On Sep 25, 1:07 am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Tom Anderson) wrote:

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

In article om,
(MIG) wrote:

The UNDMs were all from the extra build known as 1949 stock, rather
than 1938 stock as such. I think that 1949 stock consisted of only
UNDMs and trailers and allowed units to be reformed.

Not so at all. Some of the UNDMs (22 out of 92) came from the
remains of the aborted 9 car train experiment.

9 cars? What? Where? When? How?

Read any good book on Northern Line history.

If i ever lay my hands on one, i will. All i can glean from the web is
that some of the later platforms were built to 9-car length, and there was
a plan to run trains with 9 cars, with SDO (or whatever it was back then -
a guard with a key, probably) keeping the rear two cars out of use in the
7-car older sections. I don't know which stations were built for 9 cars -
i'm guessing the 1920s extensions, ie everything north of Golders Green
and Highgate, and south of Clapham Common. I also don't know if the two
rear cars would have been emptied before going into the 7-car section; i
certainly hope so.

The 1938 stock book I quoted from last night described the experiment as
"something that seemed like a good idea at the time" with the
implication that the author thought they were stark staring bonkers to
have tried it!

Ha! Sounds about right. Surely hardly any of the central network would
have been 9-car, so where did they think the passengers in those rear two
cars would be going?


I've been trying to make sense of it as well, and I think it must have
been a kind of overlap, ie a couple of coaches not opened between a
suburb and somewhere in the centre, and then maybe two others going
out of use at the same time, having been emptied in the first half of
the centre.

The early UNDMs I neglected in a previous post were the third coach
in, so that they could still be driven with two coaches taken off in
sidings that were too short.

On Sep 25, 9:01 am, MIG wrote:
On Sep 25, 1:07 am, Tom Anderson wrote:





On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Tom Anderson) wrote:

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

In article om,
(MIG) wrote:

The UNDMs were all from the extra build known as 1949 stock, rather
than 1938 stock as such. I think that 1949 stock consisted of only
UNDMs and trailers and allowed units to be reformed.

Not so at all. Some of the UNDMs (22 out of 92) came from the
remains of the aborted 9 car train experiment.

9 cars? What? Where? When? How?

Read any good book on Northern Line history.

If i ever lay my hands on one, i will. All i can glean from the web is
that some of the later platforms were built to 9-car length, and there was
a plan to run trains with 9 cars, with SDO (or whatever it was back then -
a guard with a key, probably) keeping the rear two cars out of use in the
7-car older sections. I don't know which stations were built for 9 cars -
i'm guessing the 1920s extensions, ie everything north of Golders Green
and Highgate, and south of Clapham Common. I also don't know if the two
rear cars would have been emptied before going into the 7-car section; i
certainly hope so.

The 1938 stock book I quoted from last night described the experiment as
"something that seemed like a good idea at the time" with the
implication that the author thought they were stark staring bonkers to
have tried it!

Ha! Sounds about right. Surely hardly any of the central network would
have been 9-car, so where did they think the passengers in those rear two
cars would be going?

I've been trying to make sense of it as well, and I think it must have
been a kind of overlap, ie a couple of coaches not opened between a
suburb and somewhere in the centre, and then maybe two others going
out of use at the same time, having been emptied in the first half of
the centre.

Or filled with people heading for the opposite suburb of course.



The early UNDMs I neglected in a previous post were the third coach
in, so that they could still be driven with two coaches taken off in
sidings that were too short.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, MIG wrote:

On Sep 25, 9:01 am, MIG wrote:
On Sep 25, 1:07 am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
(Tom Anderson) wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

the aborted 9 car train experiment.

9 cars? What? Where? When? How?

The 1938 stock book I quoted from last night described the experiment
as "something that seemed like a good idea at the time" with the
implication that the author thought they were stark staring bonkers
to have tried it!

Ha! Sounds about right. Surely hardly any of the central network would
have been 9-car, so where did they think the passengers in those rear
two cars would be going?

I've been trying to make sense of it as well, and I think it must have
been a kind of overlap, ie a couple of coaches not opened between a
suburb and somewhere in the centre, and then maybe two others going out
of use at the same time, having been emptied in the first half of the
centre.

Or filled with people heading for the opposite suburb of course.

True. How much demand is there for trips from north of Golders Green to
south of Clapham? Not a lot, i'd have thought.

Also, having got my head around the history of the Northern line, i'm
starting to think it was the 1930s extension from Archway up the old LNER
line to High Barnet that had the long platforms, not the 1920s bits. That
would mean that there wasn't a nine-car region in south London. In the
absence of an overlap scheme like yours (which would involve drivers
stopping trains with their cabs two cars into the tunnel!), all this could
have done is brought people from the northern suburbs down to Highgate.
Perhaps the idea was that a lot of people would want to transfer there to
the surface railway trains to Finsbury Park, which i think were still
going at that point.

Oh, or maybe it was all part of the Northern Heights plan - if the line
from Highgate to Finsbury Park had been assimilated, longer trains could
have carried on down that way. To, of all places, Moorgate! Ha!

tom

--
Ensure a star-man is never constructed!

On 25 Sep, 11:30, Tom Anderson wrote:
True. How much demand is there for trips from north of Golders Green to
south of Clapham? Not a lot, i'd have thought.

Also, having got my head around the history of the Northern line, i'm
starting to think it was the 1930s extension from Archway up the old LNER
line to High Barnet that had the long platforms, not the 1920s bits. That
would mean that there wasn't a nine-car region in south London. In the
absence of an overlap scheme like yours (which would involve drivers
stopping trains with their cabs two cars into the tunnel!), all this could
have done is brought people from the northern suburbs down to Highgate.
Perhaps the idea was that a lot of people would want to transfer there to
the surface railway trains to Finsbury Park, which i think were still
going at that point.

You're right that it was the Archway to Barnet extension that had long
platforms. But there *was* some kind of crazy skip-stop overlap
arrangement planned, I think with the driver stopping 2 car lengths
beyond the station at Tottenham Court Rd - it's covered in Rails
Through The Clay, and I'll look it up next time I'm home and have time
(unless someone else beats me to it).

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On Sep 25, 11:30 am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, MIG wrote:
On Sep 25, 9:01 am, MIG wrote:
On Sep 25, 1:07 am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
(Tom Anderson) wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

the aborted 9 car train experiment.

9 cars? What? Where? When? How?

The 1938 stock book I quoted from last night described the experiment
as "something that seemed like a good idea at the time" with the
implication that the author thought they were stark staring bonkers
to have tried it!

Ha! Sounds about right. Surely hardly any of the central network would
have been 9-car, so where did they think the passengers in those rear
two cars would be going?

I've been trying to make sense of it as well, and I think it must have
been a kind of overlap, ie a couple of coaches not opened between a
suburb and somewhere in the centre, and then maybe two others going out
of use at the same time, having been emptied in the first half of the
centre.

Or filled with people heading for the opposite suburb of course.

True. How much demand is there for trips from north of Golders Green to
south of Clapham? Not a lot, i'd have thought.


That's not what I meant. Two cars in use could deliver people at
stations up to Tottenham Court Road, while filling up at Euston, TCR
etc with people who would then have to stay on till a suburb.
However, this theory is scuppered by the lack of platforms in the
south.

I think the nine-car trains actually went round the Kennington loop.
Two cars would be open as Leicester Square or somewhere and then not
open doors till Golders Green (and the equivalent in the opposite
direction). Presumably two others would come into/go out of use at
Tottenham Court Road for all stations through Euston to Golders Green.

But it still doesn't make sense to me and it seems mad to even attempt
such a thing. Obviously the PIS was a lot better in those days ...

The amazing thing is that, rather than being shown to be a disaster on
the first day, it was considered successful and attempted twice.



Also, having got my head around the history of the Northern line, i'm
starting to think it was the 1930s extension from Archway up the old LNER
line to High Barnet that had the long platforms, not the 1920s bits. That
would mean that there wasn't a nine-car region in south London. In the
absence of an overlap scheme like yours (which would involve drivers
stopping trains with their cabs two cars into the tunnel!), all this could
have done is brought people from the northern suburbs down to Highgate.
Perhaps the idea was that a lot of people would want to transfer there to
the surface railway trains to Finsbury Park, which i think were still
going at that point.

Oh, or maybe it was all part of the Northern Heights plan - if the line
from Highgate to Finsbury Park had been assimilated, longer trains could
have carried on down that way. To, of all places, Moorgate! Ha!

tom

--
Ensure a star-man is never constructed!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On 25 Sep, 12:15, John B wrote:
You're right that it was the Archway to Barnet extension that had long
platforms. But there *was* some kind of crazy skip-stop overlap
arrangement planned, I think with the driver stopping 2 car lengths
beyond the station at Tottenham Court Rd - it's covered in Rails
Through The Clay, and I'll look it up next time I'm home and have time
(unless someone else beats me to it).

From Rails Through The Clay (second edition):

==begin quote==

The first nine-car train ran in public service on 8th November 1937
and was considered to be such a success that three further trains of
this length were put into operation in Feburary 1938
[...]
On the southbound morning peak journeys, the two rear cars were
reserved for passengers for stations to Golders Green or to Tottenham
Court Road. After leaving Golders Green these two cars stopped in the
tunnel at all stations to Goodge Street inclusive. At Tottenham Court
Road the front cars stayed in the tunnel and the fortunate occupants
of the last two could alight at the platform, having had a much less
crowded journey than the passengers on the rest of the train. From
Leicester Square to Kennington the two rear cars again stopped in the
tunnel and were out of passenger use.

On northbound evening peak journeys from Kennington, the two leading
cars were stopped in the tunnel as far as Leicester Square, and the
two rear cars were reserved for traffic to Leicester Square or to
Golders Green and beyond. At Tottenham Court Road the two rear cars
were in the tunnel and the (hitherto empty) two front cars were at the
platform; a similar stop was made at all stations from Hampstead.

There was full signposting on the platforms and cars to make sure that
passengers did not board the wrong car, but if they did go wrong they
could use the end doors to reach the correct position and travelling
ticket inspectors were available to help them. [...] At stations where
end cars were booked to stop in the running tunnel, the tunnel
segments were painted white and red handrails were installed to
reassure passengers that the train had stopped at a station.
[...]
An internal report of June 1939 recommended that nine-car trains
should not be extended beyond a handful running at the height of the
peak.

==end quote==

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, MIG wrote:

On Sep 25, 11:30 am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, MIG wrote:
On Sep 25, 9:01 am, MIG wrote:
On Sep 25, 1:07 am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
(Tom Anderson) wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

the aborted 9 car train experiment.

9 cars? What? Where? When? How?

The 1938 stock book I quoted from last night described the
experiment as "something that seemed like a good idea at the time"
with the implication that the author thought they were stark
staring bonkers to have tried it!

Ha! Sounds about right. Surely hardly any of the central network
would have been 9-car, so where did they think the passengers in
those rear two cars would be going?

I've been trying to make sense of it as well, and I think it must
have been a kind of overlap, ie a couple of coaches not opened
between a suburb and somewhere in the centre, and then maybe two
others going out of use at the same time, having been emptied in the
first half of the centre.

Or filled with people heading for the opposite suburb of course.

True. How much demand is there for trips from north of Golders Green to
south of Clapham? Not a lot, i'd have thought.

That's not what I meant. Two cars in use could deliver people at
stations up to Tottenham Court Road, while filling up at Euston, TCR etc
with people who would then have to stay on till a suburb.

Which, according to John's transcript (cheers John!) is roughly what
happened. Good thinking you! Sort of, anyway - i think you might be
suggesting a scheme where the front two cars (say) serve all stations to
Tottenham Court Road, and the rear cars all stations from Leicester Square
onwards, whereas it seems that what they did was have the rear two bonus
cars serve TCR only, with all others being served by the front two. Also,
due to the lack of 9-car ways out to the south, it seems the bonus cars
just emptied out in the middle of town, and didn't take anyone anywhere.

A third alternative would have been a skip-stop scheme, with, say, the
front two cars serving Archway, Kentish Town, Mornington Crescent, Warren
Street, Tottenham Court Road, Charing Cross, and Waterloo, and the rear
two Tufnell Park, Camden Town, Euston, Goodge Street, Leicester Square,
Embankment, and Kennington. I guess which of all these alternatives you
choose depends on the pattern of use - if TCR gets masses more passengers
than the other stations, then the plan as implemented makes the most
sense. Otherwise, i think the skip-stop scheme provides the most capacity
in town, as it lets both end pairs of cars be used for local trips,
whereas the switchover scheme basically means the up-to-TCR cars will be
empty south of TCR.

The limiting case of the skip-stop scheme would be to run fourteen-car
trains, with no cars serving all stations, and effectively have two
separate lines running down one set of rails. They do this (or have done
it) in New York, but there, they at least have the sense to use entirely
separate trains for the two service patterns! I think this might even work
for commuter traffic, as all the central London stations are close
together; Camden Town / Mornington Crescent, Euston / Warren Street,
Goodge Street / TCR / Leicester Square, Charing Cross / Embankment. It
only fails for people wanting to go from the south-of-Highgate suburbs to
the one of Euston or Waterloo that isn't in their pattern. Or coming from
Archway or Kentish Town and wanting the Bank branch (and not wanting to
wait for a direct train).

Actually, you can do better than that - 21-car trains with a three-phase
stopping pattern. The limit is actually a 196-car train with a 14-phase
stopping pattern, one entire set of seven cars for each station south of
Highgate, but i'm not entirely sure the suburban platforms are long enough
for that ...

However, this theory is scuppered by the lack of platforms in the south.

Yes.

I think the nine-car trains actually went round the Kennington loop.

Which sort of makes the lack of platforms in the south okay. If they could
have lengthened Kennington, it would have been pretty good. Aha! Or
stopped at the down platform as normal, and made a bonus-type stop at the
up platform - that way, everyone gets a chance to get out, and you have
the bonus cars running non-stop from Kennington to TCR (or whatever your
pattern implies), helping handle the transfer traffic from Bank trains.
You have to take passengers round the loop, though - was/is that allowed?

tom

--
There's no future.

On Wed, 26 Sep 2007, John B wrote:

On 25 Sep, 12:15, John B wrote, quoting RTTC2:

On the southbound morning peak journeys, the two rear cars were reserved
for passengers for stations to Golders Green

Golders Green? So it *was* the 1920s extension to Edgware that had
nine-car platforms, not the 1930s High Barnet extension?

or to Tottenham Court Road. After leaving Golders Green these two cars
stopped in the tunnel at all stations to Goodge Street inclusive. At
Tottenham Court Road the front cars stayed in the tunnel and the
fortunate occupants of the last two could alight at the platform, having
had a much less crowded journey than the passengers on the rest of the
train. From Leicester Square to Kennington the two rear cars again
stopped in the tunnel and were out of passenger use.

Okay. That sounds crazy, but actually quite clever.

But not as clever as if they'd used my dual-stop Kennington idea too.

On northbound evening peak journeys from Kennington, the two leading
cars were stopped in the tunnel as far as Leicester Square, and the two
rear cars were reserved for traffic to Leicester Square or to Golders
Green and beyond. At Tottenham Court Road the two rear cars were in the
tunnel and the (hitherto empty) two front cars were at the platform; a
similar stop was made at all stations

So not the inverse of the southbound pattern?

from Hampstead.

From or to?

tom

--
There's no future.

On 26 Sep, 12:17, Tom Anderson wrote:
On northbound evening peak journeys from Kennington, the two leading
cars were stopped in the tunnel as far as Leicester Square, and the two
rear cars were reserved for traffic to Leicester Square or to Golders
Green and beyond. At Tottenham Court Road the two rear cars were in the
tunnel and the (hitherto empty) two front cars were at the platform; a
similar stop was made at all stations

So not the inverse of the southbound pattern?

from Hampstead.

From or to?

Probably to. The book actually says "at", and I half-alertly corrected
it.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

In message , Tom
Anderson writes
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007, John B wrote:

On 25 Sep, 12:15, John B wrote, quoting RTTC2:

On the southbound morning peak journeys, the two rear cars were
reserved for passengers for stations to Golders Green

Golders Green? So it *was* the 1920s extension to Edgware that had
nine-car platforms, not the 1930s High Barnet extension?

or to Tottenham Court Road. After leaving Golders Green these two
cars stopped in the tunnel at all stations to Goodge Street
inclusive. At Tottenham Court Road the front cars stayed in the tunnel
and the fortunate occupants of the last two could alight at the
platform, having had a much less crowded journey than the passengers
on the rest of the train. From Leicester Square to Kennington the two
rear cars again stopped in the tunnel and were out of passenger use.

Okay. That sounds crazy, but actually quite clever.

But not as clever as if they'd used my dual-stop Kennington idea too.

On northbound evening peak journeys from Kennington, the two leading
cars were stopped in the tunnel as far as Leicester Square, and the
two rear cars were reserved for traffic to Leicester Square or to
Golders Green and beyond. At Tottenham Court Road the two rear cars
were in the tunnel and the (hitherto empty) two front cars were at
the platform; a similar stop was made at all stations

So not the inverse of the southbound pattern?

from Hampstead.

From or to?

tom

Careful now, Doug will be on you back about the energy used to run extra
cars empty. No come to think, any PT can use as much fuel as it likes,
it has Dugs blessing.
--
Clive.