wrote:
On 13.01.16 8:55, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
In article , (Mizter T) wrote:

On 12/01/2016 20:51, Steve Fitzgerald wrote:

In message , Mizter T
writes
Do you like the S-stock - from a driver's POV that is?

I love them. Comfortable, good driving position, cab air-com (although
it's a bit noisy) and hi-tech controls (which always goes down well with
me!)

It's almost disappointing when a D stock turns up as they are getting
dated and not much loved by the depots these days.

That's great to hear! I like them from a passenger's perspective too
- lots of space, big wide doors, smooth ride.

I agree except for the lack of transverse seats on the S7s. One advantage of
the S8s which I last used.

Yes, I always try and grabs transverse seat on an S8, even a rear facing
one.

Are there any external differences at this point between an S7 and S8?
Or does one need to always look at the seating arrangement/

Earlier, one could tell the difference by the fact that the third number
on an S7 railcar's number was always 3. Now however, that no longer
appears to be the case.


I don't know if there are still any S7+1s on the Met (I've not seen any
recently). If not, then the line tells you whether it'll be an S7 or S8.
I'm not aware of any other ways of telling from the external appearance.

In article , () wrote:

On 13.01.16 8:55, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
In article , (Mizter T)
wrote:

On 12/01/2016 20:51, Steve Fitzgerald wrote:

In message , Mizter T

writes
Do you like the S-stock - from a driver's POV that is?

I love them. Comfortable, good driving position, cab air-com
(although it's a bit noisy) and hi-tech controls (which always goes
down well with me!)

It's almost disappointing when a D stock turns up as they are
getting dated and not much loved by the depots these days.

That's great to hear! I like them from a passenger's perspective too
- lots of space, big wide doors, smooth ride.

I agree except for the lack of transverse seats on the S7s. One
advantage of the S8s which I last used.

Yes, I always try and grabs transverse seat on an S8, even a rear
facing one.

Are there any external differences at this point between an S7 and
S8? Or does one need to always look at the seating arrangement/

Earlier, one could tell the difference by the fact that the third
number on an S7 railcar's number was always 3. Now however, that no
longer appears to be the case.

S8 stock is numbered as half sets 001-116. S7 is numbered as half sets
301-566.

In other words, S8 cars are numbered 21001-21116, 22001-22116, 23001-23116*,
24001-24116 while S7 cars are 21301-21566, 22301-22566, 23302-23566* (even
numbers only) and 24301-24566.

* De-icing cars in some units are numbered 25xxx instead of 23xxx (even nos
only). This appears to cover 25002-25056 and 25302-25386 (evens).

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Recliner wrote on 13 Jan 2016 at 08:55 ...
wrote:
In article , (Mizter T) wrote:

On 12/01/2016 20:51, Steve Fitzgerald wrote:

In message , Mizter T
writes
Do you like the S-stock - from a driver's POV that is?

I love them. Comfortable, good driving position, cab air-com (although
it's a bit noisy) and hi-tech controls (which always goes down well with
me!)

It's almost disappointing when a D stock turns up as they are getting
dated and not much loved by the depots these days.

That's great to hear! I like them from a passenger's perspective too
- lots of space, big wide doors, smooth ride.

I agree except for the lack of transverse seats on the S7s. One advantage of
the S8s which I last used.

Yes, I always try and grabs transverse seat on an S8, even a rear facing
one.

To my surprise, having always tried to get a transverse seat on D stock,
I find that the lack of transverse seats on S7 doesn't actually bother
me, probably because S7 is better in all other respects. It helps (when
not in tunnel) that the windows are large, so much better than the
Overground's class 378 from the same manufacturer.

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

Richard J. wrote:
Recliner wrote on 13 Jan 2016 at 08:55 ...
wrote:
In article , (Mizter T) wrote:

On 12/01/2016 20:51, Steve Fitzgerald wrote:

In message , Mizter T
writes
Do you like the S-stock - from a driver's POV that is?

I love them. Comfortable, good driving position, cab air-com (although
it's a bit noisy) and hi-tech controls (which always goes down well with
me!)

It's almost disappointing when a D stock turns up as they are getting
dated and not much loved by the depots these days.

That's great to hear! I like them from a passenger's perspective too
- lots of space, big wide doors, smooth ride.

I agree except for the lack of transverse seats on the S7s. One advantage of
the S8s which I last used.

Yes, I always try and grabs transverse seat on an S8, even a rear facing
one.

To my surprise, having always tried to get a transverse seat on D stock,
I find that the lack of transverse seats on S7 doesn't actually bother
me, probably because S7 is better in all other respects. It helps (when
not in tunnel) that the windows are large, so much better than the
Overground's class 378 from the same manufacturer.

Yes, it's surprising how different those trains are, considering they were
built at the same time in the same factory. Even the seats are a lot more
comfortable in the S stock than the 378s. Some of the latter's windows are
small because of the external displays, aren't they?

On 15.01.16 22:30, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 13.01.16 16:02, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 14:53:50 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:08:43 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
transfer to Vivarail. I suspect you'd be at the front of the queue of the
complainers if the D stock was still running around unrefurbished after 35
years of service.

As long as a train is reliable I don't really care what the interior decor
is
like especially if a refurb means yet more strain on the budget and hence
potential ticket price rises.

Were you under the impression that the refurbishment was just a paint job??
Wow!

See these pages to see what was actually done. Most of it was to improve
functionality and reliability, as well as some safety features. The paint
job was also needed for trains that were looking shabby and graffiti
stained after 25 years of service, but it was a small part of the project.
http://www.trainweb.org/districtdave...rbishment.html

I don't see anything (in this admittedly messy site) about the motors or
traction control equipment being refurbished. So some wiring was redone and
an "information system" was put in. Nothing that was vital for a train about
to be ditched less than 10 years later.

Here's your list:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lond...#Refurbishment

The bogies were also replaced, but I think that was a separate project.

I don't think they knew the replacement plans when the refurbishment plans
were agreed.

I miss the D78s' wood floors.

Presumably no longer allowed for fire safety reasons? All the old stock
had it, but I assume it's gone for good now.

I'm inclined to agree.

On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:08:25 +0000
" wrote:
On 15.01.16 22:30, Recliner wrote:
Presumably no longer allowed for fire safety reasons? All the old stock
had it, but I assume it's gone for good now.

I'm inclined to agree.

Wood can be made pretty fire proof - otherwise wooden houses would be banned.
I think its probably more likely that a nice wooden floor is expensive compared
to some cheap plastic (or whatever they use) covering over the bare metal.

--
Spud

wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:08:25 +0000
" wrote:
On 15.01.16 22:30, Recliner wrote:
Presumably no longer allowed for fire safety reasons? All the old stock
had it, but I assume it's gone for good now.

I'm inclined to agree.

Wood can be made pretty fire proof - otherwise wooden houses would be banned.
I think its probably more likely that a nice wooden floor is expensive compared
to some cheap plastic (or whatever they use) covering over the bare metal.

The lino is probably easier to clean, too, than the old wooden slats. They
can also colour-code it these days, with a different colour near the doors.

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 12:43:11 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Getting back to the subject of what to name future Underground lines, I assume
there will eventually be an Elizabeth line, probably some years after King
Charles III (or whatever other monarchical name he chooses) ascends the throne.
If this happens Her Majesty will have two lines named for her, as the Jubilee
was named for the Silver Jubilee. Given how long she has served the country,
that seems fitting.

Absolutely.

Naming lines after politicians, especially controversial ones or those who
divide opinion, would never be a good idea, regardless of the political
allegiance of the politician in question. Plus in general monarchical names
tend to just sound better, as they tend to be long-used and familiar, and
carry the majesty of their various original owners to an extent.

So naming something for "Clement Attlee" would not work for you.

I could see the merit in a Cromwell Line, while I'd personally not be in
favour I can accept that he was a sufficiently major character in English
history as to be potentially valid. And long enough ago that any personal
animosity on either side should have dissipated. Personally I thank the
gods that his ideas failed and we returned to being a monarchy though!

Of course major social movements for progress could possibly also be
considered. The abolition of slavery, the emancipation of women, the
outlawing of racism, the equality of people of alternative sexuality
and gender identity. But as movement names (the Emancipation Line,
or the Equality Line, perhaps?) as opposed to being named for individuals.
Though perhaps politicians from more than say 200 years ago could be
considered to be both long-term historically significant enough, and
sufficiently long ago as to be no longer divisive, could be allowed.
The Wilberforce Line?

A "Wilberforce" line, or any public structure so named, is a concept I
would wholeheartedly favor.

It doesn't matter what the name is as long as it meets the
three criteria: non-controversial; easily pronounced, concise.

One of the two halves will continue as the Northern Line.
The other can be called anything: Barclay Line, Primrose Line;
Sherman Line; anything you like. It doesn't matter if the name
makes no sense. Within a few days it will become accepted,
used and very familiar.

On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:41:15 +0000, e27002 aurora
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 12:43:11 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Getting back to the subject of what to name future Underground lines, I assume
there will eventually be an Elizabeth line, probably some years after King
Charles III (or whatever other monarchical name he chooses) ascends the throne.
If this happens Her Majesty will have two lines named for her, as the Jubilee
was named for the Silver Jubilee. Given how long she has served the country,
that seems fitting.

Absolutely.

Naming lines after politicians, especially controversial ones or those who
divide opinion, would never be a good idea, regardless of the political
allegiance of the politician in question. Plus in general monarchical names
tend to just sound better, as they tend to be long-used and familiar, and
carry the majesty of their various original owners to an extent.

So naming something for "Clement Attlee" would not work for you.

I could see the merit in a Cromwell Line, while I'd personally not be in
favour I can accept that he was a sufficiently major character in English
history as to be potentially valid. And long enough ago that any personal
animosity on either side should have dissipated. Personally I thank the
gods that his ideas failed and we returned to being a monarchy though!

Of course major social movements for progress could possibly also be
considered. The abolition of slavery, the emancipation of women, the
outlawing of racism, the equality of people of alternative sexuality
and gender identity. But as movement names (the Emancipation Line,
or the Equality Line, perhaps?) as opposed to being named for individuals.
Though perhaps politicians from more than say 200 years ago could be
considered to be both long-term historically significant enough, and
sufficiently long ago as to be no longer divisive, could be allowed.
The Wilberforce Line?

A "Wilberforce" line, or any public structure so named, is a concept I
would wholeheartedly favor.

Depends on who is being served? duicks