![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
You're not even going to tell us where they're made? How can they be "British Rail" so many years after privatisation? Please explain that too. --kingboyk 21:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Are Grand Central planning to use Meridians, Pioneers or have ther own form of 222? Simply south 13:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
No order has been placed so are presumed to be using High Speed Trains (Class 43). Chaz247 21:46, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
It actually shows on their website a set of Class 222. See [1] Simply south 21:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm aware of that. Grand Central have also previous had on there website Class 158s, Class 64 + Mk3s and HSTs. No order has been placed with Bombardier and production has ceased. In a recent Rail Magazine it was stated that they are refurbishing a High Speed Train to 1000v ETS to use in 2007. Chaz247 18:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
According forum members on this this website - http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/showthread.php?thread=1847. All the 9 car meridians are to have a coach removed so they are then 8 car meridians, the removed coach will then be added to some of the 4 car meridians to turn them into 5 car meridians. Does anybody know if this is true, i have not seen anything about this on any other websites, so did not want to add anything about it to the main article
If you click here then you will see that 222004 has 8 carriages and 222014 has 5. Although this is just a trial at the moment, it does look like it will be a success and that 6 other carriages will be transferred between trains. Edvid 05:18, 31st October 2006 (UTC)
I have read somewhere that the MML sets are not 222/0, but rather were 222/4 and 222/9 (dependent on length). Am I right or am I wrong? Chris cheese whine 20:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
"Recently an additional stop was introduced at Howden"
How relevent is this statement? It appears irrelevent to my eye, but could it be as a result of the faster journey times? 82.40.75.55 22:55, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I was told that by a member of staff (who was also a rail enthusiast).
The statement that 017 is out of service is correct, and i can prove this, as i have seen nothing of it in the way of photos on fotopic since Thursday (the day it was taken out of service).
Also, I can trust that that person is correct, as they told me a EMT class 153 would be coming in at 11.00, and they were correct.
ACBestDog and Bone 15:29, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
I attempted to tidy the article - as part of that I've tagged the section British_Rail_Class_222#Details as requiring clarification. ie multiple coupling..
British_Rail_Class_222#Formation_and_Passenger_facilities states that there are 3 versions 222/1 222/4 222/9 and is referenced.
Another editor has said that these versions do not exist.
Currently there is only one reference to show that they do - it may be innacurate.
Can someone show one way or another whether or not the information in the above section is accurate. Thanks.
I've tagged the reference with a [dubious – discuss] tag
I've removed mention of all the subclasses until someone can clarify this: Only one source mentions the 222/4 and 222/9 subclasses and there are no sources that I have found to suggest any mechanical difference between the hull and midland trains versions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FengRail (talk • contribs) 19:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
The Department for Transport does not make any distinction between the five and seven car units operated by East Midlands Trains. On its list of vehicles that comply with the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations, it lists 222001-222023 as Class 222. On the same list, the four units that were operated by Hull Trains are listed as Class 222/1. this can be seen here. The reason that the 222/1 is classed seperately is not due to any mechanical differences, but because of the different internal layout, which saw a four car Hull Trains unit seating 192, compared to 174 on a four car MML unit. Bombardier Class 222; The Railway Centre Class 222. As a consequence, I think it is correct that the EMT units be classed as Class 222/0, as that is what they are numbered as. Please note also that the page on The Railway Centre has not been updated since 2006. [[User:Hammersfan|Hammersfan] 24/02/09, 15.45 GMT
I've asked for clarification on the electric connections on the class 222 - on the site listed http://www.rssb.co.uk/rv_coupling_system_data/list_index.asp there is no mention of inter-unit electric connectors - so I assume they are absent.
Is this right.?FengRail (talk) 17:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Just to let you know, the Commons category for Class 222s is now completely sorted by line, operator and livery. -mattbuck (Talk) 02:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
This article is currently named in accordance the Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways naming conventions for British rolling stock allocated a TOPS number. A proposal to change this convention and/or its scope is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Naming convention, where your comments would be welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avicennasis (talk • contribs) 18:15, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
As a regular user on the London - Sheffield I hear several comments on the Meridians. In particular the luggage racks are unable to take even a reasonable size holdall or backpack. This is because what I assume is an air duct taking up much of the ceiling space.
Another comment is that the high seat backs make the carriages very claustrophobic - you can't see when the train manager or the refreshment trolley is passing through the train. Danensis (talk) 15:26, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on British Rail Class 222. 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.railwayherald.co.uk/issues/RHUK/Issue4.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on British Rail Class 222. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:45, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Revert edit 1003817877 by 'SavageKieran', factually incorrect as said and cited on two occasions in the past week. 2A02:C7F:7C23:BC00:35D6:8771:AAAC:F715 (talk) 21:34, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
I +1 this. This goes for the same with the Class 810. I have cited my sources and nowhere (either ROSCO or the TOC they are used with) say they are called Voyager. Voyagers are a brand name in themselves. If we go by 'SavageKieran' 's logic, then the Class 395's are called "AT300s" and the Class 180's are called "Coradia"s. This is factually incorrect and will mislead so many people. Stop this. 92.13.9.126 (talk) 21:42, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
As per the Hitachi A-train article, the Class 395 units are actually an AT300 (Javelin as their brand) and this is backed up by citations. Same goes on this same article for the Class 810 units and all of the other Class 80x units if you actually look at their respective articles too. You shouldn't say that the information isn't factually correct and misleading when you haven't even read the citations behind them, considering the AT300 term is used by Hitachi on their official website. --SavageKieran (talk) 17:11, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
There has been dispute about whether the name on the infobox should be British Rail Class 222 Meridian or British Rail Class 222 Voyager. Please discuss below whether you think it should remain as British Rail Class 222 Meridian or should change to British Rail Class 222 Voyager. This discussion will close on Monday 8th February 2021 at 01:10 AM. E.Wright1852 (talk) 01:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Table at end of article describes Class 222/0 and Class 222/1 trains without providing any definition or description of what these terms mean and how they differ. 77.98.117.249 (talk) 10:12, 13 December 2023 (UTC)