|
grahame
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: December 15, 2020, 13:29:06 » |
|
Are carriages taken off / added on along the way on trains like the Ghan?
They are fixed formation block trains of 342 wagons carrying 100t iron ore each powered by five electric locomotives distributed within the train with the slave locos acting under radio control from the lead loco. Length = 3780 metres (12400 ft) - Weight = 41400 tonnes. Not bad for a 3'6" gauge railway My reckoning was that we were looking at the shortest and longest trains anywhere.
If you are talking about 'standard length', then, 'Yes', coaches are taken off / added on the Ghan and Indian Pacific trains. The length on a particular day is determined by the number of bookings. ...
Obviously, on any one particular outing, no coaches are added / taken off during the journey.
Wasn't obvious to me ... from what I knew, there might have been short journey options with the train dropping off excess carriages ... full train from Adelaide to Alice Springs, and a shorter service onward to Darwin. Not a new idea - I understand than London to Penzance trains sometimes drop off a few carriages at Plymouth. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
TonyN
|
|
« Reply #16 on: December 15, 2020, 17:14:44 » |
|
3 Dalwhinnie Highest above sea level Berney Arms lowest
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #17 on: December 15, 2020, 18:35:22 » |
|
3 Dalwhinnie Highest above sea level Berney Arms lowest
Yes ... that was my 'plan'. Though should someone tell me of a fenland station below sea level, it would replace Berney Arms. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
stuving
|
|
« Reply #18 on: December 15, 2020, 18:54:52 » |
|
3 Dalwhinnie Highest above sea level Berney Arms lowest
Yes ... that was my 'plan'. Though should someone tell me of a fenland station below sea level, it would replace Berney Arms. What about Essex Road, or one of its neighbours? I reckon (without good data) it's about 10 m BSL. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Western Pathfinder
|
|
« Reply #19 on: December 15, 2020, 19:41:28 » |
|
Corrour I allways thought was the highest above sea level.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
PhilWakely
|
|
« Reply #20 on: December 15, 2020, 19:50:39 » |
|
Corrour I always thought was the highest above sea level.
Dalwhinnie is 1174 feet above sea level, whilst Corrour is 1,340 - some 166 feet higher. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PhilWakely
|
|
« Reply #22 on: December 15, 2020, 20:02:20 » |
|
Corrour I always thought was the highest above sea level.
Dalwhinnie is 1174 feet above sea level, whilst Corrour is 1,340 - some 166 feet higher. Thankyou Phil.
However, Drumochter Summit, close to Dalwhinnie is higher at 1,484 feet. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Western Pathfinder
|
|
« Reply #23 on: December 15, 2020, 20:45:39 » |
|
Quite so but does not have a station as I recall.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
froome
|
|
« Reply #24 on: December 15, 2020, 21:08:12 » |
|
3 Dalwhinnie Highest above sea level Berney Arms lowest
Yes ... that was my 'plan'. Though should someone tell me of a fenland station below sea level, it would replace Berney Arms. Shippea Hill station, despite its name, appears to be exactly at sea level. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
eightonedee
|
|
« Reply #25 on: December 15, 2020, 22:30:44 » |
|
No 7 - is it most and fewest platforms for stations outside London (17 at Leeds, none at Dartmouth)?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #26 on: December 15, 2020, 22:56:18 » |
|
No 7 - is it most and fewest platforms for stations outside London (17 at Leeds, none at Dartmouth)?
It is ... Just one question left: 4. Adrian Backshall and Jonathon Jones-Pratt |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
stuving
|
|
« Reply #27 on: December 15, 2020, 23:21:04 » |
|
No 7 - is it most and fewest platforms for stations outside London (17 at Leeds, none at Dartmouth)?
But Leeds ties with Edinburgh Waverley, if you don't allow split platforms. If you do allow them, because used operationally or if officially numbered as such, EDI would win. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #28 on: December 15, 2020, 23:46:43 » |
|
No 7 - is it most and fewest platforms for stations outside London (17 at Leeds, none at Dartmouth)?
But Leeds ties with Edinburgh Waverley, if you don't allow split platforms. If you do allow them, because used operationally or if officially numbered as such, EDI would win. And if you say "England", Leeds .... Just shows how difficult (or interesting) these questions can be. We'll probably have a report of a station with a negative number of platforms next and find that Dartmouth is questionable too  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
stuving
|
|
« Reply #29 on: December 15, 2020, 23:51:54 » |
|
No 7 - is it most and fewest platforms for stations outside London (17 at Leeds, none at Dartmouth)?
But Leeds ties with Edinburgh Waverley, if you don't allow split platforms. If you do allow them, because used operationally or if officially numbered as such, EDI would win. And if you say "England", Leeds .... Just shows how difficult (or interesting) these questions can be. We'll probably have a report of a station with a negative number of platforms next and find that Dartmouth is questionable too Yes, especially since Leeds label their platforms in quarters (a,b,c&d), and even in the TPR▸ some more platforms (ones I wasn't counting since they have no mid-point crossover) are given listed lengths for their halves (ab & cd). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Click on the map to explore geographics
