That would be the answer to my question as to how this country keeps coming up with "better" solutions that don't work. We have have too many politicians pulling strokes for anybody who has the neck to ask them for them.

Hence we end up with trains leaving branch lines with 4 passengers, thousands of houses build in the middle of swamps 100 miles from the nearest job and tolled motorways where there isn't enough traffic to pay the toll collectors.

so the three remaining unaccepted sets (59/60/61) are likely to stay Heuston-side when their cheque clears, and we should stop looking out to sea for 10/11?

i would imagine so. 10/11, i think that 60/61 is in effect their replacement, but i could be wrong.

Dont see how sets 60 and 61 could be a replacement for 10 and 11 unless Irish Rail have negotiated a reduction in the order.

The most recent order was for 17 3-car sets (effectively sets 47 to 63 inclusive, all of which have now been delivered). These additional units were supposedly for longer distance suburban services - preseumeably Portlaoise, Longford, Gorey, Carlow, Athlone, Dundalk. So far there is only one ICR working from Dundalk while the south eastern and Longford outer suburban services are still typically worked by 29ks. So there would seem to be a defic on the Connolly side rather that the Heuston side.

The obvious strategy would see the northern line ICR allocation used to provide express commuter services from Drogheda/Dundalk and Newry thus relieving the inner suburban services, attracting new passengers and leveraging some benefit from the 90 mph line limit.

Similarly I would expect that some effort should be made to separate Longford/Mullingar traffic from Maynooth traffic again to impove the overall product offering.

Have read on a number of sites that it will be around December before the replacment sets are dilevered. They should still be numbered 10 and 11.

I kinda wish they would have negotiated a change - like a 6 car First with TPWS to replace the 2 x 3. Eventually the DDs are going to have to be overhauled and the C3Ks and econ/TPWS 22s are a poor substitute. Given that it would have only two driving cabs instead of four it might have even been cheaper for Rotem to make!

The contract is fixed, any variance is a cost.

The entire fleet is still wired to allow future installation of TPWS, the gap is there in the fuse board and the slot on the drivers console is plated over.

They have 4 sets of 7 coaches and currently 3 sets are only being used, they used to be 3 sets of 8 coaches but were reduced a few years ago which has allowed a full fourth set to be formed. (used for testing EGV recently)

If an overhaul was required it could still be done without affecting passenger services but would take longer. If wiki is correct they entred service in 1997 and IR say a full overhaul is required every 15 years which would mean its due this year for Belfast fleet.

i said i could be wrong, i dont see the need for smart-arsery.

61 has been seen on trial runs so presumably it (and possibly another, IE seeming to mostly add 22s in pairs the last few months) will be in service soon.

Don't see what your problem is to be honest. I still don't know why two randomly selected sets (60 and 61) out of 17 new sets (47 to 63) could be deemed a replacement for sets 10 and 11. You were speculating (which is fair enough), I was merely questioning your conclusion.

If you know sets 60 and 61 replace 10 and 11, fair enough, if not I don't think it is unreasonable to point out that what you are suggesting isn't particularly logical.

Sorry if I upset you.

I personally don't care what number is on the front it doesn't matter

Rotem under contract had to build two replacement units due the damage during shipping.

The fleet will be 234 in size when complete.

And yes Irish Rail do get some financial benefit from the late delivery

Can't say I am too pushed either although the numbers do give a clue to whats happening !