On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 10:26:31 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 09:48:06 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:42:55 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:07:14 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
The DC line is mostly 6-carriage platforms.

I'm sure if TfL/Bombardier got stephen hawking and some rocket
scientists
on
a
retainer they could after some serious brainstorming sessions figure
out
a
way
to build a 6 car 378.

Oi, pay attention, the naughty boy at the back!

As already mentioned in this thread and others, the DC line will be
getting
new 4-car Aventras to replace the 5-car 378s. So, far from any rocket
scientists, it won't even need any retards like you to figure out a way
to
build 6-car 378s. There won't be any more 378s built.

So you're answer to why they're not using 378s on the goblin is because
they're not.

Please translate that into English?

Sorry, I was trying to comprehend your tortured logic. Clearly I failed
probably because there wasn't any to start with.

I realise English isn't your native language, but I wonder if your
translator generated "you're" instead of "your" in that garbled sentence?
Perhaps you're using obsolete software to translate what passes for your
thoughts into English?

Awww, have you really had to fall back on pointing out typos? Never mind,
don't get upset, you'll think up a proper counterpoint again one day!

They're not typos. They're illiteracy.

Your translation software needs upgrading.

You're on thin ice here since I'm damn sure if I searched back through all
your posts I could find some typos but I have better things to do with my
life. If you're idea of a riposte is typo spotting then knock yourself out
but you're simply coming across as desperate.

When its a continuation of a previous order that rule generally doesn't apply
which is how they managed to build all those extra cars to extend the ELL
trains to 5 cars.

It's not a continuation of an existing order.

If TfL had had any forsight it could easily have been.

--
Spud

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 13:54:13 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 10:26:31 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 09:48:06 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:42:55 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:07:14 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
The DC line is mostly 6-carriage platforms.

I'm sure if TfL/Bombardier got stephen hawking and some rocket
scientists
on
a
retainer they could after some serious brainstorming sessions figure
out
a
way
to build a 6 car 378.

Oi, pay attention, the naughty boy at the back!

As already mentioned in this thread and others, the DC line will be
getting
new 4-car Aventras to replace the 5-car 378s. So, far from any rocket
scientists, it won't even need any retards like you to figure out a way
to
build 6-car 378s. There won't be any more 378s built.

So you're answer to why they're not using 378s on the goblin is because
they're not.

Please translate that into English?

Sorry, I was trying to comprehend your tortured logic. Clearly I failed
probably because there wasn't any to start with.

I realise English isn't your native language, but I wonder if your
translator generated "you're" instead of "your" in that garbled sentence?
Perhaps you're using obsolete software to translate what passes for your
thoughts into English?

Awww, have you really had to fall back on pointing out typos? Never mind,
don't get upset, you'll think up a proper counterpoint again one day!

They're not typos. They're illiteracy.

Your translation software needs upgrading.

You're on thin ice here since I'm damn sure if I searched back through all
your posts I could find some typos but I have better things to do with my
life. If you're idea of a riposte is typo spotting then knock yourself out
but you're simply coming across as desperate.

I know you have trouble comprehending, as well as writing, English,
but if you slowly re-read what I wrote, you may manage to understand
that I was not pointing typos, which we all make.

I was pointing out that your bile generator is illiterate, which makes
many of your posts hard to understand (perhaps that's a mercy?).
Perhaps you could seek the assistance of a native English speaker?


When its a continuation of a previous order that rule generally doesn't apply
which is how they managed to build all those extra cars to extend the ELL
trains to 5 cars.

It's not a continuation of an existing order.

If TfL had had any forsight it could easily have been.

Why are you so convinced that TfL would want to be buying more of an
obsolete design, when an improved, more efficient model is available?
Not everyone is as thick as you.

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 14:18:27 +0000
Recliner wrote:
You're on thin ice here since I'm damn sure if I searched back through all
your posts I could find some typos but I have better things to do with my
life. If you're idea of a riposte is typo spotting then knock yourself out
but you're simply coming across as desperate.

I know you have trouble comprehending, as well as writing, English,

Says the man who just added a redundant comma after "writing" (yes, it is,
don't even bother to argue otherwise). Ah , that nice warm feeling of irony

but if you slowly re-read what I wrote, you may manage to understand
that I was not pointing typos, which we all make.

Don't back pedal, its pathetic.

I was pointing out that your bile generator is illiterate, which makes
many of your posts hard to understand (perhaps that's a mercy?).

No, they're not hard to understand for anyone who isn't in the first stages
of senility unlike you.

Why are you so convinced that TfL would want to be buying more of an
obsolete design, when an improved, more efficient model is available?
Not everyone is as thick as you.

I've already stated why. But I guess it was all a bit complex for you to
follow so you decided to hunt for typos instead. I guess being a senior
citizen your get tired quickly and the old brain gets a bit foggy doesn't it?

--
Spud

wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 14:18:27 +0000
Recliner wrote:
You're on thin ice here since I'm damn sure if I searched back through all
your posts I could find some typos but I have better things to do with my
life. If you're idea of a riposte is typo spotting then knock yourself out
but you're simply coming across as desperate.

I know you have trouble comprehending, as well as writing, English,

Says the man who just added a redundant comma after "writing" (yes, it is,
don't even bother to argue otherwise). Ah , that nice warm feeling of irony

Yet again, you illustrate your illiteracy! It seems that it's not just the
use of apostrophes that wasn't covered in your English as a second language
course.


but if you slowly re-read what I wrote, you may manage to understand
that I was not pointing typos, which we all make.

Don't back pedal, its pathetic.

It's "it's". You illustrate your illiteracy in every sentence, which was
my point that you've nicely confirmed, again.


I was pointing out that your bile generator is illiterate, which makes
many of your posts hard to understand (perhaps that's a mercy?).

No, they're not hard to understand for anyone who isn't in the first stages
of senility unlike you.

At least my memory is intact…


Why are you so convinced that TfL would want to be buying more of an
obsolete design, when an improved, more efficient model is available?
Not everyone is as thick as you.

I've already stated why. But I guess it was all a bit complex for you to
follow so you decided to hunt for typos instead. I guess being a senior
citizen your get tired quickly and the old brain gets a bit foggy doesn't it?

As I said, by your logic, TfL should just have commissioned more 313s when
it expanded the LO.

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:29:45 +0000, David Walters
wrote:

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:04:48 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:15:01 -0600
And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Are they planning on buying a whole new set of EMUs just for the goblin then?
I find that hard to believe.

TfL are buying 45 four-car 710s for use on the West Anglia Routes and
the Watford DC, GOBLIN and Romford to Upminster lines
'Tis true, 31 class 710/1 AC only for Chenford & Romford- Upminster &.
14 class 710/2 AC/DC for Watford & Goblin.

So, spud is correct, 3rd rail would have worked for the local
passenger service on the Goblin but that's all.

Another AC link across NE London "IS A GOOD IDEA" if only to create
the electrified network that this country needs.

We no longer seem to have the commonsense that other countries have,
we shave pennies from new schemes just to save pennies rather than
consider the future.

AFAIK, even the link between the N.L. line & the GWML at Acton
Mainline isn't going to be wired!

Who really cares anyway, the engineers will finish the Goblin wiring &
probably before the new trains arrive, the passengers will have a few
more seats, (untill the Barking Riverside extension opens.....) &
Walthamstow will be a liitle bit quieter.

Maybe (!) Netwirk Raik will learn yet another lession re. project
management, but I think not.

FWIW I was alive & taking an interest in the N.E, London
electrification when B.R. & it's contractors managed to get the job
done on time & without closing down the services.

Progress..........


DC

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 2017\02\15 13:54, d wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 10:26:31 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

It's not a continuation of an existing order.

If TfL had had any forsight it could easily have been.

Were the TfL takeover of the West Anglia lines and the electrification
of the Goblin even on the cards when the 378s were ordered?

On 2017\02\15 20:02, David C wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:29:45 +0000, David Walters
wrote:

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:04:48 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:15:01 -0600
And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Are they planning on buying a whole new set of EMUs just for the goblin then?
I find that hard to believe.

TfL are buying 45 four-car 710s for use on the West Anglia Routes and
the Watford DC, GOBLIN and Romford to Upminster lines
'Tis true, 31 class 710/1 AC only for Chenford & Romford- Upminster &.
14 class 710/2 AC/DC for Watford & Goblin.

So, spud is correct, 3rd rail would have worked for the local
passenger service on the Goblin but that's all.

Another AC link across NE London "IS A GOOD IDEA" if only to create
the electrified network that this country needs.

We no longer seem to have the commonsense that other countries have,
we shave pennies from new schemes just to save pennies rather than
consider the future.

AFAIK, even the link between the N.L. line & the GWML at Acton
Mainline isn't going to be wired!

Blimey.

There's a letter in RAIL asking why the link to the ECML at Harringay
isn't being electrified... I was sure it was, I remember Murphy being
awarded the contract!

In article , (Basil Jet)
wrote:

On 2017\02\15 20:02, David C wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:29:45 +0000, David Walters
wrote:

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:04:48 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:15:01 -0600
And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Are they planning on buying a whole new set of EMUs just for the
goblin then? I find that hard to believe.

TfL are buying 45 four-car 710s for use on the West Anglia Routes and
the Watford DC, GOBLIN and Romford to Upminster lines
'Tis true, 31 class 710/1 AC only for Chenford & Romford- Upminster &.
14 class 710/2 AC/DC for Watford & Goblin.

So, spud is correct, 3rd rail would have worked for the local
passenger service on the Goblin but that's all.

Another AC link across NE London "IS A GOOD IDEA" if only to create
the electrified network that this country needs.

We no longer seem to have the commonsense that other countries have,
we shave pennies from new schemes just to save pennies rather than
consider the future.

AFAIK, even the link between the N.L. line & the GWML at Acton
Mainline isn't going to be wired!

Blimey.

There's a letter in RAIL asking why the link to the ECML at Harringay
isn't being electrified... I was sure it was, I remember Murphy being
awarded the contract!

Crazy! I was going to ask about that one too.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:00:36 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 14:18:27 +0000
Recliner wrote:
You're on thin ice here since I'm damn sure if I searched back through all
your posts I could find some typos but I have better things to do with my
life. If you're idea of a riposte is typo spotting then knock yourself out
but you're simply coming across as desperate.

I know you have trouble comprehending, as well as writing, English,

Says the man who just added a redundant comma after "writing" (yes, it is,
don't even bother to argue otherwise). Ah , that nice warm feeling of irony


Yet again, you illustrate your illiteracy! It seems that it's not just the
use of apostrophes that wasn't covered in your English as a second language
course.

The comma was redundant. Squawk and quack all you like. It doesn't change
that fact. Unless you really do speak in pregnant pauses which actually
wouldn't surprise me.

It's "it's". You illustrate your illiteracy in every sentence, which was
my point that you've nicely confirmed, again.

Its kind of sad really watching you grasping at any comeback no matter
how trivial. Though it has a certain amusement factor too. Keep it up, I
need a laugh in the mornings

I've already stated why. But I guess it was all a bit complex for you to
follow so you decided to hunt for typos instead. I guess being a senior
citizen your get tired quickly and the old brain gets a bit foggy doesn't it?

As I said, by your logic, TfL should just have commissioned more 313s when
it expanded the LO.

So fill us in on the major traction and control system advances between the
378s and the 710s then? Since you seem to equate it to the difference between
camshaft driven 313s and the 378s I presume the 710s must be powered by
some sort of dilithium warp engines?

--
Spud

wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:00:36 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 14:18:27 +0000
Recliner wrote:
You're on thin ice here since I'm damn sure if I searched back through all
your posts I could find some typos but I have better things to do with my
life. If you're idea of a riposte is typo spotting then knock yourself out
but you're simply coming across as desperate.

I know you have trouble comprehending, as well as writing, English,

Says the man who just added a redundant comma after "writing" (yes, it is,
don't even bother to argue otherwise). Ah , that nice warm feeling of irony


Yet again, you illustrate your illiteracy! It seems that it's not just the
use of apostrophes that wasn't covered in your English as a second language
course.

The comma was redundant. Squawk and quack all you like. It doesn't change
that fact. Unless you really do speak in pregnant pauses which actually
wouldn't surprise me.

I guess the correct use of commas was considered too advanced a topic for
your basic ESL course?

It's "it's". You illustrate your illiteracy in every sentence, which was
my point that you've nicely confirmed, again.

Its kind of sad really watching you grasping at any comeback no matter
how trivial. Though it has a certain amusement factor too. Keep it up, I
need a laugh in the mornings

Yup, another para, another incorrect apostrophe. At least your illiteracy
is consistent.


I've already stated why. But I guess it was all a bit complex for you to
follow so you decided to hunt for typos instead. I guess being a senior
citizen your get tired quickly and the old brain gets a bit foggy doesn't it?

As I said, by your logic, TfL should just have commissioned more 313s when
it expanded the LO.

So fill us in on the major traction and control system advances between the
378s and the 710s then? Since you seem to equate it to the difference between
camshaft driven 313s and the 378s I presume the 710s must be powered by
some sort of dilithium warp engines?


You just don't seem to get the concept of TfL inviting bids for new trains
to run on several of its routes, and the winning bidder proposing its
current model of EMU, not an obsolete, out-of production model.

Here's what the manufacturer said at the time:

"These next-generation AVENTRA trains will feature an innovative design
with optimised performance, including reduced weight, energy consumption,
maintenance costs and high reliability, providing substantial benefits to
both TfL and its passengers traveling on key London Overground routes,
including the newly acquired West Anglia Inner Metro Service."

Or, for a more detailed comparison:

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/main-line/bombardier-focuses-on-mass-and-maintenance-with-aventra.html

I can't manage your illiterate drivel, but I can just imagine your
scathing, condesceding posts if TfL had instead ordered more of the
heavier, less efficient, higher maintenance and less reliable obsolete
trains.

But at least it's interesting that you've suddenly become the biggest fan
of the 378s. I realise you're losing your memory, but perhaps you can ask
your carer to help find your older posts that attacked the slow 378s, and
suggested TfL should have bought S stock trains for LO.