Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to the
west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
<https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.

Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
and not keeping to the published times?

On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away. It also ran
early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
<https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>

Sam

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

On 08/07/2021 12:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to the
> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
> I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>
> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
> and not keeping to the published times?
>
> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away. It also ran
> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>
> Sam
>

Some years ago, I saw a nuclear flask train go trhough Walsall station,
with two class 37's. It surprised me because I thought they would route
such trains away from centres of industrial towns and cities.

On 08/07/2021 20:48, Weather or Not wrote:
> On 08/07/2021 12:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to
>> the
>> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
>>
>>   I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>>
>> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>> and not keeping to the published times?
>>
>> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away.  It also ran
>> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>>
>>
>> Sam
>>
>
> Some years ago, I saw a nuclear flask train go trhough Walsall station,
> with two class 37's. It surprised me because I thought they would route
> such trains away from centres of industrial towns and cities.

Given the locations of power stations and the processing plant, it is
unavoidable that some of them pass through large towns & cities, but I
think they try to avoid them stopping in stations unless something like
a crew change is necessary.

I think that the occasional trains carrying "military" materials carry
"special security" arrangements.

Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/07/2021 20:48, Weather or Not wrote:
>> On 08/07/2021 12:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to
>>> the
>>> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
>>>
>>>   I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>>>
>>> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>>> and not keeping to the published times?
>>>
>>> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away.  It also ran
>>> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sam
>>>

>> Some years ago, I saw a nuclear flask train go trhough Walsall station,
>> with two class 37's. It surprised me because I thought they would route
>> such trains away from centres of industrial towns and cities.
>
> Given the locations of power stations and the processing plant, it is
> unavoidable that some of them pass through large towns & cities, but I
> think they try to avoid them stopping in stations unless something like
> a crew change is necessary.
>
> I think that the occasional trains carrying "military" materials carry
> "special security" arrangements.
>
>
>

Southampton for a few years in the 1980’s declared itself a “ Nuclear Free
City” and announced rhe fact on signs on roads leading into it, the policy
was aimed at the Royal Navy as occasionally they move a submarine onto a
berth designated for them as an exercise if ever one of their normal bases
became unavailable. Despite the signs the subs never stopped their
occasional visit and neither did the nuclear waste trains from Winfrith
Atomic Energy Establishment located at Wool in Dorset stop,passing through
on occasions
Perhaps there should have been signs on the railway and the entrance to
Southampton Water.
The Subs when they visit lead to a plan being activated that should there
be a radiation leak from a reactor then iodine tablets would be
distributed to residents in the area around the port, as most are now
students it would it be seen as just another recreational drug.
When one does visit the usual suspects usually gather and protest though
many don’t seem to be able to distinguish between nuclear powered and
nuclear armed.
One visit did result in a casualty, a junior rating on guard duty had a
grudge and started to shoot senior officers one fatally, the rating was
actually brought down by the leader of the Council who with the Mayor was
visiting at the time and wrestled the SA80 rifle from him.

GH

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to the
> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
> I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>
> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
> and not keeping to the published times?
> Sam

Arn’t the Nuclear Flask trains in Scotland easily spotted by the Tartan
liveried flasks ?
It seems a popular design amongst picnickers.

GH

Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/07/2021 20:48, Weather or Not wrote:
>> On 08/07/2021 12:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to
>>> the
>>> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
>>>
>>>   I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>>>
>>> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>>> and not keeping to the published times?
>>>
>>> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away.  It also ran
>>> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sam
>>>
>>
>> Some years ago, I saw a nuclear flask train go trhough Walsall station,
>> with two class 37's. It surprised me because I thought they would route
>> such trains away from centres of industrial towns and cities.
>
> Given the locations of power stations and the processing plant, it is
> unavoidable that some of them pass through large towns & cities, but I
> think they try to avoid them stopping in stations unless something like
> a crew change is necessary.
>

With all the Magnox and some older AGR stations now closed, and mostly
de-fuelled, I assume that the nuclear fuel trains are now less widespread
than they used to be. There must be quite a few former routes that no
longer see such trains.

But when the stations are (much) later dismantled, I wonder if the
radioactive materials are removed by rail?

On Thu, 8 Jul 2021 11:19:42 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to the
>west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
><https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
> I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>
>Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>and not keeping to the published times?
>
>On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away. It also ran
>early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
><https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>
>Sam

Down here in Somerset the waste from Hinkley Point is taken to
Bridgewater by road and then up to Cumbria by train (the normal
initial destination is Crewe Coal Sidings (DRS) where I guess some
consolidation takes place). There are two paths:
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17013/2021-07-09/detailed
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17014/2021-07-09/detailed
As a general rule the train seems to use the earlier one and sometimes
it's on time (well roughly). Last run was 7th July when it ran about
an hour early
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17013/2021-07-07/detailed
and it was reported as having a 68 and 88 as the power.
Todays run from Crewe to Sellafield left 38 minutes late but arrived 7
early!
The Dungerness runs have to negotiate the regular pattern passenger
services on the Southern so, perhaps idiotically, they do tend to run
roughly to time through the suburbs.
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17018/2021-07-07/detailed

My experience tends to the view that some "freight" trains are
sticklers for time keeping but an awful lot of them can be
"unreliable". Round here the single line from Castle Cary down to
Dorchester imposes a need to stick to time. There's a test train that
comes down the Cotswold line then via Didcot and Swindon - its'
timekeeping is good through the Cotswolds, unpredictable through to
Swindon then good again to Westbury (single line through Melksham),
slightly early to Castle Cary then to time. That said the last run was
late.

The NMT makes a Thursday run once a month down the old LSWR route to
Exeter and then, next day it runs down the Berks and Hants to
Penzance. They both tend to run to time.

In the last 18 months the reductions in service due to the pandemic
has meant that the "unreliable" "freights" have more flexibility yo
run early!

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16967/2021-07-08/detailed
There are also trains to/from Berkeley C.E.G.B (less frequent). The
most recent used an STP back north when it departed a little early,
ran on time through parts of the midlands and then ran early again.

On 08/07/2021 22:41, Marland wrote:
> Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 08/07/2021 20:48, Weather or Not wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2021 12:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to
>>>> the
>>>> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
>>>>
>>>>   I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>>>>
>>>> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>>>> and not keeping to the published times?
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away.  It also ran
>>>> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sam
>>>>
>
>>> Some years ago, I saw a nuclear flask train go trhough Walsall station,
>>> with two class 37's. It surprised me because I thought they would route
>>> such trains away from centres of industrial towns and cities.
>>
>> Given the locations of power stations and the processing plant, it is
>> unavoidable that some of them pass through large towns & cities, but I
>> think they try to avoid them stopping in stations unless something like
>> a crew change is necessary.
>>
>> I think that the occasional trains carrying "military" materials carry
>> "special security" arrangements.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Southampton for a few years in the 1980’s declared itself a “ Nuclear Free
> City” and announced rhe fact on signs on roads leading into it, the policy
> was aimed at the Royal Navy as occasionally they move a submarine onto a
> berth designated for them as an exercise if ever one of their normal bases
> became unavailable. Despite the signs the subs never stopped their
> occasional visit and neither did the nuclear waste trains from Winfrith
> Atomic Energy Establishment located at Wool in Dorset stop,passing through
> on occasions
> Perhaps there should have been signs on the railway and the entrance to
> Southampton Water.
> The Subs when they visit lead to a plan being activated that should there
> be a radiation leak from a reactor then iodine tablets would be
> distributed to residents in the area around the port, as most are now
> students it would it be seen as just another recreational drug.
> When one does visit the usual suspects usually gather and protest though
> many don’t seem to be able to distinguish between nuclear powered and
> nuclear armed.

I don't think missile subs were ever intended to visit. The last sub I
saw in Southampton was HMS /Tireless/ undergoing a fairly extensive
refit about 8 years ago. I was amused to discover that we lived just
outside the radius where iodine tablets would be issued automatically in
the event of a leak.

> One visit did result in a casualty, a junior rating on guard duty had a
> grudge and started to shoot senior officers one fatally, the rating was
> actually brought down by the leader of the Council who with the Mayor was
> visiting at the time and wrestled the SA80 rifle from him.

IIRC that sub wasn't a nuke and was subsequently sold to the Canadians
even before the last of the class had been delivered.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 08/07/2021 22:41, Marland wrote:
>> Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2021 20:48, Weather or Not wrote:
>>>> On 08/07/2021 12:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to
>>>>> the
>>>>> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
>>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
>>>>>
>>>>>   I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>>>>> and not keeping to the published times?
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away.  It also ran
>>>>> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
>>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sam
>>>>>
>>
>>>> Some years ago, I saw a nuclear flask train go trhough Walsall station,
>>>> with two class 37's. It surprised me because I thought they would route
>>>> such trains away from centres of industrial towns and cities.
>>>
>>> Given the locations of power stations and the processing plant, it is
>>> unavoidable that some of them pass through large towns & cities, but I
>>> think they try to avoid them stopping in stations unless something like
>>> a crew change is necessary.
>>>
>>> I think that the occasional trains carrying "military" materials carry
>>> "special security" arrangements.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Southampton for a few years in the 1980’s declared itself a “ Nuclear Free
>> City” and announced rhe fact on signs on roads leading into it, the policy
>> was aimed at the Royal Navy as occasionally they move a submarine onto a
>> berth designated for them as an exercise if ever one of their normal bases
>> became unavailable. Despite the signs the subs never stopped their
>> occasional visit and neither did the nuclear waste trains from Winfrith
>> Atomic Energy Establishment located at Wool in Dorset stop,passing through
>> on occasions
>> Perhaps there should have been signs on the railway and the entrance to
>> Southampton Water.
>> The Subs when they visit lead to a plan being activated that should there
>> be a radiation leak from a reactor then iodine tablets would be
>> distributed to residents in the area around the port, as most are now
>> students it would it be seen as just another recreational drug.
>> When one does visit the usual suspects usually gather and protest though
>> many don’t seem to be able to distinguish between nuclear powered and
>> nuclear armed.
>
> I don't think missile subs were ever intended to visit. The last sub I
> saw in Southampton was HMS /Tireless/ undergoing a fairly extensive
> refit about 8 years ago. I was amused to discover that we lived just
> outside the radius where iodine tablets would be issued automatically in
> the event of a leak.
>
>> One visit did result in a casualty, a junior rating on guard duty had a
>> grudge and started to shoot senior officers one fatally, the rating was
>> actually brought down by the leader of the Council who with the Mayor was
>> visiting at the time and wrestled the SA80 rifle from him.
>
> IIRC that sub wasn't a nuke and was subsequently sold to the Canadians
> even before the last of the class had been delivered.
>
>

That sub was very much a nuke, and was in fact the first of the UK's latest
class of hunter-killer subs, HMS Astute:

Sailor who murdered officer on submarine HMS Astute jailed for life.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-14971198

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 08/07/2021 22:41, Marland wrote:
>> Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2021 20:48, Weather or Not wrote:
>>>> On 08/07/2021 12:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to
>>>>> the
>>>>> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
>>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
>>>>>
>>>>>   I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>>>>> and not keeping to the published times?
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away.  It also ran
>>>>> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
>>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sam
>>>>>
>>
>>>> Some years ago, I saw a nuclear flask train go trhough Walsall station,
>>>> with two class 37's. It surprised me because I thought they would route
>>>> such trains away from centres of industrial towns and cities.
>>>
>>> Given the locations of power stations and the processing plant, it is
>>> unavoidable that some of them pass through large towns & cities, but I
>>> think they try to avoid them stopping in stations unless something like
>>> a crew change is necessary.
>>>
>>> I think that the occasional trains carrying "military" materials carry
>>> "special security" arrangements.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Southampton for a few years in the 1980’s declared itself a “ Nuclear Free
>> City” and announced rhe fact on signs on roads leading into it, the policy
>> was aimed at the Royal Navy as occasionally they move a submarine onto a
>> berth designated for them as an exercise if ever one of their normal bases
>> became unavailable. Despite the signs the subs never stopped their
>> occasional visit and neither did the nuclear waste trains from Winfrith
>> Atomic Energy Establishment located at Wool in Dorset stop,passing through
>> on occasions
>> Perhaps there should have been signs on the railway and the entrance to
>> Southampton Water.
>> The Subs when they visit lead to a plan being activated that should there
>> be a radiation leak from a reactor then iodine tablets would be
>> distributed to residents in the area around the port, as most are now
>> students it would it be seen as just another recreational drug.
>> When one does visit the usual suspects usually gather and protest though
>> many don’t seem to be able to distinguish between nuclear powered and
>> nuclear armed.
>

>
>> One visit did result in a casualty, a junior rating on guard duty had a
>> grudge and started to shoot senior officers one fatally, the rating was
>> actually brought down by the leader of the Council who with the Mayor was
>> visiting at the time and wrestled the SA80 rifle from him.
>
> IIRC that sub wasn't a nuke and was subsequently sold to the Canadians
> even before the last of the class had been delivered.
>
Sorry Graeme it was definitely a Nuclear powered vessel.
HMS Astute.

Navy officer 'unlawfully killed' in submarine shooting

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-21012670

The Upholder class had already been dumped on ,sorry sold to Canada by
then.
One was involved in incident after leaving Scotland where some water
pouring down from the conning tower which should be anticipated on a
submarine got into equipment below
and caused an electrical fire. One sailor later died from the effects of
smoke inhalation .
Dodgy submarines , miniature( to them ) coaches that were surplus, anything
else we have persuaded the Canadians to take on. I ‘m surprised they are
still friendly.

GH

On 09/07/2021 08:34, Graeme Wall wrote:
> I don't think missile subs were ever intended to visit. The last sub I
> saw in Southampton was HMS/Tireless/ undergoing a fairly extensive
> refit about 8 years ago. I was amused to discover that we lived just
> outside the radius where iodine tablets would be issued automatically in
> the event of a leak.

There are Z Berths all around the UK which nuclear submarines can head
to in the event of problems.

Can't help thinking of robots popping pills through the letterbox on
reading "automatically"!

If you look online you will find lists of Z Berths and probably their a
copy of their plan for when activated.

Not just the big ports, places like Broadford are a Z Berth.

On 08/07/2021 21:11, Bevan Price wrote:
> I think that the occasional trains carrying "military" materials carry
> "special security" arrangements.

I thought the military used road rather than rail. There is a whole
fleet of vehicles that accompanies them to protect and also react to any
incident. They did have their own secure radio network some years ago.

They even have their own road to Coulport.

I was looking at Coulport through binoculars a few weeks ago.

On 09/07/2021 09:33, Marland wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 08/07/2021 22:41, Marland wrote:
>>> Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 08/07/2021 20:48, Weather or Not wrote:
>>>>> On 08/07/2021 12:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
>>>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>>>>>> and not keeping to the published times?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away.  It also ran
>>>>>> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
>>>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sam
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>> Some years ago, I saw a nuclear flask train go trhough Walsall station,
>>>>> with two class 37's. It surprised me because I thought they would route
>>>>> such trains away from centres of industrial towns and cities.
>>>>
>>>> Given the locations of power stations and the processing plant, it is
>>>> unavoidable that some of them pass through large towns & cities, but I
>>>> think they try to avoid them stopping in stations unless something like
>>>> a crew change is necessary.
>>>>
>>>> I think that the occasional trains carrying "military" materials carry
>>>> "special security" arrangements.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Southampton for a few years in the 1980’s declared itself a “ Nuclear Free
>>> City” and announced rhe fact on signs on roads leading into it, the policy
>>> was aimed at the Royal Navy as occasionally they move a submarine onto a
>>> berth designated for them as an exercise if ever one of their normal bases
>>> became unavailable. Despite the signs the subs never stopped their
>>> occasional visit and neither did the nuclear waste trains from Winfrith
>>> Atomic Energy Establishment located at Wool in Dorset stop,passing through
>>> on occasions
>>> Perhaps there should have been signs on the railway and the entrance to
>>> Southampton Water.
>>> The Subs when they visit lead to a plan being activated that should there
>>> be a radiation leak from a reactor then iodine tablets would be
>>> distributed to residents in the area around the port, as most are now
>>> students it would it be seen as just another recreational drug.
>>> When one does visit the usual suspects usually gather and protest though
>>> many don’t seem to be able to distinguish between nuclear powered and
>>> nuclear armed.
>>
>
>>
>>> One visit did result in a casualty, a junior rating on guard duty had a
>>> grudge and started to shoot senior officers one fatally, the rating was
>>> actually brought down by the leader of the Council who with the Mayor was
>>> visiting at the time and wrestled the SA80 rifle from him.
>>
>> IIRC that sub wasn't a nuke and was subsequently sold to the Canadians
>> even before the last of the class had been delivered.
>>
> Sorry Graeme it was definitely a Nuclear powered vessel.
> HMS Astute.
>
> Navy officer 'unlawfully killed' in submarine shooting
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-21012670
>
>
> The Upholder class had already been dumped on ,sorry sold to Canada by
> then.
> One was involved in incident after leaving Scotland where some water
> pouring down from the conning tower which should be anticipated on a
> submarine got into equipment below
> and caused an electrical fire. One sailor later died from the effects of
> smoke inhalation .
> Dodgy submarines , miniature( to them ) coaches that were surplus, anything
> else we have persuaded the Canadians to take on. I ‘m surprised they are
> still friendly.
>

Got my subs mixed up, did an Upholder visit Southampton in the short
time they were in service?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 09/07/2021 10:27, MB wrote:
> On 08/07/2021 21:11, Bevan Price wrote:
>> I think that the occasional trains carrying "military" materials carry
>> "special security" arrangements.
>
>
> I thought the military used road rather than rail.  There is a whole
> fleet of vehicles that accompanies them to protect and also react to any
> incident.  They did have their own secure radio network some years ago.
>
> They even have their own road to Coulport.
>
> I was looking at Coulport through binoculars a few weeks ago.
>
>
>

There was a panic near Southampton some years back when one of those
conveys suffered a breakdown of the transporter lorry and the major
alert system was actuated.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 09/07/2021 11:54, Graeme Wall wrote:
> There was a panic near Southampton some years back when one of those
> conveys suffered a breakdown of the transporter lorry and the major
> alert system was actuated.

Their biggest concern was probably Rent-a-Mob turning out and
obstructing their work.

Weather or Not <weather@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/07/2021 12:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to the
>> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
>> I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>>
>> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>> and not keeping to the published times?
>>
>> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away. It also ran
>> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>>
>
> Some years ago, I saw a nuclear flask train go trhough Walsall station,
> with two class 37's. It surprised me because I thought they would route
> such trains away from centres of industrial towns and cities.
>

Town centres are difficult to avoid… if it didn't go through Walsall
presumably it'd have to go through Wolverhampton; depending on origin, to
avoid either it'd presumably have to go through the Severn Tunnel and
Shrewsbury…

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jul 2021 11:19:42 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to the
>> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
>> I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>>
>> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>> and not keeping to the published times?
>>
>> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away. It also ran
>> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>>
>
> Down here in Somerset the waste from Hinkley Point is taken to
> Bridgewater by road and then up to Cumbria by train (the normal
> initial destination is Crewe Coal Sidings (DRS) where I guess some
> consolidation takes place). There are two paths:
> https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17013/2021-07-09/detailed
> https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17014/2021-07-09/detailed
> As a general rule the train seems to use the earlier one and sometimes
> it's on time (well roughly). Last run was 7th July when it ran about
> an hour early
> https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17013/2021-07-07/detailed
> and it was reported as having a 68 and 88 as the power.

68 and 88 is quite a common combination.

When Bristol Panel signallers controlled Temple Meads, some of them used to
love bringing the flask train in on a single yellow then a green at the
exit of the train shed, for some loud class 20/37 thrash from walking pace
back up to 25mph!

> Todays run from Crewe to Sellafield left 38 minutes late but arrived 7
> early!
> The Dungerness runs have to negotiate the regular pattern passenger
> services on the Southern so, perhaps idiotically, they do tend to run
> roughly to time through the suburbs.
> https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17018/2021-07-07/detailed
>
> My experience tends to the view that some "freight" trains are
> sticklers for time keeping but an awful lot of them can be
> "unreliable". Round here the single line from Castle Cary down to
> Dorchester imposes a need to stick to time. There's a test train that
> comes down the Cotswold line then via Didcot and Swindon - its'
> timekeeping is good through the Cotswolds, unpredictable through to
> Swindon then good again to Westbury (single line through Melksham),
> slightly early to Castle Cary then to time. That said the last run was
> late.
>
> The NMT makes a Thursday run once a month down the old LSWR route to
> Exeter and then, next day it runs down the Berks and Hants to
> Penzance. They both tend to run to time.
>
> In the last 18 months the reductions in service due to the pandemic
> has meant that the "unreliable" "freights" have more flexibility yo
> run early!
>
> https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16967/2021-07-08/detailed
> There are also trains to/from Berkeley C.E.G.B (less frequent). The
> most recent used an STP back north when it departed a little early,
> ran on time through parts of the midlands and then ran early again.
>

Serving two power stations from one terminal, of course :)

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 09/07/2021 10:27, MB wrote:
>> On 08/07/2021 21:11, Bevan Price wrote:
>>> I think that the occasional trains carrying "military" materials carry
>>> "special security" arrangements.
>>
>>
>> I thought the military used road rather than rail.  There is a whole
>> fleet of vehicles that accompanies them to protect and also react to any
>> incident.  They did have their own secure radio network some years ago.
>>
>> They even have their own road to Coulport.
>>
>> I was looking at Coulport through binoculars a few weeks ago.
>>
>>
>>
>
> There was a panic near Southampton some years back when one of those
> conveys suffered a breakdown of the transporter lorry and the major
> alert system was actuated.
>

the one I recall was near the ammunition depot at Dean between Romsey and
Salisbury which as I was working from Romsey at the time and had elected
to go that way came across and was turned back from. Don’t recall any
panic at the time as we all knew what the armaments depot handled.
It made a change from the previous disruptions in that direction when one
came across the filming of Wurzel Gummidge .

News item on the incident here

https://youtu.be/luvknRCyD-o

From a Railway point of view RNAD was served by a spur off the line to
Salisbury and also had its own
extensive narrow gauge system within. The depot closed in the early 2000’s.
Some photos of the place after it had been sold by the MOD but before the
new owners removed the track. As can be seen it was in excellent condition
as the MOD/ politicians with their usual careful concerns for the
taxpayers who pay for it renewed it all about 18 months before deciding
they no longer needed it and selling it off at auction.

https://www.28dayslater.co.uk/threads/rnad-dean-hill-wiltshire-25-03-07.11259/

GH

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 08/07/2021 20:48, Weather or Not wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2021 12:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to
>>>> the
>>>> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
>>>>
>>>>   I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>>>>
>>>> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>>>> and not keeping to the published times?
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away.  It also ran
>>>> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sam
>>>>
>>>
>>> Some years ago, I saw a nuclear flask train go trhough Walsall station,
>>> with two class 37's. It surprised me because I thought they would route
>>> such trains away from centres of industrial towns and cities.
>>
>> Given the locations of power stations and the processing plant, it is
>> unavoidable that some of them pass through large towns & cities, but I
>> think they try to avoid them stopping in stations unless something like
>> a crew change is necessary.
>>
>
> With all the Magnox and some older AGR stations now closed, and mostly
> de-fuelled, I assume that the nuclear fuel trains are now less widespread
> than they used to be. There must be quite a few former routes that no
> longer see such trains.

I wonder (someone will know) to what extent the choice of sites for nuclear
power stations was governed by rail access? Dounreay obviously not so much
but the road access is long and winding. Torness has the ECML running
close by and its siding is about half a mile from the front gate. I don’t
know where Hunterston is accessed, but there’s a line to the ore/coal
terminal at sea level and sidings on the Largs branch up the hill. I don’t
know any other sites at all well.

> But when the stations are (much) later dismantled, I wonder if the
> radioactive materials are removed by rail?

Given that they’ve got the technology (big strong flasks that fit on the
wagons) I’d guess it would make sense to use it.

Sam

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

On Fri, 9 Jul 2021 10:27:21 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:

>On 08/07/2021 21:11, Bevan Price wrote:
>> I think that the occasional trains carrying "military" materials carry
>> "special security" arrangements.
>
>
>I thought the military used road rather than rail. There is a whole
>fleet of vehicles that accompanies them to protect and also react to any
>incident. They did have their own secure radio network some years ago.
>
>They even have their own road to Coulport.
>
>I was looking at Coulport through binoculars a few weeks ago.
>
>
Ever driven eastbound along the M4 from Marlborough to Newbury?
There's an exit (eastbound only) that's used to be signed along the
lines of "MAINTENANCE ONLY" but may well be unsigned now apart from
count down markers. I once passed it when there were a couple of
unusual looking vehicles entering. A look at Google Earth shows it
leads into RAF Welford. My first thought was that it was something to
do with Harwell but it turns out to be a USAF munitions dump according
to Wikipedia.

Getting back to railways, In the 12 years I've been living in Somerset
I think there have been two nuclear moves to/from Plymouth dockyard.
The only one I saw had two "escort" carriages along with the two
military flasks.

On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 12:26:28 +0100
Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 9 Jul 2021 10:27:21 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>On 08/07/2021 21:11, Bevan Price wrote:
>>> I think that the occasional trains carrying "military" materials carry
>>> "special security" arrangements.
>>
>>
>>I thought the military used road rather than rail. There is a whole
>>fleet of vehicles that accompanies them to protect and also react to any
>>incident. They did have their own secure radio network some years ago.
>>
>>They even have their own road to Coulport.
>>
>>I was looking at Coulport through binoculars a few weeks ago.
>>
>>
>Ever driven eastbound along the M4 from Marlborough to Newbury?
>There's an exit (eastbound only) that's used to be signed along the
>lines of "MAINTENANCE ONLY" but may well be unsigned now apart from
>count down markers. I once passed it when there were a couple of
>unusual looking vehicles entering. A look at Google Earth shows it
>leads into RAF Welford. My first thought was that it was something to
>do with Harwell but it turns out to be a USAF munitions dump according
>to Wikipedia.

There are a lot of special exit roads off motorways, this one I used as
an escape road when stuck in traffic a number of times:

https://goo.gl/maps/gRmuutdAZwB67p1f9

Though these days its gated but in the past it was usually open and you
could nip down it. Clearly they got wise to that.

There's also dedicated offramps on the M11 inside the M25 for plods
traffic control centre (or something like that). I'll leave it to the reader
to find it, its pretty obvious on Maps.

On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 12:26:28 +0100, Graham Harrison wrote:
> Ever driven eastbound along the M4 from Marlborough to Newbury? There's
> an exit (eastbound only) that's used to be signed along the lines of
> "MAINTENANCE ONLY" but may well be unsigned now apart from count down
> markers. I once passed it when there were a couple of unusual looking
> vehicles entering. A look at Google Earth shows it leads into RAF
> Welford. My first thought was that it was something to do with Harwell
> but it turns out to be a USAF munitions dump according to Wikipedia.

Still there, or was in March. While it's signed "works unit only", for
those who know what they're looking for this sign:
https://goo.gl/maps/zYNhZM4p9SHyPHS7A
is a complete giveaway. While you might wonder why a works unit needs an
advance sign (they don't usually have one), the sign is also the wrong
colour. Works unit signs are blue, like all motorway signs. White signs
with red borders are MoD facilities - which makes it clear that the
"works unit" is military, not highways.

Mike

On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 09:16:26 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2021 20:48, Weather or Not wrote:
>>>> On 08/07/2021 12:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>> Yesterday afternoon I got all excited when I was near a railway out to
>>>>> the
>>>>> west of Edinburgh and found this on Real Time Trains:
>>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H17010/2021-07-07/detailed>.
>>>>>
>>>>>   I then found that it had passed where I was over 2 hours early.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there some kind of sensitivity about whether such trains are trackable
>>>>> and not keeping to the published times?
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand I did see this with two 37s growling away.  It also ran
>>>>> early but the timings seem to allow for all sorts of slop.
>>>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H16828/2021-07-07/detailed>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sam
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Some years ago, I saw a nuclear flask train go trhough Walsall station,
>>>> with two class 37's. It surprised me because I thought they would route
>>>> such trains away from centres of industrial towns and cities.
>>>
>>> Given the locations of power stations and the processing plant, it is
>>> unavoidable that some of them pass through large towns & cities, but I
>>> think they try to avoid them stopping in stations unless something like
>>> a crew change is necessary.
>>>
>>
>> With all the Magnox and some older AGR stations now closed, and mostly
>> de-fuelled, I assume that the nuclear fuel trains are now less widespread
>> than they used to be. There must be quite a few former routes that no
>> longer see such trains.
>
>I wonder (someone will know) to what extent the choice of sites for nuclear
>power stations was governed by rail access? Dounreay obviously not so much
>but the road access is long and winding. Torness has the ECML running
>close by and its siding is about half a mile from the front gate. I don’t
>know where Hunterston is accessed, but there’s a line to the ore/coal
>terminal at sea level and sidings on the Largs branch up the hill. I don’t
>know any other sites at all well.

The Magnox sites were probably selected in the early/mid 1950s, and the AGRs in the early 1960s, so their choice would
have been influenced by the then rail and road networks (ie, much less motorway, and much more rail than now). I don't
know how much popular resistance there was back then to nuclear stations as a neighbour, but I don't suppose they were
ever popular, so that would have excluded some otherwise suitable locations.

>
>> But when the stations are (much) later dismantled, I wonder if the
>> radioactive materials are removed by rail?
>
>Given that they’ve got the technology (big strong flasks that fit on the
>wagons) I’d guess it would make sense to use it.

Yup, particularly if the waste will be sent to Sellafield for processing, as it already has all the right handling
facilities. and the rail link.

On 10/07/2021 13:44, Mike Humphrey wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 12:26:28 +0100, Graham Harrison wrote:
>> Ever driven eastbound along the M4 from Marlborough to Newbury? There's
>> an exit (eastbound only) that's used to be signed along the lines of
>> "MAINTENANCE ONLY" but may well be unsigned now apart from count down
>> markers. I once passed it when there were a couple of unusual looking
>> vehicles entering. A look at Google Earth shows it leads into RAF
>> Welford. My first thought was that it was something to do with Harwell
>> but it turns out to be a USAF munitions dump according to Wikipedia.
>
> Still there, or was in March. While it's signed "works unit only", for
> those who know what they're looking for this sign:
> https://goo.gl/maps/zYNhZM4p9SHyPHS7A
> is a complete giveaway. While you might wonder why a works unit needs an
> advance sign (they don't usually have one), the sign is also the wrong
> colour. Works unit signs are blue, like all motorway signs. White signs
> with red borders are MoD facilities - which makes it clear that the
> "works unit" is military, not highways.

The Google car seems to have been down to have a look. There is a good
end of motorway sign.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Recliner wrote:

>On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 09:16:26 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>>I wonder (someone will know) to what extent the choice of sites for nuclear
>>power stations was governed by rail access? Dounreay obviously not so much
>>but the road access is long and winding. Torness has the ECML running
>>close by and its siding is about half a mile from the front gate. I don’t
>>know where Hunterston is accessed, but there’s a line to the ore/coal
>>terminal at sea level and sidings on the Largs branch up the hill. I don’t
>>know any other sites at all well.
>
>The Magnox sites were probably selected in the early/mid 1950s, and the AGRs in the early 1960s, so their choice would
>have been influenced by the then rail and road networks (ie, much less motorway, and much more rail than now). I don't
>know how much popular resistance there was back then to nuclear stations as a neighbour, but I don't suppose they were
>ever popular, so that would have excluded some otherwise suitable locations.

My late uncle worked for the CEGB, and in his early career in the
1950s was posted to various coal fired power stations in fairly
industrial locations.

With the advent of nuclear power, he realised that these stations
would all be put in pleasant countryside locations, so changed
his focus and managed to get a job at Berkeley, where he spent
the rest of his time as one of their Charge Engineers.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK
chris@cdixon.me.uk @ChrisJDixon1

Plant amazing Acers.