Search results

Isn’t the FAI procedure the (near) equivalent to an inquest? Was it opened and adjourned until after the court case?

I‘m not sure. There have definitely always been complaints about the fares, both Wightlink and Red Funnel get very similar criticism. I suspect any analysis would find they’re just very expensive operations, staffing levels must be very high for one thing.

I think it was posted at the time that GWR were all geared up to start the service, the traction changes were all sorted and working, and DfT pulled them at a very late stage.

Why would it matter? I don’t think anybody is going to be looking for a neatly spaced Newcastle to Manors service, it’s really about departures from Manors heading north. They’re about 10-15 mins apart from next week, but I wonder if anyone even has the times yet for Dec 2025? As they’re...

AIUI the private company Wightlink actually owns the road pier and pierhead, Network Rail only owns the railway pier. They are completely separate structures for almost the entire length.

I think one train from Sunderland at stupid o’clock in the morning isn’t really comparable to a proper all day service, even if only running in alternate hours. They still intend a Middlesbrough service eventually, which suggests 2 hourly from Bradford has a good case.

Later on… The ITT SWT issued for “10 car suburban” stock, that eventually became the 458/5 conversion from 460s, and the 456 transfer, was originally written to “hint at” more 450s, or at least some sort of Desiros. IIRC they weren’t allowed to explicitly specify that Siemens stock was the...

It’s not a “switch of a unit from Bristol to Cardiff”, as you write. It‘s a Voyager that starts in Derby, and runs to Cardiff, replacing the 170 that would have previously run through from Nottingham. This should have been clear from the earlier discussions in this thread.

I explained the ‘excuse’ for the service in post #80. It’s a direct quote from the track access application.

That link isn’t valid, I’m afraid.

I think if your memory is correct about it being near 50 years ago they would have had to reverse at Morpeth, because the direct northbound link from Hepscott Junction wasn’t put in until 1980.

Here you are: https://flic.kr/p/2qyWoRa

No longer likely according to what railway staff have posted earlier in this thread. Were they to be used on Portsmouth services a few, (but not all), would be stabled at Fratton overnight, but the fleet would be given routine maintainance at Bournemouth, similar to the plan for the 442s.

There‘s definitely a YouTube video somewhere showing the current state of the former Hotel Curve entrance at the south end, IIRC it is still there but full of location cases installed during various recent upgrades. I’ll try and find it. Here you are: So at 11m 48s he is at the south end of...

The other possibility is that it’s a complete basket case and that’s why First haven’t mentioned it at all. Fails on “rule 1“ of open access, you normally need London at the end of your route.

Yes I keep getting that wrong… :oops:

They’re talking about nine intermediate stations between, (but not including), Bletchley and Bedford St John’s. In the video introduction they quite clearly limit the subject area to the section from Fenny Stratford to Kempston.

I agree the number is not news. I‘m referring to how the way they show it on a line diagram connecting Oxford to Cambridge highlights it.

EWR have uploaded a short video highlighting the issue of the large number of stations between Bletchley and Bedford. Shown in line diagram format the way they’ve done it certainly makes it look as if the station density on that section is unusually high. So I get the impression they want to...

The drawings I found, (linked in the other thread), don’t show any step plate junctions. It was to be a separate single line from the site near Primrose Hill all the way to the Old Oak Common box. There are no intermediate junctions on the route at all, at least nothing is shown on the publicly...