On 17 Aug, 14:54, wrote:
On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 06:38:33 -0700 (PDT)

Andy wrote:
Yes, but the '73 stock is narrower than both the '67 and '09 stock,
the overhand at the corners depends on both the length, the width and
the positions of the bogies on the cars.

Whatever the reason, to me it seems daft to have built a train to large to
be able to run on any other tube line and can't even be rail hauled to its
depot. And then instead of using the tiny amount of extra space the larger
size has gained they waste it with thick walls and door pillars. Common
sense was in short supply when the 2009 trains were designed IMO.


It's not daft to build a train to fit the more modern infrastructure
on the Victoria line, the 2009 stock would never be able to run on any
other tube line in passenger service, as they are too long (they're
even longer than the '92 stock on the Central). As I said, rail
haulage for delivery via the Piccadilly line would always have been
unlikely due to the lack of capacity for delivery runs, if this wasn't
the case, we might have seen the '67 stock being taken away via this
route, but that is leaving by road. I also don't know if the 2009
stock can be fitted with the necessary tripcocks for running over
conventionally signaled lines, the '67 stock can be.

Of course, without the extra width available, the thick walls and door
pillars would have impinged even more into the passenger space and
there may be a good reason for this bit of the design.