Search results

Early on in the scheme, it was planned to build a station at Seghill, slightly further south of the original station. It got canned in an attempt to reduce the forecasted journey time form Ashington.

Sadly no, for example Seaton Delaval station is supposed to serve the whole of Seaton Valley, including Seghill (the line runs through more or less the middle of the village). Privately the officer behind the project have admitted that people from the likes of Seghill won't likely use/benefit...

A side note, as far as I'm aware the Virgin XC and West Coast MK2/3 refurbishments were started by the previews BR owned shadow franchise companies, hence the XC and West Coast interiors being different. Back on topic, IMHO the two worst privatisation refurbs are the Merseyrail 142...

I'm sure GE Transportation/Wabtec uses a variant of Mk3 equipment on their test track in Harborcreek, Pennsylvania: And did/still do at their plant at Erie: http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1099402

I always though they looked good from the variuos pictures. The Northern Spirit 142 refurb was ok IMHO, apart from making the lights even more dimmer and not touching the interior panels either.

Speaking about 142s ,the Valley Lines 142 refurbishment looked pretty extensive (N.B. I've only seen photos of those). The Merseyrail 142s are probably one of the quintessential examples of somehow making a bad product even worse.

Class 305/307/308 refurbishments may count (removal of compartments and fitting of gangways) : http://citytransport.info/Compartment.htm

I've never been a fan of the 156s (especially with their original interiors), to me they seemed noisy and bland inside and out. I remember going on a newly refurbished Northern Spirit 156 (on the Esk Valley line to Whitby) with its new carpet smell, complete with a few carpet cuttings left on...

A Class 55 did haul a rake of loco hauled MK3s on the ECML at least once: 06/09/1979 - York - uploaded by John Turner, from 53A Models of Hull Collection.

One thing in particular I like abort the Perkins fitted 158s is that they don't have that whining sound that you hear with the Cunnins fitted 158s.

My 1999 book shows them as having 90 mph max speed.

When comparing a 150 to a 156, the key differences was my perceived dwell times (far better on a 150) and the window alignment (god awful on the 150s compared to the 156s). That aside, I personally get the feeling that now is the right time that both classes should have been replaced en masse.

With my Software Engineer hat on, being reliant on 2 character TOC codes seems like a bad idea as it drastically limits the possible combinations (especially given that multiple operators come and go over the years; something which BR et al. must have considered at that time) and they are not...

With hindsight in mind, assuming the layout of 4040 is now as PRM compliant as the majority of the fleet, perhaps the original 3/4 life refurb should adopted the same seating layout? I'd imagine it would have saved a fair bit.

It will just be a stock photo, probably supplied by the web developer, kind of like what you can find here.

Like the 1992 tube stock, the 91s were designed on the cusp of technological overhaul/innovation such as the move to AC motors and the extensive use of computerised systems. I remember a very old Rail article on the 91s at the time of their refurbishment stating that they were the first British...

If the Caterpillar based gensets for the TfW 230s prove successful, I wonder if the LNR examples would be retrofitted?

Thanks for the link. I recall from some BR journal papers that a rebody of all pacer classes was a possibility to extend them beyond their (then anticipated )10-15 year lifespan. :lol: Though I wonder if the post Winsford mods would have made that more difficult. That aside, I'm certain that...

I wouldn't be so naive with regards to A/C; if an operator can advertise their buses has having a more comfortable travelling environment, along with other bells sand whistles like Wi-Fi etc, I am sure it will attract some new users. Of course it will not attract all from their cars en masse.

Some interesting views reading the worst sort of bus; the worst for me would be the Turkish TEMSA Avenues in service with Arriva NE. If you think the low cost offerings from the UK manufacturers are bad, you should sample one of those heaps. When they first launched, Arriva NE had a press...