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

Is the 201 class doomed for imminent withdrawn?

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Del.Monte
    Registered Users Posts: 12,363 ✭✭✭✭Del.Monte


    L1011 wrote: »
    Door to door courier firms made railway parcels ops completely unviable decades ago. It's astounding that they even kept trying as long as they did here

    Fasttrack would have been closed in a cost cutting round and we'd have dead space being shuttled around on often crush capacity trains

    DPD can get a box door to door nationwide next day for 4.50. You would have to pay people to deal with the hassle or dropping and collecting at railway stations during manned hours; not just undercut that for a tiny subset of the market that is near manned stations.

    Lovely Victoriana concepts do not make for a viable railway


    It was closed as a cost cutting measure!


    Anyway, has it escaped your attention that An Post have seen a vast increase in parcels traffic since the increase in online shopping https://www.anpost.com/Media-Centre/News/Record-An-Post-Parcel-Volumes-exceeding-3m-Per-Wee Are you seriously telling that the railway couldn't have captured a decent chunk of this traffic in some way or other?



    As it is, An Post should never have been allowed to abandon the railway. And don't tell me it was for financial reasons - the same company who spent a shed load of money on a new rail based sorting facility adjoining Connolly and then built a new road transportation hub that was colossal failure. Can't find the details online or I'd post.

    ****



  • Options
    #33
    TheBoyConor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭TheBoyConor


    The ICRs are too noisy and uncomfortable for Intercity work. And they are not the right layout for commuter services.
    So what exactly are they intended for? They tried to be a one size fits all but it fails at all roles.

    my god the Mk3s were lovely. They were properly comfortable and had a very smooth ride quality, and pleasant interiors. And quiet.

    The MkIVs have Rock hard seats, a stupid window vent that blows in your face and is sloped so you can't rest your arm, a very rough and bumpy ride, and horrible white/blue lighting that gives you a headache.

    I'd love to see a set of toothpaste Mk3s with an 071 or 201 running the Cork and Galway lines again. I thought know why they weren't refurbished.. They weren't at all old at withdrawal. Refurbishing would have given s far superior service at a cheaper cost.


  • Options
    #34
    The J Stands for Jay
    Registered Users Posts: 5,669 ✭✭✭The J Stands for Jay


    GT89 wrote: »
    I don't think the ICRs are that bad a train myself but they've been used too much as a one size fits all train. They are not suitable for commuter work as they are poor for standing passengers due to having single leaf doors and lots of bulkheads. The 29000s are much more suitable for commuter work and they aren't a great train either. I would much prefer proper commuter trains to be used on the Kildare services rather than ICRs.

    It could also be argued that the ICRs are not comfortable enough for intercity work either.

    The 29000s are awful yokes. I agree that the ICRs aren't perfect, but it's much better getting on of those than a 29000.


  • Options
    #35
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,850 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Del.Monte wrote: »
    Anyway, has it escaped your attention that An Post have seen a vast increase in parcels traffic since the increase in online shopping https://www.anpost.com/Media-Centre/News/Record-An-Post-Parcel-Volumes-exceeding-3m-Per-Wee Are you seriously telling that the railway couldn't have captured a decent chunk of this traffic in some way or other?

    With their cost base they would have captured diddly squat - actually zero. They were too expensive, offering a surreally limited, poor service.
    Del.Monte wrote: »

    As it is, An Post should never have been allowed to abandon the railway. And don't tell me it was for financial reasons - the same company who spent a shed load of money on a new rail based sorting facility adjoining Connolly and then built a new road transportation hub that was colossal failure. Can't find the details online or I'd post.

    You do not seem to understand the concept of operational expenses.

    The introduction of computerised sorting tipped the speed advantage back to roads - TPOs were only beneficial due to on-board sorting; and massively brought the cost advantage to road also. The country is not big enough to have a high speed MU vs flight pricing/time argument like the UK has; and our most remote areas *don't have railways*.


    Victorian railway operations (parcels, porters, dining cars, station buffets, loco haulage, whatever) are not coming back. If they'd had to be retained, we'd have no railways at all.


  • Options
    #36
    goingnowhere
    Registered Users Posts: 4,142 ✭✭✭goingnowhere


    Motorways killed Fastrack


    If you want a clapped out rust bucket Mk2d with the horrific brake noise, horrible retro interior and doors you can fall out of and crawl along at 75mph, go right ahead... Mk2d was 1/3 of the fleet pre ICR.

    Never had a failure on a ICR, spent plenty of time looking at scenery at Tullamore (Mk2 total electrical failure, proceeded on a hot July day with no AC to Galway, nice...), Athlone (Mk3 total electrical failure, couldn't continue as no power means no doors). The air con never really worked on either.

    Only 201 failure I had was a shutdown coming down the Ballybrophy bank due an overspeed (wrong side of 102mph), back up and running after a brief stop.

    For all the negativity 50 million took the train in 2019, back in 1979 it was 17.8 million, if you look at it as 1979-2008 (46 million it is even more impressive) that with fewer coaches, fewer route miles the numbers are up by a factor of 3. Dublin Bus numbers have halved in the same period.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    Del.Monte wrote: »
    By the time CIE axed Fastrack they were charging almost more for a parcel than a passenger and you don't see any potential here?

    very little. Couriers have taken parcels traffic to a whole new level. Roads have improved and go everywhere.


  • Options
    #38
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,998 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Del.Monte wrote: »
    I started out being happy with the introduction of the ICRs but having used them frequently over the years I have little good to say about them - noisy, over-lit, tiny toilets (except for the wheelchair ones), poor catering with trolleys, such as they are, frequently unable to get through carriages due to overcrowding and blocking people trying to get on and off, no parcels capacity....etc.etc.


    still much better then those other heaps that are often forced on us though.
    L1011 wrote: »
    Victorian railway operations (parcels, porters, dining cars, station buffets, loco haulage, whatever) are not coming back. If they'd had to be retained, we'd have no railways at all.

    to be fair the only thing off your list that is victorian railway operations is porters.

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



  • Options
    #39
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,673 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    goingnowhere wrote: »
    Motorways killed Fastrack


    If you want a clapped out rust bucket Mk2d with the horrific brake noise, horrible retro interior and doors you can fall out of and crawl along at 75mph, go right ahead... Mk2d was 1/3 of the fleet pre ICR.

    Never had a failure on a ICR, spent plenty of time looking at scenery at Tullamore (Mk2 total electrical failure, proceeded on a hot July day with no AC to Galway, nice...), Athlone (Mk3 total electrical failure, couldn't continue as no power means no doors). The air con never really worked on either.

    Only 201 failure I had was a shutdown coming down the Ballybrophy bank due an overspeed (wrong side of 102mph), back up and running after a brief stop.

    For all the negativity 50 million took the train in 2019, back in 1979 it was 17.8 million, if you look at it as 1979-2008 (46 million it is even more impressive) that with fewer coaches, fewer route miles the numbers are up by a factor of 3. Dublin Bus numbers have halved in the same period.

    Least you'd be kept warn and comfortable on a clapped out Mark 2.

    Jacket and gloves needed next week for ICR passengers with the cold spell, no overcrowding to keep everyone warm these days.


  • Options
    #40
    91wx763
    Registered Users Posts: 523 ✭✭✭91wx763


    goingnowhere wrote: »
    224 was an exception. RAIU report will reveal all. Clearly there isn't a widespread issue as the 201 fleet remains in service.

    As an express passenger locomotive the 201 class is a very primitive piece of equipment by todays standards. Replacement with a modern equivalent of similar power output is desirable, say a UK class 68. Faster to accelerate and can actually provide power to the train without going up in a ball of flames as the 201's keep doing

    A class 68 went up in a "ball of flames" near Warwick yesterday......

    Are you say IÉ set out for their equipment to fail ?


  • Options
    #41
    TheBoyConor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭TheBoyConor


    There are 2700s and 8200s lying laid up and idle in Inchicore, Fairview and Limerick i think. There were bad reliability problems with them. I wonder if freight flows decline further would IE consider the possibility of adapting them to suit haulage or push-pull operation, perhaps with the refurbished freed up from freight 071s hauling? Perhaps leasing a baby GM from the ITG for shorter journeys where lower speeds are acceptable.

    Refitting the 2700s and 8200s for haulage would be only a fraction of the cost of reactivating the class as railcars/EMUs, and the 071s are undergoing ongoing refurbishment anyway. The main element of refurbishing the stock is refurbishing the brake system, removing the engines and motors and re-fitting out the end cabs for push-pull working. Even one set could be liveried in the IE toothpaste or supertrain colours. It would be a thing of beauty and in itself would attract travelers to use the service over their cars.

    There would certainly be a precedent for this. The AEC railcars were adapted for haulage before.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    andrewfaulk
    Registered Users Posts: 430 ✭✭andrewfaulk


    TheBoyConor wrote: »
    There are 2700s and 8200s lying laid up and idle in Inchicore, Fairview and Limerick i think. There were bad reliability problems with them. I wonder if freight flows decline further would IE consider the possibility of adapting them to suit haulage or push-pull operation, perhaps with the refurbished freed up from freight 071s hauling? Perhaps leasing a baby GM from the ITG for shorter journeys where lower speeds are acceptable.

    Refitting the 2700s and 8200s for haulage would be only a fraction of the cost of reactivating the class as railcars/EMUs, and the 071s are undergoing ongoing refurbishment anyway. The main element of refurbishing the stock is refurbishing the brake system, removing the engines and motors and re-fitting out the end cabs for push-pull working. Even one set could be liveried in the IE toothpaste or supertrain colours. It would be a thing of beauty and in itself would attract travelers to use the service over their cars.

    There would certainly be a precedent for this. The AEC railcars were adapted for haulage before.

    The origins of this was IE floating the idea, as a worst case to solve the rolling stock shortages. It was more to focus politicians and the NTAs attention to the rolling stock issues than a serious proposition.. The order for 41 new ICR cars, and the collapse in pax numbers due to COVID have killed it stone dead..

    Also, not going to be any locos freed up from freight, the trend is upwards now downwards for the past few years


  • Options
    #43
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,998 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    even the most hardened enthusiasts wouldn't get out of their car for the 2700 heaps, even if in tooth paste livery and hauled by a locomotive.
    absolute ****e ina buckets that are hated by anyone with any sort of sense.
    they will surely be scrapped soon anyway, they are hardly going to be refurbished now.

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



  • Options
    #44
    TheBoyConor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭TheBoyConor


    I don't accept that freight is going to go on an upward trend. Sure with the marginal lines like south Wexford, ballybrophy and LJ waterford lines facing the axe more than likely and the fact that passing loops, sidings and freight facilities are being scrapped torn up and sold off or turned into car parks by the dozen over the last 10 years, little to no capacity remains in the existing infrastructure that is left to expand freight operations in any way.. most of the rolling stock for freight has been scrapped also. All that is left is mine wagons and flats and timbers. And a few pocket wagons.


    Even the rake of 3 or 4 82/2700s with a leased baby GM fitted out for push pull would alleviate pressure on the less busy intercity lines. There is no reason why IE could not leasebback a few baby gms from the itg who will be glad of the revenue.

    I didn't realise that i.e. had been exploring that idea. That is positive news that they are at least considering it. Where would I get details of this proposal?


  • Options
    #45
    GT89
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,770 ✭✭✭GT89


    TheBoyConor wrote: »
    I don't accept that freight is going to go on an upward trend. Sure with the marginal lines like south Wexford, ballybrophy and LJ waterford lines facing the axe more than likely and the fact that passing loops, sidings and freight facilities are being scrapped torn up and sold off or turned into car parks by the dozen over the last 10 years, little to no capacity remains in the existing infrastructure that is left to expand freight operations in any way.. most of the rolling stock for freight has been scrapped also. All that is left is mine wagons and flats and timbers. And a few pocket wagons.

    I wouldn't say it's on the up it's just no longer in decline. I can't see it being expanded majorly but I can see them maintaining what they have at the moment for the foreseeable future.


  • Options
    #46
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    TheBoyConor wrote: »
    I don't accept that freight is going to go on an upward trend. Sure with the marginal lines like south Wexford, ballybrophy and LJ waterford lines facing the axe more than likely and the fact that passing loops, sidings and freight facilities are being scrapped torn up and sold off or turned into car parks by the dozen over the last 10 years, little to no capacity remains in the existing infrastructure that is left to expand freight operations in any way.. most of the rolling stock for freight has been scrapped also. All that is left is mine wagons and flats and timbers. And a few pocket wagons.


    Even the rake of 3 or 4 82/2700s with a leased baby GM fitted out for push pull would alleviate pressure on the less busy intercity lines. There is no reason why IE could not leasebback a few baby gms from the itg who will be glad of the revenue.

    I didn't realise that i.e. had been exploring that idea. That is positive news that they are at least considering it. Where would I get details of this proposal?

    using a small GM is a total non-starter, If these units are to be of any use, maybe they could be re-engineered like the former tuber units have been in the UK, with modern running gear. Still can't see it.


  • Options
    #47
    andrewfaulk
    Registered Users Posts: 430 ✭✭andrewfaulk


    TheBoyConor wrote: »
    I don't accept that freight is going to go on an upward trend. Sure with the marginal lines like south Wexford, ballybrophy and LJ waterford lines facing the axe more than likely and the fact that passing loops, sidings and freight facilities are being scrapped torn up and sold off or turned into car parks by the dozen over the last 10 years, little to no capacity remains in the existing infrastructure that is left to expand freight operations in any way.. most of the rolling stock for freight has been scrapped also. All that is left is mine wagons and flats and timbers. And a few pocket wagons.


    Even the rake of 3 or 4 82/2700s with a leased baby GM fitted out for push pull would alleviate pressure on the less busy intercity lines. There is no reason why IE could not leasebback a few baby gms from the itg who will be glad of the revenue.

    I didn't realise that i.e. had been exploring that idea. That is positive news that they are at least considering it. Where would I get details of this proposal?

    None of those branches have much to add to the freight proposition anyway.. They either duplicate existing routes(Ballybrophy and WRC) or don’t really go anywhere that offers enough freight for rail to be viable(South Wexford past Belview).. Any wagons that were scrapped were obsolete(Oil, beet, cement bubbles) or only of use for the flows they were designed for(ferts and ammonia) anyway.. There is a shortage of the right kinds of stock now(45ft container flats, timbers) which is one of the big constrains on growth..

    The baby GMs won’t be back, too much work to make them mainline compatible.. Ditto with the 2700s.. Put them together and it’s an unnecessary extra train set at best, and one the drives customers off whatever line they are put on most likely..


  • Options
    #48
    GT89
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,770 ✭✭✭GT89


    andrewfaulk wrote: »
    None of those branches have much to add to the freight proposition anyway.. They either duplicate existing routes(Ballybrophy and WRC) or don’t really go anywhere that offers enough freight for rail to be viable(South Wexford past Belview).. Any wagons that were scrapped were obsolete(Oil, beet, cement bubbles) or only of use for the flows they were designed for(ferts and ammonia) anyway.. There is a shortage of the right kinds of stock now(45ft container flats, timbers) which is one of the big constrains on growth..

    The baby GMs won’t be back, too much work to make them mainline compatible.. Ditto with the 2700s.. Put them together and it’s an unnecessary extra train set at best, and one the drives customers off whatever line they are put on most likely..

    I do think there is a market for more freight in the South West of the country. Atm there is nothing out of Cork, Limerick or Galway which there is potential for Cork definitely a rail connection to the port is needed, Limerick possibly if they reopen the Foynes line and Galway not so much. I do think there could be some potential to grow cross border freight if IE could partner up with NIR for some freight out of Belfast possibly or maybe some companies in the North may be interested used to be liners out of Dundalk back in the 90s I believe.

    I do think for it to possible there does need to be some EU support to increase the amount of rail freight as part of a joined up strategy. I believe Europe as a whole has the lowest volume of rail freight compared to Russia, China and the USA.


  • Options
    #49
    TheBoyConor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭TheBoyConor


    Cork is a dead end as far as freight is concerned. The Port of Cork have all but pulled out of Tivoli where there was a railhead formerly, and all their operations are going to be down in Ringaskiddy within 5 years.
    The CB&PR used to go relatively close to Ringaskiddy, close enough to build a spur, if the line was still extant. However, that was closed up, built on and the remainder turned into a shady rape zone, sorry I mean greenway. So there will never be any rail connected Port in Cork again. Sure the port of Cork this week vacated the beautiful Customs House Building in the city and moved their main offices down to some soulless shed in Ringaskiddy.


  • Options
    #50
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    GT89 wrote: »
    I do think there is a market for more freight in the South West of the country. Atm there is nothing out of Cork, Limerick or Galway which there is potential for Cork definitely a rail connection to the port is needed, Limerick possibly if they reopen the Foynes line and Galway not so much. I do think there could be some potential to grow cross border freight if IE could partner up with NIR for some freight out of Belfast possibly or maybe some companies in the North may be interested used to be liners out of Dundalk back in the 90s I believe.

    I do think for it to possible there does need to be some EU support to increase the amount of rail freight as part of a joined up strategy. I believe Europe as a whole has the lowest volume of rail freight compared to Russia, China and the USA.

    that's because they are huge. Ireland isn't end of story


  • Options
    #51
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    TheBoyConor wrote: »
    Cork is a dead end as far as freight is concerned. The Port of Cork have all but pulled out of Tivoli where there was a railhead formerly, and all their operations are going to be down in Ringaskiddy within 5 years.
    The BPWR used to go relatively close to Ringaskiddy, close enough to build a spur, if the line was still extant. However, that was closed up, built on and the remainder turned into a shady rape zone, sorry I mean greenway. So there will never be any rail connected Port in Cork again. Sure the port of Cork this week vacated the beautiful Customs House Building in the city and moved their main offices down to some soulless shed in Ringaskiddy.

    BPWR?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    TheBoyConor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭TheBoyConor


    Isambard wrote: »
    BPWR?

    My guess was wrong. I meant the CB&PR. Fixed it.


  • Options
    #53
    GT89
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,770 ✭✭✭GT89


    Isambard wrote: »
    that's because they are huge. Ireland isn't end of story

    I agree there isn't a big market for railfreight in Ireland but I do think it has some potential to grow which should be looked at. Not to volumes there once was but I could see some more demand for I and with a bit of support for it there is some degree of potential.


  • Options
    #54
    TheBoyConor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭TheBoyConor


    Is there any chance of new freight stock being purchased?
    Would we have any home of getting a few new locomotives? Perhaps something smaller, more manageable size and weight that gives the PW lesss of a beating than the overly heavy 201s which destroy the PW.


  • Options
    #55
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,998 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    i would have once said no chance, but i think going forward it's certainly possible.
    i think in the future we will be forced to increase rail freight by some bit whether we want to or not, it will be forced on us i reccan.
    we won't ever see the amounts once carried but certainly room for growth, and it would be better for it to happen at the hands of ireland itself rather then it being pushed on us.
    time will tell.

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



  • Options
    #56
    TheBoyConor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭TheBoyConor


    I'd love to see freight flows coming back up. God it would be some sight to behold.
    Pockets, barytes, Tara mines, ammonia, beet, cement, Asahi, timber, liners, bitumen, fuel tankers, livestock wagons, complemented with the 071s, a few reactivated leased back baby GMs, and possibly a Metrovick or two, but that might be asking a bit much.

    If new freight rolling stock was to be aquired, would there be much hope of a few new mid-range locomotives?


  • Options
    #57
    dublinman1990
    Registered Users Posts: 8,340 ✭✭✭dublinman1990


    TheBoyConor wrote: »
    I'd love to see freight flows coming back up. God it would be some sight to behold.
    Pockets, barytes, Tara mines, ammonia, beet, cement, Asahi, timber, liners, bitumen, fuel tankers, livestock wagons, complemented with the 071s, a few reactivated leased back baby GMs, and possibly a Metrovick or two, but that might be asking a bit much.

    If new freight rolling stock was to be aquired, would there be much hope of a few new mid-range locomotives?

    From one perspective; there is probably no advantages right now in IÉ buying new electric diesel locomotives that need OHLE fitted to run them in the 1st place. A lot of the newer diesel locomotives used throughout Continental Europe are currently supplied with a Hybrid/Electric powered engine. We have a lack of infrastructure in our case at the moment because IÉ currently do not have OHLE infrastructure installed on the rest of it's rail network outside of the GDA. I would assume that IÉ just have exchequer funding set aside for OHLE installation for DART+ at this current time when compared to the rest of their rail network.

    Although; there could a possibility from IÉ's pov to ask GM if there was any new hybrid powered engine technologies from their current railway rolling stock portfolio from GM's factories to see if it can be compatible with older rolling stock which could then allow IÉ to refurbish their IÉ's 071 & 201 class locomotives in the future. If there was such a scope of supplies available from GM for this new equipment; that would be a huge advantage to IÉ at this current time from an infrastructure pov because it can be done on a lower cost than expected for the taxpayer. IÉ wouldn't actually need to acquire big amounts of government funding to supply themselves with buying new diesel electric locomotives for their freight business & OHLE from other suppliers.

    The suitable scenario that I could see here when IÉ buys new diesel electric locomotives is when most or the remainder of their GM IÉ diesel stock is deemed no longer fit for purpose on our rail network. If they had the option to actually refurbish the remaining GM stock with GM Hybrid Engines; it would be great news if that sort of work could be done very quickly. But the big questions to be asked here is what type of work would be involved in this project? If GM were able to supply new hybrid engines for IE's rolling stock. You probably would have to ask them whether this technology would be much heavier to use on IÉ's PW rather than sticking with full diesel engines? Does the hybrid engine need to fitted with new GM parts only or can they supplied from another manufacturers?


  • Options
    #58
    GT89
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,770 ✭✭✭GT89


    It will be a cold day in hell before IE even think about buying new locos. I really cannot see it happening until all locos they currently have are clapped out.


  • Options
    #59
    TheBoyConor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭TheBoyConor


    If there were to be fitted with gear for ohle operation, I'm sure any brand is equipment could be used as long as it's suitable. It all comes down to tenders.

    It would be all electrical equipment just to bypass the existing generator and basically condition, regulate and connect the power from the ohle to the existing traction motors in the bogies. Whether there is enough room in the engine rooms to accommodate it would be the main hurdle.

    But anyway, there wouldn't be much point in fitting then with ohle gear when the ohle network is only very limited . There would be no advantage at all when most locomotive work would be intercity and freight


  • Options
    #60
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    GT89 wrote: »
    It will be a cold day in hell before IE even think about buying new locos. I really cannot see it happening until all locos they currently have are clapped out.

    Yes, I think they'll have to bite the mk4 bullet when the 201s get to that point but they won't buy new locos, more railcars probably modular dual electric and diesel like some foreign lines. A small number of locos would need to be re-engineered to cover freight and infrastructure needs. You really can't expect them to be allowed to continue using the current old technology when road transport has to meet strict pollution standards


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Del.Monte
    Registered Users Posts: 12,363 ✭✭✭✭Del.Monte


    TheBoyConor wrote: »
    I'd love to see freight flows coming back up. God it would be some sight to behold.
    Pockets, barytes, Tara mines, ammonia, beet, cement, Asahi, timber, liners, bitumen, fuel tankers, livestock wagons, complemented with the 071s, a few reactivated leased back baby GMs, and possibly a Metrovick or two, but that might be asking a bit much.

    If new freight rolling stock was to be aquired, would there be much hope of a few new mid-range locomotives?




    I really don't get what your talking about, the railways are not one giant plaything for enthusiasts.and, if your serious, many of your posts do little to promote rail investment. Why would you want to see train loads of Asahi, Ammonia and Beet wagons as the factories formerly served by them no longer exist?

    ****



Advertisement