On Aug 15, 7:20*pm, Ken Wheatley wrote:
On 2011-08-15 13:05:01 +0000, said:

On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:34:33 +0100
Clive wrote:
There weren't any interlocks on 62 stock, you've imagined it.
Huh? Interlocks in the guard's bell circuit came in with the 1938 stock.
No they didn't, I've worked on both 38 stock on the Northern, and 62
stock on the central, and neither have any interlock that interferes
with traction current when the doors are open.

So the trains could be driven normally even if all the doors were open?

I'm pretty sure I remember times when a train tried to move and the power
cut out because there were door issues.

B2003

Sometime a driver would very briefly apply power in an attempt to shake
loose a sticking door.

Maybe that's what was happening when I thought the driver had jumped
the bell. It was all very quick though.

But we don't seem to have established whether there was an interlock
with the bell, and how that would work differently at stations from
signal stops.

Someone says "wasn't there an interlock with the bell?" and then
someone else says "no, there was no interlock with the doors".

In message
, MIG
writes
Maybe that's what was happening when I thought the driver had jumped
the bell. It was all very quick though.
But we don't seem to have established whether there was an interlock
with the bell, and how that would work differently at stations from
signal stops.
Someone says "wasn't there an interlock with the bell?" and then
someone else says "no, there was no interlock with the doors".
On the old 38 and 62 stock the driver would flick the power handle to
point one and back to give the train a jolt and let the guard know that
the signal had turned green. The same practice could also be used to
sometimes shake loose sticking doors. From a passengers point of view,
you would feel the train kick and then a loud pop as the line breakers
opened. From the platform, you would also see the arc from the flame
chutes on the line breakers as they were E.P. And exhausted through the
contacts blowing the arc out.
--
Clive

On 16/08/2011 14:23, Clive wrote:
In message
, MIG
writes
Maybe that's what was happening when I thought the driver had jumped
the bell. It was all very quick though.
But we don't seem to have established whether there was an interlock
with the bell, and how that would work differently at stations from
signal stops.
Someone says "wasn't there an interlock with the bell?" and then
someone else says "no, there was no interlock with the doors".
On the old 38 and 62 stock the driver would flick the power handle to
point one and back to give the train a jolt and let the guard know that
the signal had turned green. The same practice could also be used to
sometimes shake loose sticking doors. From a passengers point of view,
you would feel the train kick and then a loud pop as the line breakers
opened. From the platform, you would also see the arc from the flame
chutes on the line breakers as they were E.P. And exhausted through the
contacts blowing the arc out.

Would they not at also at times release the brakes, using the rush of
air to let the guard know that the signal had cleared?

What about the platform repeaters, BTW?

In message ,
" writes
Would they not at also at times release the brakes, using the rush of
air to let the guard know that the signal had cleared?

What about the platform repeaters, BTW?
If you got to a timing point a few minutes early then the bobby held you
until correct time. No one knowing they had a few minutes to wait
stood by the buttons ready to go so the driver normally give the train a
quick jolt. Releasing the E.P. Brakes might have done the trick if the
guard was observant, but a quick jolt was far more effective.
Repeaters are only any use where the platform is bent and the guard is
at his position, not reading a newspaper or book.
--
Clive

On 16/08/2011 21:33, Clive wrote:
In message ,
" writes
Would they not at also at times release the brakes, using the rush of
air to let the guard know that the signal had cleared?

What about the platform repeaters, BTW?
If you got to a timing point a few minutes early then the bobby held you
until correct time. No one knowing they had a few minutes to wait stood
by the buttons ready to go so the driver normally give the train a quick
jolt. Releasing the E.P. Brakes might have done the trick if the guard
was observant, but a quick jolt was far more effective. Repeaters are
only any use where the platform is bent and the guard is at his
position, not reading a newspaper or book.

I wonder if they do this on the Island Line to this day, although
traffic volumes there are not nearly what they are/were in London.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 14:23:23 +0100
Clive wrote:
On the old 38 and 62 stock the driver would flick the power handle to
point one and back to give the train a jolt and let the guard know that
the signal had turned green. The same practice could also be used to

Wouldn't that knacker the equipment if done too often?

B2003

In message , d
writes
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 14:23:23 +0100
Clive wrote:
On the old 38 and 62 stock the driver would flick the power handle to
point one and back to give the train a jolt and let the guard know that
the signal had turned green. The same practice could also be used to

Wouldn't that knacker the equipment if done too often?
It was standard practise and I don't remember any failures with traction
equipment.
--
Clive

On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 13:54:51 +0100, Mizter T wrote:
"David Cantrell" wrote:
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 06:12:42PM +0100, Mizter T wrote:

it's not just TfL stations - though I think some
people have suggested there might be a few stations missing from the
list?
One needs to be making a journey from or to that station, the refund
can't just be picked up from a ticket machine.

Sucks for people who rarely travel by train, like those who mostly use
buses.

Or bikes. I tend to take the train when I've racked up enough miles for
one day, and it's a time of day / place where I'm allowed to take the bike
on - not easy to predict a few days in advance, and the refund only stays
available for a week.

Yes, though I'd suggest such people are less likely to encounter Oyster
charging issues that lead on to refunds being given.

As likely as anyone else per journey. And what about passengers' charter
refunds? Are they still paper vouchers even if the journey was paid for
with Oyster pre-pay?

Colin McKenzie

--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

"Colin McKenzie" wrote in message
newsp.v0g87avxby8eno@sheepdog...

As likely as anyone else per journey. And what about passengers' charter
refunds? Are they still paper vouchers even if the journey was paid for
with Oyster pre-pay?

AIUI the NR CofC single journey refund arrangements don't apply to journeys
made using Oyster PAYG, refunds are effectively subcontracted to the Oyster
helpline.

Paul S