cactustwirly
Established Member
I'm on 1B58 with 43 052 and 43 467. Is it common to have VP185 and MTU power in the same set?
No but happens occasionally, the MTUs are in a separate pool, and are based at Etches Park and not Neville Hill
I'm on 1B58 with 43 052 and 43 467. Is it common to have VP185 and MTU power in the same set?
Which isn’t a great comparison: different routes and different top speeds for a start.The ride quality of these Mk3s are worse than I've come to expect on GWRs 255 sets.
Indeed, the Midland Mainline is a world away from anything on the Great Western. Twists, lurches and bumps aplenty.Which isn’t a great comparison: different routes and different top speeds for a start.
Which isn’t a great comparison: different routes and different top speeds for a start.
At the end of February I believeAny news on when the red sets will be in service?
It is entirely down to reducing the level of PRM non-compliance.Sorry to dig up something that's probably been asked, but I've not really read much about the transfer until recently. What are the reasons EMR are replacing their fleet of HSTs with ex-LNER ones? Is it because the LNER ones are in better nick since thier recent refurbishment and have better PRM provisions, as opposed to investing in kitting out EMR's ones which are in relatively original spec?
I think that ride quality varies between sets actually - I was on one yesterday and would say no real issue with ride quality. I didn't note the set concerned.I'm on 1B58 with 43 052 and 43 467. Is it common to have VP185 and MTU power in the same set? I will have to agree with the above post that the mallard interiors are far superior to the IC70 seats. The ride quality of these Mk3s are worse than I've come to expect on GWRs 255 sets.
Funny - good point, but I'm pretty avg height 5'10" and have never found them uncomfortable in either 1st or standard. Tho the ex LNER sets will be good too comfort wise. I'll miss the original interior seats for nostalgic reasons.On the 1134 to Nottingham, I have to say I won't miss the EMR carriages, I'd forgotten how uncomfortable I find the IC70 seats , they're far too low backed
Yeah it has varied for me to, my return trip was much smoother.I think that ride quality varies between sets actually - I was on one yesterday and would say no real issue with ride quality. I didn't note the set concerned.
Time since last C4 overhaul is an obvious reason for varying ride quality.I think that ride quality varies between sets actually - I was on one yesterday and would say no real issue with ride quality. I didn't note the set concerned.
Thanks - makes lots of sense!Time since last C4 overhaul is an obvious reason for varying ride quality.
But don't the EMR sets have different dampers to the GWR sets.
Although I haven't noticed a significant difference between the sets in ride quality
The 180's will still be needed for the post December timetable until the new units enter service. Probably find some training runs will happen before December.Now I know this thread is about the ex LNER HSTs but there seems to be no-where else to post this. The Twitter Feed from EMR above included a reference to the 'Angel' HSTs and stated that they were staying until Dec 2020 - the same date as the ex LNER ones will depart. This is not what's been suggested before; what is happening about the 180s, I wonder.
On the subject of the LNER ones; in the past it has been stated on another thread that not all of the coaches in the set formations used by LNER had control emission toilets and perhaps it was only one in each class. Does anyone know the situation? Does the number of sets available and each set having one coach more than will be required make it possible to re-shuffle the formation so that all the CEM coaches were combine to make all-CEM sets?
As far as I know the ex-LNER sets don’t have CET. It is purely about them being less non-compliant for PRM than the current sets.Now I know this thread is about the ex LNER HSTs but there seems to be no-where else to post this. The Twitter Feed from EMR above included a reference to the 'Angel' HSTs and stated that they were staying until Dec 2020 - the same date as the ex LNER ones will depart. This is not what's been suggested before; what is happening about the 180s, I wonder.
On the subject of the LNER ones; in the past it has been stated on another thread that not all of the coaches in the set formations used by LNER had control emission toilets and perhaps it was only one in each class. Does anyone know the situation? Does the number of sets available and each set having one coach more than will be required make it possible to re-shuffle the formation so that all the CEM coaches were combine to make all-CEM sets?
As far as I know the ex-LNER sets don’t have CET. It is purely about them being less non-compliant for PRM than the current sets.
The 180's will still be needed for the post December timetable until the new units enter service. Probably find some training runs will happen before December.
Good question you posed earlier. Having been on Angel set yesterday I can't see what extra PRM compliance it would have had - eg no info screens for example.Thanks for the information. The first 2 180s released were moved to EP some time ago. As it turned out this was possibly more for accommodation reasons than any urgency to get them into traffic to replace the ex GC sets for May timetable changes, and I'd actually assumed the latter reason which is now clearly not so. The present NL only have derog. 'til May (up-thread) but presumably the GC ones are more like the LNER ones, a little nearer PRM, so have the December extension.
One of the oddities about the ex GC sets is that, every time I travel on one (every month or so) the formation seems to have changed from the previous one, whereas the NL sets seemed to be very fixed. Maybe this is just to equalise the mileages as the two diagrams are very different in mileage and there is almost a complete set of spare coaches, too.
Do you reckon EMR might get another derogation beyond December this year?As far as I know the ex-LNER sets don’t have CET. It is purely about them being less non-compliant for PRM than the current sets.
Good question you posed earlier. Having been on Angel set yesterday I can't see what extra PRM compliance it would have had - eg no info screens for example.
And standard class disabled toilet, along with improved passenger announcements.The current EMR HST’s have seats with fixed armrests. The LNER ones have seats with fold up armrests. I believe that is the thing that makes them more PRM compliant.
The current EMR HST’s have seats with fixed armrests. The LNER ones have seats with fold up armrests. I believe that is the thing that makes them more PRM compliant.
As far as I know the ex-LNER sets don’t have CET. It is purely about them being less non-compliant for PRM than the current sets.
Funny - good point, but I'm pretty avg height 5'10" and have never found them uncomfortable in either 1st or standard. Tho the ex LNER sets will be good too comfort wise. I'll miss the original interior seats for nostalgic reasons.
I was surprised by the difference in legroom between my service out of STP (1D28 on Tuesday) and the return journey (1B79) on Wednesday, as the latter had masses more legroom, and I was in a normal airline seat on both journeys. Are there differences within the existing EMR fleet?
1B79 is operated by one of the ex-GC HSTs, which do have a different layout, including some declassified first class vehicles