On May 5, 8:40*am, "Pat O'Neill" wrote:
http://patrickoneill204.fotopic.net/p58004145.html

"Perfick", beautiful. These remind me of my teenage years in London.
The '38 stock was truly iconic.

"1506" wrote in message
...
On May 5, 8:40 am, "Pat O'Neill" wrote:
http://patrickoneill204.fotopic.net/p58004145.html

"Perfick", beautiful. These remind me of my teenage years in London.
The '38 stock was truly iconic.

and it looks a great deal better than it did in Network SouthEast or
Dinosaur livery.

Peter

"Peter Masson" wrote:

and it looks a great deal better than it did in Network SouthEast or
Dinosaur livery.


It's a big improvement on the dinosaur livery, I agree.

But I think the application of NSE livery to the IOW trains was
beautifully done, inside and out, and overall they were a credit to BR.

Tony Polson wrote:
"Peter Masson" wrote:

and it looks a great deal better than it did in Network SouthEast or
Dinosaur livery.


It's a big improvement on the dinosaur livery, I agree.

But I think the application of NSE livery to the IOW trains was
beautifully done, inside and out, and overall they were a credit to
BR.

They were, but the 1938 stock does look 'normal' in red. Anything else just
doesn't seem right.

wrote:
On Tue, 05 May 2009 19:53:54 +0100, Tony Polson
wrote:

But I think the application of NSE livery to the IOW trains was
beautifully done, inside and out, and overall they were a credit to BR.

Yes they were very smart following the conversion and I think many
non enthusiast travelers would have been surprised to find how old
they really were.


Indeed. I recall reading that the cost of refurbishment was high and
that the budget was considerably exceeded. There was certainly a lot of
new hardwood in there and that cannot have been cheap.


Twas getting for nearly the best part of 20 years
ago though and time and sea air must be having an effect. The car was
in for an MOT last month and rather than wait around I nipped over to
the Island to pass the time and see the stock for the first time since
it has gone back to red. To be honest I was slightly under whelmed,
much as I was when I popped down to Lymington in the Autumn and
traveled on the slam door stock. The enthusiast side of me
appreciated the efforts made by those who have kept these trains
reasonably presentable but I found myself asking the question ,Would I
want to travel on this bone shaker everyday to go to work. The answer
was no .


It's inevitable, Gordon. These trains are around 70 years old now and
there's a limit to what can be done to keep them looking good.


Time is catching up with them, fortunately a lot of the
passengers are on holiday and riding an old train is part of it . The
IOW of course has loading gauge issues but I can't help thinking that
if it was an Island off say Germany then some modern trams would have
been adapted by now. Something like Docklands stock would enable
lighter track to be used as well and admittedly I am guessing here
possibly use less electric.


The cost of new or newish trams would be several orders of magnitude
more than could be justified. That would make it all too easy to
justify cutting the line short to make it a pier shuttle service only.

Perhaps some more recent Tube stock could be purchased instead? The
Victoria Line stock is being replaced. I know its alloy construction
would be less than ideal but perhaps some high tech corrosion protection
could be applied? Using old rolling stock on the Island is in keeping
with the long established tradition of using secondhand stock from the
mainland.

In article ,
(Tony Polson) wrote:

Perhaps some more recent Tube stock could be purchased instead? The
Victoria Line stock is being replaced. I know its alloy construction
would be less than ideal but perhaps some high tech corrosion protection
could be applied? Using old rolling stock on the Island is in keeping
with the long established tradition of using secondhand stock from the
mainland.

Isn't the problem with older tube stock, including the 1967/72 TS, that it
isn't alloy enough? In other words the combination of aluminium bodies on
steel underframes is the real corrosion headache on Ryde Pier?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote:
In article ,
(Tony Polson) wrote:

Perhaps some more recent Tube stock could be purchased instead? The
Victoria Line stock is being replaced. I know its alloy construction
would be less than ideal but perhaps some high tech corrosion protection
could be applied? Using old rolling stock on the Island is in keeping
with the long established tradition of using secondhand stock from the
mainland.

Isn't the problem with older tube stock, including the 1967/72 TS, that it
isn't alloy enough? In other words the combination of aluminium bodies on
steel underframes is the real corrosion headache on Ryde Pier?


Quite possibly.

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...

Perhaps some more recent Tube stock could be purchased instead? The
Victoria Line stock is being replaced. I know its alloy construction
would be less than ideal but perhaps some high tech corrosion protection
could be applied? Using old rolling stock on the Island is in keeping
with the long established tradition of using secondhand stock from the
mainland.

I'm guessing that it would be difficult to put 67Ts on the Island Line
because of the modifications that would be required, besides just for the
3rd rail shoes.

Victoria stock is built primarily to run on ATO. I believe that, even in
coded manual, the 67TS is designed not to exceed 25 miles -- to say nothing
of what their speeds would be if they were set at uncoded manual. In
comparison, permitted speeds on the Island Line are 45 miles.

I'm really not sure what sort of modifications would need to be carried out
on Victoria stock for that, however. Is it possible that they could just cut
out certain circuit breakers?

One other thing that Victoria stock would require on the IOW are trip cocks.
AFAIK, 67TS trains do not have them and they would have to be installed,
unless there are plans to carry out major modifications to the Island Line's
signalling infratsructure. Again, however, I don't know what sort of work
would be required to install trip cocks on 67TS stock.

I know that the 62As on the Metropolitan Line are due to be replaced in the
next year or so. Would they not make a more suitable alternative for the
Island Line? Would the loading gauges be an issue?

Perhaps the 313s would be more suitable as they are also due to be replaced
and require guards?

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...
wrote:
In article ,
(Tony Polson) wrote:

Perhaps some more recent Tube stock could be purchased instead? The
Victoria Line stock is being replaced. I know its alloy construction
would be less than ideal but perhaps some high tech corrosion protection
could be applied? Using old rolling stock on the Island is in keeping
with the long established tradition of using secondhand stock from the
mainland.

Isn't the problem with older tube stock, including the 1967/72 TS, that it
isn't alloy enough? In other words the combination of aluminium bodies on
steel underframes is the real corrosion headache on Ryde Pier?


Quite possibly.

How much of an issue is corrosion on the Island Line? Are they really on the
pier for long enough periods of time that it can become problematic?

In message
wrote:

[snip]

I know that the 62As on the Metropolitan Line are due to be replaced in the
next year or so. Would they not make a more suitable alternative for the
Island Line? Would the loading gauges be an issue?


Yes, there's a very low bridge[1] in Ryde that requires the use small stock,
hence the reason for choosing tube stock in the first place.

[1] And possibly others elsewhere on the system.

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail