Talk:IÉ 22000 Class

Ireland Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: Passenger trains Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	January 2, 2011

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the Passenger trains task force.

This article lacks references.

Car types[edit]

The recent edit by 84.66.246.166 re no. of 3 & 6-car sets is, I believe, correct. However, my own sources tell me that all car types are powered. A "B1" type being identical to the "B" type except for the addition of sanding. This would mean that only 2 cars of the 3-car set would be powered, which doesn't seem likely. Unless you know differently?? Suckindiesel 23:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is correct that all cars are powered. Earlier info in an enthusiast magazine was wrong on this point

My own info is that there is no "B2" type car, only B & B1 types. Ref to a "B2" type in some docs is a typo Suckindiesel 17:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is biased Irish Rail propaganda, ignoring delays in the introduction of these trains including the fact that all publicity about them has been removed from stations and different reports of technical problems with them —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.67.152.237 (talk) 19:37, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That the article is "biased Irish Rail propaganda" is putting it a bit strongly as none of the facts contained within this article are incorrect, as far as I can tell. The only part that is doubtful is the "In service: Late 2007" claim. Time will tell re this one. Suckindiesel 13:10, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That the service introduction of these trains has been delayed is certainly true. However, that is not the point of the article which merely states a late 2007 service date. I have re-read the article in vain looking for any factual inaccuracies and have therefore removed the disputed article header. Suckindiesel 16:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Manufacturer[edit]

I've removed ref to TCC & substituted Hyundai Rotem as manufacturers. These cars are made in Rotem's plant in Korea, not by TCC, who merely supplied the bogies. Therefore TCC are in the same category as any other sub-supplier. Suckindiesel (talk) 17:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on IE 22000 Class. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120208083903/http://www.irrs.ie/Journal%20157/157%20News%20NIR.htm to http://www.irrs.ie/Journal%20157/157%20News%20NIR.htm

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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:53, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Car weight 63 tonne[edit]

The given car weight of 63 tonne seems unreasonably high and is uncited. If I have it right it was added on 05:08 20 February 2012 UTC by Librotyrannus ... be aware any internet sources post this date may have originated from Wikipedia. Djm-leighpark (talk) 01:26, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hyundai Rotem project Record IE 22000 DMU (original) gives trainset weight 287t for 378 passengers ... implies a six car set. 48t per railcar. It looks like this may be from project stage. Propose this is used unless anything better arises. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:05, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Having also seen other sources not useable in wikipedia I weight 48t-49t is the correct weight, I understand circa 60t is the crush weight (without pushers). Being pedantic a better source is required but I think this is adequate for most purposes.Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:01, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think I first included that 63 tonne figure back on 3/07/07. So long ago that I can't remember its source. 48 tonnes agrees with Rotems press release, and is a realistic figure, typical of other similar cars.Suckindiesel (talk) 00:25, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ... yes ... you be right .. it may be you who introducing the likely fake 63 tonnes across the internet possibly influencing not to but any more because they are so heavy.The problem is the rightful weights are a tad higher than 48t to my best understanding. I need to apologise to Librotyrannus for getting this incorrect. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 02:06, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Revised transmission trial[edit]

Seems to have been a trial to reduce fuel consumption ... noting for possible late article enhancment, Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:17, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Model[edit]

Just about to revert unsourced information about a model ... sourced information is required .... I guess the'll need one for the Fry and I guess that will need to be OO/EM from the rumours .... Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:17, 10 February 2019 (UTC) I have noted there was model for sale and it appears to have been a handbuilt conversion of a another Bachmann model, possibly a GB Class 170, and possibly a one-off. This is not my specialist area to I am speculating. I do not believe it is worthy of article mention unless a commercial conversion kit is identified ... 23:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Services[edit]

I have seen an ICR at Midleton recently, is it just me? or does Wikipedia not mention it? Ié 2600 Class (talk) 06:55, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]