In message <t0n6gu$9a9$9@dont-email.me>, at 10:47:59 on Mon, 14 Mar
2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <b3im2hl31qjt9d56kotlu1gd8vgd6r8deg@4ax.com>, at 13:09:03 on
>> Fri, 11 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 12:15:10 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <t0fcpq$v9i$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:46:02 on Fri, 11 Mar
>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>> A bit more research digging has 12 carriages written off as a result of
>>>>>> Hatfield, so only seven more to track down.
>>>>>
>>>>> Presumably they were written off in the Selby crash?
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, that should have said "Hatfield and Great Heck [aka Selby]. So
>>>> still seven awol.
>>>>
>>>>>> There's apparently 27 in service from TfW, which came partly from LNER
>>>>>> but also partly from a pool stored for use by Grand Central, but never
>>>>>> called upon.
>>>>>
>>>>> They were all originally built for the BR ECML operation and only ever
>>>>> served on that line until the TfW re-use.
>>>>
>>>> Eventually they'll be scrapping some TfW MK4's, so those won't be "Ex
>>>> ECML". That just leaves the edge case of the [albeit un-deployed]
>>>> ex-Grand_Central coaches, but as they've all gone to TfW, we can park
>>>> that discussion until TfW scraps or mothballs them.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure I understand you: all Mk 4s are ex-ECML.
>>
>> But it's far more interesting (and additional data) who had possession
>> of them at the point they were scrapped or most recently mothballed.
>
>Thus far, that's also, entirely, ex-LNER (or predecessor ECML operators for
>those scrapped as a result of earlier accidents).

Yes, but it's nevertheless far more interesting to know who they
belonged to at the point the decision to scrap was made.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t0i1s7$k6l$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:57:59 on Sat, 12 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t0hvqb$5c9$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:22:51 on Sat, 12 Mar
>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t0fcpq$v9i$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:46:02 on Fri, 11 Mar
>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>> A bit more research digging has 12 carriages written off as a result of
>>>>>> Hatfield, so only seven more to track down.
>>>>>
>>>>> Presumably they were written off in the Selby crash?
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, that should have said "Hatfield and Great Heck [aka Selby]. So
>>>> still seven awol.
>>>
>>> Surely all are accounted for in
>>> <https://225group.org.uk/docs/Intercity-225-Fleet-List-Mark-4-Coaches-an
>>> d-DVTs.pdf>
>>
>> New data always welcome.
>>
>> That has around 150 scrapped (and three as donors, which is much the
>> same in the long run), so the 19 reported elsewhere is definitely VERY
>> OLD news.
>>
>> It also has entries such as:
>>
>> 82230 Stored pending return to service GC (un-branded)
>>
>> Not GU. Any comments bearing in mind earlier correspondence?
>
>Some were destined for the notional GU to Wales and some for the notional
>GCWC, which were, I think both Ian Yeowart ventures. As neither actually
>happened, I wonder why you're so hung up on them?

I'm trying to decide if the Wikipedia entry is incorrect (and hence
might need editing) or whether you have more information about them than
the Wikipedia editors have to date.

To some extent the latter may be true, given that the number scrapped
has escalated considerably.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t0n6gu$9a9$9@dont-email.me>, at 10:47:59 on Mon, 14 Mar
> 2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <b3im2hl31qjt9d56kotlu1gd8vgd6r8deg@4ax.com>, at 13:09:03 on
>>> Fri, 11 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 12:15:10 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <t0fcpq$v9i$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:46:02 on Fri, 11 Mar
>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> A bit more research digging has 12 carriages written off as a result of
>>>>>>> Hatfield, so only seven more to track down.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Presumably they were written off in the Selby crash?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, that should have said "Hatfield and Great Heck [aka Selby]. So
>>>>> still seven awol.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's apparently 27 in service from TfW, which came partly from LNER
>>>>>>> but also partly from a pool stored for use by Grand Central, but never
>>>>>>> called upon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They were all originally built for the BR ECML operation and only ever
>>>>>> served on that line until the TfW re-use.
>>>>>
>>>>> Eventually they'll be scrapping some TfW MK4's, so those won't be "Ex
>>>>> ECML". That just leaves the edge case of the [albeit un-deployed]
>>>>> ex-Grand_Central coaches, but as they've all gone to TfW, we can park
>>>>> that discussion until TfW scraps or mothballs them.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure I understand you: all Mk 4s are ex-ECML.
>>>
>>> But it's far more interesting (and additional data) who had possession
>>> of them at the point they were scrapped or most recently mothballed.
>>
>> Thus far, that's also, entirely, ex-LNER (or predecessor ECML operators for
>> those scrapped as a result of earlier accidents).
>
> Yes, but it's nevertheless far more interesting to know who they
> belonged to at the point the decision to scrap was made.

Presumably all the scrapped coaches belonged to Eversholt?

In message <t0o2nl$77s$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:49:25 on Mon, 14 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t0n6gu$9a9$9@dont-email.me>, at 10:47:59 on Mon, 14 Mar
>> 2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <b3im2hl31qjt9d56kotlu1gd8vgd6r8deg@4ax.com>, at 13:09:03 on
>>>> Fri, 11 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 12:15:10 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>><roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <t0fcpq$v9i$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:46:02 on Fri, 11 Mar
>>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A bit more research digging has 12 carriages written off as a result of
>>>>>>>> Hatfield, so only seven more to track down.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Presumably they were written off in the Selby crash?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, that should have said "Hatfield and Great Heck [aka Selby]. So
>>>>>> still seven awol.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There's apparently 27 in service from TfW, which came partly from LNER
>>>>>>>> but also partly from a pool stored for use by Grand Central, but never
>>>>>>>> called upon.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They were all originally built for the BR ECML operation and only ever
>>>>>>> served on that line until the TfW re-use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Eventually they'll be scrapping some TfW MK4's, so those won't be "Ex
>>>>>> ECML". That just leaves the edge case of the [albeit un-deployed]
>>>>>> ex-Grand_Central coaches, but as they've all gone to TfW, we can park
>>>>>> that discussion until TfW scraps or mothballs them.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure I understand you: all Mk 4s are ex-ECML.
>>>>
>>>> But it's far more interesting (and additional data) who had possession
>>>> of them at the point they were scrapped or most recently mothballed.
>>>
>>> Thus far, that's also, entirely, ex-LNER (or predecessor ECML operators for
>>> those scrapped as a result of earlier accidents).
>>
>> Yes, but it's nevertheless far more interesting to know who they
>> belonged to at the point the decision to scrap was made.
>
>Presumably all the scrapped coaches belonged to Eversholt?

I haven't looked that closely at the comprehensive list cited earlier.
--
Roland Perry