"Mack" wrote in message

On Jan 9, 1:20 pm, "Recliner" wrote:
wrote in message

First it was because tube trains are too narrow, then it was because
they're not articulated, now you're grasping at this straw. Just
admit you were wrong.

If the bogies are very near the car ends, then the effect is close to
articulation. But with the circular profile of Tube tunnels, I'm
certain that reasonable sized open gangways are not feasible without
true articulation. If you look at the relative movement of Tube car
ends, you can see just how difficult it would be -- look at how much
smaller the gangway is compared to the outer body in S stock and
378s in order to accommodate all the movement.

So, sorry Boltar, you won't be seeing open gangways in LU Tube stock
in the absence of articulation.

Wrong. The original plan to have walk though Tube trains did not use
articulation. what they did instead was make the cars shorter so it
could flex better. The original S Stock was not designed for the SSL
but the Victoria Line. The idea being you went from 8 cars to 12 cars
with silmar train lengths.

Problem was this was being done just before PPP, which when Metronet
came in and saw the design was a risk they weren't will to run, so the
project was put on the back burner. Meaning the 09ts was designed and
lessons learnt from the S stock SSL version were put into practise and
are now being built.

I'm sorry, but I'm having trouble understanding what you're saying (at
least Boltar is clear). Are you really saying that the S Stock was
designed for Tube gauge tunnels? And how would the 2009 stock be
designed based on lessons learned from the S stock, given that the 2009
stock went into service first? Both were designed at about the same
time, so it's hard to see how lessons learned from either could help the
other's design. And how would having lots of short, non-articulated
carriages facilitate open gangways or make it 'flex' better? Surely
that proposal for more, shorter carriages was also based on them being
articulated (which is why you have shorter carriages in the first
place)?

Aren't you getting mixed up with the articulated 'space train' concept,
which was indeed planned for the Victoria line before the PPP came in
and sidelined it, but which may be resurrected for the 1972 and 1973
replacement stock?