Search results

Judging by how successful the last year (plus) of running of these new brilliant trains has been I guess everybody at TL now wishes they had gone with a Hitachi product instead (hopefully they took part in the tender!).

The obnoxious smell is definitely something that many people notice. It's not nice in a sense that when you get a new car you can't get enough of it, here it's more of a reverse aka vomit inducing situation.

It's a shame it didn't go through Inverness, that's the shortest route to Hornsey from Dollands Moor after all...

So that's the reason behind that dumb ramp leading to cab doors... As for PIS doesn't terminal/control unit display station names in case they need to be overridden? I think that's how it works in other systems.

TL used to send 319's into Victoria regularly, without passengers.

Definitely 66 for me too. Or anything that rocks the EMD 2 stroke lump for that matter. I find the sound appealing like no other loco.

Sounds like you've been on those projects too eh? This video is a good illustration of what you wrote above and how the class 700 tender/design/build process (and perhaps the whole TL project too although it predates modern project management developments) could have looked like...

Yep, it's hard to describe but the EMD signature ying makes me very happy indeed. I can't stand most modern diesels especially the racket that Cummins powered locos/DMU's make but the EMD's I can listen to for hours on end. And that applies to all notches (although tickover is my favourite).

That's a blasphemy. Engine is the main reason I'd love to get my hands on one... Or two. Just can't get enough of that EMD sound man.

It was just a tongue in cheek response.

Chiltern could buy all available for sale 66's from DBS and use them in push-pull configuration. One can only dream.

I'd love to get one for my garden, maybe one day! How much roughly would one of these be, anyone?

Nobody said it would be simple. I appreciate space is at premium but I'm sure they could have found a workaround. One would be level separation starting between Farringdon and Kings Cross Thameslink potentially having the GN on separate level to the widened lines/TL and having STP split into...

Or they could have made the south end tunnels 4 tracks wide and have 4 tracks from the last viable spot where the junction could be to where the STP is. It'd cost money obviously.

York road tunnels are still in situ so they could reuse that haha. It's pretty pathetic how we can't draw conclusions from past experiences and plan/invest/provision accordingly. Underground STP needs 4 platforms to work efficiently in my opinion since any, even slightest hiccup when 24tph start...

Of course it will therefore I predict that in less than a decade underground STP will get another set of platforms (which it should have had from the get go)

This guy seems more than happy with PIS (or POS as some call it). Apparently he was involved in designing it so perhaps he also has access to those missing manuals? https://youtu.be/a5bLDmrCAgQ?t=7m13s

Possibly full with many slim people? These indicators work on load not occupied space.

I remember cleaners getting on at Farringdon and getting off at STP for a while, in them firstcrapitalconnect days.

Does this mean Canal Tunnels will now be regularly used for stock movement?