Talk:New Zealand DM class electric multiple unit

message: There is a very real need to ensure that the English Electric red sets are preserved for future heritage services both in Wellington and elsewhere. Anyone interested in forming a trust to save the english electrics should contact light_of_the_goldendawn@hotmail.com
Anywhere else in the world, and the Johnsonvill line would have been declared a heritage railway and the Red sets kept in use. However That is not to be. Lets ensure that as many red sets as possible can be saved so as to enable a future heritage service to be started up.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.205.34 (talk) 22:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Tranz Metro have restored one of the EE units to heritage standards. That's more than adequate IMHO. Also, it makes little sense to turn a major urban railway into a heritage railway. That's what we've got Ferrymead or Silver Stream for. --Lholden (talk) 01:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

text: This is one of the silliest ideas I've heard in a long time, and I hang around on Railpage Australia, so I've heard plenty of unrealistic gunzel wet dreams.  No other country in the world would even dream of converting a well-used commuter railway into a heritage railway!  Hell, I commend Tranz Metro for the restoration job done on Cyclops; I can't name a single other operator in Oceania who have been that conscious of their heritage - the only comparison would be Yarra Trams in Melbourne continuing to operate a fleet of 54 W class trams, some of which are in a pretty sorry aesthetic state.  In most countries, the Old Reds would've been withdrawn by the end of the 1980s.  Wellington's network is a dilapidated joke.  Take as a comparison Melbourne again.  In Wellington, the operational Old Reds date from 1949.  In Melbourne, the oldest rolling stock are 7 Hitachi sets from the 1970s, and they were in fact withdrawn a few years ago and only brought back to deal with high volumes of traffic and to cover for the new Siemens sets while they had teething problems.  There are already plans afoot to replace the Comeng sets, of the same vintage of Wellington's EM/ET sets!  Sydney, Brisbane, and Perth also make Wellington look very bad.  The Old Reds, as much as I love them, are museum pieces and never should have made it to 1990 in regular service, let alone 2010.  Let Ferrymead, Silverstream, et al. look after our heritage and leave the commuter railway to modern trains. - Axver (talk) 04:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Preservation for preservations sake makes no sense.  How would it benefit anyone to acquire decommissioned rolling stock only to have it sit around in storage and deteriorate into a pile of rusting junk?  If you don't also have the facilities and resources to restore what you have acquired and then display it somewhere where the public have access or operate it as a heritage service on your own line, what have you actually accomplished?  As an example of the class, I think those heritage units in the ownership of TranzMetro and the CRS are quite adequate specimens. – Matthew25187 (talk) 11:25, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Preservation

message: How many DMs still retain the olive livery?  I was under the impression a good number of them had been repainted blue, yet the caption of the leading photo currently says DM 147 is the only one in blue.  This is clearly wrong, as the photo at the bottom of this page shows two sets in blue. - Axver 03:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DMs in olive or blue 

message: Were two of the three-car units coupled together in rush hour on the Taita line (as two two-car units were coupled together on the Johnsonville line). I presume the platforms were long enough. If so it should be mentioned Hugo999 (talk) 06:53, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Three-Car units 

message: There's been a number of uncited additions made to the page. Obviously I assume good faith, as the editor seems to be coming from the same IP address. However, things such as the scrapping date (May 2011) seem too specific to be correct. Should we start removing them on sight? --LJ Holden 01:19, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: At a minimum such comments should be tagged with  and given, say a week, before summary removal. — Matthew25187 (talk) 10:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncited additions 

message: The actual classes for each carriage was recently removed from all entries (which caused other problems, but I won't go into that). However this means that readers who can't distinguish between a DM number and a D number will have no idea which is which - perhaps we need to split the entries up into two tables? Thoughts? pcuser42 (talk) 03:47, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it was (is) a bit of a mess. I would split the two classes into separate tables - unlike the EM/ETs, they aren't permanently coupled together --LJ Holden 03:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now fixed the table (fully!) and put the colours back. --LJ Holden 09:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Class register