Central Line To Close (again)
 

CJG wrote:
Apparently cracks have been found in motor brackets on central Line
trains. The whole fleet is being checked. One of the unions want the
whole fleet taken out of service so they can check them properly.
Just when you thought it was safe to go back on Central Line etc...
etc....

The BBC's report is at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3198807.stm

Nowhere does it say that the line will close.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Central Line To Close (again)
 

Richard J. wrote:
CJG wrote:
Apparently cracks have been found in motor brackets on
central Line trains. The whole fleet is being checked. One
of the unions want the whole fleet taken out of service so
they can check them properly. Just when you thought it was
safe to go back on Central Line etc... etc....

The BBC's report is at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3198807.stm

Nowhere does it say that the line will close.

Since when has CJG ever allowed the truth to get in the way of a slagging.

Central Line To Close (again)
 

In message , Richard J.
writes
Nowhere does it say that the line will close.

RMT want ALL the trains taken out of service to be checked. So without
trains how exactly are they going to run the central line?
Have illegal immigrants pulling people along in dodgy carts along the
line?
--
CJG

Central Line To Close (again)
 

CJG wrote:
In message , Richard
J. writes
Nowhere does it say that the line will close.

RMT want ALL the trains taken out of service to be checked. So without
trains how exactly are they going to run the central line?
Have illegal immigrants pulling people along in dodgy carts along the
line?

"RMT want" is not the same as "will happen". LU say that half the fleet has
been checked already.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Central Line To Close (again)
 

Richard J. wrote:
CJG wrote:
In message ,
Richard
J. writes
Nowhere does it say that the line will close.

RMT want ALL the trains taken out of service to be checked. So
without trains how exactly are they going to run the central line?
Have illegal immigrants pulling people along in dodgy carts along
the
line?

"RMT want" is not the same as "will happen". LU say that half the
fleet has been checked already.

And Carlton London News said that a dozen cracks had been found in
that half alone. The picture on the BBC news shows new strengthening
brackets which are supposed to cure the problem that caused the
Chancery Lane crash. These are labeled defective!!

--

Phil ,,,^.".^,,,


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.514 / Virus Database: 312 - Release Date: 28/08/03

Central Line To Close (again)
 

"Redonda" wrote in message ...
And Carlton London News said that a dozen cracks had been found in
that half alone. The picture on the BBC news shows new strengthening
brackets which are supposed to cure the problem that caused the
Chancery Lane crash. These are labeled defective!!

Anyone want to lay odds on the 1992 stock following the 1983 stock into
early oblivion due to uncurable reliability issues? I personally wouldn't
be surprised if LU doesn't get shot of them in 10-15 years if this sort
of thing continues.

B2003

Central Line To Close (again)
 

Robin May wrote in message .. .
That would be unfortunate, if only because the 1992 stock seems to have
become the face of the tube. By that I mean that when there's a picture
or model of a tube train it's 1992 stock, and when there's a drawing of
a tube train it usually most closely resembles 1992 stock.

Didn't they use the 83 stock for that too?

Personally I'd miss the 92 stock too , its got far and away the best
acceleration of any trains on the underground (why the 95/96 stocks are
still so sluggish is anyones guess) and I like the large window area
which gives a nice airy feeling. But if its that unreliable....

B2003

Central Line To Close (again)
 

Boltar wrote:
Robin May wrote in message
.. .
That would be unfortunate, if only because the 1992 stock seems to
have become the face of the tube. By that I mean that when there's
a picture or model of a tube train it's 1992 stock, and when
there's a drawing of a tube train it usually most closely
resembles 1992 stock.

Didn't they use the 83 stock for that too?

Personally I'd miss the 92 stock too , its got far and away the
best acceleration of any trains on the underground (why the 95/96
stocks are still so sluggish is anyones guess)

There is something to be said for trains that don't accelerate so fiercely
that motors fall off or things get cracked. It's also unpleasant when
seated sideways.

and I like the large window area which gives a nice airy feeling.

i.e. acts like a mobile greenhouse in summer (modern buses suffer too from
this obsession with large areas of glass and no aircon).
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Central Line To Close (again)
 

In article , Richard J.
writes

i.e. acts like a mobile greenhouse in summer (modern buses suffer too from
this obsession with large areas of glass and no aircon).

Putting air con on a bus is relatively easy.
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

Central Line To Close (again)
 

CJG wrote:

In message , Richard J.
writes
Nowhere does it say that the line will close.

RMT want ALL the trains taken out of service to be checked.

Ah, the RMT have found a way to inconvenience the travelling public
without going on strike...

--
James Farrar |
London SE 13 |

Central Line To Close (again)
 

On Tue, 2 Sep 2003 18:38:23 +0100, Andrew P Smith
wrote:

Putting air con on a bus is relatively easy.

Indeed. Given how much was spent on the superb (IMO) Mercedes
bendies, I was surprised it was not even tried. It is used
successfully in other countries - I used to look forward to getting
one of the Pinneberger Verkehrsgesellschaft's experimental aircon
buses on my daily trip to uni in Hamburg in the summer, and in the
winter it also helped to avoid steaming up.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
is a valid email address, but is sent to /dev/null.
Try my first name at the above domain instead if you want to e-mail me.

Central Line To Close (again)
 

"Richard J." wrote in message ...
There is something to be said for trains that don't accelerate so fiercely
that motors fall off or things get cracked. It's also unpleasant when

Well the DLR had never had any issues with that AFAIK and their trains
accelerate quicker than pretty much anything on rails (apart from maybe the
croydon tramlink). But then they probably maintain their trains more than once
every 10 years. IMO the 92 stock have been ruined because LU couldn't be arsed
to follow the manufacturers maintenance instructions.

seated sideways.

Can't say it bothers me though I do think the ATO could do with a bit more
intelligence so that it doesn't suddenly accelerate to its target speed and
whoops , suddenly realise theres another train in front then brake , then , oh
that trains moved , we'll accelerate again , oh , we're too close again lets
brake.. etc etc. I'm thinking someone should have mentioned the concept of
coasting to the systems programmers.


and I like the large window area which gives a nice airy feeling.

i.e. acts like a mobile greenhouse in summer (modern buses suffer too from
this obsession with large areas of glass and no aircon).

Fair point, but I still think its nice.

B2003

Central Line To Close (again)
 

"spammy" wrote in message
...
"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
Personally I'd miss the 92 stock too , its got far and away the best
acceleration of any trains on the underground (why the 95/96 stocks are
still so sluggish is anyones guess) and I like the large window area
which gives a nice airy feeling. But if its that unreliable....


so what stocks have there been since 92? and how can you tell the
difference? they all look the same to me...

They are all the same on the Central line. 95/96 refers to the Jubilee and
Northern lines repectively. I thought the acceleration on the 95/96s was
deliberately slugged in software to allow them to co-exist with the old
stock while they were being phased in.

Central Line To Close (again)
 

"Boltar" wrote in message
om...

Can't say it bothers me though I do think the ATO could do with a bit more
intelligence so that it doesn't suddenly accelerate to its target speed
and
whoops , suddenly realise theres another train in front then brake , then
, oh
that trains moved , we'll accelerate again , oh , we're too close again
lets
brake.. etc etc. I'm thinking someone should have mentioned the concept of
coasting to the systems programmers.


A limitation of fixed block signalling... there's not much the ATO can do
about it!

Central Line To Close (again)
 

irvine wrote:
"Boltar" wrote in message
om...

Can't say it bothers me though I do think the ATO could do with a
bit more intelligence so that it doesn't suddenly accelerate to its
target speed and whoops , suddenly realise theres another train in
front then brake , then , oh that trains moved , we'll accelerate
again , oh , we're too close again lets brake.. etc etc. I'm
thinking someone should have mentioned the concept of coasting to
the systems programmers.

A limitation of fixed block signalling... there's not much the ATO
can do about it!

But human drivers manage it!
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Central Line To Close (again)
 

Ed Crowley wrote:
"spammy" wrote in message
...
"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
Personally I'd miss the 92 stock too , its got far and away the best
acceleration of any trains on the underground (why the 95/96 stocks
are still so sluggish is anyones guess) and I like the large window
area which gives a nice airy feeling. But if its that unreliable....


so what stocks have there been since 92? and how can you tell the
difference? they all look the same to me...

They are all the same on the Central line. 95/96 refers to the
Jubilee and Northern lines repectively.

The other way round. 95 is Northern, 96 is Jubilee (though the "95" stock
is actually a later design than the "96").
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Central Line To Close (again)
 

"Ed Crowley" wrote in message t...
They are all the same on the Central line. 95/96 refers to the Jubilee and
Northern lines repectively. I thought the acceleration on the 95/96s was
deliberately slugged in software to allow them to co-exist with the old
stock while they were being phased in.

Thats what everybody said (on here) but it seems they're genuinely
underpowered. Certainly going up the hill from from highgate to east finchley
they seem to me slower than the stock they replaced but that could just be
psychological I guess because of less motor noise.

B2003

Central Line To Close (again)
 

"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
:
: Can't say it bothers me though I do think the ATO could do with a bit more
: intelligence so that it doesn't suddenly accelerate to its target speed
and
: whoops , suddenly realise theres another train in front then brake , then
, oh
: that trains moved , we'll accelerate again , oh , we're too close again
lets
: brake.. etc etc. I'm thinking someone should have mentioned the concept of
: coasting to the systems programmers.
:
Doesn't this contribute to the shorter headways that ATO trains can operate
compared to manually driven trains?

Charles

Central Line To Close (again)
 

"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
"Charles Towler" wrote in message
...
"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
:
: Can't say it bothers me though I do think the ATO could do with a bit
more
: intelligence so that it doesn't suddenly accelerate to its target
speed
and
: whoops , suddenly realise theres another train in front then brake ,
then
, oh
: that trains moved , we'll accelerate again , oh , we're too close
again
lets
: brake.. etc etc. I'm thinking someone should have mentioned the
concept of
: coasting to the systems programmers.
:
Doesn't this contribute to the shorter headways that ATO trains can
operate
compared to manually driven trains?

Yes and no. What I'm saying is that if the computer had more intelligence
it
would know that it will have to break again fairly soon so theres no point
accelerating to a higher speed but instead just keep coasting at the
current
one. No only would this be more comfy for the passengers but it would save
energy too.

How granular is the speed control on these trains? I read somewhere that
the Victoria line basically has Full and Half speed (as well as stop,
obviously). Is the Central line system more advanced?

Central Line To Close (again)
 

"Ed Crowley" wrote in message
...

How granular is the speed control on these trains? I read somewhere that
the Victoria line basically has Full and Half speed (as well as stop,
obviously). Is the Central line system more advanced?

ISTR there's 9 codes from "put the anchors on!" to "full speed ahead
captain!"

Bus ventilation
 

In article , Richard J. wrote:
Boltar wrote:
Personally I'd miss the 92 stock too... I like the large window
area which gives a nice airy feeling.

i.e. acts like a mobile greenhouse in summer (modern buses suffer too from
this obsession with large areas of glass and no aircon).

Given how relatively cool summers here are[1], I hardly think air
conditioning is a necessity, but I really can't figure out why modern
buses have almost no ventilation on the upper deck. In this regard,
the Routemasters really are much, much better (at least in the
summer!)


[1] What passes for a heat wave here is just normal summer weather in
Ottawa. When I was growing up there, there was no air
conditioning to be found on buses, but the windows sure opened!


Christopher

--
Christopher Allen . + . -===""===- c==== .
email: * . . \ \____}}
WWW: http://ruah.dyndns.org/~cpcallen/ . * @====-' .
snail: Studio 10, 319 Archway Rd. London N6 5AA U.K. . *

Central Line To Close (again)
 

In article ,
(Boltar) wrote:

"Ed Crowley" wrote in message
t...
They are all the same on the Central line. 95/96 refers to the
Jubilee and Northern lines repectively. I thought the acceleration on
the 95/96s was deliberately slugged in software to allow them to
co-exist with the old stock while they were being phased in.

Thats what everybody said (on here) but it seems they're genuinely
underpowered. Certainly going up the hill from from highgate to east
finchley they seem to me slower than the stock they replaced but that
could just be psychological I guess because of less motor noise.

Figures. Only the 92 stock has all axles motored. 95/96 stock has one
unpowered car in three. The 96 stock will be worse when extended to 7 cars
too, I suppose.

--
Colin Rosenstiel