1. See http://www.clpg.co.uk/Sept2011%20Timetable%20Plans.htm The only likely addition in December will be an HST▸ extended back from Oxford to start from Charlbury at 7.15am. No there aren't any more HSTs - where would they get them from? 2. Had Network Rail used its brdige with lifts - see Axminster - the howls of protest would have been heard all the way to Worcester, too big/tall/ugly. 3. Can people not add to this thread and stick to posting in the main one? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2011, 18:10:06 » |
|
1. Thanks - is this what is planned from December as well?
2. Don't understand. The one they've put up is hardly not ugly. It's certainly wider than the lifts model, and surely can't be much shorter. Anyway - it won't be me looking at it every day so I don't care.
3. If people think the old one is bloated, we could shut it down and continue on here. Newbies are going to be put off an 88 page thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2011, 18:34:19 » |
|
They (& you) could post their Q's into the original thread regardless, if you can't be bothered to read the latest 10 pages (which likely has all your answers). Makes no difference if on the end of that one or this one?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phil
|
|
« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2011, 21:14:10 » |
|
3. If people think the old one is bloated, we could shut it down and continue on here. Newbies are going to be put off an 88 page thread.
* removes moderator hat I have to say, I totally agree with this. / replaces hat |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #5 on: July 06, 2011, 17:10:29 » |
|
I disagree with 'Btline' and 'Phil' on this one - partly because I am looking forward to the original thread going past 100000 page views and then 100 actual pages! Being so long it makes interesting reading from the birth of the scheme, through to speculation about the design/scope, through the rumours of it being cancelled/delayed and then onto the actual work in progress.
For that reason, I think the original thread should continue as one and this one merged into it. What do others think?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #6 on: July 06, 2011, 17:14:14 » |
|
I'm with IndustryInsider on this one.....otherwise you might as well strip into threads of no more than 20 pages, marking them thread #1, #2, #3....but ugh!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SandTEngineer
|
|
« Reply #7 on: July 06, 2011, 20:32:38 » |
|
Erm....there is such a thing as a search facility on this site you know..........  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #8 on: July 08, 2011, 19:11:38 » |
|
The other reason is that the Cotwsold line redoubling has many different aspects to it.
Having every thread merged into a super thread means that topics get lost.
However I do appreciate the way it is a record of the whole project.
Really don't mind - tbh I'm just amazed it's finally finishing! Not that many years ago it was just an "aspiration". (i.e. never going to happen)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Chris from Nailsea
|
|
« Reply #9 on: July 08, 2011, 22:31:48 » |
|
Hmm.  To be fair, Btline, I have looked at the question of whether that particularly large topic could be broken down into more sizeable chunks, each covering a different aspect of the project. However, it's just not that easy: many posts refer to several aspects of the project, and taking any of them out of context would just lead to confusion. There has never been any merging of threads there, so far as I'm aware: the whole history of that topic has simply been the adding of replies to previous posts on that same thread. I have, however, several times taken the opportunity (often with very helpful input from willc) to split off into new topics some posts which were clearly unrelated to the main theme there, and which could stand on their own. That's probably as much as we can do, in practical terms - and, as has been pointed out, there is a search facility, if you wish to track any particular aspect of the overall redoubling project. I hope this helps. Chris. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
William Huskisson MP▸ was the first person to be killed by a train while crossing the tracks, in 1830. Many more have died in the same way since then. Don't take a chance: stop, look, listen.
"Level crossings are safe, unless they are used in an unsafe manner." Discuss.
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #10 on: July 11, 2011, 08:02:05 » |
|
Could all references to the locations of photos be remived (apart from say, the first & last)? That would trim some posts?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Chris from Nailsea
|
|
« Reply #11 on: July 12, 2011, 21:08:43 » |
|
Hmm. Would ChrisB's suggestion be alright with you, willc?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
William Huskisson MP▸ was the first person to be killed by a train while crossing the tracks, in 1830. Many more have died in the same way since then. Don't take a chance: stop, look, listen.
"Level crossings are safe, unless they are used in an unsafe manner." Discuss.
|
|
|
|
pbc2520
|
|
« Reply #12 on: July 16, 2011, 00:25:50 » |
|
Could all references to the locations of photos be remived (apart from say, the first & last)? That would trim some posts?
Here's a totally different idea. I think it would be good if, rather than removing the links, they were made more specific to point the batch of photos that Will was referring to at the time by e.g. replacing http://www.flickr.com/photos/willc2009/with http://www.flickr.com/photos/willc2009/archives/date-posted/2011/05/29/That way, the link is relevant to that point in the discussion which adds something for people reading through the thread. I'm not sure that removing the links helps make the thread more readable and, perhaps, removes something useful. (What if somebody arrives half-way along the thread via a search engine?) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #13 on: July 16, 2011, 08:58:24 » |
|
Point well made, Sir!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Electric train
|
|
« Reply #14 on: July 16, 2011, 09:34:16 » |
|
I am not a user of the Cotswold Line but would still hate to see the original thread messed about with; it is a great "history" of observation and comments on the progress and what the potential is of the redoubling which has been amplified by the dedicated photography by Willc.
The only think I would like is for Willc to add a hyper link in his signature to his flichr album of the redoubling
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Starship just experienced what we call a rapid unscheduled disassembly, or a RUD, during ascent,”
|
|
|
|
