|
New York Times on Crossrail
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 20:27:13 on Wed, 2 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: 1. SPILL to Bedford. Already electrified, but only designed for 100mph trains. There was a project to upgrade it for more, faster trains, but I don't know if that project will continue. If it doesn't, IEPs will have good acceleration, but lower top speeds than the old diesels. But IEPs aren't expected on that line. Aren't they... No, all the ones on order are spoken for by VTEC and GWR. Not true: do your research. 2. Bedford to Kettering. Newly electrified, Is it, already? Not completed, but intended to be. We are talking about NR and Grayling here. The only thing you can reasonably expect is that whatever they claim today may change tomorrow. suitable for 125 mph electric or diesel trains. IEPs will outperform the existing diesels. 3. Kettering to Leicester and on to Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield. Electrification work started, Just a few bridge works. but work will be suspended indefinitely. Bi-mode IEPs will be able to run, but performance will be worse than current diesel trains, specially the Meridians. So keep the Meridians. Yes, but not the HSTs. There's only one tph (to Nottingham) operated by HSTs, and now electrification has been cancelled they'll have to find something else to replace the HST. But I doubt it'll be IEPs. Doubt it all you like… |
New York Times on Crossrail
On 2017\08\03 07:49, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 20:26:51 on Wed, 2 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: I take it you don't read any railway magazines? I don't read magazines yet to be printed. MML electrification was only cancelled ten days ago. RAIL dated yesterday (Wednesday) has the story on its front cover. |
New York Times on Crossrail
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2017\08\03 07:49, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 20:26:51 on Wed, 2 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: I take it you don't read any railway magazines? I don't read magazines yet to be printed. MML electrification was only cancelled ten days ago. RAIL dated yesterday (Wednesday) has the story on its front cover. Indeed so, and subscribers received their copies earlier in the week, as per usual. Even before that, there had been strong speculation that something like this would happen. |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug
2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/trai...08/03/advanced -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:38:16 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Obviously you're familiar with "copenhagen junction" and "belle isle". I've never heard of them and have no idea where they are. -- Spud |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 10:56:30 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:38:16 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Obviously you're familiar with "copenhagen junction" and "belle isle". I've never heard of them and have no idea where they are. https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57685025875056 |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:38:16 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote: In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Indeed! http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/trai...08/03/advanced I notice it's shown as a 365, but presumably it's more likely to be a class 700 in reality? |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 12:01:28 +0100
Recliner wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:38:16 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Indeed! Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? -- Spud |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 11:59:22 +0100
Recliner wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 10:56:30 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:38:16 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Obviously you're familiar with "copenhagen junction" and "belle isle". I've never heard of them and have no idea where they are. https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57685025875056 That looks like it was a fun day out. Did the graffiti vandals do requests? -- Spud |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 10:56:30 on Thu, 3 Aug
2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Obviously you're familiar with "copenhagen junction" and "belle isle". I've never heard of them and have no idea where they are. Between Finsbury Park and St Pancras. -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:14:48 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 12:01:28 +0100 Recliner wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:38:16 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Indeed! Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? I think we all assumed anyone posting here as often as you do, pouring scorn on all and sundry, might have at least the most basic knowledge of one of the biggest rail projects in London, which has been going on for more than two decades. You often express strong opinions on the Thameslink project, so it was reasonable for us to assume you might know at least a tiny bit about what you're criticising. So, no, we didn't expect you to "know the precise junction layouts of the various lines," but to at least know the basics of the huge project, including where the Thameslink and ECML routes connect. |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:15:53 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 11:59:22 +0100 Recliner wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 10:56:30 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:38:16 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Obviously you're familiar with "copenhagen junction" and "belle isle". I've never heard of them and have no idea where they are. https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57685025875056 That looks like it was a fun day out. Did the graffiti vandals do requests? You probably know them, so why don't you ask? |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 12:01:28 on
Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Indeed! http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/trai...08/03/advanced I notice it's shown as a 365, but presumably it's more likely to be a class 700 in reality? Probably. -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 11:14:48 on Thu, 3 Aug
2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Indeed! Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? The link has been discussed since before they built SPILL. Do keep up! -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message
-septe mber.org, at 07:19:00 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: But IEPs aren't expected on that line. Aren't they... No, all the ones on order are spoken for by VTEC and GWR. Not true: do your research. Cite please. There's only one tph (to Nottingham) operated by HSTs, and now electrification has been cancelled they'll have to find something else to replace the HST. But I doubt it'll be IEPs. Doubt it all you like… It makes no sense to have an IEP mini-fleet to run 1tph. -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 08:57:04 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017,
Basil Jet remarked: I take it you don't read any railway magazines? I don't read magazines yet to be printed. MML electrification was only cancelled ten days ago. RAIL dated yesterday (Wednesday) has the story on its front cover. What does LIAR say about the fleet post-HST? -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message
-septe mber.org, at 23:41:07 on Wed, 2 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: A class 700 all the way to Leicester? Ouch! How far further north do you think Leicester is than Peterborough? By rail, I'd have thought it was nearly 20 miles further? Very close in mileage. Hardly: here are the actual figures: Peterborough: 76m 29h (76.36m) Leicester: 99m 07ch (99.09m) I'm not going to fall out over 99-76 being not close enough to 20. So Leicester is almost 23 miles further from London, a bit more than my quick initial guess. I note that you describe a 30% difference as 'very close'. I'll remember that the next time you nit-pick over much smaller differences. Like I said, what's 3 miles? Perhaps you should know the answers *before* setting challenges for people more than capable of doing their own research? The classic statistic is that Peterborough is further north than Wolverhampton (few people believe that until you show them a map). -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 12:28:02 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote: In message -septe mber.org, at 07:19:00 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: But IEPs aren't expected on that line. Aren't they... No, all the ones on order are spoken for by VTEC and GWR. Not true: do your research. Cite please. Class 802/2s have been ordered for Hull Trains (5) and TPE (19). You'll be delighted that this is confirmed by Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britis...#Fleet_details There's only one tph (to Nottingham) operated by HSTs, and now electrification has been cancelled they'll have to find something else to replace the HST. But I doubt it'll be IEPs. Doubt it all you like… It makes no sense to have an IEP mini-fleet to run 1tph. There's six HSTs. Grayling says bi-modes will replace them. Can you think of any other bi-modes available for immediate purchase with 100+ mph capability? If Hull trains can operate five, why shouldn't EMT? Presumably Hitachi will maintain them. |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 12:28:44 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote: In message , at 08:57:04 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Basil Jet remarked: I take it you don't read any railway magazines? I don't read magazines yet to be printed. MML electrification was only cancelled ten days ago. RAIL dated yesterday (Wednesday) has the story on its front cover. What does LIAR say about the fleet post-HST? It quotes Grayling as saying that bi-modes will be used. No doubt, with your superior knowledge on the subject, you'll correct them and him? |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 12:32:56 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote: In message -septe mber.org, at 23:41:07 on Wed, 2 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: A class 700 all the way to Leicester? Ouch! How far further north do you think Leicester is than Peterborough? By rail, I'd have thought it was nearly 20 miles further? Very close in mileage. Hardly: here are the actual figures: Peterborough: 76m 29h (76.36m) Leicester: 99m 07ch (99.09m) I'm not going to fall out over 99-76 being not close enough to 20. No, but you thought the difference was much less than that; 20 was my guess before I checked. So Leicester is almost 23 miles further from London, a bit more than my quick initial guess. I note that you describe a 30% difference as 'very close'. I'll remember that the next time you nit-pick over much smaller differences. Like I said, what's 3 miles? You described 99.09 miles as "very close in mileage" to 76.36 miles. It's actually about 30% more. My guess of 20 miles difference was much closer (though still not quite right). Perhaps you should know the answers *before* setting challenges for people more than capable of doing their own research? The classic statistic is that Peterborough is further north than Wolverhampton (few people believe that until you show them a map). Quite possibly, but it's the rail distances that matter in this case, not latitude. |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 12:50:05 +0100, Recliner
wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 12:28:02 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message -septe mber.org, at 07:19:00 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: But IEPs aren't expected on that line. Aren't they... No, all the ones on order are spoken for by VTEC and GWR. Not true: do your research. Cite please. Class 802/2s have been ordered for Hull Trains (5) and TPE (19). You'll be delighted that this is confirmed by Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britis...#Fleet_details There's only one tph (to Nottingham) operated by HSTs, and now electrification has been cancelled they'll have to find something else to replace the HST. But I doubt it'll be IEPs. Doubt it all you like… It makes no sense to have an IEP mini-fleet to run 1tph. There's six HSTs. Grayling says bi-modes will replace them. Can you think of any other bi-modes available for immediate purchase with 100+ mph capability? If Hull trains can operate five, why shouldn't EMT? Presumably Hitachi will maintain them. Actually, I've just looked again at the Rail article, and it sounds like the class 802 order could be much larger. It talks about bi-modes to Sheffield, which suggests that more or even the whole of the existing diesel fleet (27x222s and 9 HSTs) could be replaced by 802s. I suppose it'll be decided by the DfT this summer, as there won't be time for the next franchise operator to select an HST replacement before they have to go, and it makes little sense for Stagecoach to select the new stock as it may have lost the franchise before it arrives (as with the 707s on SWT). As Grayling is confidently talking about bi-modes, the decision may well have been taken already. They may ask for bids, but I don't see who but Hitachi could deliver in time. |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 12:55:40 on
Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: By rail, I'd have thought it was nearly 20 miles further? Very close in mileage. Hardly: here are the actual figures: Peterborough: 76m 29h (76.36m) Leicester: 99m 07ch (99.09m) I'm not going to fall out over 99-76 being not close enough to 20. No, but you thought the difference was much less than that; 20 was my guess before I checked. So Leicester is almost 23 miles further from London, a bit more than my quick initial guess. I note that you describe a 30% difference as 'very close'. I'll remember that the next time you nit-pick over much smaller differences. Like I said, what's 3 miles? You described 99.09 miles as "very close in mileage" to 76.36 miles. It's actually about 30% more. My guess of 20 miles difference was much closer (though still not quite right). I agreed that your estimate of 20 was "very close" to the actual answer. Are you arguing just for the sake of it now? The classic statistic is that Peterborough is further north than Wolverhampton (few people believe that until you show them a map). Quite possibly, but it's the rail distances that matter in this case, not latitude. Most people think it's the time onboard which matters most. But we've seen that timing is not your strong suit. -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 13:37:09 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote: In message , at 12:55:40 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: By rail, I'd have thought it was nearly 20 miles further? Very close in mileage. Hardly: here are the actual figures: Peterborough: 76m 29h (76.36m) Leicester: 99m 07ch (99.09m) I'm not going to fall out over 99-76 being not close enough to 20. No, but you thought the difference was much less than that; 20 was my guess before I checked. So Leicester is almost 23 miles further from London, a bit more than my quick initial guess. I note that you describe a 30% difference as 'very close'. I'll remember that the next time you nit-pick over much smaller differences. Like I said, what's 3 miles? You described 99.09 miles as "very close in mileage" to 76.36 miles. It's actually about 30% more. My guess of 20 miles difference was much closer (though still not quite right). I agreed that your estimate of 20 was "very close" to the actual answer. Ah, I must have misunderstood you. You appeared to be saying that my guess of "nearly 20 miles" was too high, and that the two routes were "Very close in mileage". Are you arguing just for the sake of it now? No, I respect your world championship status. The classic statistic is that Peterborough is further north than Wolverhampton (few people believe that until you show them a map). Quite possibly, but it's the rail distances that matter in this case, not latitude. Most people think it's the time onboard which matters most. But we've seen that timing is not your strong suit. No, I'm not nearly as imaginative as you. I'm a boring engineer who simply sticks to the facts, and doesn't feel the need to invent new ones when proved wrong. As an aside, and don't take this the wrong way, but have you recently had some traumatic event? You seem to be arguing much more than usual, often claiming expertise that you don't have. Perhaps you should take a break of a few weeks from posting on, or even reading, these news groups? |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 12:24:06 +0100
Recliner wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:14:48 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 12:01:28 +0100 Recliner wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:38:16 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Indeed! Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? I think we all assumed anyone posting here as often as you do, pouring scorn on all and sundry, might have at least the most basic knowledge of one of the biggest rail projects in London, which has been going on Well there are currently only 3 to speak of anyway. And as I haven't been keeping up on the thameslink project since frankly it doesn't interest me much I didn't even realise they'd bored any new tunnels. If its anything like the "improved" St Pancras station which turned a 100m walk to the tube into 500m one because they couldn't figure out how to extend platforms into a tunnel (though oddly they managed to build an entire new station in a pre-existing tunnel, go figure) then I will continue to pay little attention to it unless when it starts it ****s up the moorgate line even more. for more than two decades. You often express strong opinions on the Thameslink project, so it was reasonable for us to assume you might know at least a tiny bit about what you're criticising. I never criticised this project. I've criticised thameslink when I used it occasionally back in the day which as a paying passenger I'm entitled to do. So what? So, no, we didn't expect you to "know the precise junction layouts of the various lines," but to at least know the basics of the huge project, including where the Thameslink and ECML routes connect. 1km of new tunnel is hardly "huge". Crossrail is huge, this is an upgrade. As an aside I can see the chord from blackfriars to london bridge from my office. They've been attempting to re-lay about 200m of track for over a month now and its still not even ballasted properly or had the 3rd rail reinstated. No wonder this project has taken 2 decades if thats the speed they work at. -- Spud been working on re- |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 13:55:05 on
Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: As an aside, and don't take this the wrong way, but have you recently had some traumatic event? You seem to be arguing much more than usual, often claiming expertise that you don't have. Perhaps you should take a break of a few weeks from posting on, or even reading, these news groups? I've recently become a bit less tolerant of people spouting nonsense, I agree. -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 13:09:18 on Thu, 3 Aug
2017, d remarked: In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Indeed! Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? I think we all assumed anyone posting here as often as you do, pouring scorn on all and sundry, might have at least the most basic knowledge of one of the biggest rail projects in London, which has been going on Well there are currently only 3 to speak of anyway. And as I haven't been keeping up on the thameslink project since frankly it doesn't interest me much I didn't even realise they'd bored any new tunnels. FSVO new; I think they must be ten years old by now. And iirc much was probably cut and cover. -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 12:51:17 on
Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: I take it you don't read any railway magazines? I don't read magazines yet to be printed. MML electrification was only cancelled ten days ago. RAIL dated yesterday (Wednesday) has the story on its front cover. What does LIAR say about the fleet post-HST? It quotes Grayling as saying that bi-modes will be used. Ask again in three weeks, and you'll probably get a different answer. He's just regurgitating a somewhat tired figleaf. -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
On 2017\08\03 12:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:56:30 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Obviously you're familiar with "copenhagen junction" and "belle isle". I've never heard of them and have no idea where they are. Between Finsbury Park and St Pancras. Christ almighty, you didn't even *try* to convince Spud they'd built a new viaduct from Potters Bar to Worcester Park. |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 12:50:05 on
Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 12:28:02 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message -septe mber.org, at 07:19:00 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: But IEPs aren't expected on that line. Aren't they... No, all the ones on order are spoken for by VTEC and GWR. Not true: do your research. Cite please. Class 802/2s have been ordered for Hull Trains (5) and TPE (19). You'll be delighted that this is confirmed by Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britis...#Fleet_details Glad to see you have joined the "Wikipedia says it" bandwagon. There's only one tph (to Nottingham) operated by HSTs, and now electrification has been cancelled they'll have to find something else to replace the HST. But I doubt it'll be IEPs. Doubt it all you like… It makes no sense to have an IEP mini-fleet to run 1tph. There's six HSTs. Wiki says they have 24 power cars. I agree that you probably only actually need about six sets. But Cricklewood has numerous parked up during the day (rather than shuttling between Nottingham and London). http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sear...03/0200-0159?s tp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=EM Grayling says bi-modes will replace them. He's waffling. Can you think of any other bi-modes available for immediate purchase with 100+ mph capability? If Hull trains can operate five, why shouldn't EMT? Presumably Hitachi will maintain them. More likely EMT's successor will get Hull's Adelante's cascaded to them, like the Pioneers before them. -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:50:05 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 12:28:02 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message -septe mber.org, at 07:19:00 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: But IEPs aren't expected on that line. Aren't they... No, all the ones on order are spoken for by VTEC and GWR. Not true: do your research. Cite please. Class 802/2s have been ordered for Hull Trains (5) and TPE (19). You'll be delighted that this is confirmed by Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britis...#Fleet_details Glad to see you have joined the "Wikipedia says it" bandwagon. There's only one tph (to Nottingham) operated by HSTs, and now electrification has been cancelled they'll have to find something else to replace the HST. But I doubt it'll be IEPs. Doubt it all you like… It makes no sense to have an IEP mini-fleet to run 1tph. There's six HSTs. Wiki says they have 24 power cars. I agree that you probably only actually need about six sets. But Cricklewood has numerous parked up during the day (rather than shuttling between Nottingham and London). http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sear...03/0200-0159?s tp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=EM Grayling says bi-modes will replace them. He's waffling. No, you're the one who's waffling, having already told us that no IEPs had been ordered other than for GWR and EC, and that no magazines had yet covered the story that IEPs would be used on the MML. Can you think of any other bi-modes available for immediate purchase with 100+ mph capability? If Hull trains can operate five, why shouldn't EMT? Presumably Hitachi will maintain them. More likely EMT's successor will get Hull's Adelante's cascaded to them, like the Pioneers before them. You seem to have developed a taste for being repeatedly proved wrong… I don't think we'll have long to wait for the class 802 order; the only question is how many. I suspect it may be another mass extinction job. |
New York Times on Crossrail
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:55:05 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: As an aside, and don't take this the wrong way, but have you recently had some traumatic event? You seem to be arguing much more than usual, often claiming expertise that you don't have. Perhaps you should take a break of a few weeks from posting on, or even reading, these news groups? I've recently become a bit less tolerant of people spouting nonsense, I agree. You must be getting very angry with yourself, then, shown by your bad temper, as your own nonsense rate has shot up lately. |
New York Times on Crossrail
In article , d () wrote:
On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 12:01:28 +0100 Recliner wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:38:16 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Indeed! Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
New York Times on Crossrail
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:51:17 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: I take it you don't read any railway magazines? I don't read magazines yet to be printed. MML electrification was only cancelled ten days ago. RAIL dated yesterday (Wednesday) has the story on its front cover. What does LIAR say about the fleet post-HST? It quotes Grayling as saying that bi-modes will be used. Ask again in three weeks, and you'll probably get a different answer. He's just regurgitating a somewhat tired figleaf. Serious question: does Grayling have a reputation for regularly changing his mind? Offhand, I can't think of any examples. He was a poor justice minister, but his bad policies weren't overturned during his period in office. And he's been too ideological in the DfT, but I don't recall him changing his mind at the drop of a hat. If anything, he's pig-headed. Truncating the electrification project was an inevitable decision, following NR's failure to deliver, and probably reflects the mandarins' long term scepticism about electrification. Choosing the DfT-specified IEP for the MML would also be in line with their policies for other main lines. I doubt that Grayling knows much about rolling stock, other than on his local line, so he's probably just accepting civil service advice. Why do you think that would change? In any case, I have a strong suspicion that the decision on bi-modes was taken at the same time that they decided not to electrify beyond Kettering and Corby. So it's very unlikely he'll change his mind in the next three weeks. But why do you think he would? |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 20:29:21 -0500
wrote: In article , d () wrote: On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 12:01:28 +0100 Recliner wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:38:16 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:36:44 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, d remarked: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Slaps forehead Indeed! Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... -- Spud |
New York Times on Crossrail
|
New York Times on Crossrail
On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 12:25:04 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 09:48:34 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, d remarked: Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... ....we will ignore everything you say, as you've now admitted it's founded upon ignorance. Feel free to point out where I said anything of the sort. In the meantime I'll continue to ignore most of what you say as I've been doing for quite a while as it happens. -- Spud |
New York Times on Crossrail
|
Do any of the posters pouncing with glee upon Spud's admission
that he is not an expert on railway geography and track layout in North London genuinely believe this forum should be a narrow, exclusive club for railway experts? An Internet forum is at its best when it has a wide variety of members with differing levels of knowledge and a broad range of questions. The proper purpose of an Internet forum is to provide and exchange information and opinions. |
Quote:
YouTube video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GY7BbHkkTQ - which displays captions as to the locations being passed. Copenhagen Junction is one of those. Belle Isle is name given to the short space between the first two tunnels passed through by trains leaving Kings Cross. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:22 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk