http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29520761

I distinctly remember arguing on this group a few years back with someone
saying that walk through tube trains would be impossible because of [insert
nonsense reason about loading gauge here]. Good thing for them I can't remember
who it was and I'm too lazy to go through the archives otherwise there would be
a serious session of I Told You So right now.

--
Spud

On Thursday, October 9, 2014 12:22:46 PM UTC-4, wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29520761

I distinctly remember arguing on this group a few years back with someone
saying that walk through tube trains would be impossible because of [insert
nonsense reason about loading gauge here]. Good thing for them I can't remember
who it was and I'm too lazy to go through the archives otherwise there would be
a serious session of I Told You So right now.

I thought that TfL had considered walk-through for the 2009 stock on the Victoria line, but rejected it as impractical.

AIUI, this proposed new stock is not intended to replace the 2009 stock.
--
Roy

On 09/10/2014 18:30, Steve Fitzgerald wrote:
[...]
I thought that TfL had considered walk-through for the 2009 stock on
the Victoria line, but rejected it as impractical.

AIUI, this proposed new stock is not intended to replace the 2009 stock.

I believe it was not TfL as such but Metronet (as was) who as the agency
charged with this upgrade decided it was too risky so they took the safe
approach to archive the target.


That was my understanding - less risky to go with the proven design.

wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29520761

I distinctly remember arguing on this group a few years back with someone
saying that walk through tube trains would be impossible because of [insert
nonsense reason about loading gauge here]. Good thing for them I can't remember
who it was and I'm too lazy to go through the archives otherwise there would be
a serious session of I Told You So right now.

Apart from being being lazy, you have a bad memory as well as a poor grasp
of engineering. The argument was with me, and it was that small-size Tube
stock would need to be articulated to have wide through gangways. Years
ago, such trains were proposed for the Victoria line, but Metronet went for
cheaper conventional stock with your favourite thick walls instead.

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 16:22:46 GMT, d wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29520761

I distinctly remember arguing on this group a few years back with someone
saying that walk through tube trains would be impossible because of [insert
nonsense reason about loading gauge here]. Good thing for them I can't remember
who it was and I'm too lazy to go through the archives otherwise there would be
a serious session of I Told You So right now.

I would prefer to wait and see them in service. A drawing and a
snazzy video does not a working, viable production train make. And it
wasn't me who argued with you in the past. I don't really care very
much but each of the Picc, Bakerloo and Central have their own
particular constraints and issues so there has to be a tiny question
in my mind that one generic design will inevitably be compromised in
order to fit all three routes without any problems.

Yes, this mockup of new "38 Tube stock" (did anyone notice the number in
the picture?) trains seems to have rather unrealistically thin articulated
joints. The tight curves on the Picc would certainly need much thicker
bellows, allowing much more motion between carriages.

On 2014-10-09 20:52:20 +0000, Recliner said:

Yes, this mockup of new "38 Tube stock" (did anyone notice the number in
the picture?) trains seems to have rather unrealistically thin articulated
joints. The tight curves on the Picc would certainly need much thicker
bellows, allowing much more motion between carriages.

It bears more than a passing family resemblance to the old Northern
Line stock, doesn't it? Following a bit in the footsteps of the Bozza
bus...sort-of.

I imagine it hasn't gone for technical accuracy just yet.

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

Neil Williams wrote:
On 2014-10-09 20:52:20 +0000, Recliner said:

Yes, this mockup of new "38 Tube stock" (did anyone notice the number in
the picture?) trains seems to have rather unrealistically thin articulated
joints. The tight curves on the Picc would certainly need much thicker
bellows, allowing much more motion between carriages.

It bears more than a passing family resemblance to the old Northern Line
stock, doesn't it? Following a bit in the footsteps of the Bozza bus...sort-of.

I imagine it hasn't gone for technical accuracy just yet.

Here's a longer article on the new-gen 38 TS:
http://www.dezeen.com/2014/10/09/pri...n-underground/

I assume they picked that iconic stock number deliberately? Note that this
is just a design study, not a manufacturer's engineered prototype, so it's
more about colours and surfaces, rather than accurate sizes for walls,
articulated coupling designs, bellows, etc.

Some of the points I noted:
- Evenly-spaced double-width doors intended for PEDs.
- Illuminated, colour-coded door edges, so you can tell if they're about to
close.
- LCD ad panels that can switch to becoming real-time info panels (eg, the
next station name) as needed.
- WiFi throughout.
- 12/13 short articulated carriages, with train length varying by line.
- All LED lighting, inside and outside.

On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 20:43:56 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 16:22:46 GMT, d wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29520761

I distinctly remember arguing on this group a few years back with someone
saying that walk through tube trains would be impossible because of [insert
nonsense reason about loading gauge here]. Good thing for them I can't
remember
who it was and I'm too lazy to go through the archives otherwise there would
be
a serious session of I Told You So right now.

I would prefer to wait and see them in service. A drawing and a
snazzy video does not a working, viable production train make. And it
wasn't me who argued with you in the past. I don't really care very
much but each of the Picc, Bakerloo and Central have their own
particular constraints and issues so there has to be a tiny question
in my mind that one generic design will inevitably be compromised in
order to fit all three routes without any problems.

Well if they managed to produce stock that could run on all 3 lines in the
1950s I'm pretty sure they can manage it in the 21st century.

--
Spud

On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 15:47:32 -0500
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29520761

I distinctly remember arguing on this group a few years back with someone
saying that walk through tube trains would be impossible because of [insert
nonsense reason about loading gauge here]. Good thing for them I can't
remember
who it was and I'm too lazy to go through the archives otherwise there would
be
a serious session of I Told You So right now.

Apart from being being lazy, you have a bad memory as well as a poor grasp

Or perhaps I use my memory for more important things than remembering the
names of people in long ago usenet arguments.

of engineering. The argument was with me, and it was that small-size Tube
stock would need to be articulated to have wide through gangways. Years

Yes you did. Then it was pointed out to you that equally narrow non articulated
trains in paris already had walk through at which point you disappeared in a
fog of bluster.

ago, such trains were proposed for the Victoria line, but Metronet went for
cheaper conventional stock with your favourite thick walls instead.

And that proves what other than metronet were idiots?

--
Spud

On 10/10/2014 11:36, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Fri, 10 Oct 2014 09:49:41 GMT, d wrote:

Well if they managed to produce stock that could run on all 3 lines in the
1950s I'm pretty sure they can manage it in the 21st century.

And that stock was accessible as were the platforms? All I am saying
is that a generic design will inevitably be compromised. No one has
said how many seats these trains will have, where the luggage space is
for the airport passengers on the Picc Line etc. Even more boring -
will the seats have any padding in them and will there be some
recognition that not everyone is as thin as a stick insect?

The concept of the air for the air cooling, not air conditioning,
being drawn from underneath the trains risks all sorts of issues.
Where is most heat created on a tube train? Yep from the motors and
other equipment hung under the train. I'm not saying it is impossible
to sort out but we cannot have a repeat on the tube of what has
happened with the NB4L. This nonsense of revealing snazzy "designs"
before you know if someone can deliver a working, reliable and
effectively engineered train is so reminiscent of the NB4L that it
worries me. There we have a bus that is fatally compromised - we
simply can't have a repeat with tube trains that will be in service
for up to 50 years.

Hear hear. It looks nice and pretty on an impressive video mock-up, but
that's really not the point. (I wonder to what extent this
'presentation' was driven by Team Boris?)