Bulk Water Carriers

Posted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 12:02 am

Well, if the powers that be actually learned to make their minds up what they really, actually wanted from ANY of the vehicles that are put on the run for LFB then maybe the BWC's would be utilised...

Then again, yer'd have nothing to grumble about would yer.. :wink:

Learner User Online: Joined: 03 Oct 2007 Posts: 41

BWC1 was written off on a training run near Werthersfield when it overturned into a ditch, this was after the first time that they had supposedly fixed the faults causing them to fail their tilt tests. The truck is most certainly written off although the tank is still OK (from what I saw anyway) so if they do want the sixth machine they could re-chassis the tank.

Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 1:12 am

The latest from Graham on the MRV is that Asset Co are going to take over the resposibility of mobilising the BWC fleet when needed, in a sort of Non-Op driver role.

This is all fine and dandy, but a dodgy road to go down if the support side of the fleet end up going over to this type of operation. Less LFB folks required . . . . etc etc.

Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 1:20 pm

I'd be interested to find out how Graham knows this.

Learner User Online: Joined: 03 Oct 2007 Posts: 41

From what I heard it sounds like the mobilising by Asset Co would be a temporary solution as they are still not happy with the trucks bluelighting at speed. If (or 'when' if you're feeling optimistic) the issues are sorted they should go operational, although it is likely that some of the locations will change from the initial plans

Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:56 pm

We'll have one at Finchley, we like trucks that do fuck all.

Perhaps, given that, we could get an FRU back?

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 11:34 pm

Dagenham are meant to be getting a BWC but apparenty Dagenhams bay floor cant hold the weight. Dont know if this is true or not lol

Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:27 pm

Thats because Norris ate all the pies and weakened it.