Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Enterprise refurbishment comes closer?

Options
12357…15

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    L1011 wrote: »
    Neither of those are pressing concerns that can't be done at a station.

    wrong. both of those can be easily solved by a way of moving between sets while the train is moving rather then waiting for a station getting off one unit and on another unit and hoping you can get a seat. their removal was an idiotic decisian. i won't be convinced otherwise and won't be changing this stance.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #123
    L1011
    Registered Users Posts: 69,006 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    But it's zero impediment to use, despite your explicit claim to the contrary


  • Options
    #124
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    L1011 wrote: »
    But it's zero impediment to use, despite your explicit claim to the contrary


    i claimed nothing of the sort. i effectively said they were bought with gangways for a reason and they should have been left alone. i then gave reasons why i have used them in the past just as an add on.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #125
    L1011
    Registered Users Posts: 69,006 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    end of the road wrote: »
    i claimed nothing of the sort. i effectively said they were bought with gangways for a reason and they should have been left alone. i then gave reasons why i have used them in the past just as an add on.

    ???
    end of the road wrote: »
    all though it won't happen as the 26 and 2800s won't have their gangways put back


  • Options
    #126
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    L1011 wrote: »
    ???

    still not what you claimed i claimed

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    L1011
    Registered Users Posts: 69,006 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    end of the road wrote: »
    still not what you claimed i claimed

    Yes, it is. You claimed that the lack of gangways would prevent them being returned to service which this is patently untrue

    If you didn't mean that, perhaps you should have phrased it differently - very differently!


  • Options
    #128
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    L1011 wrote: »
    Yes, it is. You claimed that the lack of gangways would prevent them being returned to service which this is patently untrue

    i claimed no such thing.
    L1011 wrote: »
    If you didn't mean that

    re-reading it carefully will help you understand
    L1011 wrote: »
    perhaps you should have phrased it differently - very differently!

    rubbish, i phrased it all perfectly.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #129
    L1011
    Registered Users Posts: 69,006 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    end of the road wrote: »
    i claimed no such thing.

    Yes, you did.

    end of the road wrote: »
    rubbish, i phrased it all perfectly.


    If you did, you're now trying to get away from what you wrote.

    There really is nothing further to be gained arguing this - its obvious for anyone else to see also. I'm not going to dignify your back-pedalling with another response.


  • Options
    #130
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,922 ✭✭✭GM228


    end of the road wrote: »
    i agree, but we could do with them back eventually though. all though it won't happen as the 26 and 2800s won't have their gangways put back probably as it can't be done. typical waste

    In fairness you did say it WON'T happen!

    GM228


  • Options
    #131
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    GM228 wrote: »
    In fairness you did say it WON'T happen!

    GM228
    yeah, that the 2700s won't return to traffic and the 2800s to dublin so the gangway issue is irrelevant.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,922 ✭✭✭GM228


    end of the road wrote: »
    yeah, that the 2700s won't return to traffic and the 2800s to dublin so the gangway issue is irrelevant.

    You never mentioned 2800s to Dublin, you specifically said "i agree, but we could do with them back eventually though. all though it won't happen as the 26 and 2800s won't have their gangways put back probably as it can't be done. typical waste".

    Therefore it is clear that you stated a lack of gangways on 2600s (obviously incorrect) and 2800s means "it won't happen" in reference to a return of the 2700s!

    GM228


  • Options
    #133
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,753 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    All of gangways is not an issue for multiple operation as can be seen across the country with ICRs operating in multiple, 29000s operating in multiple and 4 car 2800s operating on the WRC.

    Suggesting otherwise is nonsense.


  • Options
    #134
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,922 ✭✭✭GM228


    lxflyer wrote: »
    All of gangways is not an issue for multiple operation as can be seen across the country with ICRs operating in multiple, 29000s operating in multiple and 4 car 2800s operating on the WRC.

    Suggesting otherwise is nonsense.

    And the DARTs!

    GM229


  • Options
    #135
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    lxflyer wrote: »
    All of gangways is not an issue for multiple operation as can be seen across the country with ICRs operating in multiple, 29000s operating in multiple and 4 car 2800s operating on the WRC.

    Suggesting otherwise is nonsense.
    the 2800s were bought with gangways for a reason obviously. to facilitate moving from unit to unit. the WRC has so few passengers to make this an issue. whether they should have been bought with them or not i don't know, maybe not but they were and should have been left. thats my stance on the issue and i will not be budging.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #136
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,922 ✭✭✭GM228


    end of the road wrote: »
    the 2800s were bought with gangways for a reason obviously. to facilitate moving from unit to unit. the WRC has so few passengers to make this an issue. whether they should have been bought with them or not i don't know, maybe not but they were and should have been left. thats my stance on the issue and i will not be budging.

    The WRC may have very few passengers to make it an issue but what about the DART which may have 1000s of passengers spread over four 2-car sets so passenger numbers don't come into play! The 2700s and 2800s only had gangways as IE requested them in the first place, if they feel fit to remove them that's their choice!

    The DMUs have spent a greater number of years with the gangways not used than used!

    GM228


  • Options
    #137
    L1011
    Registered Users Posts: 69,006 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    end of the road wrote: »
    the 2800s were bought with gangways for a reason obviously. to facilitate moving from unit to unit. the WRC has so few passengers to make this an issue. whether they should have been bought with them or not i don't know, maybe not but they were and should have been left. thats my stance on the issue and i will not be budging.
    You appear to be confusing opinion with fact


  • Options
    #138
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    L1011 wrote: »
    You appear to be confusing opinion with fact
    i'm not.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #139
    Rashers72
    Registered Users Posts: 1,207 ✭✭✭Rashers72


    That 5 carriage ICR seems under serious pressure on the 19.00 Dublin to Belfast service. Sitting ride beside an 8 carriage suburban service to Dundalk, with capacity (i.e. 90% seats gone).


  • Options
    #140
    Captain Chaos
    Registered Users Posts: 11,174 ✭✭✭✭Captain Chaos


    An update showing the final Enterprise livery along with the unfinished livery on 209.

    Thanks to Chris Playfair for his photos showing the second coach to be painted along with the new logo. Looks very Deutsch Bahn ICE to me. Can't wait to see a 201 fully finished out with the red stripes.

    http://chrisplayfair.smugmug.com/Travel/2014-Photos/Ireland-December-2014/46120607_wj52Vt#!i=3783740550&k=bGMRgTM


  • Options
    #141
    metrovick001
    Registered Users Posts: 420 ✭✭metrovick001


    Looks very well.
    Captain Chaos wrote: »
    An update showing the final Enterprise livery along with the unfinished livery on 209.

    Thanks to Chris Playfair for his photos showing the second coach to be painted along with the new logo. Looks very Deutsch Bahn ICE to me. Can't wait to see a 201 fully finished out with the red stripes.

    http://chrisplayfair.smugmug.com/Travel/2014-Photos/Ireland-December-2014/46120607_wj52Vt#!i=3783740550&k=bGMRgTM


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    SpaceTime
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,088 ✭✭✭SpaceTime


    Looks a little like the new TGV colours too.

    http://tgvrhinrhone.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/dsc01565.jpg


  • Options
    #143
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,922 ✭✭✭GM228


    Captain Chaos wrote: »
    An update showing the final Enterprise livery along with the unfinished livery on 209.

    Thanks to Chris Playfair for his photos showing the second coach to be painted along with the new logo. Looks very Deutsch Bahn ICE to me. Can't wait to see a 201 fully finished out with the red stripes.

    http://chrisplayfair.smugmug.com/Travel/2014-Photos/Ireland-December-2014/46120607_wj52Vt#!i=3783740550&k=bGMRgTM

    Looks well! Has the carriage actually been refurbished already or just painted first?

    GM228


  • Options
    #144
    Captain Chaos
    Registered Users Posts: 11,174 ✭✭✭✭Captain Chaos


    GM228 wrote: »
    Looks well! Has the carriage actually been refurbished already or just painted first?

    GM228

    It's just been painted, it's just a shell inside, no seats or anything. You can see they installed new buttons for opening the doors. It's the second coach to be painted so far.

    I was under the impression they were to be shipped off to France for the refit so I'm a bit surprised to see painted shells rolling around York Road already.


  • Options
    #145
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    new paint isn't any substitute for first class rolling stock


  • Options
    #146
    Captain Chaos
    Registered Users Posts: 11,174 ✭✭✭✭Captain Chaos


    corktina wrote: »
    new paint isn't any substitute for first class rolling stock

    As in point being....

    The De Detrich rolling stock is the finest rolling stock in the country for comfort as it currently stands. This new refurb is only going to raise the bar.

    Irish rail should have ordered 8 sets of these with DVGTs in the formations for the Cork line instead of going to CAF with the Mk4s.


  • Options
    #147
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Captain Chaos wrote: »
    It's just been painted, it's just a shell inside, no seats or anything. You can see they installed new buttons for opening the doors. It's the second coach to be painted so far.

    I was under the impression they were to be shipped off to France for the refit so I'm a bit surprised to see painted shells rolling around York Road already.

    i think they are being refurbished in scotland with some work at york road? couldn't tell you for definite though but its what i'm lead to believe.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #148
    SpaceTime
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,088 ✭✭✭SpaceTime


    They'd be Alstom now as De Dietrich sold off its rail division before the MK4 was built.

    CAF is one of the companies doing the Enterprise refurbishment btw...


  • Options
    #149
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,922 ✭✭✭GM228


    end of the road wrote: »
    i think they are being refurbished in scotland with some work at york road? couldn't tell you for definite though but its what i'm lead to believe.

    As far as I know all work is being done at York Road, the Belmond Mk3s are going to Scotland for refurb-perhaps that's what your thinking?

    GM228


  • Options
    #150
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,097 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    GM228 wrote: »
    As far as I know all work is being done at York Road, the Belmond Mk3s are going to Scotland for refurb-perhaps that's what your thinking?

    GM228

    ah yeah i know the mark 3s are off to scotland. for some reason i believed the de-deitricks were going over as well but to a different place. but it could have been something lost in translation all right.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,753 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    A second Enterprise set will be removed from service from 25 May.

    The following departures will now be operated by a 6 coach NIR CAF set, without 1st Class or full catering:

    Monday-Saturdays:
    Ex-Belfast: 06:50, 12:35, 18:05
    Ex-Connolly: 09:35, 15:20, 20:50

    Sundays:
    Ex-Belfast: 11:05
    Ex-Connolly: 14:00

    Also, from Monday 1st June, there will be some Enterprise timetable changes:

    19:00 Dublin-Belfast will be accelerated by 10 minutes, arriving at Belfast Central at 21:05

    21:35 Belfast-Dublin will be advanced to 21:15 arriving at Connolly at 23:12


Advertisement