Edit - answered above
www.facebook.com
Perhaps it was vinyled for the event with the plan to refurb afterwards?The Watercress Line themselves.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Looks like it's only vinyl, which makes sense from a cost point of view, but still a bit of a shame.
watercressline.co.uk
Isn’t it ironic that while GWR struggle to cope with providing enough cl 150 units each day to cover the many, many services that rely on them in Devon and Cornwall, that a (GBR avoiding) wealthy and lucrative rolling stock leasing company’s equally well-fed Directors can gift an otherwise far from life expired unit to a seasonal Heritage Leisure Railway for further use.
Not really...
The staff onboard were delighted at the Gathering, I was also thrilled to see one had been preserved seeing how 150231 was a unit I saw regularly. I do hope to go down and visit her when she begins running on the line!
The situation with the 150s has been well documented. Without Porterbrook doing what it has done over many years with donating stock to heritage operations, we wouldn’t have the Thumper DEMUs saved, nor a Class 87, some 47s and several HST vehicles. I know who put together the business case for donating to preservation and getting it signed off by the Porterbrook board (it wasn’t me) and it was all about supporting heritage operations - so your comments about directors are frankly out of order.
Availability usually isn't that bad. On any given day, there is often only 1 or 2 units out of use on top of 232 and 238 at Wolverton. Any units that break down tend to be out and about within a day or two. Over the last few weeks especially I've seen a drop in 2 car formations.
chill out - wait till you find out about those preserved steam trains that could be out in use on the main line every day. Some of them only worked for 15 years!
( The donation arrangement will prevent this I am sure)Yes I agree with you there, while I'm very against the non stop money train that is the current version of stock ownership. Porterbrook has shown on more than one occasion being more helpful than it needed to be to help out with preservation and imo has been very generous
They did, but whilst it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that a further C6 could be authorised, it won’t be allowed by the DfT. So it’s either scrap or Pres for these, unless someone has a change of heart.
Unit was due for overhaul which has not been sanctioned by the leasing company. Cheaper and more PR savvy to donate it away rather than send for scrap (and have to pay to get it there). Your area is by no means unique. There is not an hour that goes by in most other areas that passenger services are not cancelled or short formed through unit non-availability, Northern on the north Manchester side at last set of statistics was 17% short form and 6% cancellations....just saying. Could send you the 8 Northern 769/4's, have you seen their availability??
Are you sure it was a big change for the railways? Lots of gangwayed DMUs and EMUs have been built in the last 40 years.
I think he means that the first Sprinter (which happened to be non-gangwayed) was a big change, not that non-gangwayed (or indeed gangwayed) units were a novelty.
I thought the first Pacers entered service before the 150s? Unless you don't count the Pacers as regional DMUs.
The sole 140 (preserved on paper, but in a state of disrepair) and the 141s (three preserved initially, two of which survive) beat the Sprinters into traffic, but classes 142-144 didn't.
It would seem unlikely, although it could be done using the interior fittings from 150268-150277. However, just the cost of refitting the initial moquette would be money a preserved railway could ill afford. In any case, should artefacts only ever be preserved in original condition?
A 2+2 interior is far better for a preserved railway than 2+3.
Yes, I agree.
