"Sam Wilson" wrote in message

In article ,
Graeme wrote:

In message
Sam Wilson wrote:

And T5. The acceleration on the T5 transit is quite impressive.


I've missed that one but then I usually access T5 by road from the
west.

It runs between the main terminal (5A, apparently) and the 5B
satellite hub. If you don't use the B gates you'll never get to see
it.

The opportunities to use it will double when the second satellite (T5C)
opens next year. The escalator down to the "APM" is pretty spectacular
(very long, and open, so you get some fine views, though the regular pax
tend to use the faster lifts).

The system isn't completely unmanned, as security people make sure all
the arriving pax have got off before opening the doors for the
security-screened departing pax to board.

In message
Sam Wilson wrote:

In article ,
Graeme wrote:

In message
Sam Wilson wrote:

And T5. The acceleration on the T5 transit is quite impressive.


I've missed that one but then I usually access T5 by road from the west.

It runs between the main terminal (5A, apparently) and the 5B satellite
hub. If you don't use the B gates you'll never get to see it.


Last time I used the B hub it was bustituted.

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net/

Paul Terry wrote:
In message , Arthur
Figgis writes

How will the pod cars at Heathrow fit in with this?

Driverless trains have been running on the Gatwick monorail for years.

IIRC it has a bit too many rails to be a monorail. But aren't the two
tracks both elevated and completely separate, so the trains can't crash
into each other or stray cows?

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message

Paul Terry wrote:
In message ,
Arthur Figgis writes

How will the pod cars at Heathrow fit in with this?

Driverless trains have been running on the Gatwick monorail for
years.

IIRC it has a bit too many rails to be a monorail. But aren't the two
tracks both elevated and completely separate, so the trains can't
crash into each other or stray cows?

Yes, it's a simple system (currently bustituted, of course). Presumably
there's some sort of points mechanism to get the vehicles on and off the
running tracks, but that would not happen with pax on board. Lots of
airports around the world have similar systems, and many do have
switches that are traversed in service.

Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 2 Dec 2009 10:38:04 -0800 (PST), MIG
wrote:

But it seems that if the key comes out, the door reverts to being a
normal door and closes, and the train takes off without further
prompt.

That seems somewhat of a dangerous[1] design flaw.

Arguably, if the key is removed the unit should remain in the state it
was in (one door open) until it is reinserted and the member of staff
tells it what to do next.

A command to depart should be active, not passive.

[1] Let's say the member of staff does get themselves locked out - but
in doing so gets their coat caught in the door. The train then takes
off for the next station, whacking the member of staff against the
wall if a passenger hasn't noticed in time.


There appear to be four positions for the key: The centre position is
when all doors are open, and the key cannot be removed.

If you turn the key to the left, then all doors will close, save for the
single door panel where the captain is operating the doors. This allows
him to check the platform.

Turning the key once more to the left closes the single panel, allowing
the train to take off.

Alternatively, the captain can turn the key from its centre position to
the right. This allows him to remove the key without closing any doors.

Neil Williams wrote:
On 03 Dec 2009 20:10:57 GMT, Matthew Geier
wrote:

Originally a train captain had to on any vehicular that was moving. After
much arguing they got it relaxed to any train in passenger service,
meaning the train captains were not being 'wasted' riding empty cars to
and from the depots.

When there's a failure and manual driving is required, that might
cause some delay as it would be difficult to get a member of staff to
the train on an elevated section.

Didn't know any unmanned operation was allowed! I'll have to look out
for one next time I'm on the DLR!

Neil

It's done in Vienna.

Paul Terry wrote:
In message , Arthur
Figgis writes

How will the pod cars at Heathrow fit in with this?

Driverless trains have been running on the Gatwick monorail for years.

And at Stansted.

On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Neil Williams wrote:

On 03 Dec 2009 20:10:57 GMT, Matthew Geier
wrote:

And they run fully automatic with no on train staff OR platform staff
and there are no platform screen doors. They run through dense
residential 'towns'

One of the curious features of them as a result is that the windows are
actually LCD panels, and are automatically blanked when it passes close
to apartment buildings.

Was this cheaper than fences?

tom

--
Through the darkness of Future Past the magician longs to see.

One of the curious features of them as a result is that the windows
are actually LCD panels, and are automatically blanked when it passes
close to apartment buildings.

Was this cheaper than fences?

It may well be, if the amount of area that would be need to be fenced is
very large, and the number of trains needing special windows not so much.

Of course, probably the real reason is that this scheme allows the
apartment dwellers to keep their views.

-Miles

--
Year, n. A period of three hundred and sixty-five disappointments.

In message , at 08:18:41 on Fri, 4
Dec 2009, Paul Terry remarked:

How will the pod cars at Heathrow fit in with this?

Driverless trains have been running on the Gatwick monorail for years.

It's not a monorail, and there are PEDs; but apart from that...
--
Roland Perry