London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11   Report Post  
Old June 10th 09, 07:47 AM posted to uk.railway,misc.transport.urban-transit,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 1
Default Modern Railways, June


"Stephen O'Connell" wrote in message
...
1506 wrote:
The 1938 tube train looked perfect. Although ISTR in service these
units ran with black roofs. The preserved one is all over red.


IIRC they were a darkish Grey. (Which could be black!) The roofs certainly
weren't red in my day anyway. However, that's only a minor nitpick. They
are lovely trains to see around, especialy in a red livery. It brings back
soooo many memories..


I always thought of them as the Routemaster of the tube world!



  #12   Report Post  
Old June 10th 09, 08:17 AM posted to uk.railway,misc.transport.urban-transit,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Default Modern Railways, June



"Grumbling Appendix" wrote

The 1938 tube train


I always thought of them as the Routemaster of the tube world!

I'd have said the RT. RMs were more the contemporaries of the 59 and 62
stock.

Peter
(old enough to have travelled to school on RFs and RTs)

  #13   Report Post  
Old June 10th 09, 12:18 PM posted to uk.railway,misc.transport.urban-transit,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Mar 2005
Posts: 41
Default Modern Railways, June

On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:15:58 +0100, "Tim Fenton"
wrote:


"Peter Masson" wrote in message
...

I always thought of them as the Routemaster of the tube world!

I'd have said the RT. RMs were more the contemporaries of the 59 and 62
stock.


Mind you, the RT was still in production in 1954 (paradoxically, some of
these had OLD nnn numberplates).


This was actually a pre-war design - you could recognise the pre-war
from the post-war because the former had route-number boxes front and
back but the latter only had them at the front or not at all. We used
to see them occasionally on the local routes when I was a kid.

Both the RT family (including RTL and RTW) and the RM family were long
lived, rugged and reliable vehicles many of which had an extended life
on provincial cities after withdrawal by London Transport. RMs were
the mainstay of of many of the independents athat sprung up after
deregulation.
  #14   Report Post  
Old June 10th 09, 03:11 PM posted to uk.railway,misc.transport.urban-transit,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Default Modern Railways, June



"Tim Fenton" wrote

There were two spells of RM operation in south Manchester, the second
being with an independent. The RM was a good vehicle for Wilmslow Road,
but needed a crew of two, and they were by now getting old.

You do make me feel old. The RMs were billed as the replacement for
trolleybuses, and I was disappointed when the Bexleyheath trolleys were
replaced by RTs (on the 96, and by extending the 229 through to Woolwich by
the 698 route). My earliest RM journeys were on Red Rovers, starting 161
Chislehurst to Woolwich (RT), Woolwich Ferry, and an RM (route 69?) from
North Woolwich to Chingford.

Peter

  #15   Report Post  
Old June 10th 09, 04:02 PM posted to uk.railway,misc.transport.urban-transit,uk.transport.london
MIG MIG is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,154
Default Modern Railways, June

On 10 June, 16:11, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Tim Fenton" wrote

There were two spells of RM operation in south Manchester, the second
being with an independent. The RM was a good vehicle for Wilmslow Road,
but needed a crew of two, and they were by now getting old.


You do make me feel old. The RMs were billed as the replacement for
trolleybuses, and I was disappointed when the Bexleyheath trolleys were
replaced by RTs (on the 96, and by extending the 229 through to Woolwich by
the 698 route). My earliest RM journeys were on Red Rovers, starting 161
Chislehurst to Woolwich (RT), Woolwich Ferry, and an RM (route 69?) from
North Woolwich to Chingford.

Peter


I think it could well be the 69.

I remember that we referred to the RMs on the 123 as "new buses".
Although, that was only relative to RTs on other routes like the 144
as it was then. I don't suppose they were that new really.


  #16   Report Post  
Old June 10th 09, 04:19 PM posted to uk.railway,misc.transport.urban-transit,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Default Modern Railways, June



"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 10 June, 16:11, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Tim Fenton" wrote

There were two spells of RM operation in south Manchester, the second
being with an independent. The RM was a good vehicle for Wilmslow Road,
but needed a crew of two, and they were by now getting old.


You do make me feel old. The RMs were billed as the replacement for
trolleybuses, and I was disappointed when the Bexleyheath trolleys were
replaced by RTs (on the 96, and by extending the 229 through to Woolwich
by
the 698 route). My earliest RM journeys were on Red Rovers, starting 161
Chislehurst to Woolwich (RT), Woolwich Ferry, and an RM (route 69?) from
North Woolwich to Chingford.

Peter


I think it could well be the 69.

I remember that we referred to the RMs on the 123 as "new buses".
Although, that was only relative to RTs on other routes like the 144
as it was then. I don't suppose they were that new really.


I'm now feeling really old. In November 1952 the 227 was shared between old
Scooters and new RFs. If both were lined up at Chislehurst Gordon Arms I'd
insist on going on the RF, even if the Scooter was due out first.

Peter

  #17   Report Post  
Old June 10th 09, 04:26 PM posted to uk.railway,misc.transport.urban-transit,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Feb 2009
Posts: 35
Default Modern Railways, June


"Peter Masson" wrote in message
...


"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 10 June, 16:11, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Tim Fenton" wrote

There were two spells of RM operation in south Manchester, the second
being with an independent. The RM was a good vehicle for Wilmslow
Road,
but needed a crew of two, and they were by now getting old.

You do make me feel old. The RMs were billed as the replacement for
trolleybuses, and I was disappointed when the Bexleyheath trolleys were
replaced by RTs (on the 96, and by extending the 229 through to Woolwich
by
the 698 route). My earliest RM journeys were on Red Rovers, starting 161
Chislehurst to Woolwich (RT), Woolwich Ferry, and an RM (route 69?) from
North Woolwich to Chingford.

Peter


I think it could well be the 69.

I remember that we referred to the RMs on the 123 as "new buses".
Although, that was only relative to RTs on other routes like the 144
as it was then. I don't suppose they were that new really.


I'm now feeling really old. In November 1952 the 227 was shared between
old Scooters and new RFs. If both were lined up at Chislehurst Gordon Arms
I'd insist on going on the RF, even if the Scooter was due out first.

Peter

The RF was a pleasure to drive, I drove them on the 712-713-714 out of
Dorking and before that I had a go with the re-geared one at Reigate on the
727, that could really motor.


  #18   Report Post  
Old June 10th 09, 04:27 PM posted to uk.railway,misc.transport.urban-transit,uk.transport.london
MIG MIG is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,154
Default Modern Railways, June

On 10 June, 17:19, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"MIG" wrote in message

...





On 10 June, 16:11, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Tim Fenton" wrote


There were two spells of RM operation in south Manchester, the second
being with an independent. The RM was a good vehicle for Wilmslow Road,
but needed a crew of two, and they were by now getting old.


You do make me feel old. The RMs were billed as the replacement for
trolleybuses, and I was disappointed when the Bexleyheath trolleys were
replaced by RTs (on the 96, and by extending the 229 through to Woolwich
by
the 698 route). My earliest RM journeys were on Red Rovers, starting 161
Chislehurst to Woolwich (RT), Woolwich Ferry, and an RM (route 69?) from
North Woolwich to Chingford.


Peter


I think it could well be the 69.


I remember that we referred to the RMs on the 123 as "new buses".
Although, that was only relative to RTs on other routes like the 144
as it was then. *I don't suppose they were that new really.


I'm now feeling really old. In November 1952 the 227 was shared between old
Scooters and new RFs. If both were lined up at Chislehurst Gordon Arms I'd
insist on going on the RF, even if the Scooter was due out first.

Peter-


Now I'm feeling young ...

There was a local route with RFs that I did used to go on, which was
the 254. I remember the climb to get in: it was like a single decker
that only had a top deck and no bottom deck. I don't remember ever
going on them anywhere else, but I think they persisted at Kingston
for quite a long time.

I always liked the look of them though. And the noise.
  #19   Report Post  
Old June 10th 09, 04:50 PM posted to uk.railway,misc.transport.urban-transit,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 42
Default Modern Railways, June

On Jun 10, 4:38*am, "Stephen O'Connell" wrote:

hear the same. They were notoriously unreliable from the word go,


Unreliable? Yet some of them are still operating on the Isle of Weight
some 60 years after they were built! If that's unreliable, I hope I
still am at that age!!! *:-)



) I take the joke ... but have to point out longevity is not the
same as reliability.

There may be a tenuous relationship in that something that has low
reliability may have a shorter than planned service life if a point is
reached where capital replacement is lower than maintenance (incl.
overhauls).

IOW is an artificial regime ... large fleet compared to traffic
requirements, unintensive service, very small dedicated operators as
well as engineers.

--
Nick



  #20   Report Post  
Old June 10th 09, 04:55 PM posted to uk.railway,misc.transport.urban-transit,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 42
Default Modern Railways, June

On Jun 10, 3:35*pm, "Tim Fenton" wrote:

Actually, many of the RTL and RTW (6RT and 7RT) got withdrawn at the end of
the 1960s and were cut up, which was a bit of a waste, but then there had
been over 4,000 built, and it wouldn't have been possible to find new owners



Especially as double decker OMO became legal in 1968 (or thereabouts)
so no sane domestic operator would want a fleet of them, and R/H drive
second hand buses don't have huge export potential. Cue a long list of
where exLT buses and trollies have gone ... but the sum total is not
huge and extended over a long period.

--
Nick


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
May Modern Raiways, Map of London's Railways E27002 London Transport 31 May 14th 10 06:19 PM
The modern art fountain thing at St Giles Circus Basil Jet London Transport 6 June 11th 09 10:13 AM
Modern Railways, June [email protected] London Transport 0 June 10th 09 11:35 PM
Modern trains and electronic equipment? elyob London Transport 5 September 11th 06 04:36 PM
Modern DC EMUs Dominic London Transport 26 May 4th 04 12:10 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017