on the subject of re-releasing the existing model. i think all the
major points could be sorted out fairly easily. a good half f the
complaints posted earlier on this forum were to do with
paintwork. this would be corrected anyway. and let us not forget
that a re-release could then be painted in all the other livery
variations that we never saw from hornby previously.

my second point is that a re-release would be fitted with scale
wheels and probably a new motor as well. this would also in turn
resuls in a new bogie on the power car.

i dont think anything would be done about the windows (other
than correcting the silver window surround) but frankly i think it is
close enough. the lengths of the coaches and power cars i feel
are close enough.

if spare trailers were made available then i dare say etched
overlays would be made buy one of the many kit manufacturers
to kit bash intermediate cars.

lastly it has been suggester on this forum that there would be
insuffecient demand for this model. i think this model would fly
off shelves in the hands of modellers and children alike.

Peter

Hi All,
Ive just come back from Shildon after completing the re-build of E
train. She is now fully on display.

I will post a major update on the website ASAP.

In the mean time, see the pictures in the photo section.

Enjoy

Paul
APT-E Conservation & Support Group

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4507168246

Bathmatus

---

Moving house? Beach bar in Thailand? New Wardrobe? Win £10k with Yahoo! Mail to make your dream a reality.

Hi All,
Just posted a quick snip of E train on display at Shildon, find it
in the files scetion.

Enjoy.

Regards

Paul
APT-E Conservation & Support Group, Locomotion, Shildon

HI Paul

APT-E looks great on your video, I'm looking forward to seeing the rest
soon.

Ralph

Slightly off topic but still very interesting:

http://www.hitachi-rail.com/products/rv/tilting/tilting_features.html

Ian

With all due respect to Messers Hitachi................ cobblers!

Using the geometry they show in their diagrams the car pivots around the
passenger's head level when they're standing up. That means that when they
are sitting down, more than 80% of the time I hope, they will be having
some hefty lateral accelerations just BECAUSE they are sitting down. The
transient accelerations as the car starts and stops it's tilt motion will
also be quite high.

Not only that, with any pendulum type system, a la Spanish Talgo trains,
the tilt response rate just isn't fast enough to compensate in real time,
unless you limit the speed of the train.

Hitachi are not comparing apples with apples here, the JNR narrow gauge
trains don't run anywhere near the speeds that the Euro tilting trains do,
and the systems are correspondingly different.

Regards
Kit

This series is being repeated from 15th December on BBC1 in the early
hours for those of us who missed it the first time around (including me)

I think the APT was in programme four ?!


Rob
www.apt-p.com

Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time Wed 15 Dec, 03:15 - 03:45
BBC One
Series celebrating bloopers both great and small, including the branding
of British Airways tail-fins, changing the flavour of Coke, and the
Millennium Dome. [Signed]

Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time Thu 16 Dec, 02:20 - 02:50
BBC One
A celebration of cock-ups great and small and a chance to look afresh
at famous incidents, like Neil Kinnock's walk on Brighton beach and
some of George W Bush's great speeches. [Signed]

Hi all
today i called into locomotion at shildon and saw the apt-e train there and
shes had a very good paint job on her. but 1 question where did the extra
bogie come from?

i thought the formation was pc1-tc1-tc2-pc2


nigel


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.808 / Virus Database: 550 - Release Date: 08/12/2004

I didn't see that particular episode but I did see the last episode
in the series, which provided a succinct summary of the items shown
in the previous episodes.

The voice-over started the summary with "We've seen ...", and when he
reached the APT (signified by a short piece of APT footage) he
said "the train that was 25 years too late, ...'.

Too late? More like too early.

Nigel,

>but 1 question where did the extra bogie come from?<

The bogie that's currently supporting the free end of TC1 is the last ever
Swinging Arm bogie that we used under TC2 when it was exhibited in the
Great Hall at York in the late 70s. At that time I built a small hydraulic
pack that lived in the pit under TC2 so that the coach could tilt, albeit
under manual control, and the motion of the bogies could be seen by Joe
Public. Sadly the spoil sport HASWE decided it was too 'dangerous' and
stopped the process. Hadn't they heard of barriers?

That SA bogie was one of the ones off POP-Train and as such is the last bit
of POP still in existance. (I keep on suggesting to Paul that we should
build a brand new POP-Train, after all it's only some RHS sections and
sheet steel welded together <g>)

Both the the SA bogie and the E1T under TC2 have a socking great bracket
welded on the outer end of the steering beam to anchor it down to the
ground properly. Hopefully the guys at Shildon will grasp the necessity of
doing this, which the York NRM people never did manage.

>I thought the formation was pc1-tc1-tc2-pc2<<

It was originally, and never ran any other way in 4 car form. Unfortunately
when the vehicles were moved to Shildon someone got their 1s mixed up with
their 2s
and now it's lined up as PC1-TC2 gap TC1-PC2. This means we can't bolt up
the pin joints under the joint modules as there are two female and two male
joints facing each other. We can fix that by swapping the pin joint
brackets, but the bolts are torqued to over 400 ft-lbs from memory!!

Swapping the cars around apparently isn't practical. Paul and I have talked
about repainting PC1 as PC2 and vice versa, but of course we in the Support
Group and those on the List will know the truth <g>

Regards
Kit

please could somebody measure their model and tell me how much
shorter it really is than true scale.

it should be
DTS-21.44m
TBF 21.1m
NDM 20.4m

i am currently in the process of making a resin mould for the lima
mk3 sleeper and want something for my next project.

peter

----- Original Message -----

From: Kit Spackman

To: INTERNET:Advanced-Passenger-Train@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 11:02 AM

Subject: <APT Group> E Train at Shildon

Nigel,

>but 1 question where did the extra  bogie come from?<

The bogie that's currently supporting the free end of TC1 is the last ever
Swinging Arm bogie that we used under TC2 when it was exhibited in the
Great Hall at York in the late 70s. At that time I built a small hydraulic
pack that lived in the pit under TC2 so that the coach could tilt, albeit
under manual control, and the motion of the bogies could be seen by Joe
Public. Sadly the spoil sport HASWE decided it was too 'dangerous' and
stopped the process. Hadn't they heard of barriers?

That SA bogie was one of the ones off POP-Train and as such is the last bit
of POP still in existance. (I keep on suggesting to Paul that we should
build a brand new POP-Train, after all it's only some RHS sections and
sheet steel welded together <g>)

Both the the SA bogie and the E1T under TC2 have a socking great bracket
welded on the outer end of the steering beam to anchor it down to the
ground properly. Hopefully the guys at Shildon will grasp the necessity of
doing this, which the York NRM people never did manage.

>I thought the formation was pc1-tc1-tc2-pc2<<

It was originally, and never ran any other way in 4 car form. Unfortunately
when the vehicles were moved to Shildon someone got their 1s mixed up with
their 2s
and now it's lined up as PC1-TC2 gap TC1-PC2. This means we can't bolt up
the pin joints under the joint modules as there are two female and two male
joints facing each other. We can fix that by swapping the pin joint
brackets, but the bolts are torqued to over 400 ft-lbs from memory!!

Swapping the cars around apparently isn't practical. Paul and I have talked
about repainting PC1 as PC2 and vice versa, but of course we in the Support
Group and those on the List will know the truth <g>

Regards
Kit

Well, yes she SHOULD be the correct way round, but............

The contractors got mixed up with the formation, the various parts
where reversed in the action of loading and unloading.

Both myself and Kit have spent many days working on E train during
the split and move. As she is built like nothing else, we were
drafted to help out the contactors, they had no idea how to lift and
move her.

Once we got to Shildon, it was far too late for them to swap the
powercars over, please note, its take 13 days to complete the split
and move.

We can all take comfort from she is now saft, under cover and will
be here for many many years now.

I am taking to Locomotion about re-starting the support group in the
New Year, as we still have a lot of work to do, although she is by
far the best item on display, and very much the most striking.

She is displayed in an OK fashion, but we can make it a lot better
in time.

I started the support group, with the move to Shildon top of the
agenda, so to that end, I think the major part of the support groups
actions have been completed.

Regards

Paul
APT-E Conservation & Support Group

--- In Advanced-Passenger-Train@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Johnson
Pianos" <brian@b...> wrote:

> Just swap the formation back to how she should be, a

museum/collection of any kind is supposed to be preserving items in
their as original state.

>
> The National Railway Collection needs a kick up the back side,

after all if we were to mess around with Mallard they would probably
go mad.

>
> Keep E train as she is and get who ever messed it up to be there

getting her back together!

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Kit Spackman
> To: INTERNET:Advanced-Passenger-Train@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 11:02 AM
> Subject: <APT Group> E Train at Shildon
>
>
> Nigel,
>
> >but 1 question where did the extra bogie come from?<
>
> The bogie that's currently supporting the free end of TC1 is the

last ever

> Swinging Arm bogie that we used under TC2 when it was exhibited

in the

> Great Hall at York in the late 70s. At that time I built a small

hydraulic

> pack that lived in the pit under TC2 so that the coach could

tilt, albeit

> under manual control, and the motion of the bogies could be seen

by Joe

> Public. Sadly the spoil sport HASWE decided it was

too 'dangerous' and

> stopped the process. Hadn't they heard of barriers?
>
> That SA bogie was one of the ones off POP-Train and as such is

the last bit

> of POP still in existance. (I keep on suggesting to Paul that we

should

> build a brand new POP-Train, after all it's only some RHS

sections and

> sheet steel welded together <g>)
>
> Both the the SA bogie and the E1T under TC2 have a socking great

bracket

> welded on the outer end of the steering beam to anchor it down

to the

> ground properly. Hopefully the guys at Shildon will grasp the

necessity of

> doing this, which the York NRM people never did manage.
>
> >I thought the formation was pc1-tc1-tc2-pc2<<
>
> It was originally, and never ran any other way in 4 car form.

Unfortunately

> when the vehicles were moved to Shildon someone got their 1s

mixed up with

> their 2s
> and now it's lined up as PC1-TC2 gap TC1-PC2. This means we

can't bolt up

> the pin joints under the joint modules as there are two female

and two male

> joints facing each other. We can fix that by swapping the pin

joint

> brackets, but the bolts are torqued to over 400 ft-lbs from

memory!!

>
> Swapping the cars around apparently isn't practical. Paul and I

have talked

> about repainting PC1 as PC2 and vice versa, but of course we in

the Support

> Group and those on the List will know the truth <g>
>
> Regards
> Kit
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------

> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Advanced-Passenger-Train/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Advanced-Passenger-Train-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms

of Service.

hi mate, did you get that vhs i sent you was it ok? only 12mins but all
helps, i have origional cam-corder tape if that copy crap.
as 4 e-train i think its going to have to come out in time because ive still
got a lot of weilding and grinding to do and you cant realy have that with
public walking round so being in split formation is a bonus 4 now we could
just shunt half out for repairs. let us know whats going on when you see
them mate and have a hapy christmas

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Leadley" <PAUL@...>
To: <Advanced-Passenger-Train@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 10:12 AM
Subject: <APT Group> Re: E Train at Shildon


>
>
> Well, yes she SHOULD be the correct way round, but............
>
> The contractors got mixed up with the formation, the various parts
> where reversed in the action of loading and unloading.
>
> Both myself and Kit have spent many days working on E train during
> the split and move. As she is built like nothing else, we were
> drafted to help out the contactors, they had no idea how to lift and
> move her.
>
> Once we got to Shildon, it was far too late for them to swap the
> powercars over, please note, its take 13 days to complete the split
> and move.
>
> We can all take comfort from she is now saft, under cover and will
> be here for many many years now.
>
> I am taking to Locomotion about re-starting the support group in the
> New Year, as we still have a lot of work to do, although she is by
> far the best item on display, and very much the most striking.
>
> She is displayed in an OK fashion, but we can make it a lot better
> in time.
>
> I started the support group, with the move to Shildon top of the
> agenda, so to that end, I think the major part of the support groups
> actions have been completed.
>
> Regards
>
> Paul
> APT-E Conservation & Support Group
>
> --- In Advanced-Passenger-Train@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Johnson
> Pianos" <brian@b...> wrote:
> > Just swap the formation back to how she should be, a
> museum/collection of any kind is supposed to be preserving items in
> their as original state.
> >
> > The National Railway Collection needs a kick up the back side,
> after all if we were to mess around with Mallard they would probably
> go mad.
> >
> > Keep E train as she is and get who ever messed it up to be there
> getting her back together!
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Kit Spackman
> > To: INTERNET:Advanced-Passenger-Train@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 11:02 AM
> > Subject: <APT Group> E Train at Shildon
> >
> >
> > Nigel,
> >
> > >but 1 question where did the extra bogie come from?<
> >
> > The bogie that's currently supporting the free end of TC1 is the
> last ever
> > Swinging Arm bogie that we used under TC2 when it was exhibited
> in the
> > Great Hall at York in the late 70s. At that time I built a small
> hydraulic
> > pack that lived in the pit under TC2 so that the coach could
> tilt, albeit
> > under manual control, and the motion of the bogies could be seen
> by Joe
> > Public. Sadly the spoil sport HASWE decided it was
> too 'dangerous' and
> > stopped the process. Hadn't they heard of barriers?
> >
> > That SA bogie was one of the ones off POP-Train and as such is
> the last bit
> > of POP still in existance. (I keep on suggesting to Paul that we
> should
> > build a brand new POP-Train, after all it's only some RHS
> sections and
> > sheet steel welded together <g>)
> >
> > Both the the SA bogie and the E1T under TC2 have a socking great
> bracket
> > welded on the outer end of the steering beam to anchor it down
> to the
> > ground properly. Hopefully the guys at Shildon will grasp the
> necessity of
> > doing this, which the York NRM people never did manage.
> >
> > >I thought the formation was pc1-tc1-tc2-pc2<<
> >
> > It was originally, and never ran any other way in 4 car form.
> Unfortunately
> > when the vehicles were moved to Shildon someone got their 1s
> mixed up with
> > their 2s
> > and now it's lined up as PC1-TC2 gap TC1-PC2. This means we
> can't bolt up
> > the pin joints under the joint modules as there are two female
> and two male
> > joints facing each other. We can fix that by swapping the pin
> joint
> > brackets, but the bolts are torqued to over 400 ft-lbs from
> memory!!
> >
> > Swapping the cars around apparently isn't practical. Paul and I
> have talked
> > about repainting PC1 as PC2 and vice versa, but of course we in
> the Support
> > Group and those on the List will know the truth <g>
> >
> > Regards
> > Kit
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Advanced-Passenger-Train/
> >
> > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Advanced-Passenger-Train-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
> of Service.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

A Pendolino train was abandoned in Coventry on sat lunchtime with its
wheels on fire,it was there when i arrived 390003.Did this ever
happen to APT i dont remember APT having this occur.

http://iccoventry.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100localnews/tm_objectid=14974074%26method=full%26siteid=50003%26headline=train%2dwheels%2dfire%2dalert-name_page.html

Could someone please let me know the width and height of APT-P. Any
unit will do, so long as the measurements are accurate.

Specifically, I would like to know the width and height of the coach
cross-section as seen on page 28 of BR's official APT booklet.

Ta.

Hi Alan

Yahoo has been down during the last couple of days when I tried to
reply so sorry for the delay.

See

www.apt-p.com/DiagDTS.tif

for APT dimensions.



Rob
www.apt-p.com


--- In Advanced-Passenger-Train@yahoogroups.com, "Alan" <yahoo@h...>
wrote:

>
> Could someone please let me know the width and height of APT-P. Any
> unit will do, so long as the measurements are accurate.
>
> Specifically, I would like to know the width and height of the

coach

> cross-section as seen on page 28 of BR's official APT booklet.
>
> Ta.

Wow, they are stunning! Thank you very much!

---

Win a castle for NYE with your mates and Yahoo! Messenger

>2. When & where was the POP train scrapped?

Scrapped October 1985 by Ward Ferrous Metals at Derby RTC.

Simon

hi Brian,

>1. Some photo's of APT-E's power cars seem to feature a lamp bracket just

above the lights on the left side, >in other photo's there isn't one. Was
it removed or added?<

The bracket was a flat piece of steel that just plugged into a rectangular
hole moulded in the fibreglass nose cone. When we didn't need it there we
just yanked it out and put it in the other end. Despite having electric
tail lights we stil had to have an old style lamp as well. So
silly.........

>Scrapped October 1985 by Ward Ferrous Metals at Derby RTC.<

Sadists! The first tilting rail vehicle in Europe too! That's why we should
build a replica <g>

Regards
Kit

----- Original Message -----

From: Simon Bendall

To: Advanced-Passenger-Train@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 7:31 PM

Subject: Re: <APT Group> More Questions!

>2. When & where was the POP train scrapped?

Scrapped October 1985 by Ward Ferrous Metals at Derby RTC.

Simon

> The bracket was a flat piece of steel that just plugged into a rectangular
> hole moulded in the fibreglass nose cone. When we didn't need it there we
> just yanked it out and put it in the other end. Despite having electric
> tail lights we stil had to have an old style lamp as well. So
> silly.........

Why was that? Did the rule book not only specify that a red tail lamp be
carried, but that it should also be of a specific type...? Seems odd. When
was this changed (presumably modern stock is allowed to use electrics tail
lights without the need for an oil lamp as well).

Cheers, Howard.

The rule book had already become anachronistic with the wide spread entry into service of both continuous brakes and multiple units, as the lamp, or absence of it, was supposed to inform the signalman that the train had parted. Battery lamps were not considered reliable enough to replace oil lamps.

It was not until the advent of the flashing LED lamp, designed and developed by my BR Research colleague Gerry Fisher, that battery lamps gained wide acceptance.

Regards

Gerry Bates

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

On 19/12/2004 at 10:20 Howard Sprenger wrote:

>> The bracket was a flat piece of steel that just plugged into a
>rectangular
>> hole moulded in the fibreglass nose cone. When we didn't need it there we
>> just yanked it out and put it in the other end. Despite having electric
>> tail lights we stil had to have an old style lamp as well. So
>> silly.........
>
>Why was that? Did the rule book not only specify that a red tail lamp be
>carried, but that it should also be of a specific type...? Seems odd.
>When
>was this changed (presumably modern stock is allowed to use electrics tail
>lights without the need for an oil lamp as well).
>
>Cheers, Howard.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>This email has been verified as Virus free
>Virus Protection and more available at http://www.plus.net

> The rule book had already become anachronistic with the wide spread entry
> into service of both continuous brakes and multiple units, as the lamp, or
> absence of it, was supposed to inform the signalman that the train had
> parted. Battery lamps were not considered reliable enough to replace oil
> lamps.
>
> It was not until the advent of the flashing LED lamp, designed and
> developed by my BR Research colleague Gerry Fisher, that battery lamps
> gained wide acceptance.

Thanks Gerry. I'm still not clear about whether the rule book actually
specified oil lamps, though. You say that battery lamps eventually gained
acceptance, but there's an implication that a rule change was required to
allow their use - otherwise, why did the electric lamps on the APT (and
incidentally, on earlier stock like the Blue Pullman) have to be
supplemented by lamps placed on brackets?

Cheers, Howard.

Good question, why where 3 P trains built? And how much did each one cost?

Ian


"Mark Drury" wrote:

>One thing I've always wanted to know is why 3 P trains were built.

Mark,
The original diesel pilot scheme (1955?) provided
multiple locos of the same type for evaluation.
Later, BR ordered 100+ class 17s ( warning these
figures are subject to poor memory recall) a.k.a
'Claytons', without testing a pilot batch and they
were not very reliable so there seems not to have been
a consistant policy.

Another thought is that the HST was relatively
conventional when compared to the APT so perhaps they
felt more confident about it. Although after the above
mentioned debacle you have to wonder.

Another way of looking at it is that 3 was all they
were allowed to make, well actually it was 4, but had
they had the funding to build 100 sets and had done
so, they would not have been able to give up.
<rant>
If only the rolling stock dept hadn't been so pig
headed and insisted on starting from scratch and then
hadn't tried to make the powercar tilt, potentially
years could have been saved, the political and
economic conditions would have been different and who
knows... maybe there would have been no HST-S at all?
</rant>

slightly off topic,
Did HST-P ever carry fare paying passengers?

Laurie







___________________________________________________________
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Ian and Mark,

>Good question, why where 3 P trains built? And how much did each one

cost?<

Rob may have a better idea than me, but as I recall we needed enough trains
to run a 'starter service' and 3 was the minimum number possible to do
that. One northbound on any one day, one southbound and one in for
maintenance.

However, ther original plan was for more many more. I recall talking to
Lucas about building 50 or 80 trailer car tilt packs and this would
indicate 4 or more trains plus some spares. It's all a long time ago
though....

Regards
Kit

----- Original Message -----

From: Kit Spackman

To: INTERNET:Advanced-Passenger-Train@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 4:19 PM

Subject: <APT Group> Why 3 P Trains?

Ian and Mark,

>Good question, why where 3 P trains built? And how much did each one
cost?<

Rob may have a better idea than me, but as I recall we needed enough trains
to run a 'starter service' and 3 was the minimum number possible to do
that. One northbound on any one day, one southbound and one in for
maintenance.

However, ther original plan was for more many more. I recall talking to
Lucas about building 50 or 80 trailer car tilt packs and this would
indicate 4 or more trains plus some spares. It's all a long time ago
though....

Regards
Kit

I hope that everyone in the Group has a Joyful Christmas and a Happy New
Year.

And remember that if the horizon seems not to be quite level at any time,
it's probably NOT R103 on your personal tilt control system that needs
trimming <g>

Regards
Kit

A Happy Christmas and a fanastic New Year to everyone on the group.

Lets keep the APT alive.

Regards

Paul
APT-E Conservation & Support Group, NRM, Shildon

According to the excellent Rail Express magazine, 20 years ago this
month an APT smashed the London-Glasgow record.

Is says that on December 12th 1984 the ten car APT, with power cars
Sc49003 and Sc49006, departed from Euston at 16:35 and covered the
401.25 mile journey to Glasgow Central in just 3 hours 53 minutes,
which represents an average speed of 103mph.

The entire journey was in the dark (hmmmm!) and included an
unscheduled 2-minute signal stop at Stafford.

The magazine also states that a maximum speed of 138mph was reached
near Blisworth, but it's not clear if this was during the previous
record on 7th December 1981.


I never knew about this record, and it hasn't been mentioned in
the group. Did anyone here know?

I've recorded the episode that talks about APT.

Unfortunately it's a signed version (there's a woman in the
bottom right corner waving her arms about), but on the plus side it
was recorded from Freeview (digital, widescreen).

I'll capture the relevant section and post it in the files folder
ASAP, but for now I will post the first few seconds of audio.

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the Advanced-Passenger-Train
group.

File : /FullAudio_LOW.wav
Uploaded by : apw6270 <yahoo@...>
Description : Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time (APT) - Full audio.

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Advanced-Passenger-Train/files/FullAudio_LOW.wav

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

apw6270 <yahoo@...>

Tilt & Hydrokinetic brakes excepted, how uch APT-P is in a class 91?

Sorry about this but I'm having problems uploading the video file.

It works fine for files up to just over 2Mb, but larger than that I
get the standard 'The page cannot be displayed' page after a minute
or two.

Yahoo groups allow individual files up to 5Mb, so that's not the
problem. I increased my browser's timeout setting but that had no
effect.

I may just have to split the file into 2Mb chunks.

Bear with me; I will not be defeated.

OK, I've done it.

I tinkered around with the audio and video settings to improve them,
and that resulted in a file of over 5Mb, so I had to split it anyway.

The files and full instructions are in the appropriate folder in the
files section.

Grab it quick before it goes.

Hi all,

This is a direct quote from the "British Railways General Appendix to
Working Timetables and books of Rules and Regulations", issued by the
Railway Clearing House, dated 1st October 1960, and delivered to Maryport
Grasslot Crossing Signalbox:-

(page 41)

6) Head and Tail Lights and Destination Indicators
The Driver is responsible for ensuring, at any turning round point, that the
train classification / route indicator is suitably blanked out and the light
extinguished before he proceeds to the other end of the train.
An oil tail lamp must be carried on the rearmost vehicle and a spare oil
tail lamp, properly trimmed, must be carried in the Guard's compartment to
enable the provisions of Rule 204 to be complied with.

The rule, agreed with the train unions, specified an oil lamp, thus the need
for the removable lamp bracket.
The rule appears without the "oil" in the 1982 version, the last I have
here.

I hope that is some help

Stephen

> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:08:34 +0000
> From: "Gerry Bates" <gerry@...>
> Subject: Re[4]: E train lamp bracket
>
> Sorry about the delay, Howard
>
> I've been cogitating on that one!
>
> I was once - and might still be - in possession of a Rule Book from the

1950s. Until it should turn up I can only offer conjecture.

>
> I don't think that the rule book specifically mentioned oil lamps but I'm

sure that it specified the use of a removable lamp at the end of the train.

>
> There was definitely a rule change to allow built-in tail lamps.
>
> Regards
>
> Gerry
>
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>
> On 20/12/2004 at 22:17 Howard Sprenger wrote:
>
> >> The rule book had already become anachronistic with the wide spread
> >entry
> >> into service of both continuous brakes and multiple units, as the lamp,
> >or
> >> absence of it, was supposed to inform the signalman that the train had
> >> parted. Battery lamps were not considered reliable enough to replace

oil

> >> lamps.
> >>
> >> It was not until the advent of the flashing LED lamp, designed and
> >> developed by my BR Research colleague Gerry Fisher, that battery lamps
> >> gained wide acceptance.
> >
> >Thanks Gerry. I'm still not clear about whether the rule book actually
> >specified oil lamps, though. You say that battery lamps eventually gained
> >acceptance, but there's an implication that a rule change was required to
> >allow their use - otherwise, why did the electric lamps on the APT (and
> >incidentally, on earlier stock like the Blue Pullman) have to be
> >supplemented by lamps placed on brackets?
> >
> >Cheers, Howard.
> >

Thanks, Stephen

That sorts that out!

Regards

Gerry

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

On 30/12/2004 at 16:17 STEPHEN FORD wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>This is a direct quote from the "British Railways General Appendix to
>Working Timetables and books of Rules and Regulations", issued by the
>Railway Clearing House, dated 1st October 1960, and delivered to Maryport
>Grasslot Crossing Signalbox:-
>
>(page 41)
>
>6) Head and Tail Lights and Destination Indicators
>The Driver is responsible for ensuring, at any turning round point, that
>the
>train classification / route indicator is suitably blanked out and the
>light
>extinguished before he proceeds to the other end of the train.
>An oil tail lamp must be carried on the rearmost vehicle and a spare oil
>tail lamp, properly trimmed, must be carried in the Guard's compartment to
>enable the provisions of Rule 204 to be complied with.
>
>The rule, agreed with the train unions, specified an oil lamp, thus the
>need
>for the removable lamp bracket.
>The rule appears without the "oil" in the 1982 version, the last I have
>here.
>
>I hope that is some help
>
>Stephen
>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:08:34 +0000
>> From: "Gerry Bates" <gerry@...>
>> Subject: Re[4]: E train lamp bracket
>>
>> Sorry about the delay, Howard
>>
>> I've been cogitating on that one!
>>
>> I was once - and might still be - in possession of a Rule Book from the
>1950s. Until it should turn up I can only offer conjecture.
>>
>> I don't think that the rule book specifically mentioned oil lamps but I'm
>sure that it specified the use of a removable lamp at the end of the train.
>>
>> There was definitely a rule change to allow built-in tail lamps.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Gerry
>>
>> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>>
>> On 20/12/2004 at 22:17 Howard Sprenger wrote:
>>
>> >> The rule book had already become anachronistic with the wide spread
>> >entry
>> >> into service of both continuous brakes and multiple units, as the
>lamp,
>> >or
>> >> absence of it, was supposed to inform the signalman that the train had
>> >> parted. Battery lamps were not considered reliable enough to replace
>oil
>> >> lamps.
>> >>
>> >> It was not until the advent of the flashing LED lamp, designed and
>> >> developed by my BR Research colleague Gerry Fisher, that battery lamps
>> >> gained wide acceptance.
>> >
>> >Thanks Gerry. I'm still not clear about whether the rule book actually
>> >specified oil lamps, though. You say that battery lamps eventually
>gained
>> >acceptance, but there's an implication that a rule change was required
>to
>> >allow their use - otherwise, why did the electric lamps on the APT (and
>> >incidentally, on earlier stock like the Blue Pullman) have to be
>> >supplemented by lamps placed on brackets?
>> >
>> >Cheers, Howard.
>> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>This email has been verified as Virus free
>Virus Protection and more available at http://www.plus.net

Good stuff - thanks all. I'd never realised that the rules actually
specified an oil lamp, but it does explain the need for lamp brackets on
rolling stock built well into the "electric age"! I suppose that even with
a loss of all power, an oil lamp would always protect the rear of a train
(assuming it didn't go out - presumably a very rare occurence).

Cheers, Howard.

Hi,
The design of E-train was rooted in aerospace
thinking. P-train it seems was influenced by or
influenced the design of a space craft!

Just watched 'Return of the Jedi' on tv today and was
struck by the resemblance of Darth Vadar's shuttle to
the nose of P-train.

The question is which came first? I expect that it is
more likely that there were Star Wars fans among the
designers of p-train rather than APT aficionados in
Lucas Arts.

However, the bizarre fact that BR held a patent on
nuclear propulsion for a space craft may have some
relevance.

have a look at..
http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=star%20wars%20imperial%20shuttle&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=wi

I just read this to my wife, her reply: "You anorak,
you utter anorak" ho hum

Happy new year to you all

Laurie





___________________________________________________________
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

So THAT's what went on in the RTC? It always seemed a space-age place when I
used to go past it as a lad.

I guess one of the legacies of privitasation is that the RTC has gone from
designing anti-matter powered spacecraft to servicing a load of 40 year old
diesels. That's progress, they tell me :-(

Happy new year to all APT-iacs!

Regards,
Adam Warr, Peterborough UK
Electra Railway Graphics
www.electrarailwaygraphics.co.uk
Fotopic Site:
http://www.adamsphotos.fotopic.net/

The APT-E was first, I don't remember the shuttle in any other films. It would be nice to think the shuttle models designer was thinking about APT-E!

Laurie Still <laurie_still@...> wrote:
Hi,
The design of E-train was rooted in aerospace
thinking. P-train it seems was influenced by or
influenced the design of a space craft!

Just watched 'Return of the Jedi' on tv today and was
struck by the resemblance of Darth Vadar's shuttle to
the nose of P-train.

The question is which came first? I expect that it is
more likely that there were Star Wars fans among the
designers of p-train rather than APT aficionados in
Lucas Arts.



Yahoo! Groups Links










---------------------------------
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

APT memorabilia for sale at eBay:

InterCity APT notepad: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4124&item=6502997887

APT-P fridge magnet: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=476&item=6144654591

APT-P keyring: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3628&item=6503910388

'A Promise Unfulfilled' (APT Bible!): http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=7541&item=4518131551

APT-P stamps: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=1445&item=6503953477


Happy Bidding!
Andy

http://AA-Rail-Pics.fotopic.net

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello,

I have a question regarding the P trains. I have seen some accounts recently that one of the reasons for the demise of the P trains was a safety concern regarding tilt failures. Has anyone else heard anything about this?

The basic concern seems to have been to do with a train sticking in the full tilt position facing inwards. I can see mention of this in the press feeding frenzy of December 1981, but it is also repeated in other more credible sources, and on the link below.

http://www.aether.demon.co.uk/coolkit/apt.html

I thought the whole point of the APT profile was that it fitted into the profile of a Mark 1 regardless of tilt position.

Thanks,

Gordon McLeod,