I've noticed a spate of dubious information appearing on railway based wikipedia articles of late...
Can you provide a link to, and quote from, the source as per forum rules please?
The quote from Wikipedia has now been removed and wasn’t given a source anyway.Can you provide a link to, and quote from, the source as per forum rules please?
Note that Wikipedia isn't intended to be a primary source; articles are required to include details of their sources, and therefore these sources should be referred to here please.
Many thanks in advance
Yes it was in RAIl I remember reading its to replace some of the HST's as the ones with VP185 engines are more expensive to maintain.
Which is utter nonsense. The VP185 is cheaper to maintain than the MTU as it uses less oil and goes longer between overhauls. Fuel consumption is similar, except for 43076, which uses less fuel than the MTU.
Really then why weren't they chosen instead of MTU engines? Was it because of the VP185's being louder?
Back when the decision was made, FGW had been scarred by their VP185 experience, primarily because the support from the manufacturer was poor. Paxman was owned by Alstom at the time (enough said); support has been much improved to MML and EMT with Paxman under MAN ownership.
Seriously?
