![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Ecclesbourne Valley Railway. |
I don’t see any third rail in the photographs, so are they able to operate the electric stock, or does it just sit unused? David Arthur 19:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
The class 489 unit was donated to the railway by Porterbrook Leasing in 2003. The train comprises of five passenger coaches which are essentially BR Mk.2f air-conditioned carriages plus a Gatwick Luggage Van (GLV). The GLV is a guards van with driving cab containing a control desk compatible with BR Southern Region electric and diesel stock. When delivered, the GLV still carried third-rail current collection equipment, but this was removed soon after arrival. The Mk2f coaches never carrried current collection gear and the 'shoes' on the DVT were designed to provide additional current collection at the opposite of the train to the class 73 locomotive that provided motive power. At Wirksworth, resident Class 31 locomotive 31414 has been converted to operate with the control system of the GLV, thus permitting push-pull operation using the GLV to control operation in one direction only. Following the opening of the section to Idridgehay, it is hoped that the whole set will be brought into operation at some point in the not-too-distant future. Nferguso wyvern (talk) 04:33, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm now proposing a merger, after the AfD on WyvernRail was kept - even though the consensus was for merge!
Same terms as per the AfD.
Thanks,
BG7 11:22, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
WyvernRail’s incorporation predated the formation of the preservation society, the Ecclesbourne Valley Railway Association, by five years. WyvernRail was formed as a start-up business in response to the then forthcoming privatisation of Britain’s railways and was seeking to either lease the Wirksworth Branch or operate it under an ‘Open Access’ arrangement. In the contribution that I made, I alluded to the company’s prequalification to bid for a main line franchise and the company did also explore a variety of open access schemes during the 1990s. Unfortunately, as most of the details for these activities are buried in Board minutes going back a decade, I would be reluctant to mention them in an article as they would most definitely breach Wikipedia’s rules on referenceability, not to mention original research.
Even today, the company is rather different to other independent railway companies. WyvernRail operates a separate testing and training business which draws custom from railway engineering companies and still retains a declared intention to operate a community railway service once the whole line has been opened, thus providing a connection with main line services. This is not preservation activity and is undertaken at the risk of the company and not the preservation society.
When I submitted the original article, I deliberately stopped the narrative at the share issue in 2002, so as to avoid any danger of turning the article into ‘advertorial’. I acknowledge my potential conflict of interest and the present lack of detailed references and would like to rectify these weaknesses and develop the article a little more into a modest but informative piece. Constructive help from an editor in these respects would be sincerely appreciated.
Nferguso wyvern (talk) 23:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
BG7, Predictably you have jumped-in with your usual agressive stance. I am asking you very nicely to stay away from editing anything to do with WyvernRail or the Ecclesbourne Valley Railway. I dispute YOUR neutrality. Nferguso wyvern (talk) 17:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
BG7, you already have a reputation for agressive editing - check your own talk page for at least two rebukes. I too want a third opinion, especially in consideration of your agressive comments to other editors for this railway. Do you want me to quote back to you the cases where you have been agressive? They're not hard to find. Nferguso wyvern (talk) 19:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Just a note to point out that either "Hazlewood" or "Hazelwood" is correct. I think it likely the former is the traditional spelling but haven't had time to check, although I did a bit of research for the article for Hazlewood itself: Hazelwood vs Hazlewood: Indexes for the years 1000AD -1999AD include 64 records for the spelling 'hazlewood' and 18 records for the spelling 'hazelwood'. http://www.theoriginalrecord.com/. The station is also listed as Hazlewood in Butt, R.V.J., (1995) The Directory of Railway Stations, Yeovil: Patrick Stephens. Chevin (talk) 08:38, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Butt is wrong and should not be quoted. The station was always known as Hazelwood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Regnerps (talk • contribs) 15:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ecclesbourne Valley Railway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:38, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Ecclesbourne Valley Railway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
((dead link))
tag to http://www.e-v-r.com/multimedia/articles/001.pdf((dead link))
tag to http://www.e-v-r.com/multimedia/articles/005.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:17, 16 September 2017 (UTC)