|
Timmer
|
 |
« Reply #315 on: March 09, 2008, 09:58:59 » |
|
Just goes to show how desperate things are on the FGW▸ region that we hate the thought of losing anymore rolling stock even if we knew it was going to happen as in the case of the 5 142s heading back up north later in the year. Any rolling stock is better than severe overcrowding and people being left behind at stations.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
devon_metro
|
|
« Reply #316 on: March 09, 2008, 10:28:50 » |
|
This is VERY bad news. 2 car pacers simply cannot suffice even during off peak often!
Unless we get 5 replacement 150s its going to be a nightmare.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
vacman
|
|
« Reply #317 on: March 09, 2008, 21:27:56 » |
|
Is this the same local rag that had the headline "train company introduces inferior rolling stock"? They just cant win!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Manchester Picc
Newbie
Posts: 1
|
|
« Reply #318 on: April 20, 2008, 15:35:57 » |
|
The 5 x 142's which are going "Up North" were only ever on short term lease and were "loaned" from Northern Rail whilst class 158's were being refurbed. So what is actually happening is 142's are going back to the company where they belong and FGW▸ are going to get some nice clean 158's.  Feel sorry for us northerners who have had to make do without these units for some time now  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Lee
|
|
« Reply #319 on: April 20, 2008, 16:04:23 » |
|
Welcome to the forum, Manchester Picc.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
John R
|
|
« Reply #320 on: April 20, 2008, 16:05:59 » |
|
Welcome Manchester Piccadilly. I hate to contradict someone's first post, but I thought the 142's were off lease, as Northern had replaced them with 158s?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Conner
|
|
« Reply #321 on: April 20, 2008, 16:12:44 » |
|
Welcome Manchester Piccadilly. I hate to contradict someone's first post, but I thought the 142's were off lease, as Northern had replaced them with 158s?
Yeh, but Northen didn't get as many 158's as they were getting so they get some of the 142's. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Lee
|
|
« Reply #322 on: April 20, 2008, 16:14:08 » |
|
Welcome Manchester Piccadilly. I hate to contradict someone's first post, but I thought the 142's were off lease, as Northern had replaced them with 158s?
All of the Class 142 units are currently on lease with either FGW▸ , ATW▸ or Northern Rail. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #323 on: April 20, 2008, 17:29:58 » |
|
The 5 x 142's which are going "Up North" were only ever on short term lease and were "loaned" from Northern Rail whilst class 158's were being refurbed. So what is actually happening is 142's are going back to the company where they belong and FGW▸ are going to get some nice clean 158's. Feel sorry for us northerners who have had to make do without these units for some time now Why doesn't the paper say that FGW are getting 158s to compensate? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
vacman
|
|
« Reply #324 on: April 20, 2008, 18:47:54 » |
|
The 5 x 142's which are going "Up North" were only ever on short term lease and were "loaned" from Northern Rail whilst class 158's were being refurbed. So what is actually happening is 142's are going back to the company where they belong and FGW▸ are going to get some nice clean 158's. Feel sorry for us northerners who have had to make do without these units for some time now Why doesn't the paper say that FGW are getting 158s to compensate? They've already got the 158's! the nodding donkeys are only covering whilst our fleet is in for refurb, currently 5 units at a time, so come October we won't be better or worse off. Are the Northerners forgetting that it's because they got our 158's that we've been dumped with their four wheeled crap!!!!!! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jim
|
|
« Reply #325 on: April 20, 2008, 19:15:15 » |
|
Is this the same local rag that had the headline "train company introduces inferior rolling stock"? They just cant win!
Sure it isn't a comic? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Cheers Jim AG's most famous quote "It'll be better next week" |
|
|
|
6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01
|
|
« Reply #326 on: August 22, 2008, 00:32:40 » |
|
... i know im a little late but... if the 158's were being refitted would you use the only option you have the 142's on longish distance routes (the 158 routes) or would you replace the 158's with the 150's and 153's which you already have and as a short term measure wack the pacers which are fit for purpose onto the branchlines?
maybee its just me but im sure like 10 class 101's could have been brought out of retirement... bonus is that there not restricted to 2 car units you can wack 2 coaches in the middle or couple together
yeh im being nostalgic
bring back the 101's !!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
devon_metro
|
|
« Reply #327 on: August 22, 2008, 10:37:28 » |
|
101s don't have CDL▸ , OTMR▸ and probably not TPWS▸
^
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
swlines
|
|
« Reply #328 on: August 22, 2008, 16:47:05 » |
|
Not to mention the fact none are mainline registered anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01
|
|
« Reply #329 on: August 22, 2008, 20:37:49 » |
|
ahhh i beg to differ they were in main line use until late 2003... they have all the safty features im 99.999999% sure!!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Click on the map to explore geographics
