Search results

Where has it been mentioned? The only Desiro refurbishment I am aware of for SWR was the one included in their franchise bid and that project concluded years ago.

What makes you say that?

Biggest issue is the provision of the PRM toilet - think the two undamaged/less damaged cars are the ones without the PRM facilities?

The 101s also still have use on the München-Nürnberg RE service via the high speed line, covering for the chronic unreliability of the Skoda sets.

Who is “we” and what group are you referring to?

You are assuming that organisations are efficient at de-registering vehicles in R2! There’s plenty of “ghosts in the machine”…

You are correct with that bit. FGW modified their (slam door) HSTs with SDO on the CDL system. A really rather neat modification and is backwards compatible in that unmodified vehicles can still run in the train.

The numbers don't add up in that case. If the quote is 22 units to GWR (which excludes the accident damaged sets) with four to Northern, is that "Northern four" then three sets sub-leased from GWR plus two currently off lease vehicles?

Just because something is contracted out doesn't give the contracting body a free pass. Need to be an "intelligent customer" and it is highly debatable if TfW are/were - see also the 230s.

If a unit is on exam or having a (minor) fault fixed then it is stopped!

Why is it specifically a Trainline problem and not a "railway industry can't do the basics" problem?

43092 and 43093 have also been allocated to a new ROSP (Romic Stored Power Cars) pool.

Glossy website... but no information as to who the people behind it are... and they don't even own the loco yet. "Caveat emptor" very much applies!

43030 was not undamaged. Indeed the RAIB report states "The trailing power car did not suffer any significant damage"; the key word being "significant"; in other words it was damaged. Whilst repairable, Angel, ScotRail and their insurers must have had good reason to write it off.

The whole GBR branding is a very poor DIY attempt!

I think you need to go and have a look at the timescales for delivery of the new TPE units if you think 185s will be available in 3 or 4 years!

That's utterly hideous, to be frank. Way worse than what DfT have actually done.

I can't see DB wanting to use them as they are taking delivery of 90 ICE3neo units currently.

Which used to be known as rheostatic braking, not regen. Regen being for where energy is fed back into the catenary. Both are covered by the term "dynamic braking"!

There was a suggestion at the time that the nameplate swap was linked to the owning sector of the locos. 37403 was initially a Provincial/Regional Railways sector loco whereas 37424 was an InterCity sector loco. 37403 getting the "Isle of Mull" name back in 2016 was after it was preserved...