On Fri, 19 May 2017 08:55:38 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 15:17:11 +0100
Recliner wrote:
As expected, TfL has started the procurement process to replace
two-thirds of the DLR fleet (the B90, B92 and B2K sets), plus extra
stock to increase services. The 43 new generation articulated trains,
entering service from 2022, will be single 87m units, equivalent to
three of the current two-section units (which is how most DLR trains
runs now).

Why do light rail and tram vehicles seem to have a much shorter shelf life
than heavy rail trains? Is it build quality? The DLR trains seem in fairly
good nick to me, I can't see any pressing need as a passenger for them to
be replaced.

It seems the trains only had a 25 year design life, are used very
intensively, and do now need structural work to stay in service:
http://www.plantengineer.org.uk/plan...t-underway-for
docklands-light-railway/154830/

As usual the buy-it-on-the-cheap approach comes back to bite them. You'd have
thought they'd have learnt their lesson with the 92 stock. The other document
mentions a strenuous life for the trains, can't see it myself. There are far
older trams ploughing up and down far steeper inclines around europe that
don't have a nice reserved right of way.

--
Spud

On Fri, 19 May 2017 09:36:10 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Fri, 19 May 2017 08:55:38 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 15:17:11 +0100
Recliner wrote:
As expected, TfL has started the procurement process to replace
two-thirds of the DLR fleet (the B90, B92 and B2K sets), plus extra
stock to increase services. The 43 new generation articulated trains,
entering service from 2022, will be single 87m units, equivalent to
three of the current two-section units (which is how most DLR trains
runs now).

Why do light rail and tram vehicles seem to have a much shorter shelf life
than heavy rail trains? Is it build quality? The DLR trains seem in fairly
good nick to me, I can't see any pressing need as a passenger for them to
be replaced.

It seems the trains only had a 25 year design life, are used very
intensively, and do now need structural work to stay in service:
http://www.plantengineer.org.uk/plan...t-underway-for
docklands-light-railway/154830/

As usual the buy-it-on-the-cheap approach comes back to bite them. You'd have
thought they'd have learnt their lesson with the 92 stock. The other document
mentions a strenuous life for the trains, can't see it myself. There are far
older trams ploughing up and down far steeper inclines around europe that
don't have a nice reserved right of way.

The DLR was certainly built on the cheap. It was that or nothing.

The train design that's now wearing out predates the 92 stock, so they
could hardly learn from it. And it's probably no bad thing that the
current trains are coming up for replacement, as it provides the
opportunity to have more appropriate, longer unit trains built, that
couldn't have been ordered before the Olympics caused the stations and
trains to be extended.

On 19.05.17 8:26, Recliner wrote:
David C wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 20:02:59 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 15:17:11 +0100
Recliner wrote:
As expected, TfL has started the procurement process to replace
two-thirds of the DLR fleet (the B90, B92 and B2K sets), plus extra
stock to increase services. The 43 new generation articulated trains,
entering service from 2022, will be single 87m units, equivalent to
three of the current two-section units (which is how most DLR trains
runs now).

Why do light rail and tram vehicles seem to have a much shorter shelf life
than heavy rail trains? Is it build quality? The DLR trains seem in fairly
good nick to me, I can't see any pressing need as a passenger for them to
be replaced.


I don't know if there are any maintenance issues with the current stock,
but having the new stock built as single articulated units increases
capacity and flexibility, allowing the attendant to access the entire
length of the train at any time.

The old DLR stock may have second-value if they're in good nick, just as
the original stock did. For example, I wonder if the T&W Metro could use
them? The current Metro stock is much older, and is due to be replaced in
a few years, just when the DLR trains could be available.


An interesting thought.
One of the 1st batch, (car no. 11?) was fitted with a pantograph for
"Metrolink publicity trails" in Manchester many years ago.

The original P86 and P89 DLR trains were later fitted with pans and cabs:
https://youtu.be/hr_PtAIuD90


T&W 's 1.5kV operating voltage might be a problem though?

I'd have thought that would be easily dealt with.

Do you think that Vivarail might be interested in them? Or do we need to
see how the 230s first work out before they can consider that?

On Fri, 19 May 2017 13:43:15 +0100
" wrote:
Do you think that Vivarail might be interested in them? Or do we need to
see how the 230s first work out before they can consider that?

It took enough work to get the D stock up to mainline crash worthiness. They'd
probably have to graft half a tank onto the front of the DLR stock to manage
that

Of course it does beg the question of why tube stock has such poor crash
resistence especially given that surface stock particularly on the met line
works at speeds little different from outer urban mainline services.

--
Spud

On Fri, 19 May 2017 12:51:28 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Fri, 19 May 2017 13:43:15 +0100
" wrote:
Do you think that Vivarail might be interested in them? Or do we need to
see how the 230s first work out before they can consider that?

It took enough work to get the D stock up to mainline crash worthiness. They'd
probably have to graft half a tank onto the front of the DLR stock to manage
that

Of course it does beg the question of why tube stock has such poor crash
resistence especially given that surface stock particularly on the met line
works at speeds little different from outer urban mainline services.

Primarily, because it doesn't mix with freight trains. If it has a
collision at speed, which is highly unlikely because of the train stop
protection, it will probably be with another identical train.

On Fri, 19 May 2017 13:43:15 +0100, "
wrote:

On 19.05.17 8:26, Recliner wrote:
David C wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017 20:02:59 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2017 15:17:11 +0100
Recliner wrote:
As expected, TfL has started the procurement process to replace
two-thirds of the DLR fleet (the B90, B92 and B2K sets), plus extra
stock to increase services. The 43 new generation articulated trains,
entering service from 2022, will be single 87m units, equivalent to
three of the current two-section units (which is how most DLR trains
runs now).

Why do light rail and tram vehicles seem to have a much shorter shelf life
than heavy rail trains? Is it build quality? The DLR trains seem in fairly
good nick to me, I can't see any pressing need as a passenger for them to
be replaced.


I don't know if there are any maintenance issues with the current stock,
but having the new stock built as single articulated units increases
capacity and flexibility, allowing the attendant to access the entire
length of the train at any time.

The old DLR stock may have second-value if they're in good nick, just as
the original stock did. For example, I wonder if the T&W Metro could use
them? The current Metro stock is much older, and is due to be replaced in
a few years, just when the DLR trains could be available.


An interesting thought.
One of the 1st batch, (car no. 11?) was fitted with a pantograph for
"Metrolink publicity trails" in Manchester many years ago.

The original P86 and P89 DLR trains were later fitted with pans and cabs:
https://youtu.be/hr_PtAIuD90


T&W 's 1.5kV operating voltage might be a problem though?

I'd have thought that would be easily dealt with.

Do you think that Vivarail might be interested in them? Or do we need to
see how the 230s first work out before they can consider that?

I can't imagine why Vivarail would want them. There will be plenty of
1980s EMU available for DEMU conversion if there's a market for them,
as with the Porterbrook Brush 319 Flex conversion.

The DLR B stock would only be useful on another high floor-high door
light rail system, such as the Newcastle Metro, Manchester Metrolink
or Essen EVAG.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essen_...user_Platz.jpg

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 08:32:37AM -0000, Recliner wrote:

They'd also have to fit driver's cabs, unless the Metro
switched to DLR-style ATO on its segregated tracks.

I'm sure I saw one of their trains running automatically into St James's
Park station when I was there a week and a bit ago. So unless my eyes
were deceiving me they've already got it, at least partially.

--
David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic

Erudite is when you make a classical allusion to a
feather. Kinky is when you use the whole chicken.

David Cantrell wrote:
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 08:32:37AM -0000, Recliner wrote:

They'd also have to fit driver's cabs, unless the Metro
switched to DLR-style ATO on its segregated tracks.

I'm sure I saw one of their trains running automatically into St James's
Park station when I was there a week and a bit ago. So unless my eyes
were deceiving me they've already got it, at least partially.


Apparently not:
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=77934

Where's Mr Bell when we need his expert local knowledge?

On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 16:16:49 UTC+1, David Cantrell wrote:
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 08:32:37AM -0000, Recliner wrote:

They'd also have to fit driver's cabs, unless the Metro
switched to DLR-style ATO on its segregated tracks.

I'm sure I saw one of their trains running automatically into St James's
Park station when I was there a week and a bit ago. So unless my eyes
were deceiving me they've already got it, at least partially.

I really don't think it has. It is still working on the old signalling put in in the 1980s. Signalling and control is not part of the current Metro "all change" programme which runs until 2021.

I think Nexus want to replace parts of the signalling and control system along with the rolling stock fleet but there would be very little to gain from ATO on the Metro. There is no demand for anything approaching 1-2 (or better) minute headways anywhere on the network. Service levels now are worse than they were in 1984 when the original core network opened. As said elsewhere the interworking with NR heavy rail east of Pelaw to Sunderland complicates matters hugely.

--
Paul C
via Google

David Cantrell wrote on 30 May 2017 at 16:16 ...
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 08:32:37AM -0000, Recliner wrote:

They'd also have to fit driver's cabs, unless the Metro
switched to DLR-style ATO on its segregated tracks.

I'm sure I saw one of their trains running automatically into St James's
Park station when I was there a week and a bit ago. So unless my eyes
were deceiving me they've already got it, at least partially.

Your eyes were deceiving you. The District Line doesn't have any T&W Metro trains.
:-)

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