Tom Anderson wrote:
On 4 Apr 2005, Boltar wrote:


Jack Taylor wrote:
"Boltar" wrote in message
oups.com...

Whatever happened to moving trains by rail? How can it be easier to
stick it on a low loader (not to mention the traffic chaos is will
inevitably cause as it moves at a snails pace)?

Because as trains have become faster and more frequent there are
fewer and fewer paths for moving low-speed stock around the
country. Would you appreciate your 125mph train being delayed
whilst a 40mph transfer of London Underground stock limped into a
loop ahead of you?

Surely it can be done at night? Besides , how many people does a slow
moving low loader inconvenience , especially if its doing 20mph on
windy B road?

You'd think they could at least put it on a swapbody and move *that*
by rail, at a decent speed, in the normal manner of rail freight.

But, as Jack said, they presumably looked into this and found it
would be more expensive. Pretty poor show by rail freight there .


The real cost of moving "dead" rail vehicles is down to Network Rail's
access charges. These are such that even mainline TOCs move locos and other
vehicles by road because it's cheaper. Stupid or what?