Any flask trains to Dungeness?

Hi

I can see these are in the working timetable on RTT, but run as required. Do these still run and if so how frequently?

Thanks

Gary

Are we allowed to post that? Could be regarded as sensitive info...

randyrippley said:

Are we allowed to post that? Could be regarded as sensitive info...

Click to expand...

I can see where you're coming from, but you can see the schedules in Real Time Trains and you can see on the day when they're running. Any terrorist just need to target the Cumbrian Coast line if they fancy having a go at a flask train. They would be waiting a while on the Dungeness branch hence my question!

gazthomas said:

Do these still run and if so how frequently?

Click to expand...

Yes, they still run, but due to repair work taking place at Dungeness this Winter,
the train has only been running about once a month (most recently Jan 20th).



MARK

Freightmaster said:

Yes, they still run, but due to repair work taking place at Dungeness this Winter,
the train has only been running about once a month (most recently Jan 20th).


MARK

Click to expand...

There are plenty of anti-nuclear activists who keep an eye on these movements (Dungeness, and the other ones), and sometimes have demonstrations in places where the flasks go through the middle of built-up areas, and/or where they sit in sidings in urban areas all night. The movements really aren't secret.

Freightmaster said:

Yes, they still run, but due to repair work taking place at Dungeness this Winter,
the train has only been running about once a month (most recently Jan 20th).



MARK

Click to expand...

Thanks Mark, much obliged

such trains do not exist. What you saw was swamp gas from Venus reflected off Saturn. If you could just look at this flashing red light

AlbertBeale said:

There are plenty of anti-nuclear activists who keep an eye on these movements (Dungeness, and the other ones), and sometimes have demonstrations in places where the flasks go through the middle of built-up areas, and/or where they sit in sidings in urban areas all night. The movements really aren't secret.

Click to expand...

No doubt the same hypocritical eco greenies who complain about carbon and deforestation and hs2.............................

DarloRich said:

such trains do not exist. What you saw was swamp gas from Venus reflected off Saturn. If you could just look at this flashing red light



No doubt the same hypocritical eco greenies who complain about carbon and deforestation and hs2.............................

Click to expand...

Same ones that turn up at Sellafield in gas guzzling 4x4s...

headshot119 said:

Same ones that turn up at Sellafield in gas guzzling 4x4s...

Click to expand...

I'm a pit puzzled as to how resisting existential threats to our ecosystem relates to hypocrisy; and which people go to Sellafield/Windscale in 4x4s...

But let's not drift off-topic.

AlbertBeale said:

I'm a pit puzzled as to how resisting existential threats to our ecosystem relates to hypocrisy; and which people go to Sellafield/Windscale in 4x4s...

But let's not drift off-topic.

Click to expand...

Existential threat. Nuclear power? Goodness me. What rot.

We need to tackle climate change. To do that we need to reduce carbon emissions. We have an expanding global population who require electricity to support them. Renewable sources can't produce the amount required to meet that demand. People, despite the star trek fantasies of the eco greenie hypocrites, wont change their consumption habits. Consumption of electrical power is only going to increase with the switch ( hopefully accelerated) to electrical vehicles. The only way we can service that demand is via nuclear power yet the same hypocrites complain about carbon emission free nuclear power. It is bizarre.

It is the same hypocrisy that complains about a low emission HS2 which will remove many car or plane journeys because it might cut down some trees! It is nonsense and shows them up for what they are.

DarloRich said:

Existential threat. Nuclear power? Goodness me. What rot.

We need to tackle climate change. To do that we need to reduce carbon emissions. We have an expanding global population who require electricity to support them. Renewable sources can't produce the amount required to meet that demand. People, despite the star trek fantasies of the eco greenie hypocrites, wont change their consumption habits. Consumption of electrical power is only going to increase with the switch ( hopefully accelerated) to electrical vehicles. The only way we can service that demand is via nuclear power yet the same hypocrites complain about carbon emission free nuclear power. It is bizarre.

It is the same hypocrisy that complains about a low emission HS2 which will remove many car or plane journeys because it might cut down some trees! It is nonsense and shows them up for what they are.

Click to expand...

1. What's existential depends on one's view of a safely liveable existence. And note that threats with extremely serious consequences if they do occur, even if they have a low likelihood of occurrence, are generally classified as existential.

2. My understanding is that nuclear power is not the only way to generate sufficient electricity.

3. I wasn't aware of any projection which suggested that a significant proportion of HS2 passengers would be switchers from existing car or plane journeys.

AlbertBeale said:

1. What's existential depends on one's view of a safely liveable existence. And note that threats with extremely serious consequences if they do occur, even if they have a low likelihood of occurrence, are generally classified as existential.

Click to expand...

Hyperbole.

AlbertBeale said:

2. My understanding is that nuclear power is not the only way to generate sufficient electricity.

Click to expand...

Yes: Coal, gas or wood are suitable alternatives to deliver the power we need. They tend to release carbon mind. Hippie power wont cut it. It simply cant generate the volume we need, today. If we are serious ( not just posing or being "right on") about climate change we need to do something and we need to do it now. Nuclear is the answer to our power needs. We should be building such stations now. Why is it that eco worriers are against it I wonder?

(We actually need both renewable and nuclear and we need them now. We need to stop burning fossils and pronto or we are in serious trouble!)

AlbertBeale said:

3. I wasn't aware of any projection which suggested that a significant proportion of HS2 passengers would be switchers from existing car or plane journeys.

Click to expand...

best read a bit more widely then.

I ask again why are eco warriors against what is a green transport system? I wonder if they would have as much care for "ancient woodland" if it was in Middlesbrough rather than the south. I doubt it somehow..............

DarloRich said:

Hyperbole.


Yes: Coal, gas or wood are suitable alternatives to deliver the power we need. They tend to release carbon mind. Hippie power wont cut it. It simply cant generate the volume we need, today. If we are serious ( not just posing or being "right on") about climate change we need to do something and we need to do it now. Nuclear is the answer to our power needs. We should be building such stations now. Why is it that eco worriers are against it I wonder?

(We actually need both renewable and nuclear and we need them now. We need to stop burning fossils and pronto or we are in serious trouble!)


best read a bit more widely then.

I ask again why are eco warriors against what is a green transport system? I wonder if they would have as much care for "ancient woodland" if it was in Middlesbrough rather than the south. I doubt it somehow..............

Click to expand...

Re 1. "Existential risks ... low-probability high-impact events..." from the Centre for the Study of Existential Risks at Cambridge University.

Re 2. Renewables can replace capacity in lieu of fossil fuels much more quickly than can nuclear, and without the carbon footprint involved in building nuclear plants (which further delays the time by which they start to make any net contribution to cutting carbon).

Re 3. I have read a bit more widely - DfT figures last year predicted that only 5% of HS2 passengers would be people switching from planes or cars (1% from air and 4% from cars). The idea that HS2 is a "green transport system" is not borne out by the figures: note the carbon intensity of concrete-heavy construction of this type on this scale. HS2's own figures show that after 60 years of operation, the project will still have been a massive net carbon producer - at that stage having "paid back", during its time of use (including allowing for sequestration by tree-planting, and additional freight capacity on other lines) only between 1% and 2% of the carbon footprint of its construction (see, eg, https://assets.publishing.service.g...tachment_data/file/828986/E27_Carbon_v1.2.pdf).

I will repeat that I think we have moved too far from the topic of this thread.

AlbertBeale said:

I will repeat that I think we have moved too far from the topic of this thread.

Click to expand...

I agree. I suspect it is all i will ever agree with you on!

DarloRich said:

I agree. I suspect it is all i will ever agree with you on!

Click to expand...

Well - that's nice at least...