On Jan 10, 5:41*pm, "Recliner" wrote:
"Mack" wrote in message



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?

The replacement Victoria Stock, named the S Stock was developed
initially. The S stood for Space and was an early 90's project. They
were looking out the box with installing OHLE equipment on the entire
Victoria line along with this new fleet. Work on the intrastructure
stopped due to costs but work on the fleet continued. They also looked
at making an SSL version of the S stock, but this was after the
initial Tube version started.

The S stock actually went through a few periods of development but
nothing came to much for the Tube version. The 09ts was less inventive
evolution of the Tube fleet rather than a revolution. The development
wasn't wasted as was put into the S stock for the SSL lines.

I think I wasn't be as clear as the original S stock was the Victoria
Line fleet, which feed into the development of the 09ts in a limited
sense. But most of the work was transferred over to what we know call
the S stock for the SSL lines.