Basil Jet wrote:
On 2014\10\12 23:04, Recliner wrote:

Incidentally, the original 1900 Central London Railway tunnels were smaller
than the later Yerkes tube tunnels, but they may have been enlarged later,
just as the C&SL tunnels were.

The Central was never enlarged, because the difference was slight,
however all Central Line trains have had non-standard shoe-gear because
the third rail is higher to fit in the smaller tunnels.

But that may explain why the 92 stock is slightly smaller than the 95 stock
of the same era.

On 2014-10-13 07:34:52 +0000, Recliner said:

But that may explain why the 92 stock is slightly smaller than the 95 stock
of the same era.

I wonder what makes it feel bigger, then? Perhaps the large windows?

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 17:37:42 -0500
Recliner wrote:
I think he said they'll actually have 'drivers' in the front cab in the
first few years, then roving attendants, presumably after the PEDs are

I don't think they'd be doing much roving in a packed rush hour tube. Sadly
this is where Boris comes up against reality and Boris loses.

--
Spud

On 2014-10-13 00:20:24 +0000, Recliner said:

Maybe it'll be like the DLR, with driver's control panels, but not a
separated cab?

Not doing it like this was *deliberate* on Victoria and Central Line
stock. With Tube overcrowding, it would be a nonsense - it already
causes issues on the DLR, but at least the "guard" can stand upright by
the doors on non-Tube-profile stock.

It would be a complete nonsense.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On 2014-10-12 23:13:25 +0000, Paul Corfield said:

Clearly LU could opt to deploy obstruction detection technology but
it's unproven. Network Rail are trying to use it at level crossings
and have had a lot of problems (source - R Ford columns in Modern
Railways). Alternatively it could opt to do nothing and do as the DLR
do. However one has to then ask the question as to why they have
publicly declared that PEDs *are* required for fully automatic
operation. DLR operates into crowded and narrow platforms. It runs
over and under ground. The only main difference is that it doesn't run
at as high speeds as LU trains can and do. Further there are no
obvious suicide spots on DLR whereas there definitely are on LU.

The issue is maybe that the DLR wasn't really designed for the level of
overcrowding it actually experiences - thus there is overcrowding that
was possibly not in the original risk assessment.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

Neil Williams wrote:
On 2014-10-13 00:20:24 +0000, Recliner said:

Maybe it'll be like the DLR, with driver's control panels, but not a
separated cab?

Not doing it like this was *deliberate* on Victoria and Central Line
stock. With Tube overcrowding, it would be a nonsense - it already
causes issues on the DLR, but at least the "guard" can stand upright by
the doors on non-Tube-profile stock.

It would be a complete nonsense.


I think the new trains will have lower floors, so standing upright by the
doors will be easier. In any case, would the attendant still need a full
width cab? I still remember when there were guards in the saloons (not the
rear cab) on LU Tube trains, and they just put a bar across the carriage
end when they occupied it. They seemed to have no trouble standing.

On 2014-10-13 08:48:02 +0000, Recliner said:

I think the new trains will have lower floors, so standing upright by the
doors will be easier. In any case, would the attendant still need a full
width cab?

Arguably a half-width one would do, but that would add, what, 2 seats
or standing room for 2?

I still remember when there were guards in the saloons (not the
rear cab) on LU Tube trains, and they just put a bar across the carriage
end when they occupied it. They seemed to have no trouble standing.

They of course had the full width to themselves, and it took up almost
as much space as a full cab.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

Neil Williams wrote:
On 2014-10-13 08:48:02 +0000, Recliner said:

I think the new trains will have lower floors, so standing upright by the
doors will be easier. In any case, would the attendant still need a full
width cab?

Arguably a half-width one would do, but that would add, what, 2 seats or
standing room for 2?

That's effectively what happens on the DLR: if the PSA is driving, they
take over one pair of front seats and open the cover over the controls, but
most of the time, they're elsewhere on the train.

I still remember when there were guards in the saloons (not the
rear cab) on LU Tube trains, and they just put a bar across the carriage
end when they occupied it. They seemed to have no trouble standing.

They of course had the full width to themselves, and it took up almost as
much space as a full cab.

True, but they needed to access doors on both sides in the days before
video monitors. They also had to step out on curved platforms to see the
whole train. None of that is needed today. In fact, door closing could be
automated or controlled remotely, with the PSA providing a manual override
if needed (eg, if a wheel chair is being rolled on). After all, we're all
used to using automatic lifts, where the doors close automatically (with
override buttons), and a train is really just a horizontal lift.

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 03:48:02 -0500
Recliner wrote:
I think the new trains will have lower floors, so standing upright by the

I can't see how they're going to manage that unless they make the car narrower
at floor level S stock style. If they don't then the floor will foul a lot of
curved platforms. I can't see people being thrilled about leaning against a
door curved at the top AND the bottom.

--
Spud

On 2014-10-13 09:01:28 +0000, Recliner said:

True, but they needed to access doors on both sides in the days before
video monitors. They also had to step out on curved platforms to see the
whole train. None of that is needed today. In fact, door closing could be
automated or controlled remotely, with the PSA providing a manual override
if needed (eg, if a wheel chair is being rolled on). After all, we're all
used to using automatic lifts, where the doors close automatically (with
override buttons), and a train is really just a horizontal lift.

A train is a horizontal lift that runs to a timetable. The timetable
would end up in tatters as people who couldn't fit squeezed on, and the
doors wouldn't close, and doors were held all over the place.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.