"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...

The tunnels are all double-track, aren't they? Apart from the new
(short) links.

365s already run through single-track tunnels between Ally Pally and
Potters Bar.

Agreed. However, when the 319s were ordered they were originally designed
without the end doors. The design was required to be modified to allow for
passengers to be detrained in emergency, using front and rear end doors, in
the tunnels under St P/KX. Presumably any following stock will be subject to
the same requirement. I suspect that, as previous posters have suggested,
this may be to do with clearances in the tunnels. I'll have to trawl through
some 1988/1989 "Modern Railways" when I get the chance!

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 23:47:53 GMT, "Jack Taylor"
wrote:


"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...

The tunnels are all double-track, aren't they? Apart from the new
(short) links.

365s already run through single-track tunnels between Ally Pally and
Potters Bar.

Agreed. However, when the 319s were ordered they were originally designed
without the end doors. The design was required to be modified to allow for
passengers to be detrained in emergency, using front and rear end doors, in
the tunnels under St P/KX. Presumably any following stock will be subject to
the same requirement. I suspect that, as previous posters have suggested,
this may be to do with clearances in the tunnels. I'll have to trawl through
some 1988/1989 "Modern Railways" when I get the chance!


Yes 365s do run through single bore tunnels on the East Coast section,
however in an emergency, it is possible to exit via side doors within
the tunnel. Shakespeare Cliff Tunnel in Kent is single bore and can
only have trains with ends doors through it. In this case, it is
beause the tunnel is very tight to gauge and there is no way anyone
could exit through side doors.

Presumably such tight to gauge tunnels exist on the section of line
between Kentish Town and Farringdon. The section beyond here to
Blackfriars, doesn't since Class 465s, the fore runners too 365s, run
to Smithfield Sidings/City Thameslink.



Life without sex just isn't life.
Make love not war!

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 18:35:20 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 18:17:36 on Wed, 10
Aug 2005, Matt Wheeler remarked:
And if its any tunnel, its more likely
the one north of Farringdon rather than the one under the Thames.

err, which Thameslink tunnel goes under the Thames?


Mmmm Yes wasn't he talking about the Blackfriars Station on the bridge
OVER the Thames!!!!

Life without sex just isn't life.
Make love not war!

In article , Christine
writes
Presumably such tight to gauge tunnels exist on the section of line
between Kentish Town and Farringdon.

It's a double-track tunnel.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...
In article , Christine
writes
Presumably such tight to gauge tunnels exist on the section of line
between Kentish Town and Farringdon.

It's a double-track tunnel.

I wonder if the decision is based upon the premise that if two trains,
travelling in opposite directions, became stuck in the tunnels it would be
impossible to detrain passengers using the side doors, either to the cess or
the six foot. Hence the requirement for end doors.

Presumably such tight to gauge tunnels exist on the section of line
between Kentish Town and Farringdon.

It's a double-track tunnel.

I wonder if the decision is based upon the premise that if two trains,
travelling in opposite directions, became stuck in the tunnels it would be
impossible to detrain passengers using the side doors, either to the cess
or
the six foot. Hence the requirement for end doors.

I was wondering if perhaps the widened lines from Moorgate to King's Cross
Thameslink were still considered as part of the London Underground system at
the time and so found themselves having to meet extra requirements because
of that, regardless of the actual practicalities.

Do we actually know if the same restriction applies to this day? The 319s
have been around quite a while after all.

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 22:59:56 GMT, "Graham J"
wrote:

Presumably such tight to gauge tunnels exist on the section of line
between Kentish Town and Farringdon.

It's a double-track tunnel.

I wonder if the decision is based upon the premise that if two trains,
travelling in opposite directions, became stuck in the tunnels it would be
impossible to detrain passengers using the side doors, either to the cess
or
the six foot. Hence the requirement for end doors.

I was wondering if perhaps the widened lines from Moorgate to King's Cross
Thameslink were still considered as part of the London Underground system at
the time and so found themselves having to meet extra requirements because
of that, regardless of the actual practicalities.

Do we actually know if the same restriction applies to this day? The 319s
have been around quite a while after all.


I am wondering if the end door requirement wasn't because of tight to
gauge tunnels, but because of allowing driver access between units.
Not just in tunnels but anywhere, someone may have thought it a handy
option. I know at London Bridge on the multiple lines there, t has
been a handy feature when having to set back trapped trains. No
necessity to block other lines whilst the driver changed ends and
crossing between units. Not such a luxury with 465/386 trains.

Prior to Thameslink, didn't slam door stock (DMUs) use the lines from
Moorgate via Farringdon to Kentish Town. They had no end doors.

Life without sex just isn't life.
Make love not war!

In article ,
(Matt Wheeler) wrote:

I may be wrong, but I had understood that, originally, all the 365s
were to go to South Eastern to replace some slammers, but ultimately
25 were sent to (what was) WAGN instead, leaving just 16 for South
Eastern.

Whatever, WAGN has them all now.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Not sure if this has been posted before but the below link shows
Network Rails current thinking on TL2000. If I'm reading it right the
re-opened enquiry will limit itself to the three areas that were not
acceptable to the original enquiry chairman ie.

* Substandard designs for London Bridge
* No reinstatement plans for Borough Market
* Detailed (But relatively minor) objections to Blackfriars station

The first of these should be mittigated by the new London Bridge
masterplan.

Reinstatement plans have now been drawn up for Borough Market (Will
these be acceptable?)

Detailed changes to Blackfriars (eg. cutting the projected OHLE to City
Thameslink) which will improve the look of the station.

Therefore it seems that the whole scheme rests on whether the designs
by Network Rails Architect, Jestico & Whiles for the Borough Market
re-instatement are going to be accepted. However J&W was also the
practice that LUL contracted for their twice rejected Camden Town
re-development...

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/Documents/Web%20SOC.pdf

Sorry missed a word out it should have been (eg. cutting the projected
OHLE BACK to City Thameslink)