Michael Hoffman wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote:

I'll support that experiment. As long as none of the lost items are
bombs.

I don't think the announcements will affect the rate of bombs
intentionally
left

If the announcements cause less people to forget their bags then if a
bomb is left in a bag it'll be more obvious... surely?

--
Chris

I'll support that experiment. As long as none of the lost items are
bombs.
I don't think the announcements will affect the rate of bombs intentionally
left

Particularly as a modern terrorist is likely just to blow themselves up.

"Please ensure you have all terrorists with you when leaving the train".

wrote:
Michael Hoffman wrote:

Dave Arquati wrote:


I'll support that experiment. As long as none of the lost items are

bombs.

I don't think the announcements will affect the rate of bombs

intentionally

left


If the announcements cause less people to forget their bags then if a
bomb is left in a bag it'll be more obvious... surely?

Depends if it's ticking.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article . com,
() wrote:


Boltar wrote:

Call me a cynic but I can't help thinking that flip up seats are
probably a lot cheaper than the real thing though I'm sure this
in no way would influence their decision , no no, not at all.

IMO flip up seats are more expensive than normal fixed seats - they
move and hence need more maintenance, they require more spares to be
kept vs. having all fixed seats, and they require more space - you
can't house equipment under them.

A cheaper option would be perch seats, which one leans against. The
Jubilee 1996 stock has these in place of the Northern 1995's flip ups,
which often seem to have broken springs and don't return to upright.


The perch seats are unusable by people of normal height.

I second that for the Piccadilly line. The only vaguely usable ones are
the car-end ones, but they're still not particularly comfortable.
Standing is far more comfortable than "perching".

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Boltar wrote:

There was a short piece on BBC london news on TV last night about
the new vic line trains and an interview with some bod at (I
think) Bombardier. Anyway , turns out that it looks like the
prototypes at least will have less seating (quelle surprise) and
a lot of what seating is left will be flip up so theres room for
all these mythical wheelchair bound passengers we keep hearing
about but no one has ever actually seen.

But how does this new train design compare to other (relatively) recent
tube train designs? Have they overcome the following three design flaws:

Floor too high?
Wasted space between seats and wall?
End connection not safe to use while train is moving?

Dave Arquati wrote:
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

The perch seats are unusable by people of normal height.

I second that for the Piccadilly line. The only vaguely usable ones
are the car-end ones, but they're still not particularly comfortable.
Standing is far more comfortable than "perching".

Only for people who have two good legs and/or are not pregnant etc.

Aidan Stanger wrote:
Boltar wrote:

There was a short piece on BBC london news on TV last night about
the new vic line trains and an interview with some bod at (I
think) Bombardier. Anyway , turns out that it looks like the
prototypes at least will have less seating (quelle surprise) and
a lot of what seating is left will be flip up so theres room for
all these mythical wheelchair bound passengers we keep hearing
about but no one has ever actually seen.

But how does this new train design compare to other (relatively)
recent tube train designs? Have they overcome the following three
design flaws:

Floor too high?
Wasted space between seats and wall?
End connection not safe to use while train is moving?

The end connection will never be safe to use while the train is moving,
simply because the ends of the cars do not remain in alignment. Watch them
going round bends, in some cases the door on the adjacent car is completely
obscured.

Brimstone wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:


The perch seats are unusable by people of normal height.

I second that for the Piccadilly line. The only vaguely usable ones
are the car-end ones, but they're still not particularly comfortable.
Standing is far more comfortable than "perching".


Only for people who have two good legs and/or are not pregnant etc.

Fair enough.

Of course, for those people, an actual seat is probably far superior, be
it tip-up or not.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Brimstone wrote:
Aidan Stanger wrote:

Boltar wrote:


There was a short piece on BBC london news on TV last night about
the new vic line trains and an interview with some bod at (I
think) Bombardier. Anyway , turns out that it looks like the
prototypes at least will have less seating (quelle surprise) and
a lot of what seating is left will be flip up so theres room for
all these mythical wheelchair bound passengers we keep hearing
about but no one has ever actually seen.

But how does this new train design compare to other (relatively)
recent tube train designs? Have they overcome the following three
design flaws:

Floor too high?
Wasted space between seats and wall?
End connection not safe to use while train is moving?


The end connection will never be safe to use while the train is moving,
simply because the ends of the cars do not remain in alignment. Watch them
going round bends, in some cases the door on the adjacent car is completely
obscured.

However, the new subsurface stock will (apparently) be truly
articulated. I'm not sure why this can be done on the SSL stock and not
the Victoria stock (for which it was originally proposed).

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article . com,
() wrote:


Boltar wrote:

Call me a cynic but I can't help thinking that flip up seats are
probably a lot cheaper than the real thing though I'm sure this
in no way would influence their decision , no no, not at all.

IMO flip up seats are more expensive than normal fixed seats - they
move and hence need more maintenance, they require more spares to be
kept vs. having all fixed seats, and they require more space - you
can't house equipment under them.

A cheaper option would be perch seats, which one leans against. The
Jubilee 1996 stock has these in place of the Northern 1995's flip ups,
which often seem to have broken springs and don't return to upright.


The perch seats are unusable by people of normal height.

I'm taller than average, which is probably why I'd prefer a perch seat
to standing.
--
Michael Hoffman