"Matthew Geier" wrote in message
u...
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:06:54 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Paul Scott wrote:


Er... no - but they and the 444s have the gap in the roof for the pan,
and all the bracketry to fit them. AIUI all the additional electronics
goes under the floor, hence the internal layout of the 350s (London
Midland AC/DC units)is the same as the 450s [not the seating though].

Fair enough. Is this the kind of change that can be made cheaply and
quickly enough that it's not worth worrying about in this context?

I doubt they have transformers fitted, they may even have ballast bolted
into that position to keep the weight distribution correct. If they were
fitted with transformers and HV wiring, what state they be in after a
number of years sitting in there doing nothing and receiving no
maintenance.

Probably not even ballast fitted if the 10 tonne weight difference in the P5
book is realistic?

Of course if the design of the cable paths is half sensible, fitting a
pantograph, new HV wiring, HV circuit breaker and transformer wouldn't
that expensive - or expensive in railway terms. Mention 'railway' and the
price of every day common parts or services seems to have a few extra
zeros added.


Glancing through a cab window of a 450 a few months ago, I'm sure I noticed
a warning sign about lowering the pan for full electrical isolation - at
least one (simple) part of the job is done already!

Paul