wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 20:41:44 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 17:06:51 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
On 20/03/2019 16:23, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
On 20/03/2019 09:24, Recliner wrote:
Neil Robertson wrote:
As the picc train crawled at its usual 15mph down towards heathrow
yesterday
I noticed a 95/96 stock (couldn't tell which) was sitting in
northfields
depot which is rather a distance form its usual stomping ground. Anyone

know
what its doing there?

Brake testing?

That would be my guess... there are sprinklers fitted on the
northernmost track from Northfields to Acton Town for brake testing.


Yup, it's the dedicated test track where all LU stock goes to test any
changes to brakes, brake pad materials, etc. It's fairly easily accessed
by
all the stock types, as well.

Can the 2009 stock fit through the Piccadilly Line bends at South Ken?


I think so, running very slowly, and ECS of course. It's too large to run
in service through the Piccadilly line tunnels, but was designed to fit for
stock transfers.

You sure? I thought it was delivered by road to northumberland park because
it didn't fit. Seems a lot of effort if they could simply have dragged it
from
Derby.


It was certainly delivered by road, probably to avoid the disruption of the
fleet crawling along the Central and Piccadilly lines. If they'd really
wanted to deliver by rail it would have been much easier to restore the
connection to the NR line thst runs alongside the Northumberland Park
depot.

True. There does seem to be conflicting information wrt the 2009 stock
depending on what source you read. Wikipedia says its wider than other tube
stock - it isn't, but what it does have is a clearly more vertical profile
on the sides before the body starts to curve over. I suspect bashing the tunnel
at the top of the doors on curves is probably the real issue.


It's the same height as other tube stock, but 40mm wider than the 67 stock
it replaced, which was the previous widest stock. You may be right that the
tops of the doors could be the point of potential interference in tightly
curved tunnels.

If that's a real risk, one extreme measure could be to remove the doors of
a test train for an ECS move to Northfields. Another method might be to
lower the trains slightly, perhaps by loading them up with ballast.

In any case, the train would traverse the tight tunnels at a very low
speed, to minimise sway. I'd have thought that would be enough.

On 20/03/2019 16:54, Basil Jet wrote:
On 20/03/2019 16:23, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
On 20/03/2019 09:24, Recliner wrote:
Neil Robertson wrote:
As the picc train crawled at its usual 15mph down towards heathrow
yesterday
I noticed a 95/96 stock (couldn't tell which) was sitting in
northfields
depot which is rather a distance form its usual stomping ground.
Anyone know
what its doing there?

Brake testing?

That would be my guess... there are sprinklers fitted on the
northernmost track from Northfields to Acton Town for brake testing.


Yup, it's the dedicated test track where all LU stock goes to test any
changes to brakes, brake pad materials, etc. It's fairly easily
accessed by
all the stock types, as well.

Can the 2009 stock fit through the Piccadilly Line bends at South Ken?


I forgot to mention, the 92 stock on the W&C obviously can't get to
Northfields easily either.

--
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
Spratleys Japs - Hands (Marc Riley session)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTFmVrE1WAc

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 10:20:12 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 20:41:44 -0000 (UTC)
True. There does seem to be conflicting information wrt the 2009 stock
depending on what source you read. Wikipedia says its wider than other tube
stock - it isn't, but what it does have is a clearly more vertical profile
on the sides before the body starts to curve over. I suspect bashing the
tunnel
at the top of the doors on curves is probably the real issue.


It's the same height as other tube stock, but 40mm wider than the 67 stock
it replaced, which was the previous widest stock. You may be right that the

That depends on which part of wikipedia you believe. The text says its wider
but it says 8ft 7in for the width, whereas the width for the 1967 stock was
apparently 8ft 8in. You pays your money....

I suspect only Bombardier and a few test guys really know.

On 21/03/2019 16:10, wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 10:20:12 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 20:41:44 -0000 (UTC)
True. There does seem to be conflicting information wrt the 2009 stock
depending on what source you read. Wikipedia says its wider than other tube
stock - it isn't, but what it does have is a clearly more vertical profile
on the sides before the body starts to curve over. I suspect bashing the
tunnel
at the top of the doors on curves is probably the real issue.


It's the same height as other tube stock, but 40mm wider than the 67 stock
it replaced, which was the previous widest stock. You may be right that the

That depends on which part of wikipedia you believe. The text says its wider
but it says 8ft 7in for the width, whereas the width for the 1967 stock was
apparently 8ft 8in. You pays your money....

I suspect only Bombardier and a few test guys really know.

The real question is where do 2009 stock actually get their brakes tested.

--
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
Spratleys Japs - Hands (Marc Riley session)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTFmVrE1WAc

In message , at 16:10:14 on Thu, 21 Mar
2019, remarked:

It's the same height as other tube stock, but 40mm wider than the 67 stock
it replaced, which was the previous widest stock. You may be right that the

That depends on which part of wikipedia you believe. The text says its wider
but it says 8ft 7in for the width, whereas the width for the 1967 stock was
apparently 8ft 8in. You pays your money....

I suspect only Bombardier and a few test guys really know.

Of whom one is dead, one is mad, and the other has forgotten all about
it.
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:20:53 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:10, wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 10:20:12 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 20:41:44 -0000 (UTC)
True. There does seem to be conflicting information wrt the 2009 stock
depending on what source you read. Wikipedia says its wider than other tube

stock - it isn't, but what it does have is a clearly more vertical profile
on the sides before the body starts to curve over. I suspect bashing the
tunnel
at the top of the doors on curves is probably the real issue.


It's the same height as other tube stock, but 40mm wider than the 67 stock
it replaced, which was the previous widest stock. You may be right that the

That depends on which part of wikipedia you believe. The text says its wider
but it says 8ft 7in for the width, whereas the width for the 1967 stock was
apparently 8ft 8in. You pays your money....

I suspect only Bombardier and a few test guys really know.

The real question is where do 2009 stock actually get their brakes tested.

At every station. The ATO doesn't mess about, finesse is not part of its
programming

wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:20:53 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:10, wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 10:20:12 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 20:41:44 -0000 (UTC)
True. There does seem to be conflicting information wrt the 2009 stock
depending on what source you read. Wikipedia says its wider than other tube

stock - it isn't, but what it does have is a clearly more vertical profile
on the sides before the body starts to curve over. I suspect bashing the
tunnel
at the top of the doors on curves is probably the real issue.


It's the same height as other tube stock, but 40mm wider than the 67 stock
it replaced, which was the previous widest stock. You may be right that the

That depends on which part of wikipedia you believe. The text says its wider
but it says 8ft 7in for the width, whereas the width for the 1967 stock was
apparently 8ft 8in. You pays your money....

I suspect only Bombardier and a few test guys really know.

The real question is where do 2009 stock actually get their brakes tested.

At every station. The ATO doesn't mess about, finesse is not part of its
programming



Yes, the Northfields test track is really about testing new brake designs
or materials, particularly in wet conditions. It's not for routine testing
of existing trains.

As the Victoria line is entirely underground, it doesn't need tests in
simulated rainy conditions, so maybe the 2009 stock has no need to be
tested there.

In message , at 17:13:49 on Thu, 21 Mar
2019, Recliner remarked:

As the Victoria line is entirely underground,

Apart from the depot at Northumberland Park.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 17:13:49 on Thu, 21 Mar
2019, Recliner remarked:

As the Victoria line is entirely underground,

Apart from the depot at Northumberland Park.

Yes, we know — why do you think I worded my comment the way I did?

On 21/03/2019 17:13, Recliner wrote:

Yes, the Northfields test track is really about testing new brake designs
or materials, particularly in wet conditions.

Really? Surely that would be done in Derby or Japan or somewhere.

It's not for routine testing
of existing trains.

--
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
Spratleys Japs - Hands (Marc Riley session)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTFmVrE1WAc