In article .com,
(John B) wrote:

have a vague idea Victoria itself isn't cleared
for 23m stock, but might have got that wrong.

How did GatEx manage then?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article .com,
(John B) wrote:

have a vague idea Victoria itself isn't cleared
for 23m stock, but might have got that wrong.

How did GatEx manage then?



The old ones were Mark 2s. Not sure about their Junipers, but again,
probably different clearance from Mark 3s.

MIG wrote:
have a vague idea Victoria itself isn't cleared
for 23m stock, but might have got that wrong.

How did GatEx manage then?

The old ones were Mark 2s. Not sure about their Junipers, but again,
probably different clearance from Mark 3s.

19.66m for the 460s, according to "electric-railways.co.uk", whoever
they a
http://electric-railways.co.uk/L2_DC...Class_460.html

I know the 170s don't go to Victoria (because it's underground,
irrespective of coach length constraints), but how much - if any - of
the route from London Bridge to Brighton are they cleared for?

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

In article om,
(John B) wrote:

MIG wrote:
have a vague idea Victoria itself isn't cleared
for 23m stock, but might have got that wrong.

How did GatEx manage then?

The old ones were Mark 2s. Not sure about their Junipers, but
again, probably different clearance from Mark 3s.

I thought the GatEx sets included some Mark 3s?

19.66m for the 460s, according to "electric-railways.co.uk", whoever
they a

http://electric-railways.co.uk/L2_DC...u/emu_dc/Class
_460.html

I know the 170s don't go to Victoria (because it's underground,
irrespective of coach length constraints), but how much - if any -
of the route from London Bridge to Brighton are they cleared for?

Saw one (actually a 171) at Brighton last week but it was on a service
to Ashford.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article om,
(John B) wrote:

MIG wrote:
have a vague idea Victoria itself isn't cleared
for 23m stock, but might have got that wrong.

How did GatEx manage then?

The old ones were Mark 2s. Not sure about their Junipers, but
again, probably different clearance from Mark 3s.

I thought the GatEx sets included some Mark 3s?


No, don't think so.



19.66m for the 460s, according to "electric-railways.co.uk", whoever
they a

http://electric-railways.co.uk/L2_DC...u/emu_dc/Class
_460.html

I know the 170s don't go to Victoria (because it's underground,
irrespective of coach length constraints), but how much - if any -
of the route from London Bridge to Brighton are they cleared for?

Saw one (actually a 171) at Brighton last week but it was on a service
to Ashford.


You get SWT 170s at Brighton as well, but that still leaves most of the
route to South Croydon uncertain.

They are narrower than 442s though, and maybe tapered in different
ways, so if they are cleared it wouldn't follow that 442s were.

Come to think of it, the 166s are quite long and wider still, and cover
the Redhill to Gatwick bit.

In article .com,
(MIG) wrote:

Come to think of it, the 166s are quite long and wider still, and
cover the Redhill to Gatwick bit.

I very much doubt that they are 23m long (or indeed ,longer than 20m)
though.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article .com,
(MIG) wrote:

Come to think of it, the 166s are quite long and wider still, and
cover the Redhill to Gatwick bit.

I very much doubt that they are 23m long (or indeed ,longer than 20m)
though.


23.5m, according to their owners:
http://www.angeltrains.co.uk/datashe...ail.aspx?ID=10

I suppose this isn't too surprising given that (via the 168s) they were
the basis for the Turbostar.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

In article . com,
(John B) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article
.com,
(MIG) wrote:

Come to think of it, the 166s are quite long and wider still,
and cover the Redhill to Gatwick bit.

I very much doubt that they are 23m long (or indeed ,longer than
20m) though.

23.5m, according to their owners:
http://www.angeltrains.co.uk/datashe...ail.aspx?ID=10

I suppose this isn't too surprising given that (via the 168s) they
were the basis for the Turbostar.

Oh! I thought all Turbostars were 20m.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article . com,
(John B) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article
.com,
(MIG) wrote:

Come to think of it, the 166s are quite long and wider still,
and cover the Redhill to Gatwick bit.

I very much doubt that they are 23m long (or indeed ,longer than
20m) though.

23.5m, according to their owners:
http://www.angeltrains.co.uk/datashe...ail.aspx?ID=10

I suppose this isn't too surprising given that (via the 168s) they
were the basis for the Turbostar.

Oh! I thought all Turbostars were 20m.



It was only checking for this discussion earlier that made me realise
that they are longer than Electrostars. (And that diesel Networkers,
sorry Network Turbos, are longer than electric Networkers.)

In article .com,
(MIG) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article . com,
(John B) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article
.com,
(MIG) wrote:

Come to think of it, the 166s are quite long and wider
still, and cover the Redhill to Gatwick bit.

I very much doubt that they are 23m long (or indeed ,longer
than 20m) though.

23.5m, according to their owners:
http://www.angeltrains.co.uk/datashe...ail.aspx?ID=10

I suppose this isn't too surprising given that (via the 168s)
they were the basis for the Turbostar.

Oh! I thought all Turbostars were 20m.

It was only checking for this discussion earlier that made me
realisethat they are longer than Electrostars. (And that diesel
Networkers, sorry Network Turbos, are longer than electric Networkers.)

Interesting. I clearly failed to notice for all these years that all the
Super Sprinters were 23m.

--
Colin Rosenstiel