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.

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.

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

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?

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-

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

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

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

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.

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