Glorious NSE

Head South West, we're nowhere near a tipping point down here, I've not seen one down this way yet, and I don't think any have been in passenger service west of Exeter yet? (I know they have run down here on test, just not when I've been around!)

Don't believe anything else built in the 1970s had retention toilets either, neither did most 80s built stock, regardless of potential lifespan.... From a 70s perspective I suspect 'we've always....' fits the bill, but for later trains less so... To be fair to BR, pre-privatisation, BR had a high-level budget set externally by government, whose (public) default view was that BR was hopelessly inefficient and wasted any money they did get - in that scenario, spending your scant funds on something which doesn't make trains run isn't your top priority - and at a time when many of those trains are packed full of asbestos and falling apart, a bit of poo maybe isn't your highest priority. Post-privatisation i'm surprised that wasn't tackled though, tank retro-fitting and the necessary depot facilities could have been mandated as trains were refurbed, in the same way as accessible toilets have been - but that would have required either an external change in the law or for governments to have taken seriously the idea of procuring services up to a standard rather than down to a price...

AIUI - BR had a legal exemption from the laws regarding sewage, so those examples would not have been allowed, but discharge from trains was, and still is at present, allowed. And likely - it was considered acceptable just because it was acceptable, or at least not thought about - and had always been so for the lifetimes of anyone who would have been making a decision on it. Pre-Mk3 stock did it (and still does)... I agree with your viewpoint that it shouldn't have been so, but there we are.

Sure I read somewhere that's due to change, with the XC sets due to be re-allocated to LA as NL and EC will lose their HSTs when the new trains arrive on the East Coast whereas LA will still be working with HSTs due to the GWR short sets? Cross Country are due to do the same door/toilet upgrades and retain their 5x sets, at least to the end of that franchise (Dec 2019) and presumably they will run for at least a year or so after that at the absolute minimum, depending on the choices of the new franchise holder. Theirs will still be 125mph sets. The MML sets might or might not still be running....it depends what ultimate solution is decided on regarding getting their sets upgraded to, or replaced by PRM-TSI compliant stock by the end of Dec 2019. (My gut is they will get exempted to run into 2020, giving time for them to be either upgraded or replaced...) The ECML sets and full length GWR sets are due to all be replaced, unless things change (not impossible!)... And the other wildcard - that does leave a fairly large potential pool of 125mph capable power cars and coaches which *could* be used by a future operator/for future services if they were upgraded to PRM-TSI though.

Seats look to be the same tall seats as the GWR/FGW ones already had, just refurbed/reupholstered, reducing the tables had already occurred a decade or so back... (Though the 'flying-F' has been replaced by a GWR in the button on the back, nice touch...)

Current 2018 plan attached - if anyone is planning to come but hasn't had an email from me so far, drop me a PM with your email address...

Quite possibly - but if you know it's only ever going to be the cheap one, why do the consultation?!

To be fair, TOCs haven't always covered themselves in glory here, though their track record is not as consistent as the DfTs. For example, Northern reportedly ran a public consultation for the seats on their new trains, then reportedly turned round and chose the cheapest anyway, ranked last in the consultation...

Nothing to do with privatisation - whatever organisational structure you have, the railway would need to fund more loco's to run it, unless they're getting them each for a fiver.

It wouldn't be VTECs expense either way - the defining thing will likely be whether NR is willing/able to do the upgrades that enable the extra trains, if they don't, there's no point in VTEC or whoever runs it leasing extra trains they can't run.

Have a look at the Wills modern industrial buildings, they do a version with bellows doors etc.

Oooh - Let me know if there's any stock changes for Christow when you get chance please!

Would that have moved to the new terminal at Parkway in 2002?

Make America Grit Again.

Yes, lead powercars at Ufton Nervett, Ladbroke Grove and Southall were all written off.

You won't have to walk 8 coaches on a 4 coach train unless you get lost on the way, but I agree, should make for much smarter stops.

Good for moving badly parked cars out of the way.

Wouldn't the Intermountain one be a better option? Certainly less work for a Paducah geep!

The regular paths I suspect are in RTT already, and you can search RTT for dates/times months in advance - but as with all freight trains you'll still need to check on the day as to whether specific trains appear to be running or not, or on their usual paths, or not at all. Open Train Times gives you a live signalling map of the area which might help also: http://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/sbr

Some folk can't even manage that... https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/new-car-destroyed-four-hours-1197837

See the reference to 'temporal separation' - IE not to be used on a bit of railroad in use for anything else concurrently. OC Transpo in Ottowa already uses that system with seemingly off the peg Alstom 'Lint' low floor DMUs - you don't need it to survive a head-on with an SD70 if you don't let them anywhere near each other! From memory, their passenger network shuts down overnight, once the passenger trains are clear there is freight access to some customers online overnight, that needs to be clear of the railroad before the passenger network restarts. A bigger issue might be floor height. You'll need to build high platforms for access - a fixed high platform will almost certainly foul the loading gauge of anything else, so it won't be easy to demo it in between other trains. OTOH, leave it in London Underground livery and it might be a bit of a draw for novelty value if nothing else...

Yep - the UP calls it an 'Arrowedge' - that's a different design to the initial ones: https://www.uprr.com/newsinfo/releases/environment/2013/0903_arrowedge.shtml

It's named after an industry that once defined the town but now doesn't... It's on the ex Santa Fe main line just West of Chicago - so intermodal is that lines bread and butter.

You'd need to be adding an accessible toilet to *all* of the class 150 cars (of the 26 sets being split) for that to work though, not impossible, but more work against a tight deadline. Ideally you could then do with removing the toilet from the 153s (and the small cab could become redundant also) to create a bit more seating space (though you wouldn't have to do that on day one) - you'd have to remove the toilet on the Cardiff Bay one anyhow. Whilst we're fantasy fleetlisting though, I wouldn't bet against them being able to get all 70 153s though, depending on what the EMT strategy ends up being. If they managed that (and toilet fitted *all* their 150 vehicles) then you'd get a like fleet of 68x 150/153 combo's, plus a pair of 3 cars (150+153+150). Throw in the 5x 319 Flex units to the mix and (counting them as equiv two sets) you're now at an equivalent of 80 sets from todays 74 - and your fleet car count is 162 cars rather than todays 140. (Plus 158/175 etc...) which ought to be a useful capacity uplift for them.

Car ones are usually fixed payments though.