On 13 Aug, 12:22, "Recliner" wrote:
"DW downunder" noname wrote in message

u





"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 13 Aug, 09:51, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:40:33 +0100

Paul Corfield wrote:

If apparently the 09 stock did get dragged through the piccadilly
line tunnels without incident then we can't be talking much
difference between
09 and other tube stocks can we? Maybe a few centimeters one way
or the other at most which surely wouldn't make much difference to
equipment?

Did it arrive that way? I thought it was delivered by road rather
than rail and then across the tube network. I'd genuinely like to
know the answer to this so if anyone can point me at the facts it'd
be good.

Thats what people on here were saying. I've no idea if its true. But
it occured to me that the victoria line uses an old piccadilly line
tunnel on the northbound at finsbury park and I very much doubt they
would have bothered to spend a fortune to enlarge it by a few inches
so as 09 stock has to fit through it must be pretty close to
standard tube gauge. B2003

Isn't it more to do with the bends rather than the diameter?

AIUI, the '09 units on test were road delivered. They are out of
gauge for other tube lines (we're talking maybe 20-25mm) with the
appropriate kinematic envelope for operational speeds. I suspect they
could be crawled through tight spots if the need arose. Current
practice (as distinct from past LT practice) would suggest little if
any need for through operation on other lines, and no plans to
"cascade" stock.
Finsbury Park was extensively remodelled to provide UP-UP and
DOWN-DOWN train flows and cross platform interchanges between Picc
and Vic. It replaced the previous layout which provided for
terminating GN&C trains of "main line" loading gauge. The line of the
Victoria route means that little if any old Piccadilly running tunnel
remains in use as such. As the Vic has just been going through a
rebuild from the track up, any minor structure gauge anolomies would
have been dealt with.

The ever-reliable Wiki source says that the 2009 stock is 2.68m wide and
the 1973 stock 2.629, so the 2009 stock is apparently 5cm or 2" wider.
It also says that, "Unlike the 1967 Tube Stock, the trains are built 40
millimetres (1.6 in) wider to take advantage of the Victoria line's
slightly larger than normal loading gauge compared to the other deep
level tube lines."

Unfortunately, the unreliable Wikipedia has the 1967 stock as 9' 0
1/16" which would be 2.74m wide. Also unfortunately, it is the only
source I can find for 2009 stock details.

"DW downunder" noname wrote in message
u
"Recliner" wrote in message
...
"David Cantrell" wrote in message
k
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:26:30AM +0100, Recliner wrote:

True, but the new Victoria line trains are longer, faster and more
frequent, so that may account for some of the extra power.

Longer? When did the platforms get lengthened then?

The new Victoria line trains will be the longest on the LU network,
until the even longer new 8-car S stock trains enter service.
Presumably they just stop further into the tunnels.


But maybe answer the question: The '09 stock is longer than the 67
stock because the revised ATO is setup for a higher stopping
accuracy. That means that more of the available platform is actually
used, hence longer trains - not longer platforms. [BTW, as the trains
are in tunnel all the time they carry pax, "... stop further into the
tunnels ... " is a statement rather lacking in points of reference.]
Also, elimination of intermediate driving cabs increases the total
amount of space in the train made available to pax.

OK, stop further into the running tunnels, but you already knew what I
meant. But your other points do make sense.

Incidentally, they're 3m longer than the old trains, which were already
long by tube train standards. This might be another reason for them not
ever being expected to run in service on other LU lines.

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
"DW downunder" noname wrote in message
u
"Recliner" wrote in message
...
"David Cantrell" wrote in message
k
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:26:30AM +0100, Recliner wrote:

True, but the new Victoria line trains are longer, faster and more
frequent, so that may account for some of the extra power.

Longer? When did the platforms get lengthened then?

The new Victoria line trains will be the longest on the LU network,
until the even longer new 8-car S stock trains enter service.
Presumably they just stop further into the tunnels.


But maybe answer the question: The '09 stock is longer than the 67
stock because the revised ATO is setup for a higher stopping
accuracy. That means that more of the available platform is actually
used, hence longer trains - not longer platforms. [BTW, as the trains
are in tunnel all the time they carry pax, "... stop further into the
tunnels ... " is a statement rather lacking in points of reference.]
Also, elimination of intermediate driving cabs increases the total
amount of space in the train made available to pax.

OK, stop further into the running tunnels, but you already knew what I
meant. But your other points do make sense.

Incidentally, they're 3m longer than the old trains, which were already
long by tube train standards. This might be another reason for them not
ever being expected to run in service on other LU lines.




Vic and Central were the only 8-car lines. With the Jubilee now 7-car
(longer cars) and platform doors, clearly no cascade path there. Central
Line has the additional central area restriction that presently leads to the
outer (3rd) current rail being mounted higher than on the rest of LU lines
and NR 3rd rail.

So it seems that any semblance of integrated fleet management across LU has
been abandoned for now. The '09 stock is IT for the Vic for the next 35-40
years unless it proves a lemon like the 83. Given the cautious steps towards
introduction, there's a chance it'll prove at least a grapefruit if not a
very nice juicy navel.

The only possibility is extra stock for the Central Line being built based
on the same development platform but to the more universal loading gauge
.... then if extra trains for the Vic were required at the same time, they
may be to that more universal spec. That could only happen if more trains
could be run on the Vic or some were damaged and needed replacing. More
trains probably means changes to the signalling - anybody want to vounteer
to be project manager?

DW down under

"Andy" wrote in message

On 13 Aug, 12:22, "Recliner" wrote:


The ever-reliable Wiki source says that the 2009 stock is 2.68m wide
and the 1973 stock 2.629, so the 2009 stock is apparently 5cm or 2"
wider. It also says that, "Unlike the 1967 Tube Stock, the trains
are built 40 millimetres (1.6 in) wider to take advantage of the
Victoria line's slightly larger than normal loading gauge compared
to the other deep level tube lines."

Unfortunately, the unreliable Wikipedia has the 1967 stock as 9' 0
1/16" which would be 2.74m wide. Also unfortunately, it is the only
source I can find for 2009 stock details.

The possibly more reliable TfL site says the 1967 stock is 2.64m wide,
and the 1973 stock, 2.629m (ie, the same as Wikipedia). I wonder if the
Wiki author misread (or mistyped into his calculator) 2.64m as 2.74m?

Assuming that TfL got it right, the increase in width of Vic stock is
40mm, which is also what Wikipedia says.

On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:41:53 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

And if I had the power I'd say ...


yawn

On 12 Aug 2009 21:52:43 GMT, "Michael R N Dolbear"
wrote:

Note that train energy figures include Air Conditioning, the standard
car figures exclude it.


Air conditioning is an interesting topic. It does use a small
additional amount of fuel, but in a car, that additional amount is
smaller than would be caused by the increased drag when the windows
are opened.

So given the choice - opening the windows or switching on the aircon -
there is no doubt that the aircon is more environmentally friendly
than opening the car windows*.


*Cue some idiot trainspotter suggesting that opening car windows
should be banned.

On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:22:13 +0100, "Recliner"
wrote:

The ever-reliable Wiki source says that the 2009 stock is 2.68m wide and
the 1973 stock 2.629, so the 2009 stock is apparently 5cm or 2" wider.
It also says that, "Unlike the 1967 Tube Stock, the trains are built 40
millimetres (1.6 in) wider to take advantage of the Victoria line's
slightly larger than normal loading gauge compared to the other deep
level tube lines."


Ironically, one of the reasons why the Victoria Line tunnel was built
to a larger diameter was to reduce air resistance. ;-)

Bruce gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

Air conditioning is an interesting topic. It does use a small
additional amount of fuel, but in a car, that additional amount is
smaller than would be caused by the increased drag when the windows are
opened.

Got a reference for that?

Bruce wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:22:13 +0100, "Recliner"
wrote:

The ever-reliable Wiki source says that the 2009 stock is 2.68m wide
and the 1973 stock 2.629, so the 2009 stock is apparently 5cm or 2"
wider. It also says that, "Unlike the 1967 Tube Stock, the trains
are built 40 millimetres (1.6 in) wider to take advantage of the
Victoria line's slightly larger than normal loading gauge compared
to the other deep level tube lines."

Ironically, one of the reasons why the Victoria Line tunnel was built
to a larger diameter was to reduce air resistance. ;-)

It's not unreasonable to build the first stock for the line small to reduce
air resistance, and then build subsequent stock large to push the hot air
along.

On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:17:57 +0100
Bruce wrote:


On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:41:53 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

And if I had the power I'd say ...


yawn

Can't say I expected anything better from the same halfwit who tried to
convince uk.railway that every road in britain is fenced.

*plonk*

B2003