There is an internal layout change in the PTOSL coach.the disabled area has moved from by the toilet, and is now in the 2/3 position on the other side of the external doors.
think 377/6 and 7s are also like that.
There is an internal layout change in the PTOSL coach.the disabled area has moved from by the toilet, and is now in the 2/3 position on the other side of the external doors.
With the same three as yesterday.
387107/106/105.
These will be good if they replace the Class 165/166 on the Great Western routes. With regards them replacing the Class 222's to Corby, the answer I believe is no as I thought that route was getting IEP's Class 800?
Yeh nobody really knows who put the Corby thing up on wiki...... a rumour with no substance.
Yeh nobody really knows who put the Corby thing up on wiki...... a rumour with no substance.
Well, the comment is actually as follows:
However, the Network Rail CP5 delivery plan published in March 2014 specifies a key assumption that 125 mph (201 km/h) electric units will be used on the Midland Mainline except for Corby-London which will be operated by Class 377s in up to 12 car formation.[6]
It is saying Class 377s, and I don't believe those are moving from TSGN? Could it be that the services to Corby will come under the TSGN umbrella in some way?
The following rolling stock is being assumed;
Class 377 up to 12 cars, multiple pantographs (London to Corby);
Your spot on. from a passenger perspective class 387 is almost identical to a 5 car electro star, with 1 less vehicle. The commuters generally prefer the newer electro stars, as they have around 25 to 30 power sockets per vehicle.
Browsing on youtube and found this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqPSy7gxca0&app=desktop
(not my video)
Okay, so what fell off the train here? (1m 13s)
http://youtu.be/wqPSy7gxca0?t=1m13s
I thought it was just the buttons....
Not wishing to put whoever the driver is in trouble, but it looks like a piece of rubbish thrown rather than a part of the train, if it fell off it would have had to be caught by a bit of wind to come out at that angle from the centre of the open doorway!
Yeh nobody really knows who put the Corby thing up on wiki...... a rumour with no substance.
Not wishing to put whoever the driver is in trouble, but it looks like a piece of rubbish thrown rather than a part of the train, if it fell off it would have had to be caught by a bit of wind to come out at that angle from the centre of the open doorway!
The rumor comes from Rail originally who but it in an article quite a while back now. In fact the wiki entry is pretty much word for word what was out in Rail. Of course no sources to back that up but in the TSGN ITT it did state that one road of Cauldwell Depot was to be given over the EMT franchise in 2017 for three new electric stock that supposed to be running to Corby.
So its got some substance behind it but requires some logical leaps to reach.
Looks to me like a soggy leaf caught in the droplight
oh okay. Wish there was more info floating about. There is no need for it to be confidential surely?
With the same three as yesterday.
387107/106/105.
I lose track, do these 387s have identical interiors to the 377/6s where even first class is everyone's favourite ironing board seats? If so, I'll certainly be waiting an extra 15 minutes if required for my regular trips from Harpenden to Brighton for a 377/2, 377/5 or 319. What a shame it's come to this.
The Class 700s have the same seats but have padding unlike the 377/6s.
Not quite - they may have same seat cushions and frame but 700's don't have arm rests and tray tables. Plus they seemed to have less leg room on the 700's judging that on the mock up my knees were jammed into the seat in front.
I find the 377/7's very comfortable on the West London line and the seat layout pretty good - plus there is lots of space for standing in the seated areas with grab rails which is very good too.
As I said same seats. Rest are optional extra to a seat.
After doing a 377/7 Milton Keynes to Clapham Junction, I disagree with the comfortable part but its subjective anyway.
This debate goes on
Do we know what part of which carriage will be allocated to First Class? If all of the 'passive provision' is used, I think this will give more First Class seats than the 319s (and 377/2 and 377/5), which is unlikely to be tolerated given the crowding through the core.
Would make sense if the FC section will be in the end section (like on the 377/2&5s) to avoid confusing the poor passengers.