| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Victoria Line - always DOO?
I've just watched the latest Video 125 drivers eye view, of the Victoria
line. Included as a bonus was some archive film covering the construction and opening of the line. It appears that, from the outset, there were CCTV screens at platform end, giving operators a view of the platform. However, no mention was made of the purpose served by this facility. So, was the Victoria line one person operated from the outset, or did the screens serve some other purpose, and if so, what? Whilst not, on the face of it, the most interesting DEV subject, this made surprisingly good viewing. Notably, the crossover just outside Brixton station being taken at full line speed by the 'auto pilot', which apparently leads trainee operators, transferring from other lines, to grab for the brake in panic! Chris |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 19:51:49 +0100, "Chris Read"
wrote: I've just watched the latest Video 125 drivers eye view, of the Victoria line. Included as a bonus was some archive film covering the construction and opening of the line. It appears that, from the outset, there were CCTV screens at platform end, giving operators a view of the platform. However, no mention was made of the purpose served by this facility. So, was the Victoria line one person operated from the outset, or did the screens serve some other purpose, and if so, what? Whilst not, on the face of it, the most interesting DEV subject, this made surprisingly good viewing. Notably, the crossover just outside Brixton station being taken at full line speed by the 'auto pilot', which apparently leads trainee operators, transferring from other lines, to grab for the brake in panic! Chris I think the first train was driven by HM the Queen, if I recall I am sure there were plenty of guards on board. |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
From the day it was opened the Victoria Line was designed and built to be
operated by automatic trains (the 1967 stock). The Automatic Train Operation technology used was tested on the District Line between Ravenscourt Park and Hammersmith(?) stations in the early 1960s. From a technical viewpoint it was / is not actually necessary to have someone in the front cab at all, but it was deemed to be a step too far to have "driverless" trains, as it would have upset passengers, (and caused some staff relations issues), so the post of Automatic Train Operator (ATO) was created. The ATO controls the opening and closing of doors at the station and then presses two buttons on the console to initiate the ATO "driving" process to the next station. In the days when the other LT underground lines were all operated by a crew of a motorman and a guard, there was a strict line of promotion. Motormen got paid more than guards and ATOs got paid more than motormen, so the people who became ATOs were the more senior staff who had longer service with LT. "Michael Bell" wrote in message . uk... In message "Chris Read" wrote: I've just watched the latest Video 125 drivers eye view, of the Victoria line. Included as a bonus was some archive film covering the construction and opening of the line. It appears that, from the outset, there were CCTV screens at platform end, giving operators a view of the platform. However, no mention was made of the purpose served by this facility. So, was the Victoria line one person operated from the outset, or did the screens serve some other purpose, and if so, what? Whilst not, on the face of it, the most interesting DEV subject, this made surprisingly good viewing. Notably, the crossover just outside Brixton station being taken at full line speed by the 'auto pilot', which apparently leads trainee operators, transferring from other lines, to grab for the brake in panic! Chris Yes, so far as I know it was driver-only from the first. Michael Bell -- |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
"J Lynch" wrote in message . uk... From the day it was opened the Victoria Line was designed and built to be operated by automatic trains (the 1967 stock). The Automatic Train Operation technology used was tested on the District Line between Ravenscourt Park and Hammersmith(?) stations in the early 1960s. From a technical viewpoint it was / is not actually necessary to have someone in the front cab at all, but it was deemed to be a step too far to have "driverless" trains, as it would have upset passengers, (and caused some staff relations issues), so the post of Automatic Train Operator (ATO) was created. The ATO controls the opening and closing of doors at the station and then presses two buttons on the console to initiate the ATO "driving" process to the next station. In the days when the other LT underground lines were all operated by a crew of a motorman and a guard, there was a strict line of promotion. Motormen got paid more than guards and ATOs got paid more than motormen, so the people who became ATOs were the more senior staff who had longer service with LT. "Michael Bell" wrote in message . uk... In message "Chris Read" wrote: I've just watched the latest Video 125 drivers eye view, of the Victoria line. Included as a bonus was some archive film covering the construction and opening of the line. It appears that, from the outset, there were CCTV screens at platform end, giving operators a view of the platform. However, no mention was made of the purpose served by this facility. So, was the Victoria line one person operated from the outset, or did the screens serve some other purpose, and if so, what? Whilst not, on the face of it, the most interesting DEV subject, this made surprisingly good viewing. Notably, the crossover just outside Brixton station being taken at full line speed by the 'auto pilot', which apparently leads trainee operators, transferring from other lines, to grab for the brake in panic! Chris Yes, so far as I know it was driver-only from the first. Michael Bell -- I thought the ATO tests were between Stamford Brook and Ravenscourt Park? And weren't there also tests somewhere around Northfields and also at the top of the Hainault Loop of the Central? |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
"Graham Harrison" wrote in message
... "J Lynch" wrote in message . uk... From the day it was opened the Victoria Line was designed and built to be operated by automatic trains (the 1967 stock). The Automatic Train Operation technology used was tested on the District Line between Ravenscourt Park and Hammersmith(?) stations in the early 1960s. From a technical viewpoint it was / is not actually necessary to have someone in the front cab at all, but it was deemed to be a step too far to have "driverless" trains, as it would have upset passengers, (and caused some staff relations issues), so the post of Automatic Train Operator (ATO) was created. The ATO controls the opening and closing of doors at the station and then presses two buttons on the console to initiate the ATO "driving" process to the next station. In the days when the other LT underground lines were all operated by a crew of a motorman and a guard, there was a strict line of promotion. Motormen got paid more than guards and ATOs got paid more than motormen, so the people who became ATOs were the more senior staff who had longer service with LT. "Michael Bell" wrote in message . uk... In message "Chris Read" wrote: I've just watched the latest Video 125 drivers eye view, of the Victoria line. Included as a bonus was some archive film covering the construction and opening of the line. It appears that, from the outset, there were CCTV screens at platform end, giving operators a view of the platform. However, no mention was made of the purpose served by this facility. So, was the Victoria line one person operated from the outset, or did the screens serve some other purpose, and if so, what? Whilst not, on the face of it, the most interesting DEV subject, this made surprisingly good viewing. Notably, the crossover just outside Brixton station being taken at full line speed by the 'auto pilot', which apparently leads trainee operators, transferring from other lines, to grab for the brake in panic! Chris Yes, so far as I know it was driver-only from the first. Michael Bell -- I thought the ATO tests were between Stamford Brook and Ravenscourt Park? And weren't there also tests somewhere around Northfields and also at the top of the Hainault Loop of the Central? Thanks - you are right in what you say about the District Line and the Central. Not sure about Northfields though... |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
In message
"Chris Read" wrote: I've just watched the latest Video 125 drivers eye view, of the Victoria line. Included as a bonus was some archive film covering the construction and opening of the line. It appears that, from the outset, there were CCTV screens at platform end, giving operators a view of the platform. However, no mention was made of the purpose served by this facility. So, was the Victoria line one person operated from the outset, or did the screens serve some other purpose, and if so, what? Yes it was. Train operation was completely automatic so the 'driver' operated the doors and pressed a button to start the train and let it get on with it. -- Graeme Wall This address not read, substitute trains for rail Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
"J Lynch" wrote in message . uk... "Graham Harrison" wrote in message ... "J Lynch" wrote in message . uk... From the day it was opened the Victoria Line was designed and built to be operated by automatic trains (the 1967 stock). The Automatic Train Operation technology used was tested on the District Line between Ravenscourt Park and Hammersmith(?) stations in the early 1960s. From a technical viewpoint it was / is not actually necessary to have someone in the front cab at all, but it was deemed to be a step too far to have "driverless" trains, as it would have upset passengers, (and caused some staff relations issues), so the post of Automatic Train Operator (ATO) was created. The ATO controls the opening and closing of doors at the station and then presses two buttons on the console to initiate the ATO "driving" process to the next station. In the days when the other LT underground lines were all operated by a crew of a motorman and a guard, there was a strict line of promotion. Motormen got paid more than guards and ATOs got paid more than motormen, so the people who became ATOs were the more senior staff who had longer service with LT. "Michael Bell" wrote in message . uk... In message "Chris Read" wrote: I've just watched the latest Video 125 drivers eye view, of the Victoria line. Included as a bonus was some archive film covering the construction and opening of the line. It appears that, from the outset, there were CCTV screens at platform end, giving operators a view of the platform. However, no mention was made of the purpose served by this facility. So, was the Victoria line one person operated from the outset, or did the screens serve some other purpose, and if so, what? Whilst not, on the face of it, the most interesting DEV subject, this made surprisingly good viewing. Notably, the crossover just outside Brixton station being taken at full line speed by the 'auto pilot', which apparently leads trainee operators, transferring from other lines, to grab for the brake in panic! Chris Yes, so far as I know it was driver-only from the first. Michael Bell -- I thought the ATO tests were between Stamford Brook and Ravenscourt Park? And weren't there also tests somewhere around Northfields and also at the top of the Hainault Loop of the Central? Thanks - you are right in what you say about the District Line and the Central. Not sure about Northfields though... Took a bit of googling but try this link and then hover over the picture of some men doing track work. The wording is: Automatic Train Operation (ATO) testing at South Ealing - small single seat test trolley on track. Photographed by H K Nolan, 19 Dec 1962 Image no: 3032/R/7 Inventory no: 1998/69540 Alternatively use this search term london transport automatic train operation ato south ealing in google and select the second link I think that was before even the Ravenscourt Park test. |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
Thanks all. I had thought that DOO on the tube was a 1980s phenomenon.
Chris |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
|
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Apr 1, 10:25 pm, "Chris Read" wrote:
Thanks all. I had thought that DOO on the tube was a 1980s phenomenon. Chris minor nitpick Its not called DOO on the underground, its called OPO. Well at least its called OPO all the lines I'm involved with, which at the moment does not include the Victoria. OPO is One Person Operation and applies today on all lines whether ATO or not. However, the rest of the answers above stand, Victoria was ATO with only a train operator from the start. /minor nitpick -- Nick |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
I was a teenager in London when the Victoria line opened, and I can
remember how disconcerting it was to see a train enter the station with the "driver" sitting back and not touching any of the controls (or turning and talking to his mate) - yes, they were all men then and by memory there were often two of them in the drivers cab. Peter |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Wed, 01 Apr 2009 21:14:37 +0100
rail wrote: In message "Chris Read" wrote: I've just watched the latest Video 125 drivers eye view, of the Victoria line. Included as a bonus was some archive film covering the construction and opening of the line. It appears that, from the outset, there were CCTV screens at platform end, giving operators a view of the platform. However, no mention was made of the purpose served by this facility. So, was the Victoria line one person operated from the outset, or did the screens serve some other purpose, and if so, what? Yes it was. Train operation was completely automatic so the 'driver' operated the doors and pressed a button to start the train and let it get on with it. Well not completely if the doors are manual. Examples of 100% ATO would be the VAL systems in france and line 14 in paris, where there is no driver or any staff whatsoever on board the train and everything is 100% automatic. Not so bad not having staff on those systems because the tunnels are usually double track so not so much of a sense of being trapped, but in single bore tube tunnels it wouldn't be pleasent if the train broke down and no one was on board to sort it out. B2003 |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
"Chris Read" wrote in message
Thanks all. I had thought that DOO on the tube was a 1980s phenomenon. The Victoria stock uses a very simple 1960s system that's quite different to that used in modern ATO trains. From memory, trains run at either a standard restricted speed, or flat out, with no finer controls. |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
In message
"Recliner" wrote: "Chris Read" wrote in message Thanks all. I had thought that DOO on the tube was a 1980s phenomenon. The Victoria stock uses a very simple 1960s system that's quite different to that used in modern ATO trains. From memory, trains run at either a standard restricted speed, or flat out, with no finer controls. There were four control codes used: 420 ppm up to line speed 270 ppm up to 25mph 180 ppm coasting up to 25mph 120 ppm used in connection with signalling for the 270 code there is a governor that regulated the speed between 21 and 23 mph. Over 25mph and the emergency brakes would come on automatically. A seperate 15kHz signal indicated points where power could be shut off and the train allowed to coast. As it approached the next station there were a succession of command codes to slow the train down. Codes were calculated at 100Hz/mph so 35mph had a code of 3.5kHz. There were 3 rates of breaking providied by mercury retarder switches down to 4mph at which pont a constant pressure control took over to ease the braking to a smooth stop. Very sophisticated for the time; remember, practical ICs were a decade or more in the future. -- Graeme Wall This address not read, substitute trains for rail Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 10:50:26 +0100
"Recliner" wrote: "Chris Read" wrote in message Thanks all. I had thought that DOO on the tube was a 1980s phenomenon. The Victoria stock uses a very simple 1960s system that's quite different to that used in modern ATO trains. From memory, trains run at either a standard restricted speed, or flat out, with no finer controls. Its not quite that crude I don't think. I'm sure theres some intermediate speeds. However despite its age IMO it provides a much more pleasent ride than the ATO on the central line whose internal logic seems to consist of "i'm going too fast , must slow down ... I'm going too slow , must speed up, slow down, speed up, slow down, speed up". The hopeless software even makes it consistently brake coming into some platforms only to speed up again 10 metres further along just to slow down again - St Pauls springs to mind. Never mind the wasted electricity it can't do the running gear or track any favours. B2003 |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
"rail" wrote in message
In message "Recliner" wrote: "Chris Read" wrote in message Thanks all. I had thought that DOO on the tube was a 1980s phenomenon. The Victoria stock uses a very simple 1960s system that's quite different to that used in modern ATO trains. From memory, trains run at either a standard restricted speed, or flat out, with no finer controls. There were four control codes used: 420 ppm up to line speed 270 ppm up to 25mph 180 ppm coasting up to 25mph 120 ppm used in connection with signalling for the 270 code there is a governor that regulated the speed between 21 and 23 mph. Over 25mph and the emergency brakes would come on automatically. A seperate 15kHz signal indicated points where power could be shut off and the train allowed to coast. As it approached the next station there were a succession of command codes to slow the train down. Codes were calculated at 100Hz/mph so 35mph had a code of 3.5kHz. There were 3 rates of breaking providied by mercury retarder switches down to 4mph at which pont a constant pressure control took over to ease the braking to a smooth stop. Very sophisticated for the time; remember, practical ICs were a decade or more in the future. OK, that's a bit more sophisticated than I remembered. And, yes, I agree that it's very impressive, and reliable, for mid 1960s technology. Mid/late 1960s car or airliner designs would feel a lot more antiquated compared to today's products than do those elderly 1967 stock trains. And, unlike those trains, which remain in heavy daily use, such cars and planes would almost all have been retired long ago. |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On 2 Apr, 12:19, "Recliner" wrote:
"rail" wrote in message In message * * * * *"Recliner" wrote: "Chris Read" wrote in message Thanks all. I had thought that DOO on the tube was a 1980s phenomenon. The Victoria stock uses a very simple 1960s system that's quite different to that used in modern ATO trains. From memory, trains run at either a standard restricted speed, or flat out, with no finer controls. There were four control codes used: 420 ppm up to line speed 270 ppm up to 25mph 180 ppm coasting up to 25mph 120 ppm used in connection with signalling for the 270 code there is a governor that regulated the speed between 21 and 23 mph. *Over 25mph and the emergency brakes would come on automatically. A seperate 15kHz signal indicated points where power could be shut off and the train allowed to coast. *As it approached the next station there were a succession of command codes to slow the train down. *Codes were calculated at 100Hz/mph so 35mph had a code of 3.5kHz. *There were 3 rates of breaking providied by mercury retarder switches down to 4mph at which pont a constant pressure control took over to ease the braking to a smooth stop. Very sophisticated for the time; remember, practical ICs were a decade or more in the future. OK, that's a bit more sophisticated than I remembered. *And, yes, I agree that it's very impressive, and reliable, for mid 1960s technology. Mid/late 1960s car or airliner designs would feel a lot more antiquated compared to today's products than do those elderly 1967 stock trains. And, unlike those trains, which remain in heavy daily use, such cars and planes would almost all have been retired long ago.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - We are now on the third generation "Auto driver" box as well. Also to go to a further depth of nitpicking, it wasn't just "Shut the Doors" and "Press two (sic) start buttons", the drivers window also had to be fully closed (prevented beheadings at the tunnel headwalls!) Cheers Puffernutter |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 04:28:52 -0700 (PDT), puffernutter
wrote: We are now on the third generation "Auto driver" box as well. Also to go to a further depth of nitpicking, it wasn't just "Shut the Doors" and "Press two (sic) start buttons", the drivers window also had to be fully closed (prevented beheadings at the tunnel headwalls!) Unusually for the time, there were no side doors to the drivers cabs on 1967 TS, probably for similar reasons (press the buttons, train starts moving, try to get out for some reason and wind up half inside and half on the platform at Seven Sisters). ISTR that when 1960TS units were fitted with ATO they had the side doors welded shut (or otherwise securely locked). |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 13:03:13 +0100
Uncle Toby wrote: Unusually for the time, there were no side doors to the drivers cabs on 1967 TS, probably for similar reasons (press the buttons, train starts moving, try to get out for some reason and wind up half inside and half on the platform at Seven Sisters). ISTR that when 1960TS Presumably they credit the current central line drivers with a bit more self preservation instinct. Either that or the cab doors are interlocked with the ATO. B2003 |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Apr 2, 1:36*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 13:03:13 +0100 Uncle Toby wrote: Unusually for the time, there were no side doors to the drivers cabs on 1967 TS, probably for similar reasons (press the buttons, train starts moving, try to get out for some reason and wind up half inside and half on the platform at Seven Sisters). ISTR that when 1960TS Presumably they credit the current central line drivers with a bit more self preservation instinct. Either that or the cab doors are interlocked with the ATO. B2003 Sliding cab doors came in with 1973 stock I think. Before that (including 1960 stock) it was door handles and hinges, so nothing to interlock. |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Apr 2, 11:16 am, rail wrote:
Very sophisticated for the time; remember, practical ICs were a decade or more in the future. And the line had - and still has - mechanical interlockings. The Westinghouse V-frame interlockings stay on the line through the VUL program until all 2009 stock is delivered and all 1967 stock is withdrawn - until then the new ''distance to go signalling'' system is overlaid on top of the existing wayside equipment to allow 1967 and 2009 stock co-running. Planned date 2011. -- Nick |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
wrote in message ...
On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 13:03:13 +0100 Uncle Toby wrote: Unusually for the time, there were no side doors to the drivers cabs on 1967 TS, probably for similar reasons (press the buttons, train starts moving, try to get out for some reason and wind up half inside and half on the platform at Seven Sisters). ISTR that when 1960TS Presumably they credit the current central line drivers with a bit more self preservation instinct. Either that or the cab doors are interlocked with the ATO. There does not appear to be any sort of circuit for the cab doors on Central Line trains as I have seen drivers depart with them open many a time. I would believe that drivers close them as soon as they enter the tunnels , despite there being little to no danger, because of the noise and dust. I imagine that it;s nice to have the cab door open in the spring when running on surface level, but then drivers probably risk having something thrown at them. Either that or operating rules require it to be closed. |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
rail wrote:
In message "Chris Read" wrote: So, was the Victoria line one person operated from the outset, or did the screens serve some other purpose, and if so, what? Yes it was. Train operation was completely automatic so the 'driver' operated the doors and pressed a button to start the train and let it get on with it. I visited the Victoria line depot in the early 80s when I was a student, and I remember the details of the train starting sequence. Because the driver often leans out of the cab window to see when the doors can be closed, and because of the danger of head injury if he* was still leaning out when the train went into the tunnel, the driver's cab windows were interlocked with the train start buttons. * Drivers were all "he" in those days. The sequence was thus: 1. Driver closes passenger doors 2. Driver closes cab window 3. Driver presses two buttons simultaneously to start the train -- Jeremy Double {real address, include nospam} Rail and transport photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmdoubl...7603834894248/ |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
"Jeremy Double" wrote in message
... rail wrote: In message "Chris Read" wrote: So, was the Victoria line one person operated from the outset, or did the screens serve some other purpose, and if so, what? Yes it was. Train operation was completely automatic so the 'driver' operated the doors and pressed a button to start the train and let it get on with it. I visited the Victoria line depot in the early 80s when I was a student, and I remember the details of the train starting sequence. Because the driver often leans out of the cab window to see when the doors can be closed, and because of the danger of head injury if he* was still leaning out when the train went into the tunnel, the driver's cab windows were interlocked with the train start buttons. * Drivers were all "he" in those days. The sequence was thus: 1. Driver closes passenger doors 2. Driver closes cab window 3. Driver presses two buttons simultaneously to start the train -- So the cab side windows were on a circuit? Interesting. Is that still the case? |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
Recliner wrote
OK, that's a bit more sophisticated than I remembered. And, yes, I agree that it's very impressive, and reliable, for mid 1960s technology. Mid/late 1960s car or airliner designs would feel a lot more antiquated compared to today's products than do those elderly 1967 stock trains. And, unlike those trains, which remain in heavy daily use, such cars and planes would almost all have been retired long ago. Some 1940-1946 airliners, eg DC-3s Dakotas C-47s remain in constant daily use even if this is sightseeing. -- Mike D |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Apr 2, 7:41 pm, "Michael R N Dolbear" wrote:
Some 1940-1946 airliners, eg DC-3s Dakotas C-47s remain in constant daily use even if this is sightseeing. Not in the UK any more. They were stopped last year. I'm not sure the precise reason but AIUI it was a CAA directive or similar. Air Atlantique, the sole UK DC3/C47 operator made a large number of farewell flights to mark this. -- Nick |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
wrote in message
On Apr 2, 7:41 pm, "Michael R N Dolbear" wrote: Some 1940-1946 airliners, eg DC-3s Dakotas C-47s remain in constant daily use even if this is sightseeing. Not in the UK any more. They were stopped last year. I'm not sure the precise reason but AIUI it was a CAA directive or similar. Air Atlantique, the sole UK DC3/C47 operator made a large number of farewell flights to mark this. The reason given (which may or may not be entirely true) was an EU safety directive which has all sorts of sensible rules when applied to modern airliners, but most of which would irrelevant to Dakotas. However, I suspect that if they were making enough money from them to care, they'd have found a loophole or two. But even before this 'forced retirement, the elderly Dakotas probably did no more than a handful of passenger flights a year, a very different work duty to the heavily-worked 1967 stock. More to the point, the original Boeing 737 and DC-9 airliners were introduced at the same time as the 1967 stock. I don't think any of those early models remain in service. The Boeing 747 came along a couple of years later, and all of its early examples are also long-retired. And I can't remember when I last saw a first generation Ford Escort from the same era. |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Apr 2, 8:31 pm, wrote:
Not in the UK any more. http://www.bbc.co.uk/coventry/conten...llery.shtml?21 -- Nick |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On 2 Apr, 17:35, Jeremy Double wrote:
rail wrote: In message * * * * * "Chris Read" wrote: So, was the Victoria line one person operated from the outset, or did the screens serve some other purpose, and if so, what? Yes it was. *Train operation was completely automatic so the 'driver' operated the doors and pressed a button to start the train and let it get on with it. I visited the Victoria line depot in the early 80s when I was a student, and I remember the details of the train starting sequence. Do the train operators require to drive manually on occasion in order to keep in practice and if so is this done as part of normal service operation pretty much at a time of the drivers' own choosing? -- gordon |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
In article ,
wrote: On Apr 2, 7:41 pm, "Michael R N Dolbear" wrote: Some 1940-1946 airliners, eg DC-3s Dakotas C-47s remain in constant daily use even if this is sightseeing. Not in the UK any more. They were stopped last year. I'm not sure the precise reason but AIUI it was a CAA directive or similar. No longer met standards for safe evacuation in emergencies. Air Atlantique, the sole UK DC3/C47 operator made a large number of farewell flights to mark this. And, so far as passenger flights go, Air Atlantique has been analogous to preserved-power railtours for a very long time. IIRC the last scheduled services with the Gooneys were in '83 or so (when they lost a mail contract - to rail, as it happened). -- Andy Breen Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth Post-September, somebody figured out that the Internet was cheaper than babysitters (Dick Gaughan) |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
In article ,
Recliner wrote: wrote in message On Apr 2, 7:41 pm, "Michael R N Dolbear" wrote: Some 1940-1946 airliners, eg DC-3s Dakotas C-47s remain in constant daily use even if this is sightseeing. Not in the UK any more. They were stopped last year. I'm not sure the precise reason but AIUI it was a CAA directive or similar. The reason given (which may or may not be entirely true) was an EU safety directive which has all sorts of sensible rules when applied to modern airliners, but most of which would irrelevant to Dakotas. However, I suspect that if they were making enough money from them to care, they'd have found a loophole or two. Would have required serious mods to the airframe which would have compromised originality - another pointer to these machines being preserved. More to the point, the original Boeing 737 and DC-9 airliners were introduced at the same time as the 1967 stock. I don't think any of those early models remain in service. The Boeing 747 came along a couple of years later, and all of its early examples are also long-retired. To be fair, the weeking out of early 737s, DC9s, 727s and others (BAC-111, De Havilland Gripper^W Trident) was more down to airport noise restrictions than anything else. If the same had been applied to the railways we'd have seen the back of pretty much any locomotive pre-Class 60 (and probably HST to boot) at the same time.. The airliner (well, feederliner) of that era which /is/ still going, and with many of the early examples still in use (I think..) And I can't remember when I last saw a first generation Ford Escort from the same era. Ooh. 10:40 today. White Mk.1, only mildly rally-modded. -- Andy Breen ~ Speaking for myself, not the University of Wales "your suggestion rates at four monkeys for six weeks" (Peter D. Rieden) |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
In article ,
Andrew Robert Breen wrote: In article , Recliner wrote: More to the point, the original Boeing 737 and DC-9 airliners were introduced at the same time as the 1967 stock. I don't think any of those early models remain in service. The Boeing 747 came along a couple of years later, and all of its early examples are also long-retired. snip.. The airliner (well, feederliner) of that era which /is/ still going, and with many of the early examples still in use (I think..) Duh. Forgot to finish sentence. Posting while very very tired. it should have continued.. "is the Brittan-Norman Trislander, which still seems to be doing stuff up in Scotland, just like they were in the mid-70s. -- Andy Breen, not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales "The internet, that wonderful tool for bringing us into contact with things that make us wish we could scrub our brains out with dental floss.." (Charlie Stross) |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Apr 2, 9:01 pm, (Andrew Robert Breen) wrote:
And, so far as passenger flights go, Air Atlantique has been analogous to preserved-power railtours for a very long time. IIRC the last scheduled Yep, I did x3 DC3 20 min trips from Luton 1993/1994 for £10 a throw. Still prefer Viscounts :o) -- Nick |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
|
Victoria Line - always DOO?
|
Victoria Line - always DOO?
In message
rail wrote: In message (Andrew Robert Breen) wrote: In article , Andrew Robert Breen wrote: In article , Recliner wrote: More to the point, the original Boeing 737 and DC-9 airliners were introduced at the same time as the 1967 stock. I don't think any of those early models remain in service. The Boeing 747 came along a couple of years later, and all of its early examples are also long-retired. snip.. The airliner (well, feederliner) of that era which /is/ still going, and with many of the early examples still in use (I think..) Duh. Forgot to finish sentence. Posting while very very tired. it should have continued.. "is the Brittan-Norman Trislander, which still seems to be doing stuff up in Scotland, just like they were in the mid-70s. Air Aurigny, or its successor, still operate one between Southampton and Alderney, or were till recently. Quick follow up, they still operate a fleet of 8 apparently. -- Graeme Wall This address not read, substitute trains for rail Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
peter wrote:
I was a teenager in London when the Victoria line opened, and I can remember how disconcerting it was to see a train enter the station with the "driver" sitting back and not touching any of the controls (or turning and talking to his mate) - yes, they were all men then and by memory there were often two of them in the drivers cab. Peter I remember, on one occasion, seeing the "driver" reading a newspaper as the train entered the platform. -- John Ray |
Victoria Line - always DOO?
|
Victoria Line - always DOO?
On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 21:15:11 +0100, Jeremy Double
wrote: A European Safety directive I believe, which required the fitting of safety slides (even though the passenger door is only 4ft above the ground) and oxygen masks (even though it is an unpressurised airliner and never flies high enough to require oxygen)! Surely not masks? The KLM/VLM Fokker 50s don't have masks, I believe as they don't fly high enough to need them. (This causes the safety demonstration to be oddly short). Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:24 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk