INBOX
play ball.’
I understand it would be ok to recovered from the Pacers though; emission rules relate to the procurement of new engines, and there aren't any reasons why on belching out exhaust fumes
From: Neil Palmer Subject: Ex-LU stock being stop the north?
to join the WCML somewhere Liverpool, Warrington and the North.
From: Graham Nalty Subject:
usage were published, I had a look for parkway stations and also for the nearest city centre stations. parkway station two miles outside Crewe cannot
realistically be
expected to attract more than about 1,500,000 'entries and exits' compared with 2,500,000 at the might be less if inter-city trains also called at the existing Crewe station.
that of today, we would expect the Crewe 'hub' to have 3,000,000 'entries and exits compared to were at the present Crewe station. coupled with its much larger population, would generate close to 10,000,000 'entries and exits'.
would create many more jobs than at either Crewe or the Crewe 'hub', because the many more service industries such as banking, marketing and design located at
businesses to grow. By contrast, trying to lure new industries to industries would tend to attract only those industries that do not need good rail communications to
From: Subject: Train driver prosecuted for passing red signal and ignoring warnings
driver can restart the train after today’s technology it is possible to disable the train until the driver is given a code to input before the train will restart...
From: Greyoldgrumpy Subject: What will the Pacers be replaced with?
All well and good to talk about please tell me where suitable diesel engines are coming from? As I understand it,
currently
there aren't any diesels suitable the space envelope available.
probably get a message from government saying something replace the Pacers but those nasty people at Porterbrook etc wouldn't
rail technology magazine Dec/Jan 15 | 15
I think [RMT general secretary] Mick Cash should keep his mouth shut until he can actually see one of the converted trial vehicles. he has. Basically everything will be new except for the 30-year- old corrosion free aluminium bodyshells and 10-year-old bogies. What's the problem there?
If Mick thinks there's an unlimited supply of public money for new rolling stock he's dreaming. Or maybe he's planning to put union money where his mouth is and donate some of his union's funds towards replacement with brand new vehicles?
…I believe there are several
reasons TfL wanted to replace refurbishment being
completed
around 2008. One of the reasons is the inability to adapt them for Automatic Train Operation to meet TfL requirements for capacity improvement (also the trains). Also, moving to a common save on maintenance costs and
pretty much considered as new, as aluminium is corrosion-free, and they have real bogies unlike the Pacer bus-frame-on-wagon- wheels. This is a new from-the- bodyshells to save a whack of money, which, face it, TfL brings in a lot more of from the farebox to me and a big saving for the taxpayers.
As long as FGW doesn't try using them on a route like Bristol to Penzance I don't see a problem if this gets rid of Pacers.
From: Les F Subject: Ex-LU stock being stop the north?
doesn't matter for chassis and aluminium bodies.
Getting them for scrap value much cheaper than new trains. All the components subject to wear will be new, so the trains will be good as new.
Electrifying more track for third in use; [Network Rail] has declared
would be invaluable during the long conversion to AC. London Underground lines are seriously overcrowded, so new trains there are needed with increased capacity.
© Tom Page
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108