Am 15.01.2012 13:28, schrieb Wolfgang Schwanke:

I ask, because I noticed that some tracks simply stopped short of the
border, literally cut, when I visited Berlin in 1999,

Do you remember the exact place you were then? The U-Bahn system has
been restored to its pre-wall status in 1995 with all previous
cross-border connections operational.

So I think that this "1999" is a type, originially meant "1989".

When U2 was reconnected in 1993, polarity on the third rail had to be
reversed on its eastern half, because they'd altered it for some reason
in the east.

That is another difference between the large and narrow profiles --
the older one, i.e. the narrow profile, touched the third rail from
above, the newer one, i.e. the wide profile, touched it from below, as
the S-Bahn does. This is the safer option, and probably they changed
this for exactly that reason. Maybe it enabled also the narrow profile
cars to be used on the wide profile line E (today U5), just with
"Blumenbretter" (window sill) attached under the doors in order to
bridge the gap between car and platform, just as they did in Pyönyang,
to add a detail to the next question below:

They must have adapted it. As Pyongyang ran both small profile "Gisela"
as well as large profile "D" at different stages, who are incompatible
with each other, they must have made mechanical and electrical
adaptations at least for one of the two types, or even both.

There is at least at one point in the web (or was) a page with
information on this.


Cheers,
L.W.

Am 14.01.2012 14:47, schrieb :
Lastly, as East Germany was part of the Eastern bloc, why did they not
eventually operate Soviet-built metro cars?

There were enough railway industry left in the GDR to build the cars
for their own needs, and even railway cars for the Transsiberian
railway. My trip on the Transsib (in 1988) was made in a car built at
Waggonbau Ammendorf in the GDR. I guess at least some of those are still
in use today.


Cheers,
L.W.

On 15/01/2012 12:52, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
Wolfgang wrote
in :

Maybe, yes, as the Berlin U-Bahn existed before any Soviet metro
opened, so certain specs that differed had to be maintained.

The same is true for Bucharest.

I meant Budapest

The Millennium Railway, a.k.a. Line 1, was built in 1896 and is quite
unique and quite different from the other two lines.

Lines 2 & 3 were built after World War II, when Hungary was part of the
Eastern Bloc and at least received its rolling from the Soviet Union. (I
wonder if that was being done under the guise of Comecon.)

I wonder what Line 4 will be like.

Romania split with the Soviet Union and really did go its own way, so
it's not surprising that the Bucharest Metro is not like other Eastern
Bloc nations.

On 15/01/2012 12:28, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
wrote
in :

Anyway, both AI and AII were
phased out in November 1989, coincidentally only a few days before
the fall of the wall. They had already been phased out in West Berlin
in the 1960s and early 1970s, respectively. So the footage is really
from the very last months, weeks or even days these types were in
regular operation.

I just noticed there's a camera date June 1989 at the beginning of the
footage.

With what did they plan to replace the AIs and AIIs, particularly the
wide-profile ones?

With Giselas only. That's how the line operated from then on until it
was joined with its western counterpart in 1993. Of course they didn't
know that in 1989, so they must have been planning to run it with
Giselas indefinetely.

Now I am confused. I thought that Giselas could not run on the
wide-profile U-Bahn line. Thus, if BVB was withdrawing wide-profile
A-series trains from revenue service, with what did they plan to replace
them?

Dorota = D-class U-Bahn trains from West Berlin.

Oh

Were there any physical connections between the eastern and western
parts of the U-Bahn when the city was divided?

Yes, the "Waisentunnel" is a connection between U8 and U5 near
Alexanderplatz. I think the D carriages were transported through it.

And this tunnel existed during the city's partition?

I ask, because I noticed that some tracks simply stopped short of the
border, literally cut, when I visited Berlin in 1999,

Do you remember the exact place you were then? The U-Bahn system has
been restored to its pre-wall status in 1995 with all previous
cross-border connections operational. But the same thing cannot be said
for the S-Bahn and mainline rail even today. So I assume your memory is
not from the U-Bahn.

It was indeed on the U-Bahn. The station was elevated but covered. Just
beyond the station, the track curved slightly to the right and went over
a steel bridge. Literally below that bridge were railroad tracks that
simply stopped, literally cut before the border.

Was much homologation required when BVB acquired the
rail cars from BVG?

No they were perfectly compatible. They merely changed the livery to the
then "corporate design" of the East Berlin transport system which had
been introduced only recently.

Are there any pictures of the D class trains in East Berlin livery?
Also, what did the BVB seal look like?


When U2 was reconnected in 1993, polarity on the third rail had to be
reversed on its eastern half, because they'd altered it for some reason
in the east. This required an overhaul of all Gisela rolling stock in
the days and weeks before the rejoin.

Was U2 physically cut off? Perhaps they changed polarity before it was
cut off for military purposes, such as to prevent transport of French,
British and US troops as one method of marching into East Berlin?

It's interesting that Berlin U-Bahn trains were able to operate on the
Pyongyang Metro, however, for I would have though that the North
Koreans would have built their system more to Soviet specs, assuming
that they differed

They must have adapted it. As Pyongyang ran both small profile "Gisela"
as well as large profile "D" at different stages, who are incompatible
with each other, they must have made mechanical and electrical
adaptations at least for one of the two types, or even both. But I don't
know anything about it.

Giselas no longer run on the Pyongyang Metro, I just read. But they seem
to still be in use on the regional rail in the greater Pyongyang area.

Was the U-Bahn fare in East Berlin the same as on the U-Bahn at a flat
rate of 20 pfennigs?

On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 13:52:15 +0100, Wolfgang Schwanke
wrote:

Wolfgang Schwanke wrote
in :

Maybe, yes, as the Berlin U-Bahn existed before any Soviet metro
opened, so certain specs that differed had to be maintained.

The same is true for Bucharest.

I meant Budapest

An easy mistake, they're both in Europe. ;-)

On 15/01/2012 20:07, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
wrote
in :

With what did they plan to replace the AIs and AIIs, particularly the
wide-profile ones?

With Giselas only. That's how the line operated from then on until it
was joined with its western counterpart in 1993. Of course they didn't
know that in 1989, so they must have been planning to run it with
Giselas indefinetely.

Now I am confused. I thought that Giselas could not run on the
wide-profile U-Bahn line. Thus, if BVB was withdrawing wide-profile
A-series trains from revenue service, with what did they plan to replace
them?

I'll try to explain it as clearly as I can. The U2 line is narrow
profile. All rolling stock that has ever operated on it has been narrow
profile, and will have to be narrow profile for all eternity. AI and
AII, which we see in the video, were narrow profile stock from the
1900s and 1920s, respectively. G[isela] is narrow profile. AIII, which
is a collective label for a number of varieties constructed in West
Berlin during the 1950s through 1980s, is all narrow profile. The 1990s
designed HK stock, which can sometimes be seen on that line nowadays,
is narrow profile. (Where HK is thus named because it's the
"Kleinprofil", i.e. narrow profile twin of the wide profile H stock
from the same era).

I see.


Other narrow profile lines are U1, U3 and U4. They all share the same
rolling stock, or can in principle.

Yes, the "Waisentunnel" is a connection between U8 and U5 near
Alexanderplatz. I think the D carriages were transported through it.

And this tunnel existed during the city's partition?

Yes. I just read that the bend in that tunnel is too narrow for EIII
carriages, who are longer than U-Bahn carriages of other stock because
they're really reconstructed S-Bahn carriages. Therefore they could not
be transferred from U5 to other lines, and not to a different
maintenance facility. Otherwhise they might have survived longer than
they did.

Weren't some S-Bahn carriages also taken from Berlin to Moscow as war
reparations, and put into revenue service there.

It was indeed on the U-Bahn. The station was elevated but covered. Just
beyond the station, the track curved slightly to the right and went over
a steel bridge. Literally below that bridge were railroad tracks that
simply stopped, literally cut before the border.

First guess Gleisdreieck?

http://www.bz-berlin.de/multimedia/a...ck_129488k.jpg

It's an interchange between two elevated U-Bahn lines, both of which
were operational in 1999. Below the U-Bahn bridges there used to be
railway lines who connected to the "Potsdamer Bahnhof" station nearby,
which used to occupy the green space in the middle of the photo. The
rails serving it have always ended there because it was a terminus,
not because of the border. But the station has been abandoned in
1950ish, and flattened shortly after. It's been replaced by a
subterranean through station opened in 2003 in the same location
(Potsdamer Platz). In 1999 you might have seen construction works for
it from the U-Bahn platform.

Second best guess: Mendelssohn-Bartholdy-Park?

http://img.fotocommunity.com/photos/9465310.jpg

A new station opened in 1998 on U2 close to Gleisdreieck. You probably
had a good view on the same situation from there.

Third guess: Schönhauser Allee?

http://www.bahnbilder.de/name/einzel...stationen.html

An elevated U-Bahn along a wide lane street, crossing S-Bahn line in
a cutting. The S-Bahn there is the ring, for which there would have been
a construction site just west of the station in 1999 preparing it
for the reconnection with its western branch. To see it you would have
had to leave the U-Bahn and look down from the road bridge.

Last guess: Warschauer Straße?


Definitely not the first three. May be it was Warschauer Strasse. I
remember that the steel bridge was roundish.

Also, what did the BVB seal look like?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...BVB_Berlin.jpg

Was U2 physically cut off?

I've seen that before. Was that the seal used for all of Berlin at one
point, perhaps before World War II?


Yes, at Potsdamer Platz

Perhaps they changed polarity before it was
cut off for military purposes, such as to prevent transport of French,
British and US troops as one method of marching into East Berlin?

I don't think East Germany was particularly worried about the Allies
trying to invade them from West Berlin out of all places. And if so
the U-Bahn would not have been a wise choice as a means of transport
for an invasion army .

No, certainly they would not have had to worry about an invasion coming
out of West Berlin, particularly as it would have been surrounded. I
think that West Berlin would have had more cause to be worried about
Soviet and East German troops coming across the border, rather than
vice-versa.

I was thinking that if there would have been something more large-scale
than just from West Berlin, it would have been useful to transport
troops at later stages.

Just a guess, really.


Was the U-Bahn fare in East Berlin the same as on the U-Bahn at a flat
rate of 20 pfennigs?

Yes

How did one pay the fare, via POP or through turnstiles installed at
stations? Were tokens used at any point?

Am 15.01.2012 19:39, schrieb :
I ask, because I noticed that some tracks simply stopped short of the
border, literally cut, when I visited Berlin in 1999,

was that really in the year of 1999?

Do you remember the exact place you were then? The U-Bahn system has
been restored to its pre-wall status in 1995 with all previous
cross-border connections operational. But the same thing cannot be said
for the S-Bahn and mainline rail even today. So I assume your memory is
not from the U-Bahn.

It was indeed on the U-Bahn. The station was elevated but covered. Just
beyond the station, the track curved slightly to the right and went over
a steel bridge. Literally below that bridge were railroad tracks that
simply stopped, literally cut before the border.

How did this border look like?

There are few elevated U-Bahn stations where both railway tracks
could be seen underneath, and even more a border nearby.

The only site which I can imagine is Gleisdreieck, an elevated
crossing station in two levels, which is located above a large area
which used to be railway yards and lines, leading to the railway
stations Potsdamer Bahnhof and Anhalter Bahnhof, which had been out of
use for decades.

The functioning lines there -- until the Fernbahntunnel Nord-Süd had
been built -- are the S-Bahn lines diving into the tunnel leading to the
S-Bahn station Anhalter Bahnhof.

Looking from the U2 platform (aligned north-south) at its southern
end, the U-Bahn viaduct makes a turn to the right (but eventually a 90°
turn), crosses the old railway territory, and then vanishes in the front
buildings lining that area at the west.





Cheers,
L.W.

On 15/01/2012 21:29, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
wrote in
:

Weren't some S-Bahn carriages also taken from Berlin to Moscow as war
reparations, and put into revenue service there.

Yes, but some were handed back later.

I've seen that before. Was that the seal used for all of Berlin at one
point, perhaps before World War II?

Yes and even after until some point. There are slight variations, but
it's basically the same. The current yellow square is a new creation.

How did one pay the fare, via POP or through turnstiles installed at
stations?

No, turnstiles would imply that the entire system was enclosed like in
London or New York. That has never been the case. If memory serves, you
bought your ticket at vending machines (or earlier ticket booths at the
station entrance) and validated them before entering a train, really
the same as today. They were valid for interchange to buses, trams and
S- Bahn.


So, it was a POP system, or proof of payment.

One peculiar feature was the "Zahlbox"

http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?...ei:Zahlbox.JPG

How very advanced.

which was introduced in buses after conductors had been abolished
there. Passengers would insert a coin, or an unvalidated U-Bahn ticket
of the same value, and collect a bus ticket from the box. The box could
not check if the sum or voucher inserted was correct. Instead whatever a
person inserted would be visible through the glass window of the box
for everyone else in the vehicle to see, until four or five more tickets
had been sold. Passengers were expected to check on each other for
fraud.

They had transparent fare boxes in New York City, in which you could see
the exact amount being deposited, before they were replaced with
electronic ones. Bus drivers apparently would become adept at seeing how
much was deposited into the older boxes.

Tell me, did the signal and safety systems on the Berlin U-Bahn remain
the same throughout the city's division or did they grow apart during
those 28 years?

Am 16.01.2012 00:24, schrieb :
did the signal and safety systems on the Berlin U-Bahn remain the same
throughout the city's division or did they grow apart during those 28
years?

In West Berlin, BVG experimented with automatic, driverless
operation, and developed LZB on line U9.


Cheers,
L.W.

On 15/01/2012 23:37, Lüko Willms wrote:
Am 16.01.2012 00:24, schrieb :
did the signal and safety systems on the Berlin U-Bahn remain the same
throughout the city's division or did they grow apart during those 28
years?

In West Berlin, BVG experimented with automatic, driverless operation,
and developed LZB on line U9.


Cheers,
L.W.

What about the wayside signals and redundant systems, however?