![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Are these the type of trains named 'nodding donkeys' by rail staff? Magic Pickle 14:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Apparently 142s, 143s and 144s are all known as 'nodding donkeys' due to how to jerk up and down on unven track Hstudent 08:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
yes some staff call them nodding donkeys —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
90.200.64.164 (
talk) 00:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone know if these units can couple together or are they stuck in 2 car formations? Just out of interest, GullibleKit 23:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
They can. It's not exactly common, but I've seen trains formed of two Pacer sets coupled together. Only one set was in use, however, suggesting the other was broken-down. GBev1987 ( talk) 21:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
they are used with 150s, 143s, 153s and 158s in south wales. 82.3.16.210 ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Northern Rail use 142s attached to 142s, 150s and 156s. Sometimes one unit in operation (especially to transfer units around), sometimes both units in operation. On one occasion I saw a 142 attached to both a 156 and a 150, all in operation on a summer Blackpool service (the 142 being the front unit) 217.37.120.25 ( talk) 16:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Minor tidy - rearanged operations to be by region. Added some reference tags. Hope I haven't spoilt it - nice article - enjoyed reading it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=British_Rail_Class_142&diff=270884108&oldid=270804140
See edit summary, also please take into account the notabilty of the material you add. see Wikipedia:Notability#Notability_of_article_content —Preceding unsigned comment added by FengRail ( talk • contribs) 13:27, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Enotayokel and Peter Skuce, please stop reverting each other's edits. It isn't helping anyone. A similar series of events on British Rail Class 153 ended up on WP:LAME, and this could soon be joining it. Alzarian16 ( talk) 17:21, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Why does Enotayokel change the image without discussing it before hand? There is nothing wrong with File:142077_Penarth.JPG and I don't see how it can be too dark at all - the photograph is in broad daylight. Also this image matches the interior image. -- Peter Skuce ( talk) 02:07, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
I have placed both the Regional Railways and Greater Manchester 1980s images, next to each other, in the gallery - this has enhanced this article.-- Peter Skuce ( talk) 23:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC) I've found the photograph that I took of a refurbished Merseyrail Class 142 at Liverpool Lime Street and have uploaded this into the gallery - it does look better than the half cut image. I have placed the interior of an interior of a refreshed First Great Western Class 142 at the top of the page - if anyone ventures onto Northern area often and come across a Northern refreshed interior, then please upload it onto Wikipedia? -- Peter Skuce ( talk) 00:39, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you Enotayokel for re-arranging things when they were fine as they were - the page now looks a mess! Thanks for nothing! All that hard work by me to have as diverse collection of images has been wasted! -- Peter Skuce ( talk) 20:51, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
1. They help to break up large areas of text and make the page easier to read.
2. The size of the image as it appears on the page is larger for inline images than gallery ones.
I know you don't agree with these reasons (as you made clear on
Talk:British Rail Class 313), but the consensus is that they shold be used. The gallery is designed for images which don't fit well into the text. Remember that our only Good Article on a UK train type,
British Rail Class 47, uses this format. So we're going to use it here. I've admitted that I was wrong about the infobox interior image - now please admit that you're wrong about inline images and help to end this debate with an outcome we can agree on.
Alzarian16 (
talk) 21:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you Alzarian, I will look into this tomorrow and see if I can get the images to match the areas that the train worked in. -- Peter Skuce ( talk) 21:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
To avoid confusion with central Southern England - i.e. between Sussex and Dorset, I have changed the title to 'South West England' as it reflects the area correctly. Devon, Somerset and Cornwall are NOT in Southern England, they are in the South West. -- Peter Skuce ( talk) 13:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Just to let you know, the Commons category for Class 142s is now completely sorted by operator and livery. - mattbuck ( Talk) 23:38, 24 September 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.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
British Rail Class 142. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. 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.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:35, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on British Rail Class 142. 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) 22:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on British Rail Class 142. 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, 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:19, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Can someone get a better picture as I can not make it out on both Welsh and English one Metalhead11000 ( talk) 11:26, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
What's all this about 142005 being "the first unit to be retired"? As noted in the Accidents section, 142059 was withdrawn in 1991 and 142008 was withdrawn in 1999 (following the 1999 Winsford railway accident). These numbers have remained absent from the Platform 5 combined volume ever since. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 17:39, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I believe that the ATW unit pictured in the liveries section should be noteworthy due to its number having both 420 and 69 in it.These are significant numbers in internet culture and should be mentioned. Unit 142069 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c5:519a:9b00:a903:ba14:e651:4f02 ( talk) 16:18, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Someone just moved this unit back to "scrapped" - any reason for this as on other lists it still exists...? Anamyd ( talk) 20:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Your also missing 142011 and 142013 at Midland Rail Centre at Butterley nut 011 is being used for spares and 013 will run on the railway as well. Trooper201 ( talk) 11:33, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Heads up the last Northern service operated by a pacer happened today, class 142004.
Sadly the only proof at the moment is via Northern on twitter should anybody have any reliable sources then please update the article.
Northern say the final service was 16:36 Kirbby to Manchester Victoria. Maurice Oly ( talk) 18:29, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
@ SK2242: Ah right I thought Twitter was banned all together, many thanks for telling me about that and adding the information. Maurice Oly ( talk) 18:58, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Claas 142’s were retired from Northern on 27th of November 2020, 142s left Great western railway in 2011 and were never based at Laira Traction & Rolling Stock Maintenance Depot while with GWR instead they were based at Exeter TMD. Maurice Oly ( talk) 22:13, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Seeing the edit-warring over the uncited tables is continuing unabated, both have have deleted. They were flagged as uncited 7 months ago and yet for all the toing and froing, remain uncited. Please do not reinstate until they can be cited in full. It will either need to be from a published work as sometimes appear in a magazine or in books such as the annual Platform 5 publication. Metro140 ( talk) 05:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)