Recent content by 37705

The best thing is to speak to UKR themselves. Despite the claims that they "never request traction for their tours", I understand any tour that will operate fully under the wires will be a 90, and any that will visit somewhere from where 67s are barred will thus be 66s. UKR have also...

Well put it this way - saving it IMO is of more historical importance than saving, for example, another one built in the UK. Which is what we have had with the endless preservation of slightly anonymous 47's, 50's, etc, etc. There is at least some sort of interest factor surrounding it that you...

I joined not one but two trains in 93 and 94 upon which 31410 was one of a pair of locos on the front, but said loco had already failed by the time I got on. So this was either bad luck or the loco really was a bit of a cart.

Not mentioned so far is that saving this one would mean one of the Romanian built 56's being saved. Of course, had 56003 not been de-preserved, then yes, this would have been a questionable loco to try and save.

And IMO, the 390s are the worst trains I have ever travelled on! As has already been mentioned earlier in this forum, the hardcore MU fans who have been posting here aren't going to change their minds, however much the rest of us can to try to convince them. I personally don't see how -...

Well, of course it's a loaded question - the original question by the original poster asked for Loco Hauled V MU operation, and the fact is, Virgin misjudged the changeover from 47's to Voyagers badly by operating single units on services previously operated by longer loco hauled trains. It...

Interesting quote - is that why Chiltern have introduced MORE loco hauled sets since their original "peak hours only" turn? They did this following a passenger survey early last year, so this quote is somewhat off the mark. It is also no surprise that the now defunct Wrexham & Shropshire...

Locos every time. For me, it may be part of an age thing (I have been bashing now for 27 years), but this does not mean that I think any less of newer locos, like the 66s or 70s, as I do the old guard like the 33s or 37s. I do have a friend who seems to have a phobia of new engines, he says...

As somebody who travelled out of Padd endlessly in those days, here are a few more bits of info. The Leeds/Hull train was replaced by a Padd - Llandudno, but this only ran during Summer 86, thereafter the "Cross Country" turns went no further north than Brum/Wolves, although the winter 88/89...

And I assume there is no limit, once a "Pro" member, as to how many photos can appear in each album? I have just started experimenting with it, and my Class 40-47 gallery will eventually need to have 300+ photos in it.

Thanks for that. I have heard that the first 200 pics are free, what price do you get charged thereafter? My fotopic had about 1750-1800 photos on it that I would need to upload again.

Another post by somebody whose fotopic site has gone! My fotopic site was sorted into albums for each class, and then each photo was in loco number order. Does anybody who already has a Flickr site know the answers to these: a) if I have an album for Class 01s, then 02s, etc, in what order...

As somebody who does not work in the railways, I won't admit to knowing how the ins and outs of private companies work. But this is the press release from September 2009 that was used to "plug" the Chiltern links: http://www.wrexhamandshropshire.co.uk/news-item.php?id=75 It suggests that...

My query about the Chiltern links are that W&S were open access, Chiltern weren't. So, if Open Access companies are subject to closure if they don't turn a profit, this means that W&S could have merged with anybody and would still have gone bust. From what I can gather, Chiltern were NOT...

Does have anybody have any idea then, why (and I quote from Wikipedia) "the operating rights were handed to Chiltern Railways". Why did Chiltern get involved if it was performing so badly? Did they just hope it would start to turn a profit?