Paul Scott wrote:
"J. Chisholm" wrote in message
...
Paul Scott wrote:
"Bob" wrote in message
oups.com...

http://news.independent.co.uk/busine...icle337145.ece

Something old something new.



I wonder why they think the trains will be '... a cross between those
used on the Underground and those operating on the rail network...'. All
they need to be is normal main line stock with appropriate wide sliding
doors, surely?

AND

Higher proportion of standing to sitting space (than suburban stock)

NO need for Loos as most trips will be short
(Just think how many standing passengers you could get in a disabled loo
(;-)

Jim Chisholm

Exactly - there are already many trains in use in the SE that already
have/don't have the features you mention...

Paul


Put pantographs in the spare 458s (which was always intended to be
easy) and put them on the equivalent of existing Silverlink services
and, without need for pantographs, allow for the release of 508s from
long-distance Kent services (directly or by cascade of 465/9s).

This might include some new demisemifast services stopping at South
Hampstead, Kilburn High Road, Queens Park, Harrow and Wealdstone and
Watford (when the Bakerloo takes over).

Put the 508s and 313s on the ELL, where windows and toilets are not
needed.

Sortid.

But it would be a dramatic reduction in comfort and ambience from the
existing 45-year-old Underground stock.