Although I set out some preferences for the last one I ended up settling for literally anything to do with Britain. Those preferences about foreign exports and rare diversions remain in place but otherwise post what you like as long as it fits the broader requirement
Post DMUs.
>>2052298Anythings allowed but here
Train Sim World 6 has been announced with the Rivera Line being the UK route
https://www.theverge.com/news/766522/london-tfl-headphone-campaign-noisy-passengers
>>2052423you want >>2043128
Who's also waiting for the new 2025 stock?Hopefully the Bakerloo order gets put through before the option expires.
>>2052466Nope 1972 stock is staying for another 10-20 years from what I read, and honestly that’s a good thing
>>2052476I'll be honest, I don't think they have another 10 years in them, never mind 20. They'll also need the to expand the Bakerloo fleet if the extension to Lewisham ever gets funded.
>>2052306Sexiest DMU ever.
>>2052509>I don't think they have another 10 years in them, never mind 20I think they do, especially when you look at 1938 stock. I don't really care about "modernisation" anyway, it's exciting to see how the new Piccadilly stock will be but there's something cosy and sentimental about 1972 stock
>>2052519That's not an F40PH.
>>2052519>>2052533Neither are DMUs
Honestly goes hard, I remember hearing we have to wait until 2030 though.. Hopefully it either comes sooner or we what other competing companies have to offer until then
>>2052565should've saved one of those...
>>2052519Why do I specifically find old British freight trains so aesthetically appealing? I'm way too young to have seen any like these IRL (and there's no post-Beeching rail infrastructure left in my area anyway), yet they're the only reason I got remotely interested in rail stuff.
>>2052565I know. I was referring to>>2052306's pic.
>>2052876Yeah then the other guy mentioned F40s
>>2052843>or we whator we see what*
Honestly happy with this refurb. I missed the purple and white once it was entirely replaced with that soulless silver and white so this makes up for it
>>2052289>/n/ humour thread“Privatised” rail transport in which 95% of the rail infrastructure is state owned, most of the rolling stock, and tickets are collected by the govt to be doled out to train operators.UK’s trains haven't been privatised since WW1. Too many regulations. The used to require (before nationalisation) the trains to carry any cargo, even at a loss; price controls etc.Simultaneously post WW2, loads of trained military logistics truck drivers were in surplus, easily undercutting cargo transport by road.Government meddling has been a disaster for UK trains (and most of the rest of the UK).
>>2052843>anyone investing the UK economyDoubtful, unless recipients of backhand deals.
>>2053109Ok>>2053110This is happening lol it's just a matter of when, it's not just about the UK economy
Had to post this again https://youtu.be/c2YffL6svA8?si=fivIF5kFKppEW0bB
*blocks the aisle in your path>Oh, proper sorry, mate. (heavy breathing). Didn’t realise I was colonisin’ the bloody aisle like it’s eighteen-fifty-seven or summin’.(pathetic English mannerisms intensify). Go on, mate, carry on, mate.
>>2053337>>2052435
>>2053351hey man, making fun of Brits should be universally condoned in every thread
>>2053430Only posts I'm interested in are ones of trains
class 385 my beloved
still in bewilderment of the apparent dearth of headlight fixtures on old British locomotivesI can understand the justification but it's still an alien concept to me to drive at night without good sight of the tracks ahead
>>2052519LONG LIVE BRITISH RAIL
>>2053591Headlights spoil your night vision. I see two perfectly good marker lights and a big gtfo yellow front on the train in your pic.Trains running in rural areas tend to have car level of illumination.
>>2053678You gotta stop putting this spin on it by saying "Headlights? Who needs them?" They did have headlights only they weren't anywhere near as powerful as modern LEDs hence the yellow fronts. Steam trains used only oil lamps 100 years prior
>>2053683that's not the best photo example because they only started installing headlight fixtures after eliminating headcode housingsprior to that locomotives often only had two tiny red markers and nothing else, sometimes a single white headlamp in the middle which again is a baffling custom
>>2052289I much preferred the old trains in the Glasgow tube. Why did they even bother changing them.
>>2053704
>>2053705Find a better quality image
>>2053696If you can show me some 1940s/1950s locomotives at night without proper headlights I'll believe you. Otherwise you're probably both wrong
>>2053705Better quality image of a better livery
>>2053743Woops although I like this one too meant to send this
>>2053744Also
>>2053707this is how they rode, only headcodes were illuminatedmay or may not have tiny marker lights, nothing else
>>2053775Well so they at least had actual headlights
>>2053777not to aid in seeing something in the dark in any capacityit was not expected that the driver had to see the track ahead of him because all signals were illuminated, among some other reasons that do not convince me
>>2053779Yeah well I genuinely thought for a second they'd have nothing besides the marker lights in the night but even if those headcodes aren't powerful enough by modern standards it doesn't seem to be the case. What can I say though safety standards were different and that must be why it became mandatory in the 1970s
No greater aesthetic than early 20th century electrics
>>2053825here's something for you then, 1910 short film of the met: https://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/collections/collections-online/film-video/item/2005-3467
