|
FISHMANPET posted:I just looked at the website for this, it all seems rather... hostile. And why would they make you sign an NDA?  It's located in the middle of Amish country. He doesn't want the technology to escape to the locals.
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2014 11:46
|
|
EVERYWHERE 
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:14 |
|
|
Part 6: “Ere mate, wanna buy a railway?” Story time: When I was at university, I lived in Coventry, about 120 miles from London on the West Coast Main Line out of Euston, and this was the line I used to go home to see my family 5 or 6 times a year from about 2000-2002. One day, I arrived at Coventry station without much time to spare before my train, and to my dismay saw that there was a huge queue at the ticket office.  Not that I can blame them for wanting to get out of Coventry, mind. I got to my ticket window just as the Euston train drew into the platform. I got my ticket and sprinted for the train, which to my relief (and surprise) was still in the station, and got on board. 10 minutes later we still hadn’t moved. There were no announcements, but I noticed a small gathering of men in high-vis jackets yelling at each other on the platform. “Not good” I thought, and poked my head out of the window to hear what they were saying. I could see from the reflection in the window of the station buildings that the Virgin Railways Class 87 electric loco at the front of the train had its pantograph down, having evidently failed, and that an EWS (freight/parcels operator) Class 90 was attached to the front, ostensibly to rescue it. The three men arguing were the driver of the EWS train, the “manager” (guard) of the Virgin train, and the stationmaster. EWS Driver: “No! I’m not driving your loving train all the way to Euston! I’m contracted to Bescot [depot, near Walsall] and I’m going back there on the next train West. I’ve coupled my loco to the front of your train like you asked. I’ve got things to do.” Virgin train manager: “Your head office won’t let our driver drive your loco, even though he’s type qualified on the 90.” EWS Driver: “And that’s my problem how exactly?” Stationmaster: “Because your loving loco is blocking my loving platform. I’ve got 11 trains due in the next hour and I’m down to 3 platforms. Get your train out of my loving station.” EWS Driver: “It’s not my train, it’s his [gestures at Virgin guy]. I don’t give a monkey’s about your platform mate. If I hadn’t come along his train would still be stuck there. Anyway, they’ll fine Virgin, not us, it’s their loving train that broke down in your loving platform. I did what I can to help and all I get is abuse. gently caress this, I’m going home. Argue amongst yourselves.” With that he stormed off. 15 minutes later the next Euston train pulled in on a different platform so I got on that one instead. As I collected my bags from the failed train, I told the people sitting near that they should do the same, but in doing so I violated the unwritten British code that you NEVER talk to strangers on public transport, so they just stared at me, assumed I was some kind of crazy rambling homeless person, and stayed put. As we pulled out, I could see the Virgin manager and the stationmaster waving their arms at each other next to the driverless Class 90. The EWS driver was nowhere to be seen. I’ve no idea how any of the people on that train got home.  There's something about the town that makes people angry and keen to leave. ~~~ How could a railway system that was once literally the envy of the world end up like this? The answer lies in the batshit insane way in which the network was privatised. The privatisation deal is said to be so complex and bizarre that no one person has ever understood all of it, so my chances of describing it accurately are not all that high, but I’ll have a go. As we’ve discussed, by the late 1980s British Rail had gone beyond an embarrassment, beyond a joke and had actively become a target of hate. It was losing vast amounts of money despite its shrinking budget, was held responsible for a string of fatal accidents and was generally believed to no longer be fit for purpose. It was also falling apart – the problem with replacing all the steam engines with diesels and electrics at the same time (well, apart from all the other problems we’ve already seen) was that all those first-generation types needed replacing at the same time, that time was in the recession of the early 1990s, and there was no cash to do it. John Major’s chaotic Conservative government was certainly in no position to invest, having driven the country headlong into recession with a string of economic policy cock-ups and having won the 1992 election on a platform of not introducing the big tax rises the Labour party was proposing. In the government’s view, the two alternatives were to either seek private finance, or to close the network down completely and build motorways over the top (some Tory headbangers were seriously advocating the latter). John Major, for those unfamiliar with British politics, was a damp, uncharismatic dishrag of a man with a reputation for being weak, indecisive and easily bullied.  Ideal Prime-Ministerial material. He was known for his love of cricket, warm beer and cycling to church on Sundays. So when he proposed a return to the “Big Four”, with the tracks and trains reunited under the same management and split up geographically, he was ridiculed as being stuck in a romantic delusion of some kind of Thomas the Tank Engine railway. The hordes of lawyers, management consultants and policy wonks hired to privatise the railways laughed at him, because that was clearly a stupid idea, what with it hardly generating any repeat business for lawyers, management consultants and policy wonks. What they proposed, and what Major, true to form, meekly surrendered and agreed to, was a scheme right out of the depths of hell that made no sense from any viewpoint. It was a scheme so mad, and so complicated, that it’s going to take me at least another two posts to describe it and its consequences. Next: Part 7: Can’t we just put the Fat Controller in charge instead?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2014 13:22
|
|
|
Axeman Jim posted:When I was at university, I lived in Coventry, about 120 miles from London on the West Coast Main Line out of Euston, and this was the line I used to go home to see my family 5 or 6 times a year from about 2000-2002. Hah! At least you got out, some of us came here for Uni then didn't manage to escape.  Godiva square looks to have improved since your photo was taken at least, I assume that's the view out of the Cathedral?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2014 13:45
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:I just looked at the website for this, it all seems rather... hostile. And why would they make you sign an NDA? The facility was very nice, but from my dealings with them, the leade/founder is eccentric and surrounded by assholes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2014 15:09
|
|
|
Axeman Jim posted:How could a railway system that was once literally the envy of the world end up like this? The answer lies in the batshit insane way in which the network was privatised. The privatisation deal is said to be so complex and bizarre that no one person has ever understood all of it, so my chances of describing it accurately are not all that high, but I’ll have a go.  (this is just the start)
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
I'm going to be watching this thread with interest. You see, I am a City lawyer - and while I hadn't even graduated at the time rail privatisation went through, I have hung out with people who work in the rail and infrastructure departments in some law firms, and I'm aware of the glorious legal and investment-banking cash cow they created. I may be able to chime in and fill a few gaps. For what it's worth, I do have a functional understanding of the rail privatisation system - how it's intended to work, how it actually works, and how the difference between the two earns people vast sums of sweet, sweet taxpayer cash. The trick is to realise they're structured like a series of corporate investment vehicles. Those vehicles just happen to have sidelines in running trains.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
What percentage of rail traffic in the UK is passenger vs freight? I have to assume it's a lot higher than the US, but I'm curious, because the primary focus so far seems to be passenger.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
Put it this way, in the 50s rail and road shared the burden of freight traffic equally in terms of tonne-kilometers per year. Since then, rail freight tonne-kilometers have dropped by a third, while the road's share has increased fivefold. This is fairly similar across Europe I think. I don't really know how to compare freight and passenger traffic. Tonne-kilometers and passenger-kilometers? Number of trains a day of either type? The answer will be that while freight isn't insignificant, it is not the priority. There is some push to move more freight onto the rails in the future, but in the end the distances within the UK do not make the same economic case that freight does in the US (hardly any goes through the chunnel).
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
I did some googleing after asking that question, and while I didn't find my answer I did find out something I never realized. I knew rail freight accounted for a large percentage of US freight traffic, but I always thought trucking accounted for more. Apparently rail freight accounts for nearly double the traffic that trucking does. It makes sense, but as a railfan I'm amazed I never knew that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
In terms of ton miles, I imagine it would. The intermodal market has recently exploded as well, and alone we (UP) has added around 10% of intermodal volume. But also compare 1 coal train = 20,000 tons vs 1 semi at 40ish tons? So essentially 1 coal train is the same as 500 semis off the roads. (yeah, thats lovely rear end math, but its a broad perspective)
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
BrokenKnucklez posted:In terms of ton miles, I imagine it would. The intermodal market has recently exploded as well, and alone we (UP) has added around 10% of intermodal volume. That is basically how csx has been advertising themselves though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
BrokenKnucklez posted:In terms of ton miles, I imagine it would. The intermodal market has recently exploded as well, and alone we (UP) has added around 10% of intermodal volume. How many semis worth of diesel does the coal train burn? Also, do coal trains have to put up with the same emissions crap like diesel exhaust fluid?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
I remember posting about it here months ago, but freight railroads report their miles per gallon per ton, but the trucking industry doesn't report such statistics. Also does anyone haul something like coal in trucks?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 06:12
|
|
JuffoWup posted:That is basically how csx has been advertising themselves though. The advertising is correct, at least as it pertains to intermodal. An 8000' double stack intermodal train is about 240 40'(or 45'/53') containers. Crotch Fruit posted:How many semis worth of diesel does the coal train burn? Also, do coal trains have to put up with the same emissions crap like diesel exhaust fluid? Less than the amount of semis needed to move the coal OTR.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
A decent engineer can burn around 1500 gallons of fuel on a 2x1 (2 units on the point, 1 shoving the rear) 140 car coal train in my old area. That's light grades, with some undualtion. But nothing over 1.5% That works out to 500ish per unit burning fuel. The sad part? It takes just as much to move the empties, because your essentially hauling 140 parachutes. Edit: This is all assuming properly functioning equipment, decent dispatching (moderate amount of meets and running time - obviously sucking fuel starting from a dead stop), etc etc etc. BrokenKnucklez fucked around with this message at 06:25 on Apr 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 06:21
|
|
|
Did somebody say coal trains?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 06:57
|
|
|
.
sincx fucked around with this message at 05:55 on Mar 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 07:16
|
|
sincx posted:That's a LOT of global warming. Be the change you want to see.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 07:22
|
|
|
Wilford Cutlery posted:Did somebody say coal trains? Nice. Where is this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 08:31
|
|
|
nozz posted:Put it this way, in the 50s rail and road shared the burden of freight traffic equally in terms of tonne-kilometers per year. Since then, rail freight tonne-kilometers have dropped by a third, while the road's share has increased fivefold. This is fairly similar across Europe I think. The Department for Transport rail statistics thing is what you want https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/rail-statistics or the ORR data portal http://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/ with FUN FACTS like how on average passenger rolling stock is 18.64 years old (excluding the Island Line, whose trains are over 70 years old but it's fine they go nowhere). DfT Rail Trends Factsheet 2012/13 posted:In 2012/13 rail passengers made 1.5 billion journeys with franchised operators, travelling 36 billion miles. After remaining at around the same level for several decades, rail use in Great Britain has seen large increases since the mid-1990s. The number of journeys has doubled since 1994/95, and increased by a quarter in the last 5 years. In 2012/13, 69 per cent of journeys were made with London & South East operators, 23 per cent with regional operators and 9 per cent with long distance operators.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 10:22
|
|
|
Hyperriker posted:Nice. Where is this? Norfolk, Virginia: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/11/alex-maclean_n_5126883.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 13:39
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:Also does anyone haul something like coal in trucks? Yes, where there is no rail between a mine and a power plant. It blows for everyone but the small army of truck drivers required.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
Not coal, but some smaller iron/bauxite mines in Australia run road trains to the closest railhead.  Not just ore either:  or hydrocarbons, sometimes you've got to move some steaks:  or army Bushmasters:  But sometimes a normal roadtrain just isn't enough. You need a 'Powertrain' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_train#Rules_and_regulations quote:K represents the largest road trains operating in Australia and the world. Called a "Powertrain" or a "Body and six", these machines operate at the Granites gold mine in the western Northern Territory, and are used in place of 200t dump trucks, because of the distances involved on the haul run. A 600 hp (450 kW) 19 L (1,200 cu in) Cummins engine powers the prime mover, while a 400 hp (300 kW) Cummins engine is installed in the rear trailer of the B-double, driving through an automatic transmission, giving a total of 1,000 hp (750 kW). Weights of 460 t (453 long tons; 507 short tons) are achieved with ore loading in side-tipper bodies on a 100 km (62 mi) round trip. As these trucks operate on private property, they are not subject to governed weight and length rulings, but instead are used in the most efficient way possible.   But speaking of proper trains in Australia. The last of the remaining few Hitachi sets were retired from the Melbourne rail network, one of the heritage orginizations ran a special train for fans to ride on the Hitachis one last time. Although a bunch of dickhead vandals tampered with the airhoses of the train and forced it to stop, allowing them to tag the side of the train while passengers hurled rubbish and abuse at them: quote:What was expected to be a fond farewell of the Hitachi Electric Train in Melbourne (Australia) was today marred by an attack on the train by vandals near Rushall Railway Station in Melbourne’s inner Northern Suburb of Clifton Hill. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
"Ya fuckin turd nugget" Been a while since I've heard that one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
Part 7: Can’t we just put the Fat Controller in charge instead? OK, deep breath: Each line would be split up into a series of “Franchises”, which would be handed out by the government on 5-10 year contracts. The companies would “bid” to own a railway franchise, but they wouldn’t own any trains, or any track. Nor would they set most of the fares or the timetables, a government body called the Strategic Rail Authority would do that. They would, however, get to choose what colour the trains were painted, provided that the completely separate companies that owned the trains agreed, and what kind of humiliating uniforms their staff wore. The tracks and stations would be owned by a separate, national company called Railtrack which would be sold off in its entirety. The operating companies would manage the stations but not own them, except some which Railtrack would manage. And believe me that is a HIGHLY simplified description of the mess of leases, subcontractors, regulators and committees that constitute the privatised railway system - see bozza's post above for an indication of the spaghetti-like way the money flows. Captialist theory 101: Capitalism works because companies compete for customers. When customers are free to choose between different companies, they will chose the companies with the best products, service and prices. This keeps the quality up and the cost down. When customers are not free to change company, that company can do whatever the hell they like and the customer can go swivel. This is called a monopoly and it is BAD. That may seem achingly obvious, but it seems that the government, which was meant to be right-of-centre, completely forgot that when privatising the railways. Who was Railtrack’s competitor? Where could the operating companies go if Railtrack’s service was lovely, or even dangerous? Railtrack was a state-created private monopoly, a mutant monstrosity of an organisation that was accountable to nobody and had no incentive to do anything other than line its own pockets, which it promptly set about doing with gusto. The trains themselves are owned by Rolling Stock Companies (RoSCos) who lease them to the operators. In theory this would make it easier to swap trains from franchise to franchise than if the operators owned them, but in practice most trains are only suitable for a handful of lines anyway, and besides, all rolling stock moves (and procurement) had to be agreed on by the government anyway. So the RoSCos served no purpose at all except as holders of rapidly depreciating assets, who charged a fortune to the operating companies to plug the holes in their balance sheets, imposing huge extra costs on the system to no benefit at all. It literally would have been cheaper overall to just hand BR's trains to the operators for free. And it's not as if it helped move the rolling stock to where it was needed. EWS in particular were notorious for not releasing their surplus locomotives for fear that they would fall into the hands of competitors, instead storing them in the open air where they would disintegrate until they were only good for scrap. Their successors, DBS, are currently "ageing" a large number of Class 60 heavy freight diesels in Toton yard:  Ahhh, the 1989 vintage. Lovely overtones of corrosion and wasted money Things weren’t much better for the Train Operating Companies (TOCs). Forced to use poo poo, old ex-BR trains that they didn’t even own and were charged exorbitant fees to use, unable to alter their timetables or change their pricing structures, they somehow had to turn a profit. Unable to raise more revenue, they cut costs instead, and hard. Drivers and other train staff were sacked in droves, until it was discovered that there weren’t enough left to drive the actual trains, at which point they were re-hired, on more money. The TOCs complained to the government that they were going bankrupt, and the government (this time under Labour) responding by shovelling them taxpayer’s cash. Most estimates now reckon that the new, privatised railway costs the taxpayer four times more than BR ever did. In essence, the TOCs and RoSCos became the profit-skimming outsourced operators of a staggeringly inefficient state-controlled and state-funded railway – corporatism at its very worst. Do you know who else ran their railways like that?  The new rolling stock to replace the ex-BR rattletraps was procured with staggering incompetence. The errors of the modernisation plan were repeated all over again, with each operator and leasing company ordering its own types from a bewildering array of manufacturers in a frenzy of reckless acquisition with inadequate prototyping and testing. Because of the chaos and uncertainty surrounding the privatisation of the railways, no new rail vehicles were ordered between 1993 and 1997, causing all but one of the UK’s train builders to go bust (the last one, BREL's Derby works, was bought by Bombardier and thus survived). So the majority were procured from abroad, and came in a variety of ugly shapes, many of them to designs completely unsuited to British railway operations:  The class 458: Didn’t comply with disability regulations, GPS would get lost, ugly.  The class 334: Brakes sometimes turned themselves off without warning. REALLY ugly.  The class 175: Had to be withdrawn for modifications as the brakes were so squeaky they caused hearing damage. Ugly.  The class 180: So defective they couldn’t even test it on the main line for 6 months as it would break down before leaving the factory.  The class 375: Drew more power than the substations could provide, blowing fuses every time it moved.  The class 67: So overweight and oversized that they had to remove the cast-iron nameplates and paint them on instead. Ugly. Has to move more slowly on the remote Scottish lines it hauls sleepers over than the 50-year-old Class 37s it replaced due to its excessive axleload.  The class 390: Cramped, ugly, emergency brakes deploy at random and won’t turn off. Also beeps every 10 minutes which is loving annoying if you're trying to sleep in it. Built using technology that BR sold to Fiat after the failure of the APT.  The class 70: Ugly, noisy, catches fire a lot.  The class 220: Had important electrical equipment on the roof that would short out when it rained. But surely these were teething problems, right? The system would bed itself down eventually, surely? Ahahahahaha! Things would actually get worse. Next: Part 8 – Stop the train, I want to get off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
What would the use be for GPS on a train? Some kind of live-updating of track conditions? Weather?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:What would the use be for GPS on a train? Some kind of live-updating of track conditions? Weather?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Prague streetcars sometimes get off by a few stations too. I don't know what kind of technology they use.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:What would the use be for GPS on a train? Some kind of live-updating of track conditions? Weather? Turn left at the next exit
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
I don't think the Pendolinos are particularly ugly. On the other hand the seats are designed so if you're above a certain height you can never, ever be fully comfortable or take a nap. Those really old Soviet-looking trains that ran between Manchester and Liverpool were more pleasant to nap in no matter how many times drunken soccer hooligans have thrown up in them over the years. Then again I'm from California so the idea of taking a train between two cities was a novelty no matter how many times I did it. Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 01:08 on Apr 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
Wilford Cutlery posted:Did somebody say coal trains? Big rail yard. http://goo.gl/maps/YZqPa
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
drunkill posted:But speaking of proper trains in Australia. The last of the remaining few Hitachi sets were retired from the Melbourne rail network, one of the heritage orginizations ran a special train for fans to ride on the Hitachis one last time. Although a bunch of dickhead vandals tampered with the airhoses of the train and forced it to stop, allowing them to tag the side of the train while passengers hurled rubbish and abuse at them: As a life-long resident of Melbourne and someone who's grown up riding on those trains to get to school and university, all I can say is GOOD RIDDANCE. Those trains were awful, prone to breaking down and never had air conditioning until a rare few at the very end of their lifespan. Any time you saw one pulling up to the platform (and there was always the silent prayer of please don't let it be a Hitachi), you knew you were in for a nice hotbox on awful too-closely-spaced seating. And god help you if it was in rush hour because then it became a literal sardine can. I steadfastly refuse to believe anyone was sad to see those rolling shoe-boxes go to the scrapyard  .
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
At least you could open the windows. bit then it'd be super loud down in the city loop. Although the Comeng with original brown/orange interiors were the superior trains.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 03:39
|
|
|
drunkill posted:At least you could open the windows. I swear on summer days in the 90's you could hear the collective bargaining echoing across the platform praying for an air-conditioned Comeng to pull up  . And yes, they were godawfully loud in the Loop.On a side-note apparently they're also looking to scrap the Y-Class trams. And nothing of value was lost there either  . The W's are nice historic rides to plod round Melbourne on when you need a free ride round the CBD, but the Y's have about half the interior space and high interior stairs you have to lug stuff up to get on. And again, only really got air conditioning in the last few years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Wilford Cutlery posted:Did somebody say coal trains? Obviously that's not the entire yard, but even looking at the satellite view it doesn't seem like that many cars. I grew up we'd have coal trains with 100 cars come through 12 times a day. That entire yard looks like no more than 2-3 days worth of trains, tops. It's still a mesmerizing picture, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 04:26
|
|
|
Neddy Seagoon posted:I swear on summer days in the 90's you could hear the collective bargaining echoing across the platform praying for an air-conditioned Comeng to pull up Speaking of Melbourne trains... Heisenberg heading to Heidelberg.  Public Transport Victoria is looking to update the maps for the train network (Metro and V/Line), with the zone changes coming up and the way the system will operate in the future if we get the Metro tunnel through the city, trains will no longer just terminate at Flinders Street and go through the loop, instead some lines will continue on to the other side of the network eg: 'the bay train' Frankston to Williamstown. Also the fact that some lines don't go around the loop, the current map makes you think everything does. Daniel Bowen from the Public Transport Users Association has a good writeup on his blog: http://www.danielbowen.com/2014/04/16/new-train-map-coming/ Current Map  PTV Metro train map, 2013 by Daniel Bowen, on Flickr New Map  PTV Rail network map: concept design, April 2014 by Daniel Bowen, on Flickr Neddy Seagoon posted:On a side-note apparently they're also looking to scrap the Y-Class trams. And nothing of value was lost there either Route 67 gets shafted with rolling stock, they only recently put the B1 and B2 class trams on the line since they were replaced by the C and D classes on the Preston routes because those were replaced by the E class on the 109. The newest trams in the Glenhuntly Depot are the six B2's which are from 87-1994.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
The E-Class trams look pretty nice, though I haven't had a reason to ride on one. I do think they've gone a tad overboard with the safety stuff like the big  PASSENGERS BOARDING scrolling LED's on the front and back though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:I don't think the Pendolinos are particularly ugly. On the other hand the seats are designed so if you're above a certain height you can never, ever be fully comfortable or take a nap. Those really old Soviet-looking trains that ran between Manchester and Liverpool were more pleasant to nap in no matter how many times drunken soccer hooligans have thrown up in them over the years. and the overhead luggage racks that are too small to fit a normal holdall in god i hate pendolinos
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 10:21
|
|
|
drunkill posted:New Map Full size here
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 15:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:14 |
|
|
Cerv posted:and the overhead luggage racks that are too small to fit a normal holdall in The Pendo power system is fairly impressive, but it does have a 25kV bus bar running along the roof cos it wouldn't fit inside. They also used to vent the piss tanks right next to intake for the aircon. lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 15:34
|
|