Project Wareham

The speed limit of 25mph is the biggest threat to the success of this scheme. Regular rail commuters will tell you almost without fail that they want reliability and shorter journey times over comfort and a host of other baubles like wifi and catering. The novelty of any journey wears off at the end of the first week, and this service is not viable with only the shopping and enthusiast market so it must attract and retain regular passengers, and to do so it must offer an attractive journey time. I speak as a commuter and an enthusiast and I can say with some confidence that my fellow travellers would happily trade in a slow journey on a "comfortable" or "interesting" unit for a faster journey - yes even on a Pacer!

 

The mainline has been re-aligned onto the old loop line with the old mainline replaced as just a headshunt with a point only at the southern (eastern) end - eventually it will act as a headshunt for the old oil sidings.

I'm not sure if there may be a longer term plan to re-instate it as a loop as there has been some talk of eventually extending some heritage services to (or near) Furzebrook - but I think this may be tied in with what happens to the old oil depot sidings which Swanage are still hoping to secure to give them potential depot space as storage and servicing facilities and space for such facilities are well behind what is need for the size of the current operation.

David R

Edit - Rumpole beat me to it!

 

There is definitely a plan for the loop to be reinstated, to the extent that a provisional signalling diagram has already been drawn up for phase 1 of the project. The plan is for the loop to be reinstated shorter than previously (if you look at Furzebrook as it is now, it is planned to curve in towards the main line where the current track panels end at the end of the siding), with the headshunt for the yard being put in as a separate turnout from the single line (facing in the Up direction). This is not as much tied up with obtaining the sidings, rather with financial priorities.

 

Good to see that the Local press can't get their facts right, even when they only have to copy straight from the Press Release and invent a suitable Headline!

Now it's a Major Network Rail Project

http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/...rail-project/story-28467899-detail/story.html

David R

 

Whilst valid points, doubling the line speed between Worgret and Norden will only take 4 minutes off the 36 minute jouney time. In addition some time between Norden and Swanage is taken up with station stops and the need to cross at least one other train on the single line so there is little opportunity for any significant time saving no matter what the line speed.

The timing is comparable with the bus and the service is not (initially at least) aimed at commuters, running on (probably) only 2 days aweek in the first year and between about 10.30 and 4.30. However, it should be attractive to tourists staying in Swanage and more importantly may attract some visitors to Swanage by rail. If it can increase the attractiveness of Swanage as a holiday destination (just because you can get there by train), then it is the making of a win-win situation for the railway and the local community - just as the Park and Ride was at Norden some 20 years ago. Think more Newquay branch in Cornwall rather than London commuter network.

David R

 

Converting 121's into a 117 would be like converting Swanage's M7 into a BR standard 4MT tank. There are a handful of 121's left and being single units fetch a ridiculous price whenever they change hands. In contrast, there are over 50 117's in preservation. If they wanted to expand the DMU service, the most cost effective solution would be to simply get another 117 set. The second 117 set they've already got would be a poor prospect for this, mainly due to its relatively poor condition, which makes it more useful as a spares bank for the 117 set that's going mainline.

Sent from my HTC Desire 620 using Tapatalk

 

I have to smile at the "2235 cu metres". Muck shifting isn't that precise!

 

And if you read the comments on this article http://m.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news...__but_trial_train_service_delayed_until_2017/ someone has blamed it on the EU!

 

What a bizarre set of comments!

 

Well. If the French hadn't bullied Europe into accepting the Metric system, the imperial sized bearings for those DMUs would still be available "off the shelf". Rather than having to be made in the only major country in the world to have the sense to use still imperial measurements (except their funny gallons!)

 

I wondered whether the poster had neglected to add his smiley but regretfully concluded that he meant it. I have experience of the changeover to metric units in the construction industry. I can't now remember the name but the industry's representative body decided in principle to adopt metric units in 1965. Technical committees debated what should be standard units and produced a changeover period to last from 1970 to 1975. The industry was therefore converted over 40 years ago apart from a few small players who continued with imperial measurements until they retired. On the planning side, the first legislation introduced with metric units was in 1969, since when metric units have been used exclusively. I am not sure about changeover in engineering but it probably took place about 100 years after it should have been. Twr's idea that spare parts for vehicles last made some 45 years ago would be on the shelf is some way from reality.

 

No. My personal opinion is that there was no need to change from imperial to metric measurements. The only advantage that metric linear measurements in metres and millimetres over feet and inches; is that lazy people don't have to learn how to do fractions in their heads.
I can, and do, use both imperial and metric, but never at the same time!

 

Diesel engines, even English designed ones have always used metric

Except the two Thorneycroft built 'O' type Sirron in Balmoral whose bolts were an unholy mix of Imperial & Metric.........................

 

Erm, most of the diesel engines I'm familiar with use UNF fasteners and threads. OK, they are old ones but they certainly aren't metric.

 

English Electric diesels are all BSF
British built Sulzer diesels are BSW
Leyland 680 DMU engines are BSF

Shall we go on?

 

.... and to confuse matters even more I believe that, long metricated Germany, still use BSP in their plumbing!
Ray.

 

It's still fanciful in the extreme to try to link the UK's general adoption of metric units to sourcing some obsolete bearings for a DMU.

 

As do the French.......

 

Eh? I've yet to see a preserved diesel or DMU with a metric engine?

Sent from my HTC Desire 620 using Tapatalk

 

The European standard for pipework is BSP. Just 'metricated' so 1½" is now 40mm. Exactly the same in reality