On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 09:56:21 -0000 (UTC), Clank
<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:

>On 19 Jul 2022 at 12:26:31 PM EEST, "Sam Wilson"
><ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Clank <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> On 19 Jul 2022 at 12:46:56 AM EEST, "Charles Ellson"
>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 07:52:45 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank
>>>> <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:
>>>>>>> Dollars to donuts it's geometry changes as the knitting
>>>>>>> expands/contracts, and the obvious solution to that is shorter
>>>>>>> sections between tensioners.
>>>>>> Or winding in/out the anchored ends according to season.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes! Good idea, that would work :). Is that something you know
>>>>> that happens, or just a stroke of theoretical genius?
>>>>>
>>>> I am not sure I haven't actually seen it somewhere already but
>>>> possibly not intended for winter v. summer rather than allowing
>>>> occasional detensioning of a wire for other purposes.
>>>
>>> Making use of the Google Streetview research (;-)) I did for that other
>>> post... You can see the anchored end of a tensioned section in RO here:
>>>
>>> <https://goo.gl/maps/eUHpmPGU3HzEspbj6>
>>>
>>> It doesn't look to me like there is an obvious way to 'wind in' the OHL to
>>> compensate for seasonal changes, so not sure it's a solution that's used for
>>> that. Smart idea, though.
>>>
>>>
>>> (The other way to do it - completely automatically - of course would be if you
>>> arranged the OHL so that instead of being tensioned against a fixed anchor, it
>>> was a balanced pair (i.e. with weights at both ends of the section.) That
>>> would mean half as much movement in the wire at the extremities... But I can
>>> also imagine it would be an absolute ballache to put up and a maintenance
>>> nightmare :-).)
>>
>> Or do what we apparently do here and anchor in the middle of two runs, thus
>> approximately balancing the stress on the anchor point and avoiding the
>> issue of the slack all running to one end of the section.
>
>You misunderstand. That's just two sections of let's say 500m anchored at one
>end. The only thing you save by that is some anchoring on the midpoint; the
>amount of lateral motion at the end of each section is the same as if they
>were independent 500m sections each with their own anchor at the end.
>
>The thoroughly impractical hypothetical proposal was to hang weights off both
>ends of each 500m section. Although as well as being completely impractical,
>you could achieve the same result by just halving the lengths of sections
>instead ;).
>
If you hang weights off both ends there is no guarantee that the
movement matches at both ends. That could leave your far end (relative
to train direction) sitting on the ground while your pantograph tends
to stroke the wire toward it and make it sag.

On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 22:00:19 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank
<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:
>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 08:47:25 -0000 (UTC), Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>You have missed the pair of turnbuckles about 8-10ft to the left of
>> the pulley. Such devices come in different sizes and designs and
>> occasionally a posher description
>
>I absolutely have not.
>
>ButI assume you mean left of the anchor - you need to adjust the
> anchored end, not the weighted one, if the aim is to re-normalise
> the geometry each season - and they're about 8-10cm left of it,
> not feet. You don't need to adjust turnbuckles on the weighted
> end, since the whole point of the weights is that they very much
> adjust themselves.
>
That adjustment being defeated in hot weather.
>
>In any event, the ones pictured absolutely do not allow for the
> degree of adjustment we're talking about here
>
The amount of vertical movement of the weights is a multiple of the
longitudinal pull on the wire consequent to the pulley arrangement.
IOW your fixed end only has to be adjusted by a friction of the drop
that has to be compensated for at the weighted end.

> (you'd need to
> adjust by feet not inches to have any useful impact), and I
> simply don't believe that sending people up to the top of a pole
> with a monkey wrench, next to a 25kv conductor, every 400m down a
> railway line, every 6 months, is a remotely feasible approach
> even if they did.
>
I suspect people are creeping up with more dedicated tools more often
than that anyway where assorted components need scheduled inspection.

> If they were adjusted with that kind of
> regularity, you'd bring the adjustment down to a much more
> practical level where the adjustment could be made without having
> to shut off the line.
>
Like e.g. the weights at the other end, you can put your adjustment
components at the fixed end on the "earthy" end of the insulator.
>(Note also that those pictures are taken in summer, when the line
> should be most "wound in" to the anchor in your scheme. There's
> not much scope to wind those out in winter, unless you're
> suggesting they also weld on an extension while they're up
> there...)
>
Winter isn't the problem (yet). As long as you can pull your fixed end
in a bit in hot weather then the weighted end doesn't need fiddling
with.

On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:07:11 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank
<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:
>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 22:00:19 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>Like e.g. the weights at the other end, you can put your adjustment
>> components at the fixed end on the "earthy" end of the insulator.
>
>Yes, you could. But as is abundantly obvious from the pictures -
> they didn't.
>
They didn't have the current problem to consider.

> There are no adjustment components at the anchor
> ends beyond a fixing with about 3 inches of play in it.
>
Then some more r-design is required.

> And I'm
> not sure being on the earthy end is that much of a win for the
> poor sod you're sending up with his wrench given he's still going
> to be working a couple of feet from a live 25kv conductor
> (remember, the cable is anchored to a mast which is also carrying
> the live OHL from the next section's overlap.)
>
Not if the bit you are applying your spanner to is remote from the
OHLE.

> I know we take a
> more relaxed view to health and safety here, but I reckon that's
> still going to need a possession and the power turned
> off...
>
>>>(Note also that those pictures are taken in summer, when the line
>>> should be most "wound in" to the anchor in your scheme. There's
>>> not much scope to wind those out in winter, unless you're> suggesting they also weld on an extension while they're up
>>> there...)
>>Winter isn't the problem (yet). As long as you can pull your fixed end
>> in a bit in hot weather then the weighted end doesn't need fiddling
>> with.
>
>It appears you have forgotten the purpose of your own bright idea.
> Allow me to remind you.
>
>As the wire extends in the heat, it drags all the intermediate
> supports with it (in the direction of the tensioning weight.)
> Eventually this brings the geometry out of whack. Your idea was
> that it would be possible to wind in the wires at the anchored
> end in summer, in order to bring the geometry back into alignment
> at a higher temperature, giving more room for it to expand even
> further. (This would have the effect of raising the weight back
> up, but that's a side effect, not the intended point - the
> intended point is to move all the intermediate hangers back
> towards their centres. We don't *need* to do anything with the
> weights, because it's already clear they're bounded by the OHL
> geometry, not their room to move.)
>
>In which case, if your idea were being used here in practice, we
> should be seeing the anchored end wound in at least a foot in
> summer (we know from the specs of those spring tensioners the
> kind of ranges we are looking at.) Fiddling around with an inch
> here or there will make naff all difference, so given that there
> is more like 3 inches of available play in that turnbuckle, the
> options are:
>
>a) They wound in the cables in summer and then cut the ends off,
> and then will extend the cables again come winter, closing the
> line to do so twice a year,
>
>b) They replace the turnbuckles entirely with extended ones in
> winter, closing the line to do so twice a year,
>
>or
>
>c) they don't do it at all.
>
>
>You can cling to a or b if you want, I'll settle for c. Don't
> feel bad, it was a nice idea. Just not used in practice at this
> location. Probably because on balance just "having shorter
> sections" is easier - but maybe in some other places they do. I
> think I've done enough digging to satisfy myself for now, you are
> very welcome to do your own donkey work to find evidence of
> somewhere where your idea *is* in practice, though. I look
> forward to seeing it.

On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:50:00 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank
<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:r
>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:07:11 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 22:00:19 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> Like e.g. the weights at the other end, you can put your adjustment
>>> components at the fixed end on the "earthy" end of the insulator.
>>>Yes, you could. But as is abundantly obvious from the pictures -
>>> they didn't.
>>They didn't have the current problem to consider.
>
>What on Earth are you taking about?
>
Railways in the UK.

>The photograph is specifically of a line that deals with much
> wider temperature variations than the UK does, even now, that's
> the whole point of posting it. To see how it is that they can
> engineer OHL that doesn't collapse as soon as the temperature
> hits 40c, and yet also still works fine when it's
> -20c.
>
>Shorter sections does seem to be part of the answer.
>
Yes, if seen as appropriate. The single pulley above the weights
suggests it is a short section unlike the multi-pulley version (with
higher mechanical advantage) often seen in the UK.

> Charles'
> Patent OHL Adjuster is not. Sorry.
>
>
>If you want to move on to hypotheticals, knock yourself out - but
> you started out by saying I'd obviously missed something in the
> picture. You should have said you meant the picture in your head
>
If you move on to a bit further down that line you will find a set of
turnbuckles in use.
https://goo.gl/maps/7L4fJa6UrEvSXHUR8

On 20 Jul 2022 at 12:59:59 AM EEST, "Charles Ellson"
<charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:50:00 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank
> <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:r
>>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:07:11 +0300 (GMT+03:00),
>>> Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:>Charles Ellson
>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022
>>> 22:00:19 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>> Like e.g. the weights at the other end, you can put your adjustment
>>>> components at the fixed end on the "earthy" end of the insulator.
>>>> Yes, you could. But as is abundantly obvious from the pictures -
>>>> they didn't.
>>> They didn't have the current problem to consider.
>>
>> What on Earth are you taking about?
>>
> Railways in the UK.

So, not the post you were replying to. Right. Silly me. If only I had guessed.

>> The photograph is specifically of a line that deals with much
>> wider temperature variations than the UK does, even now, that's
>> the whole point of posting it. To see how it is that they can
>> engineer OHL that doesn't collapse as soon as the temperature
>> hits 40c, and yet also still works fine when it's
>> -20c.
>>
>> Shorter sections does seem to be part of the answer.
>>
> Yes, if seen as appropriate. The single pulley above the weights
> suggests it is a short section unlike the multi-pulley version (with
> higher mechanical advantage) often seen in the UK.

You don't actually need to guess. If you had read the post you were replying
to, you would have known I measured.

>> Charles' Patent OHL Adjuster is not. Sorry.
>>
>>
>> If you want to move on to hypotheticals, knock yourself out - but
>> you started out by saying I'd obviously missed something in the
>> picture. You should have said you meant the picture in your head
>>
> If you move on to a bit further down that line you will find a set of
> turnbuckles in use.
> <https://goo.gl/maps/7L4fJa6UrEvSXHUR8>

Indeed. There are many of them in use. But not to make adjustments of one or
two feet.

Congratulations, Charles. You have added literally *zero* value and quite a
lot of noise to what had been quite an interesting subthread when left to the
adults. Bravo. Top trolling.

*plonk*

On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 22:12:40 -0000 (UTC), Clank
<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:

>On 20 Jul 2022 at 12:59:59 AM EEST, "Charles Ellson"
><charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:50:00 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank
>> <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:r
>>>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:07:11 +0300 (GMT+03:00),
>>>> Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:>Charles Ellson
>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022
>>>> 22:00:19 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Like e.g. the weights at the other end, you can put your adjustment
>>>>> components at the fixed end on the "earthy" end of the insulator.
>>>>> Yes, you could. But as is abundantly obvious from the pictures -
>>>>> they didn't.
>>>> They didn't have the current problem to consider.
>>>
>>> What on Earth are you taking about?
>>>
>> Railways in the UK.
>
>So, not the post you were replying to. Right. Silly me. If only I had guessed.
>
You missed Lew's relay of NR's "Why are Network Rail imposing speed
restrictions?" which kicked the subject off ?
<snip>

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:50:00 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank
> <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:r
>>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:07:11 +0300 (GMT+03:00),
>>> Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:>Charles Ellson
>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022
>>> 22:00:19 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>> Like e.g. the weights at the other end, you can put your adjustment
>>>> components at the fixed end on the "earthy" end of the insulator.
>>>> Yes, you could. But as is abundantly obvious from the pictures -
>>>> they didn't.
>>> They didn't have the current problem to consider.
>>
>> What on Earth are you taking about?
>>
> Railways in the UK.
>
>> The photograph is specifically of a line that deals with much
>> wider temperature variations than the UK does, even now, that's
>> the whole point of posting it. To see how it is that they can
>> engineer OHL that doesn't collapse as soon as the temperature
>> hits 40c, and yet also still works fine when it's
>> -20c.
>>
>> Shorter sections does seem to be part of the answer.
>>
> Yes, if seen as appropriate. The single pulley above the weights
> suggests it is a short section unlike the multi-pulley version (with
> higher mechanical advantage) often seen in the UK.
>
>

Look closely at the pulley. It has two separate diameter parts, one for the
OLE wire and one for the cable to the weights, and thus it does provide
mechanical advantage similar to the multiple-pulley arrangement used in the
UK.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 23:26:58 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
<anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:50:00 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank
>> <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:r
>>>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:07:11 +0300 (GMT+03:00),
>>>> Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:>Charles Ellson
>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022
>>>> 22:00:19 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Like e.g. the weights at the other end, you can put your adjustment
>>>>> components at the fixed end on the "earthy" end of the insulator.
>>>>> Yes, you could. But as is abundantly obvious from the pictures -
>>>>> they didn't.
>>>> They didn't have the current problem to consider.
>>>
>>> What on Earth are you taking about?
>>>
>> Railways in the UK.
>>
>>> The photograph is specifically of a line that deals with much
>>> wider temperature variations than the UK does, even now, that's
>>> the whole point of posting it. To see how it is that they can
>>> engineer OHL that doesn't collapse as soon as the temperature
>>> hits 40c, and yet also still works fine when it's
>>> -20c.
>>>
>>> Shorter sections does seem to be part of the answer.
>>>
>> Yes, if seen as appropriate. The single pulley above the weights
>> suggests it is a short section unlike the multi-pulley version (with
>> higher mechanical advantage) often seen in the UK.
>>
>>
>
>Look closely at the pulley. It has two separate diameter parts, one for the
>OLE wire and one for the cable to the weights, and thus it does provide
>mechanical advantage similar to the multiple-pulley arrangement used in the
>UK.
>
Ah, ISWYM.(wire going from smaller diameter to "fish skeleton")
About 2:1 advantage?
How does that compare with two pulleys - wire up from weight, over one
pulley, round the other and back to axle line of the first one?
(it's a long time since I did this at school and it's getting late)

On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 02:09:07 +0100, Charles Ellson
<charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 23:26:58 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
><anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>
>>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:50:00 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank
>>> <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:r
>>>>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 00:07:11 +0300 (GMT+03:00),
>>>>> Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:>Charles Ellson
>>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022
>>>>> 22:00:19 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank<clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Like e.g. the weights at the other end, you can put your adjustment
>>>>>> components at the fixed end on the "earthy" end of the insulator.
>>>>>> Yes, you could. But as is abundantly obvious from the pictures -
>>>>>> they didn't.
>>>>> They didn't have the current problem to consider.
>>>>
>>>> What on Earth are you taking about?
>>>>
>>> Railways in the UK.
>>>
>>>> The photograph is specifically of a line that deals with much
>>>> wider temperature variations than the UK does, even now, that's
>>>> the whole point of posting it. To see how it is that they can
>>>> engineer OHL that doesn't collapse as soon as the temperature
>>>> hits 40c, and yet also still works fine when it's
>>>> -20c.
>>>>
>>>> Shorter sections does seem to be part of the answer.
>>>>
>>> Yes, if seen as appropriate. The single pulley above the weights
>>> suggests it is a short section unlike the multi-pulley version (with
>>> higher mechanical advantage) often seen in the UK.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Look closely at the pulley. It has two separate diameter parts, one for the
>>OLE wire and one for the cable to the weights, and thus it does provide
>>mechanical advantage similar to the multiple-pulley arrangement used in the
>>UK.
>>
>Ah, ISWYM.(wire going from smaller diameter to "fish skeleton")
>About 2:1 advantage?
>How does that compare with two pulleys - wire up from weight, over one
>pulley, round the other and back to axle line of the first one?
>(it's a long time since I did this at school and it's getting late)
>
Got it.
Looking at e.g. No.2 in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_advantage_device (Pulleys)
still 2:1 but without the amount of bend caused to the wire by the
smaller pulley diameter in the RO OHLE.

Clank <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 19 Jul 2022 at 12:26:31 PM EEST, "Sam Wilson"
> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Clank <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> On 19 Jul 2022 at 12:46:56 AM EEST, "Charles Ellson"
>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 07:52:45 +0300 (GMT+03:00), Clank
>>>> <clank75@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> Wrote in message:
>>>>>>> Dollars to donuts it's geometry changes as the knitting
>>>>>>> expands/contracts, and the obvious solution to that is shorter
>>>>>>> sections between tensioners.
>>>>>> Or winding in/out the anchored ends according to season.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes! Good idea, that would work :). Is that something you know
>>>>> that happens, or just a stroke of theoretical genius?
>>>>>
>>>> I am not sure I haven't actually seen it somewhere already but
>>>> possibly not intended for winter v. summer rather than allowing
>>>> occasional detensioning of a wire for other purposes.
>>>
>>> Making use of the Google Streetview research (;-)) I did for that other
>>> post... You can see the anchored end of a tensioned section in RO here:
>>>
>>> <https://goo.gl/maps/eUHpmPGU3HzEspbj6>
>>>
>>> It doesn't look to me like there is an obvious way to 'wind in' the OHL to
>>> compensate for seasonal changes, so not sure it's a solution that's used for
>>> that. Smart idea, though.
>>>
>>>
>>> (The other way to do it - completely automatically - of course would be if you
>>> arranged the OHL so that instead of being tensioned against a fixed anchor, it
>>> was a balanced pair (i.e. with weights at both ends of the section.) That
>>> would mean half as much movement in the wire at the extremities... But I can
>>> also imagine it would be an absolute ballache to put up and a maintenance
>>> nightmare :-).)
>>
>> Or do what we apparently do here and anchor in the middle of two runs, thus
>> approximately balancing the stress on the anchor point and avoiding the
>> issue of the slack all running to one end of the section.
>
> You misunderstand. That's just two sections of let's say 500m anchored at one
> end. The only thing you save by that is some anchoring on the midpoint; the
> amount of lateral motion at the end of each section is the same as if they
> were independent 500m sections each with their own anchor at the end.

Oh, I see - two 250m runs or one free-floating 500m one. Yes, impractical,
as you say. I was thinking, however, that balancing the pull on two
sections would save some stress on the anchot point, until something
breaks.

> The thoroughly impractical hypothetical proposal was to hang weights off both
> ends of each 500m section. Although as well as being completely impractical,
> you could achieve the same result by just halving the lengths of sections
> instead ;).

:-)

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

In message <4oqr8cuumn1iFAeM@perry.uk>, at 10:30:22 on Tue, 19 Jul 2022,
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>In message <hK8NUtt0Dl1iFAfm@perry.uk>, at 07:36:36 on Tue, 19 Jul
>2022, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>>In message <g0jcdh59bh3aqvcb38utdul3vhf17o8brv@4ax.com>, at 07:22:29
>>on Tue, 19 Jul 2022, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>>>On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 16:52:19 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In message <tb3gqq$ai91$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:40:10 on Mon, 18 Jul
>>>>2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>><martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 18/07/2022 10:09, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> Here's today's rather eclectic mix of DMUs travelling through Fenland.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.perry.co.uk/images/Heatwave-2022-day1.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> GN still planning to run [only] a 1tph shuttle Cambridge to Kings Lynn.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wish people would learn how to use the cancelled button. It's far
>>>>>> more revealing:-
>>>>>>
>>>>>>https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/detailed/gb-nr:MCH/2022-07-18/0
>>>>>>000-2359?stp=WVSC&show=all&order=wtt
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Has Stanstead cancelled all their planes or has XC assumed people don't
>>>>>> need to travel to and from their during warm weather?
>>>>
>>>>Ever since it was run by Regional Railways, they've never really
>>>>believed it's a serious way to get to Stansted Airport, just a box that
>>>>someone thought they should tick.
>>>>
>>>>>If XC can’t run their trains for whatever reason (lack of line capacity
>>>>>because everything running slowly,
>>>>
>>>>There's no OHL through March, nor most of the way west to Birmingham.
>>>>South of Ely they only have 1tph OHL-user to vie with.
>>>>
>>>>>can’t get across the closed ECML,
>>>>
>>>>It's not sufficiently closed that trains via Nottingham, Grantham and
>>>>Peterborough are failing to get through.
>>>
>>>Really? According to their websites XC was running nithing between
>>>Leicester and Stansted, and EMR nothing between Grantham and Norwich.
>>
>>I've posted the RTT aspiration
>>
>>http://www.perry.co.uk/images/Heatwave-2022-day1.jpg
>>
>>...and a commentary on the actual. There were EM trains getting
>>through, just not as many as normal. I agree that XC later cancelled
>>theirs.
>>
>>Not sure what's happening today; a quick glance looks much more
>>normal, I'll look at the detail later.
>
>Oh, I see what's going on. They've given up telling people about
>cancelled trains in advance, just "as it happens"...
>
>http://www.perry.co.uk/images/Heatwave-2022-day2.jpg

And what happened on the day:

http://www.perry.co.uk/images/Heatwave-2022-day2b.jpg

(Just five trains ran, but the *did* traverse Peterborough).
--
Roland Perry