Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by David R, Jul 31, 2015.
How did the 121 get from Eastleigh to Swanage? That should be the same gauge as a 117.
Is the problem the route or the DMU? If the former, could the DMU be returned to Swanage via Yeovil Junction?
Looks like the 121 was dragged from Eastleigh to Swanage by a class 33 last July
So has some changed in the last 6 months?
According to RTT the 117 move "was cancelled due to the train operator's request" .
According to a post on wnxx issue is installation of a new location cabinet.
If correct may not bode well for the Duchess hauling any DCE's either if it is not sorted.
A poster on WNXX suggests that the issue relates to the recent installation of a new trackside location cabinet in the Brokenhurst area. This is just the sort of situation that can and does nullify the gaugeing clearence of many non standard rail vehicles on a fairly frequent basis. The problem is not usually insoluable, but sorting it can take time.
It’s an “anomaly” near Brockenhurst that someone needs to physically visit and confirm there isn’t an issue
There’s plenty of anomalies near Brockenhurst!
First comment, although a 121 and 117 class vehicles are the same bodyshell profile, but and this is a big but, in an industry led by spreadsheet and not always knowledge they are different class numbers and will need to be gauged as a separate exercise. ( For a while 35018 and 35028 had different gauging restrictions. In that case it is justified as '28's tyres have been turned down to give an extra half inch clearance.)
Secondly, running the Network Measurement Trains helps to find new structures which get close or impinge of the loading gauge profile. Perhaps the NMT hasn't covered the line through Brockenhurst recently and the gauging engineers are erring on the side of caution. It's better to cancel a train in a controlled manner than it is to risk taking a chunk out of rolling stock or knock a location box and it's wiring out of the way.
Gauging engineers still on Christmas holidays, more likely!
Makes you wonder if Network Rail and their contractors know what a loading gauge is. There have been several well documented incidents where steam locos have been damaged by clearance issues, the ones I think of most were 6000 hitting the overbridge at Paddington, 6201 losing its chimney one evening at Manchester, returning a railtour that had used the same track in the morning. The track had been tamped/lifted during the day, but clearances were never checked, and a Hall clipping a platform edge despite being cleared for the route ( it transpired that the track had been realigned the weekend before...). The banning of 'Manors' off the Cambrian ( pre ERTMS) was just as bad.
I understand the 117 was always going to be loco-hauled from Eastleigh.
Swanage Railway crews are being trained to operate Project Wareham services.
Correct. Last year relevant paperwork was submitted to the appropriate authorities covering planned passenger operations.
Like he said
DMMU 117 is planned to come home at the end this week BY ROAD from Eastleigh yard to Norden RRI
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Is that more expensive than rail and if so who pays the extra?
Well, as our (their) railways are not common carriers anymore, it will be at Swanrails cost.
It looks like one carriage a day - Thursday to Saturday.
Would three movements by road work out cheaper than a rail move via Yeovil Junction?
Just a warning if the hauliers are moving the final coach on Saturday.
The M27 is closed between M3 Junction 13 / M27 Junction 5 to M271 Junction 3 for demolition of the final part of the Romsey Road bridge near Rownhams services.
Separate names with a comma.