Caledonian Sleeper discussion

[Caleb2010]

Yes, up in the Scottish countryside now!

 

[MylesHSG]

What will happen to 86101 and 87002 when the mk5 coaches come into service. Can they still operate the ECS moves? Or has it got to be all 92's only?

 

[CosherB]

What will happen to 86101 and 87002 when the mk5 coaches come into service. Can they still operate the ECS moves? Or has it got to be all 92's only?

Good question - you can add 86401 to the list as well. The most obvious answer to me is yes, it has to be 92s due to the ETS requirements of the stock. Not sure what the impact of that has on stock moves into Euston (the original reason why the heritage stock was drafted into use), or if using an 'inadequate' ETS supply to the stock has been thought about / incorporated into the Mk5 design for ECS moves. All a bit beyond my pay grade I'm afraid!

 

[749259]

Been a long time since 92032 has worked a Sleeper (other than ECS). A good 6 months or so, if not more. Good luck Caleb2010!

92018 is at Willesden so presumably stopped currently as would have been the more obvious substitute.
92028 also there, but not had any form of run out with coaching stock (e.g. ECS) since it's 2+ year stay in Loughborough, so makes sense that's not being used.

92032 worked 1M11 ex Wembley on Monday 5th June.

 

[marks87]

Good question - you can add 86401 to the list as well. The most obvious answer to me is yes, it has to be 92s due to the ETS requirements of the stock. Not sure what the impact of that has on stock moves into Euston (the original reason why the heritage stock was drafted into use), or if using an 'inadequate' ETS supply to the stock has been thought about / incorporated into the Mk5 design for ECS moves. All a bit beyond my pay grade I'm afraid!

Surely ETS isn't needed for ECS moves? It's a duty that been regularly performed by 66s in the past for Polmadie-Glasgow Central.

I think the only issue I can think of with using the 86s/87s would be the couplers.

 

[Caleb2010]

Been a long time since 92032 has worked a Sleeper (other than ECS). A good 6 months or so, if not more. Good luck Caleb2010!

Well it didn't disgrace itself - Edinburgh on time and nice and smooth too.

 

[TimboM]

Well it didn't disgrace itself - Edinburgh on time and nice and smooth too.

Never in any doubt

92032 worked 1M11 ex Wembley on Monday 5th June.

Yes, it did 3 of the Euston<->Wembley "shuttle" runs during the Spring Sunday night ECML diversions - twice in May (including morning of Mon 15th when it failed at Euston with the ECS move back to Wembley and 010 had to rescue it).

It's latest trip out on 4th/5th June was only as far as Wembley on 1S25 on evening of 4th (038 took forward to Waverley) and from Wembley into Euston on 1M11 on 5th as you say after 92014 had brought the train down from Scotland.

I was meaning that 032 hadn't done a full WCML 'trunk' run to/from Scotland in a long while. Think it may have been Autumn last year it last did one.

 

[TimboM]

Good question - you can add 86401 to the list as well. The most obvious answer to me is yes, it has to be 92s due to the ETS requirements of the stock. Not sure what the impact of that has on stock moves into Euston (the original reason why the heritage stock was drafted into use), or if using an 'inadequate' ETS supply to the stock has been thought about / incorporated into the Mk5 design for ECS moves. All a bit beyond my pay grade I'm afraid!

Surely ETS isn't needed for ECS moves? It's a duty that been regularly performed by 66s in the past for Polmadie-Glasgow Central.

I think the only issue I can think of with using the 86s/87s would be the couplers.

I think the new stock may see the end of the 86s/87s on the ECS moves, but I may be wrong.

Possibly the biggest reason before even contemplating the ETS angle is the Dellner couplings as you allude to marks87. From a practical perspective 86101, 86401 and 87002 would need to be modified in a similar way the 73/9s and 92s are going to be. This involves major (probably irreversible) structural alterations to the buffer beam etc. I'm not sure AC Loco Group would want this doing to their heritage locos they've carefully preserved as being key/only examples of the class/sub-class remaining.

The downside is they'd no longer get the steady revenue from GBRf that's helped them with other projects e.g. 89001, but I expect they'll know already whether or not the hire contract goes beyond the new stock and will be planning finances etc. accordingly.

From the ETS point of view, I'm no expert, but AFAIK the new stock is 1,500v versus the usual 800v of most stock (including the current stuff). The 92s have this from their Nightstar days and had a mod to be able to operate the 'classic' 800v. They're going to have that 'reversed' as part of the prep work for the new stock. So even if the stock could operate on a lower ETS for just the ECS move, the 86s/87s would need some sort of alteration to their ETS supply. It's not just a case of plugging in the existing cables into the new stock. Again, this may render 86/87s unable to operate with all other "normal" stock and hence reduce AC Loco Groups ability to spot-hire the locos/footex's/railtours etc.

Also, with all the money GBRf are investing in their 92s, would it stack up for them to also pay (either directly or indirectly) for the 3 heritage locos to have their couplings and ETS sorted just for ECS moves... I'm not sure it would.

I believe the staff travel in from the depots on the Sleeper ECS, so at least some power is required. I've no idea (not withstanding all the issues above) if it's feasible for a "low power" mode where only the basics are turned on until the 92 is hooked up. I seem to recall reading somewhere when this was discussed before that it was...?

The next issue is that whilst normally the 1S25/26 locos at Euston get onto the stock pretty quickly (at Glasgow its already on of course) it's not all that common for there to be delays (issues with locos, issues with paths across the Euston throat etc etc). If the ECS loco can provide full hotel power, it can at least allow the passengers to board whilst the loco issues at the other end are resolved. This improves passenger experience and can minimise delays as you're not waiting for everyone to board once the loco issue at the country end is sorted. So again, makes sense to have a 92 on the ECS that can do this.

The final issue I see is from an operational perspective. Particularly at Euston when the 1S25 (Highlander) loco fails it's usually the 5S96 (Lowlander ECS) loco that's used to sub in - as it'll typically be at Wembley with driver, pan-up ready to go etc at the point the 1S25 loco is declared a failure. If it's an 86/87 on the 5S96 ECS, then another 92 would need to be sourced from Willesden anyway - so you'd need at least one if not two 92s "spare". Using a 92 on the Lowlander ECS gives more options and a quicker response time to any issues - and uses a loco that would probably need to be in the vicinity anyway.

There's maybe a slightly higher chance an 86 (or something else suitable) could continue in Glasgow as the 92 is attached at the depot so there's not quite the issue of how to power the train for boarding if the loco is delayed attaching as it can be at Euston. However, if there's issues with the 1M11 loco already attached there's still the same challenge of powering the train for boarding etc. whilst the loco issue is sorted.

With the 92s being the only loco able to haul the full service, it also increases options/resilience if the Polmadie-GLC ECS loco is a 92 as would mean there's the 1M11 and 1M16 92s, plus the Carstairs/EDB portion 92 plus a 4th in the mix should anyone of the 3 booked for the main services fail.


So, bit of a long post (sorry!) but I think it'll need to be 92s on the ECS once the new stock is introduced - seems to be too many 'barriers' against continued use of the 86s/87.

Which may well be one reason why GBRf are bringing their fleet up to 12x 92s plus a further two more out of store apparently. They're going to need 7 every night (4 Scotland end, 3 Euston end) with at least one if not two "spare" to cover exams/repairs etc.


Of course, 89001 may yet appear in Midnight Teal with suped-up 1,500v ETS + Dellners (that's not a serious suggestion before folk get excited...!)

 

[marks87]

Sorry, maybe I'm misunderstanding the precise technicalities, but why would ETS be needed for ECS moves? As I said in my previous post, class 66s have done the job in the past. Don't you just need a physical coupling and the brake hose(s) hooked up?

Is there something particular to the Mk5s that they require power when moved, in-service or otherwise?

I agree the couplings would be an issue and it would seem unlikely the AC Loco group would want their "heritage" locos butchered to fit Dellners! Unless of course someone comes up with an adapter that when connected to a Dellner, allows it to be attached to a hook. But that seems unlikely, with very limited use-cases.

 

[TimboM]

Sorry, maybe I'm misunderstanding the precise technicalities, but why would ETS be needed for ECS moves? As I said in my previous post, class 66s have done the job in the past. Don't you just need a physical coupling and the brake hose(s) hooked up?

Is there something particular to the Mk5s that they require power when moved, in-service or otherwise?

I'm sure someone like Scotrail84 can give the exact reasons, but under current operations the Sleeper ECS is I believe connected ETS-wise to the ECS loco in the depot quite some time before service begins.

I don't think ETS is needed physically to move the stock in, nor do I know if the current approach is preferred or mandated (e.g. for Health & Safety reasons and/or contractual/franchise requirements).

Reasons for the ETS being connected at the ECS stage will (I believe) include:

- Health & Safety of staff travelling in on the ECS - there must be some minimum lighting/heating requirements for H&S (noting for many months of the year the moves are in the dark);

- Equipment staff on board may be using at the depot or on the way in to prep for service (kitchen equipment for example);

- Passenger comfort: ensures stock is warm in winter (heating) / cool in summer (air con). If unpowered until it arrives in the station, there'd be additional time required for the service loco once attached to heat/cool the stock to temperatures acceptable to passengers; and if there's a temporary glitch with the loco (as happens!) and it requires attention/a reboot this prolongs getting the stock ready for boarding;

- Checking for faults: hopefully less of a problem with the new stock, but still an issue. Not great if the first time an issue with a coach (or with the stock connecting to a loco) is found after it's arrived at Euston / Glasgow and the service loco's been attached. Easier - and more time - to do something about it if this is discovered at Polmadie/Wembley.

There's probably other reasons too, but they're just ones I can think of from a "member of public" point of view.

There is a question though whether all the above could be catered for during the ECS "phase" on a reduced power basis with something other than a 92 with a lower ETH index (with the 92 only needed when the train is fully loaded/in service).

If the latter was possible, I still think the coupling issue probably rules out the 86s/87, but other locos suitably adapted (either hired or acquired) may be an option rather than tying up 92s. I'd have thought initial plans would be to use the 92s though, with such options being looked at down the line if and when more 92 work is won elsewhere. Whatever the answer, I suspect GBRf will already have it - and a few back-up plans too!

 

[TimboM]

Multi-coloured swap shop on the Sleepers tonight:

CS Midnight Teal 92033 on 1S25 (Down Highlander)

Triple Grey 92044 on 1S26 (Down Lowlander)

GBRf Blue/Orange 92032 on 1M16 (Up Highlander)

And possibly* Freightliner Powerhaul Green/Yellow 90049 on 1M11 (Up Lowlander)


*Either that or 92023 with the other on the Carstairs/EDB Lowlander portion. 90049 is due back at Freightliner Crewe in a couple of days and a path in for its transfer from Willesden on Thursday, so it'll need to head down either tonight or tomorrow.

EDIT - 92023 on 1M11 as per captainbigun below

 

[xotGD]

Going forward, I guess they could use a 73 on the Edinburgh portion of the Lowlander and/or the ECS in/out of Glasgow if there is a 92 shortage in Scotland. That of course requires a spare 73 (or 2). Maybe even base a 73 in London for ECS duties if it has the grunt?

 

[captainbigun]

Probably a lot of unnecessary typing here.

Anyone noticed 37s fitted with Dellner? Remove screw link and fit Dellner. Job done.

73s are standard 1000V train supply, Mk5s will accommodate this, BUT a full 16 car rake needs the power only available from 1500V supply for full hotel power. However it will still be possible to use a 1000V supply, you just have to cut auxiliary cloth accordingly.

92023 is 1M11.

 

[marks87]

I'll not quote the epic post from TimboM, but thanks for the insight and suggestions as to why ETS might be needed.

 

[TimboM]

Probably a lot of unnecessary typing here.

Anyone noticed 37s fitted with Dellner? Remove screw link and fit Dellner. Job done.

73s are standard 1000V train supply, Mk5s will accommodate this, BUT a full 16 car rake needs the power only available from 1500V supply for full hotel power. However it will still be possible to use a 1000V supply, you just have to cut auxiliary cloth accordingly.

92023 is 1M11.

So a 73 (or similar) could do ECS for a full 16 coach-rake, assuming it had the grunt as well...

Re the Dellners, from what you're saying it's a straightforward adaption for the (ROG?) 37s. However, Brush are doing a heavy engineering job on the 73s/92s - cutting through 95mm steel, Dellner height needing to be 74mm lower than the "classic" draw hook, whilst retaining the classic, cutting the snowploughs on 73s etc. etc. (per the recent Ian Walmsley Modern Railway article and also looking at the 73/9s that have come out with the Dellners).

Are you saying a simple Dellner mod option would be feasible for the 86/87s and they could possibly manage a "lighter" ECS load, or would the 86/87s need the heavy duty Dellner mods like the 73s/92s and or have the "wrong" ETS and thus rule them out?

I'd be surprised if diesel ECS locos would be particularly welcome in Euston at least on a regular basis; or Glasgow for that matter (although I know they use the Colas 47 from time to time).

 

[TimboM]

Going forward, I guess they could use a 73 on the Edinburgh portion of the Lowlander and/or the ECS in/out of Glasgow if there is a 92 shortage in Scotland. That of course requires a spare 73 (or 2). Maybe even base a 73 in London for ECS duties if it has the grunt?

Once all are up and running and 73969 is repaired, there'll be 4 required on any given night for the north of Edinburgh portions. There's always likely to be one in for exam/repair etc. so feasibly there would be one "spare" to help out on ECS moves/Edinburgh portion if required - but probably not as a regular event.

Would be surprised if one was based in London. With the numbers above I think they'd need all 6 in Scotland. Also not sure how well a single 73 would cope with a Load 16 up Camden bank?

 

[Scotrail84]

I think the new stock may see the end of the 86s/87s on the ECS moves, but I may be wrong.

Possibly the biggest reason before even contemplating the ETS angle is the Dellner couplings as you allude to marks87. From a practical perspective 86101, 86401 and 87002 would need to be modified in a similar way the 73/9s and 92s are going to be. This involves major (probably irreversible) structural alterations to the buffer beam etc. I'm not sure AC Loco Group would want this doing to their heritage locos they've carefully preserved as being key/only examples of the class/sub-class remaining.

The downside is they'd no longer get the steady revenue from GBRf that's helped them with other projects e.g. 89001, but I expect they'll know already whether or not the hire contract goes beyond the new stock and will be planning finances etc. accordingly.

From the ETS point of view, I'm no expert, but AFAIK the new stock is 1,500v versus the usual 800v of most stock (including the current stuff). The 92s have this from their Nightstar days and had a mod to be able to operate the 'classic' 800v. They're going to have that 'reversed' as part of the prep work for the new stock. So even if the stock could operate on a lower ETS for just the ECS move, the 86s/87s would need some sort of alteration to their ETS supply. It's not just a case of plugging in the existing cables into the new stock. Again, this may render 86/87s unable to operate with all other "normal" stock and hence reduce AC Loco Groups ability to spot-hire the locos/footex's/railtours etc.

Also, with all the money GBRf are investing in their 92s, would it stack up for them to also pay (either directly or indirectly) for the 3 heritage locos to have their couplings and ETS sorted just for ECS moves... I'm not sure it would.

I believe the staff travel in from the depots on the Sleeper ECS, so at least some power is required. I've no idea (not withstanding all the issues above) if it's feasible for a "low power" mode where only the basics are turned on until the 92 is hooked up. I seem to recall reading somewhere when this was discussed before that it was...?

The next issue is that whilst normally the 1S25/26 locos at Euston get onto the stock pretty quickly (at Glasgow its already on of course) it's not all that common for there to be delays (issues with locos, issues with paths across the Euston throat etc etc). If the ECS loco can provide full hotel power, it can at least allow the passengers to board whilst the loco issues at the other end are resolved. This improves passenger experience and can minimise delays as you're not waiting for everyone to board once the loco issue at the country end is sorted. So again, makes sense to have a 92 on the ECS that can do this.

The final issue I see is from an operational perspective. Particularly at Euston when the 1S25 (Highlander) loco fails it's usually the 5S96 (Lowlander ECS) loco that's used to sub in - as it'll typically be at Wembley with driver, pan-up ready to go etc at the point the 1S25 loco is declared a failure. If it's an 86/87 on the 5S96 ECS, then another 92 would need to be sourced from Willesden anyway - so you'd need at least one if not two 92s "spare". Using a 92 on the Lowlander ECS gives more options and a quicker response time to any issues - and uses a loco that would probably need to be in the vicinity anyway.

There's maybe a slightly higher chance an 86 (or something else suitable) could continue in Glasgow as the 92 is attached at the depot so there's not quite the issue of how to power the train for boarding if the loco is delayed attaching as it can be at Euston. However, if there's issues with the 1M11 loco already attached there's still the same challenge of powering the train for boarding etc. whilst the loco issue is sorted.

With the 92s being the only loco able to haul the full service, it also increases options/resilience if the Polmadie-GLC ECS loco is a 92 as would mean there's the 1M11 and 1M16 92s, plus the Carstairs/EDB portion 92 plus a 4th in the mix should anyone of the 3 booked for the main services fail.


So, bit of a long post (sorry!) but I think it'll need to be 92s on the ECS once the new stock is introduced - seems to be too many 'barriers' against continued use of the 86s/87.

Which may well be one reason why GBRf are bringing their fleet up to 12x 92s plus a further two more out of store apparently. They're going to need 7 every night (4 Scotland end, 3 Euston end) with at least one if not two "spare" to cover exams/repairs etc.


Of course, 89001 may yet appear in Midnight Teal with suped-up 1,500v ETS + Dellners (that's not a serious suggestion before folk get excited...!)

The deliner couplers drop down like a buckeye to reveal the draw hook.

 

[Scotrail84]

Once all are up and running and 73969 is repaired, there'll be 4 required on any given night for the north of Edinburgh portions. There's always likely to be one in for exam/repair etc. so feasibly there would be one "spare" to help out on ECS moves/Edinburgh portion if required - but probably not as a regular event.

Would be surprised if one was based in London. With the numbers above I think they'd need all 6 in Scotland. Also not sure how well a single 73 would cope with a Load 16 up Camden bank?

Absolutely no chance.

 

[Scotrail84]

I'm sure someone like Scotrail84 can give the exact reasons, but under current operations the Sleeper ECS is I believe connected ETS-wise to the ECS loco in the depot quite some time before service begins.

I don't think ETS is needed physically to move the stock in, nor do I know if the current approach is preferred or mandated (e.g. for Health & Safety reasons and/or contractual/franchise requirements).

Reasons for the ETS being connected at the ECS stage will (I believe) include:

- Health & Safety of staff travelling in on the ECS - there must be some minimum lighting/heating requirements for H&S (noting for many months of the year the moves are in the dark);

- Equipment staff on board may be using at the depot or on the way in to prep for service (kitchen equipment for example);

- Passenger comfort: ensures stock is warm in winter (heating) / cool in summer (air con). If unpowered until it arrives in the station, there'd be additional time required for the service loco once attached to heat/cool the stock to temperatures acceptable to passengers; and if there's a temporary glitch with the loco (as happens!) and it requires attention/a reboot this prolongs getting the stock ready for boarding;

- Checking for faults: hopefully less of a problem with the new stock, but still an issue. Not great if the first time an issue with a coach (or with the stock connecting to a loco) is found after it's arrived at Euston / Glasgow and the service loco's been attached. Easier - and more time - to do something about it if this is discovered at Polmadie/Wembley.

There's probably other reasons too, but they're just ones I can think of from a "member of public" point of view.

There is a question though whether all the above could be catered for during the ECS "phase" on a reduced power basis with something other than a 92 with a lower ETH index (with the 92 only needed when the train is fully loaded/in service).

If the latter was possible, I still think the coupling issue probably rules out the 86s/87, but other locos suitably adapted (either hired or acquired) may be an option rather than tying up 92s. I'd have thought initial plans would be to use the 92s though, with such options being looked at down the line if and when more 92 work is won elsewhere. Whatever the answer, I suspect GBRf will already have it - and a few back-up plans too!

At the moment ETH is required to be on at all times where possible as the batteries are crap, especially on the MK2 vehs and battery power is required to kick start MA's. They even sit on depot with ETH on except when maintenance is being carried out on the coaches that require power to be switched off.

As for the new vehs I can't tell you exactly what the procedure will be regarding ETH on ECS moves but these coaches will have vastly superior batteries with 4 hours life in them to keep things going when the wires are down or a power failure etc.

Locos for the new coaches will be hauled by 73/92 only AFAIK.

 

[Scotrail84]

Yes, up in the Scottish countryside now!

What coach were you in?

 

[Caleb2010]

B, the accessible berth.

 

[TimboM]

Path in tomorrow for 0Z73 Craigentinny - Loughborough light engine move. If it runs will likely be the next 73/9 going in for Dellner fitting.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/R00280/2017/08/10/advanced

 

[Mag_seven]

Path in tomorrow for 0Z73 Craigentinny - Loughborough light engine move. If it runs will likely be the next 73/9 going in for Dellner fitting.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/R00280/2017/08/10/advanced

Once bitten twice shy mate.

 

[TimboM]

Once bitten twice shy mate.

Don't blame you!!

I think this one may actually run (although I'm not risking a couple of wasted hours in Loughborough to see it so I can say that). 73967 has been back in Scotland a week now so should be ok to send another one down.

 

[CosherB]

As for the new vehs I can't tell you exactly what the procedure will be regarding ETH on ECS moves but these coaches will have vastly superior batteries with 4 hours life in them to keep things going when the wires are down or a power failure etc.

Locos for the new coaches will be hauled by 73/92 only AFAIK.

OK, even I'm veering into holiday mode thoughts now .... Would there be any mileage for GBRf to try and get, say, 4 Class 90s from DBC (now that they seem fairly chummy) for the ECS work north and south of the border? More modern equipment that could be fitted with Dellners, better ETS than the 86s/87 (although nowhere near the capacity of a 92), more DBC locos currently parked up in gainful employment ..... what's not to like?

 

[TimboM]

OK, even I'm veering into holiday mode thoughts now .... Would there be any mileage for GBRf to try and get, say, 4 Class 90s from DBC (now that they seem fairly chummy) for the ECS work north and south of the border? More modern equipment that could be fitted with Dellners, better ETS than the 86s/87 (although nowhere near the capacity of a 92), more DBC locos currently parked up in gainful employment ..... what's not to like?

I was pondering the 90s, but was wondering where the "Greater Anglia" ones were up to (without veering off to a different thread completely on a package holiday to the Canary Islands)...?

I think the issue with the DB 90s is they're actually using them and the more decent ones in store at Crewe IEMD are being rotated in/out of store, with the non-decent ones beyond hope. Freightliner are also using them now in place of 70s and whilst GBRf have had two on-hire for a long time now, I suspect Freightliner wouldn't want that to become really long-term.

They'd have a better chance of relieving DB of some of their stored 92s at Crewe - now there's an idea...

The ECS is a funny one as its crucial to the operation, but seems a bit excessive to go buying/hiring whole "new" locos and modifying them etc. They've done it with the 86s/87 of course, but they were pretty much ready to go and no doubt a mutually beneficial agreement with ACLG was reached.

Also worth remembering the ECS moves are often used for locos coming back from repair etc. to test them out before a full run, and also a way they could rotate the locos so they take it in turns to be based at one end or the other for a few days which could help maintenance regimes/wear and tear etc. So another reason just using the 92s makes more sense.

 

[GW43125]

I noted that today and yesterday, the 92 has been stabling in the siding between platforms 16 and 17 at Edinburgh rather than in the Klondike. Is this usual, engineering related or just mixing things up a bit?

On a side note, 73967 was in Craigentinny yesterday but wasn't this morning, ditto 67013. Did these go out on the sleepers last night?

 

[Far north 37]

I was pondering the 90s, but was wondering where the "Greater Anglia" ones were up to (without veering off to a different thread completely on a package holiday to the Canary Islands)...?

I think the issue with the DB 90s is they're actually using them and the more decent ones in store at Crewe IEMD are being rotated in/out of store, with the non-decent ones beyond hope. Freightliner are also using them now in place of 70s and whilst GBRf have had two on-hire for a long time now, I suspect Freightliner wouldn't want that to become really long-term.

They'd have a better chance of relieving DB of some of their stored 92s at Crewe - now there's an idea...

The ECS is a funny one as its crucial to the operation, but seems a bit excessive to go buying/hiring whole "new" locos and modifying them etc. They've done it with the 86s/87 of course, but they were pretty much ready to go and no doubt a mutually beneficial agreement with ACLG was reached.

Also worth remembering the ECS moves are often used for locos coming back from repair etc. to test them out before a full run, and also a way they could rotate the locos so they take it in turns to be based at one end or the other for a few days which could help maintenance regimes/wear and tear etc. So another reason just using the 92s makes more sense.

im sure i read somewhere before freightliner were earmarked for the greater anglia 90s

 

[CosherB]

im sure i read somewhere before freightliner were earmarked for the greater anglia 90s

Really? I doubt Freightliner have been quoted saying that at all, even if enthusiasts claim the benefits of such a move.

 

[Far north 37]

Really? I doubt Freightliner have been quoted saying that at all, even if enthusiasts claim the benefits of such a move.

yeah true not 100% sure where i read it to be honest but i think the story said they were interested in them to replace the class 86s if i remember right.