456 toilet

BTW, the word is toilet

Arthur Figgis wrote:
> Sat on Southern's 456012 (or was it 021?) tonight I noticed that
> something was wrong - eventually I twigged the bog had gone, being
> replaced by seats but leaving the small window.
>
> Anyone know why, and if any others have lost their facilities? Seems a
> retrograde step.

"ziggy" <sciros@> wrote in message
news:dIqdnVtZA9txa-PVnZ2dnUVZ8uKdnZ2d@bt.com...
> BTW, the word is toilet
>
It's a long standing joke here that the word is 'tiolet', although some
people argue that that only refers to the facilities on Virgin trains.

Peter

ziggy wrote:
> BTW, the word is toilet

Lavatory, young sir!

;-)

Charlie

Jeremy Double wrote:
> Charlie Hulme wrote:
>
>> How many coaches in a 4-LAV had a lavatory?
>
> According to GT Moody "Southern Electric 1909-1979", 5th edition, one
> coach had a side corridor and two lavatories, the other three coaches
> were non-corridor compartments with no provision of lavatories.
>

Thanks!

So fewer passengers had access to the Lav of a 4-LAV
than of a HAL (HAlf-Lav)! But that was so called as it
had half as many compared to a 2-BIL (BI-Lav). I
remember all these too - the 2-BIL (IIRC) had a
half-compartment where you sat facing a blank wall,
usually carved with a collection of initials.

I wonder if the latest EMUs will be around in 2048?
And if so, will they seem as archaic as those old
SR ones did in the 60s?

Mind you, the 304s built for the 'ultra-modern' WCML
in 1960 were similar in layout to the 4-LAV: amusing
how the LMR publicity of the time tried and failed to
make them look state-of-the-art.

Charlie