Class 380s

Ploes · Post by **Ploes** » 08 Oct 2010 17:15

...are on the way!

Saw two Class 380/1 goes past this morning as part of a long train with some containers and a few coaches. Think its was a 67 pulling the lot!

Ameecher · Post by **Ameecher** » 08 Oct 2010 17:48

There are 10 in the UK already, they should have resumed testing after one of them ripped down the power lines and roof panels came off the unit.

audigex · Post by **audigex** » 08 Oct 2010 18:00

I saw a single car heading up the M6 a few months ago... on the back of a Lorry. Strange moment, seeing a train on the motorway.

Post by **Dave** » 08 Oct 2010 23:51

Ploes wrote:...are on the way!

Saw two Class 380/1 goes past this morning as part of a long train with some containers and a few coaches. Think its was a 67 pulling the lot!

Would have been 67+barrier+380+380+barrier+67, I should have thought.

Or maybe one 67.

Ameecher · Post by **Ameecher** » 09 Oct 2010 02:12

Single 67 plus barriers and container flats with containers on for load balancing, apparently (no idea how that makes any difference though).

Ploes · Post by **Ploes** » 09 Oct 2010 09:10

Just the one 67 and another barrier between the two 380s.

Quite impressive site for 6:30 in the morning. At first I thought it was one of the Sleeper Services.... then was like.... wait a moment!!!

jvassie · Post by **jvassie** » 14 Oct 2010 12:00

A right ugly looking duckling.. Glad Im not planning on visiting up there any time soon.

Ameecher · Post by **Ameecher** » 14 Oct 2010 14:06

jvassie wrote:A right ugly looking duckling.. Glad Im not planning on visiting up there any time soon.

Booo. Get up here you fat b******.

Ploes · Post by **Ploes** » 23 Oct 2010 10:52

jvassie wrote:A right ugly looking duckling.. Glad Im not planning on visiting up there any time soon.

You live in High Wycombe.

You have no valid opinion...

...On anything...

...Ever.

YouTube · Post by **Geo Ghost** » 23 Oct 2010 12:42

jvassie wrote:A right ugly looking duckling.. Glad Im not planning on visiting up there any time soon.

I don't know about that. I think it's a pretty neat looking unit

Sleek, mean, and not a darn box-front like many trains are.

I'd say it goes into my top 10 for just the design and shape

JamieLei · Post by **JamieLei** » 23 Oct 2010 13:05

Ploes wrote:
jvassie wrote:A right ugly looking duckling.. Glad Im not planning on visiting up there any time soon.
You live in High Wycombe.

You have no valid opinion...

...On anything...

...Ever.

More valid opinion than someone who posts his location as an IP address...

Chris · Post by **Chris** » 23 Oct 2010 23:10

Especially an IP adress which does this:

Whois - ARIN wrote: This block is assigned for use as the Internet
host loopback address. Datagrams sent to
addresses anywhere within this block loops back
inside the host. Many implementation only
support this for 127.0.0.1. This block was
assigned by the IETF in the Standard document,
RFC 1122 and is further documented in the Best
Current Practice document RFC 5735. These
documents can be found at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1122.txt
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5735.txt

Post by **Dave** » 23 Oct 2010 23:12

Without the central gangway it'd look awesome!

Chris · Post by **Chris** » 23 Oct 2010 23:18

Doesn't the gangway retract though?

Kevo00 · Post by **Kevo00** » 23 Oct 2010 23:27

I agree, the gangway is like a massive plook, as they say north of the border.

noofnoof · Post by **noofnoof** » 24 Oct 2010 04:21

I think Ploes location is humorous.
and the train, well, it's unique, and I personally enjoy the look. nothing like it.

YouTube · Post by **Geo Ghost** » 24 Oct 2010 11:07

JamieLei wrote:
Ploes wrote:
jvassie wrote:A right ugly looking duckling.. Glad Im not planning on visiting up there any time soon.
You live in High Wycombe.
You have no valid opinion...
...On anything...
...Ever.
More valid opinion than someone who posts his location as an IP address...

Permission to say "oh snap".

I do wonder what it would look like without the gang-way but I quite like the idea that it retracts back. Guess that's for streamlining?

Ameecher · Post by **Ameecher** » 24 Oct 2010 14:30

Geo Ghost wrote:Guess that's for streamlining?

No, it's for improvements in line of sight. Let's hope that the Gangways work a little better than those on the 458s down in SWT land...

YouTube · Post by **Geo Ghost** » 24 Oct 2010 15:05

Ah I see.

I thought that but seemed like the gangway didn't retract far enough back for it to be significant

Post by **Dave** » 24 Oct 2010 17:08

As far as I can tell it retracts further back than that á la the 377, as per the plan 172.

I can't really explain it, but think of the hood of a baby's pram that pulls up. That's how I envisage it works.

Transport Tycoon Forums

Class 380s

Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Re: Class 380s

Who is online