View Single Post
  #38   Report Post  
Old October 24th 03, 09:37 PM posted to uk.transport.london
Colin Rosenstiel Colin Rosenstiel is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,146
Default Why the piccadilly to Heathrow , why not the District?

In article ,
(Dr. Sunil) wrote:

If you look at the dimensions of the trains (I did find a web site
with this info but I can't find it now , typical) , I think A-stock is
only about 9cm wider than the others, which is only 4.5 on a side ,
not a whole hell of a lot really.


sorry for the length!

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...9224642.31224A
-100000%40biochem.bc.ic.ac.uk&output=gplain


Why don't people look these things up in the standard sources? Hardy (2002
edition) has this table (I've left out the lengths):

(mm)
Stock Width Height
1967 2642 2877
1972 2642 2877
1973 2630 2880
1992 2620 2869
1995 2630 2875
1996 2630 2875
A60/62 2946 3689
C69/77 2920 3687
D 2850 3620

Glover's Ian Allan London Underground (1997) has similar dimensions and
those for the 1983 stock.

--
Colin Rosenstiel