<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: O Gauge thoughts.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kalyr.co.uk/weblog/railways/o-gauge-thoughts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kalyr.co.uk/weblog/railways/o-gauge-thoughts/</link>
	<description>The blogs of Tim Hall</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Apr 2017 23:35:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=3.7.41</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martyn Read</title>
		<link>http://www.kalyr.co.uk/weblog/railways/o-gauge-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-1388</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Martyn Read]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:44:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kalyr.co.uk/wordpress/?p=1360#comment-1388</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Probably true.

We looked at Bodmin a while back, but felt it had changed too much over the years to be able to bring off era-swapping on it, it would be fine if we were all into modelling exactly the same period in time!

It would be an interesting thing to try it as a modern working junction. Wadebridge and Padstow (and Bodmin!) are big enough to warrant a half-decent passenger service, but I reckon doing so via the Southern routes would be a little pointless (between these locations and Launceston there is pretty much nothing there!). 

My thought would be that Beeching closed the Southern lines and Wadebridge was then served via Bodmin and the GWML (which I think actually happened, but the Western just didn&#039;t try very hard!)

Trying to fit such a service into the actual arrangement of tracks there could be a pain, all passenger trains from Wadebridge would have to go East, so no prospect of a Wadebridge-Truro service, lets say...

Freight off the branch, (from Wenfordbridge with CDA&#039;s and Fitzgerald lighting) would involve some awkward shunts to head for Lostwithiel/St Blazey...

Thinking of it as a real railway, capacity would be a pain, with a reversal (time consuming for freight) but no passing place at Bodmin General, and no passing place at Parkway either.

Summer saturday Voyager services to Wadebridge would work, but it could presumably only take a single unit, not a pair at Bodmin General.

Hmmm
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Probably true.</p>
<p>We looked at Bodmin a while back, but felt it had changed too much over the years to be able to bring off era-swapping on it, it would be fine if we were all into modelling exactly the same period in time!</p>
<p>It would be an interesting thing to try it as a modern working junction. Wadebridge and Padstow (and Bodmin!) are big enough to warrant a half-decent passenger service, but I reckon doing so via the Southern routes would be a little pointless (between these locations and Launceston there is pretty much nothing there!). </p>
<p>My thought would be that Beeching closed the Southern lines and Wadebridge was then served via Bodmin and the GWML (which I think actually happened, but the Western just didn&#8217;t try very hard!)</p>
<p>Trying to fit such a service into the actual arrangement of tracks there could be a pain, all passenger trains from Wadebridge would have to go East, so no prospect of a Wadebridge-Truro service, lets say&#8230;</p>
<p>Freight off the branch, (from Wenfordbridge with CDA&#8217;s and Fitzgerald lighting) would involve some awkward shunts to head for Lostwithiel/St Blazey&#8230;</p>
<p>Thinking of it as a real railway, capacity would be a pain, with a reversal (time consuming for freight) but no passing place at Bodmin General, and no passing place at Parkway either.</p>
<p>Summer saturday Voyager services to Wadebridge would work, but it could presumably only take a single unit, not a pair at Bodmin General.</p>
<p>Hmmm</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Hall</title>
		<link>http://www.kalyr.co.uk/weblog/railways/o-gauge-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-1387</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tim Hall]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2003 13:06:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kalyr.co.uk/wordpress/?p=1360#comment-1387</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think Iain Rice isn&#039;t really a D&amp;E person.  

Actually his Bodmin Road plan would work just as well as a D&amp;E layout; either 70s with surviving china clay on the branch, or late 80s/early 90s with the branch preserved.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Iain Rice isn&#8217;t really a D&#038;E person.  </p>
<p>Actually his Bodmin Road plan would work just as well as a D&#038;E layout; either 70s with surviving china clay on the branch, or late 80s/early 90s with the branch preserved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martyn Read</title>
		<link>http://www.kalyr.co.uk/weblog/railways/o-gauge-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-1386</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Martyn Read]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2003 09:26:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kalyr.co.uk/wordpress/?p=1360#comment-1386</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was surprised there were only N D&amp;E era layouts, after all, for some bits of the country you can now prototypically provide a main line passenger service with 4 car (and under) trains, (and i&#039;m not just talking about Virgin either, Chiltern, TransPennine, Settle &amp; Carlisle all spring to mind without thinking too hard...)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was surprised there were only N D&#038;E era layouts, after all, for some bits of the country you can now prototypically provide a main line passenger service with 4 car (and under) trains, (and i&#8217;m not just talking about Virgin either, Chiltern, TransPennine, Settle &#038; Carlisle all spring to mind without thinking too hard&#8230;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
