Talk:British Rail Class 86

message: Something strange is happening to the [edit]s  viewed with Mozilla under Linux... The first eight or nine are all together at one section head. Rich Farmbrough 11:31, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: How is it doing now? I see the same with Firefox so I've tried moving the images to different sections. There will still be some stacking effects at high resolutions (I see it at 1600x1200 browser window, may still be a problem above 1299 or so browser width). Jamesday 19:42, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit links broken 

message: It has apparently been mentioned in RAIL magazine (I haven't seen the article) that HT are going to use a Class 86, at least for a few months, between London and Doncaster. Then passengers will have to change (so much for a non-stop service) onto a Class 222 to take them to Hull. If all this is correct, then the line in the article saying that Anglia's withdrawal of 86s in 2005 "brought an end to 40 years of Class 86-hauled passenger trains" will have to be changed. 86.136.251.18 23:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact I believe from reading uk.railway on Usenet that RAIL thought there'd be Class 47 haulage for the last leg, but that since the mag was printed things have changed. I have no WP-suitable source for this, though. 86.136.251.18 23:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hull Trains 

message: I was just reading the table containing the status of each locomotive in the class, and am a bit confused by the "in service" column.  The dates given suggest that the locomotives commenced service around 1978-1983, which given that they were all built in the 1960s, doesn't make sense.  What do those dates refer to?  (It's not as if the all spent the first 15 years of their lives in a siding, is it?) --RFBailey (talk) 20:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Does nobody know the answer to this? --RFBailey (talk) 22:25, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  The table has now been removed as it is unreferenced. Personnally, I think the table shoul dbe moved to a new article "List of British Rail Class 86 locomotives".  There are lots of tables like this in other articles, so I feel that the removal of it from this article is inconsistent.  Perhaps we need a policy decision on whether or not to have tables like this one in articles. Olana North (talk) 10:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I can understand why it was removed--it could be argued that it was verging on indiscriminate information, especially as it was unsourced.  A "List of..." article may be more appropriate, but imagine what a list of Class 37s would look like(!).  And it would still have to address the concerns I raised above (all those months ago!).  --RFBailey (talk) 14:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates in service 

message: UK.railway shows a  linking to photos on wnxx.com, infering/showing some class 86's in Hungarian livery at Long Marston. how many are being exported/any details? Thanks in advance. 91.109.225.70 (talk) 21:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hungary 

message: 'Long Marston' bid to be exported to Hungary, the locomotive did not have contact information related to makin ... 
AndElectric Traction Ltd86205, 86260 electric locomotive No. 86701,86702 change has been altered after the station is scheduled to be released.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.137.16.146 (talk) 07:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Class 86 electric locomotives began exports of Hungary, did not have additional information requests. 

message: The following paragraph beginning:
"The 'Long Marston' Class 86 locomotive is stored in the 'EuroPhoenix' was purchased from....."
does not make any sense. Should these statements be removed from the article altogether ?
This appears twice - first of all under Section #2.5.1 Cross-Country, within the Virgin section.
Regards.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scot66 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paragraph which does not make sense ? 

message: Reading through this section 3.4 has convinced me that the paragraph contents appear to be complete nonsense ?? I can only recommend that this section be removed as it stands.
Scot66 (talk) 13:19, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section 3.4 ("Exports") :  what does the contents of this section actually mean - does it make any sense at all ? 

message: 95.145.233.193 (talk) 19:14, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Class 86 runs on Southern 

message: Here are 3 photos - I think the first two aren't great, we could do better.  The third one is the better.  How about removing (1) and (2) and adding (3)? I don't think we need 2 photos of the same locomotive in this article, and (3) is so much more illustrative.  It won't be too much of a shame to see (1) and (2) depart.  Tony May (talk) 12:25, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Completely agree, I've been bold and done it! Murgatroyd49 (talk) 15:54, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photographs