hurricanemk1c

There's a 3 C3K diagram booked Thursday - Saturday, 0933ish Belfast - Dublin and 1221 return. Frequently mistaken for covering a DD set

Nothing funny about it.Loco hauled trains only start to become more economical after 6/7 vehicles (it varies depending on the actual ones used). Under that it's considerably more efficient to use railcars with distributed traction, for performance, financial and environmental reasons. 7 ICR tests are purely for comissioning the new B2 centre cars Enthusiast wants are rather low on the pecking order for new fleets

They were posted either Thursday or Friday so depends on your mail system. I got mine along with several others on Monday

Apart from your posts from January 2014.........

There's been overnight training and trials too, just because nobody sees it doesn't mean nothing has happened.

I wonder who I took inspiration from!!

Quality books have high prices. If there's substantial new research and it's a topic you're interested in, knock yourself out and buy it. If not, move on. I've bought several books with "high" prices and all, in my opinion, have been worth it for the content.

Easter 2023 saw a long long weekend in The Netherlands, flying over on the Thursday and back the following Wednesday. Primarily for two concerts (Charlotte Wessels in Haarlem and Floor Jansen in Amsterdam), plenty of railway interest too with Traxx+ICRm formations between Amsterdam and Rotterdam/Brussels (although new Alstom ICNG sets are entering traffic), 1700s still on Berlin trains and a fantastic visit to the Spoorwegmuseum (which was having an "open train day" so many exhibits were open). Full album link - https://flickr.com/photos/hurricanemk1c/albums/72177720308734361/page1 Regards, Kieran

Planes can move left, right, up or down out of the way, trains can't. There's failures in comms there too and a set process around it which wouldn't work in a rail environment

Like ETCS Level 3 (in development) or CBTC (in use)? Both are better suited to consistent rolling stock characteristics than the relatively wide mixture of stock in use (a Tara Mines train has very different characteristics to a 85xx DART set). Such systems are not cheap by a long, long, long way, with many systems also having an absolute block system overlaid for when such systems fail. There's a lot that's happened in the last 30 years which has seen far greater service level on pretty much all routes (bar a couple), network expansion and generally reduced average run times. Cork for example has gone down from 2 hours 57 minutes in 1991 to 2 hours 37 minutes today, and increased service level from 16 to 29 services a weekday. That factor is never considered in random comparisons against the best performing trains decades ago and what we have today. Incidentally, while DART+ will have an impact, it will likely be less than people imagine. There's also due to be increased service levels for NIR which is equally never discussed. Always, always DART to blame.

Still not comparing like with like. 2 stops is not 4 stops. That is my point. Now they are 2 hours 12 minutes (generally) with 4 stops on a considerably busier network on both sides of the border, the NIR section in particular never being highlighted as an issue which is equally so due to signalling constraints.

1947 Enterprise was also non stop, compared to four stops, the dwell time alone being 6.5 minutes, and a stop on average costs an extra 2.5 minutes in acceleration and deceleration, so that's 16.5 minutes just for stops. I really hate when people just look at a time and go "oh it was better then" without actually properly comparing them. There has been trains sub two hours in the last year.

Batteries are useless for long distance operation, plus the environmental impact of creating the batteries and recycling them end of life. It's several tonnes extra per vehicle to carry around, and the heavier the vehicle the more energy required to move it. Electrification is the only way to go for proper reductions in emissions and to secure the long-term viability of the railway network. I will admit that some routes (for example the Nenagh branch) wouldn't, at the moment, justify electrification and alternative methods would be possible. That Wabtec loco is 177 tonnes. A 201 is 112 - so 65 tonnes (or approximately a Baby GM) heavier

March 2023 was a busy month for me, with the final ICR delivery and a trip to Switzerland making two significant parts of the month, along with shots of the Sperry train in action. All photos here - https://www.flickr.com/photos/hurricanemk1c/albums/72177720307938147 Regards, Kieran

While some routes would never be economically viable to electrify, it's more than possible to electrify from an infrastructural viewpoint. A bridge can be raised (if planned correctly) over a bank holiday weekend. It's planned for the Maynooth line and electrification proposals for the Phoenix Park Tunnel are in progress as per the public consultation. 071s can't last forever, neither can 201s, and parts are starting to become harder to get by. If Enterprise goes for loco propulsion, a full fleet replacement would be beneficial both to standardise parts, training and reduce the cost per vehicle. There is a project plan to convert at least one 071 to hydrogen power

February 2023 was reasonably quite, with a trip to the UK at the beginning of the month, the new Track Recording Vehicle on trial and more more ICR B2 car deliveries All photos - https://flickr.com/photos/hurricanemk1c/albums/72177720307588624 Regards, Kieran

I've always believed it was to clearly mark it as an outlying platform. Numbering Platform 10 as Platform 9 would indicate it was close to Platform 8 even though it's not. Similar ideas are used in Europe, with stations on different levels (such as Zurich Hb) being numbered in different series (1-11 being street level, 21-24 next level down, 31-34 level below etc). Additionally they frequently number the tracks rather than platform. For example, a station with through road (so platform, through, through, platform) would be Platform 1 and Platform4, 2 and 3 being the nominal through platforms

It's a fuel consumption based on max rpm with a 1,000 tonne load according to the RSS website. As is though I'd struggle to see an application for a loco with a 33-ton axle load!

January 2023 was a quiet month for me, only taking rail photos on three days of the month. Main highlight was as below All photos - https://www.flickr.com/photos/hurricanemk1c/albums/72177720306915806 February was a bit busier! Kieran

DART+ West ground preparation work is due to start in October 2023 with drainage works according to the Network Statement

Several sets were painted, but with the slow progress the last sets weren't painted but wrapped in vinyl, hence the article. Although rather late as the last one was done in September from memory

I was more pointing out about Guinness starting up their railway again, which is covered under the same law as any railway above 350mm gauge (Guinness being approx 560mm). It's a business decision, Diageo couldn't care less about the distance between the rails!

Lot more than just that, as the gauge is over 350mm would have to meet the full CRR requirements (for a loco have a look at document CRR-036A). Restoring it would be the simple part, everything else around it wouldn't be and probably not worth it when there's currently two heritage railways with steam, and more on the horizon

Frames and boilers had different numbers in the same series, think Guinness actually numbered the locos by boiler rather than frame just to confuse everyone!

Narrow gauge is "temporary" (operating cert covers the running of it for 5 years).