In message
,
Mizter T writes

On Jan 30, 2:53*pm, "Basil Jet"
wrote:

MIG wrote:
This morning I've seen a three-unit train running on the DLR, with the
designation "Special", in between other services.

How many people does a three-car DLR hold, and how does that compare with a
six-car C stock? How does the speed compare? I'm wondering about whether the
"light" railway designation still means anything.

Closely spaced stations and lots of rapid acceleration and
deceleration are light rail-esque features in my mind.

Not that I'd want a rail vehicle of any kind, light or heavy, to fall
on my head - it's a rather relative term, me thinks!
I've always assumed the difference to be in the weight of the running
rail.
--
Clive

"Clive" wrote in message

In message
,
Mizter T writes

On Jan 30, 2:53 pm, "Basil Jet"
wrote:

MIG wrote:
This morning I've seen a three-unit train running on the DLR, with
the designation "Special", in between other services.

How many people does a three-car DLR hold, and how does that
compare with a six-car C stock? How does the speed compare? I'm
wondering about whether the "light" railway designation still means
anything.

Closely spaced stations and lots of rapid acceleration and
deceleration are light rail-esque features in my mind.

Not that I'd want a rail vehicle of any kind, light or heavy, to fall
on my head - it's a rather relative term, me thinks!
I've always assumed the difference to be in the weight of the running
rail.

But surely a tram is still an LRV, even if it's running on standard
track, as happens on at least some parts of Manchester Metrolink, Tyne &
Wear Metro and Croydon Tramlink? And does the DLR use lightweight
rails?

In message , Recliner
writes
does the DLR use lightweight
rails?
I would have thought so, I must be cheaper to use 70 lbs a yard steel
than 120 lbs a yard steel in base product alone before any pre-forming
takes place.
--
Clive

On 03.02.10 16:32, Clive wrote:
In message , Recliner
writes
does the DLR use lightweight
rails?
I would have thought so, I must be cheaper to use 70 lbs a yard steel
than 120 lbs a yard steel in base product alone before any pre-forming
takes place.
What do you mean by base product?

In message , "
writes
I would have thought so, I must be cheaper to use 70 lbs a yard steel
than 120 lbs a yard steel in base product alone before any pre-forming
takes place.
What do you mean by base product?
Steel bar to be converted into rails.
--
Clive

"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 2 Feb, 21:05, Andy wrote:
On Feb 2, 8:38 am, "DW downunder" noname wrote:





"MIG" wrote in message

...
On 31 Jan, 15:11, "Recliner" wrote:

"MIG" wrote in message



On 31 Jan, 13:28, MIG wrote:

At a glance, the wheels either side of the bendy bit seem quite far
apart for a single bogie, but no further apart than the pairs at
the
outer ends. I think it's probably an illusion caused by the
smallness
of the wheels.

Actually I could be confused. I think the new units (supposedly
illustrated in the diagrams) have longer bogies, or possibly just a
longer middle bogie.

I hadn't heard that the new bogies were longer. I wonder why they'd do
that, on units that have to get round very tight curves?

Conversely, in the artist's impression you posted, all four (sic)
bogies
look too short. But I'm guessing that was just the artist making that
bit up, not thinking anyone was particularly interesting in the
wheels.
I also wonder if the floors aren't too low as well in that sketch?

I will have to start paying more attention, and maybe take a snap.
Further posts may be from Belmarsh.

Yes please, of the elusive latest models, B07/09 ... which may indeed
have
4 bogies ... we shall see.

The picture he

http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/gb/...u/B07/a1n-dlr-
snow-jp.jpg

shows the B07 units as only having a single middle bogie. You can see
the spots where the wheels are behind the current rail at the front,
middle and back of the unit. I doubt the articulation would work with
separate bogies and still be able to run around the sharp curves.

There's absolutely no doubt about them having a middle bogie at the
articulated point (ie three bogies per "vehicle"). The only question
in my mind now is whether they are a different length of bogie from
the earlier units. My impression was that they are, but I'm wondering
if it's some kind of illusion.



Well I looked at the image upthread, and page zoomed it up the
magnification - which becomes pixellated. It's very hard to see, but from
the positions of underfloor equipment, ISTM that there isn't room for
separate bogies under each car at the "joint".

Thanks to those who've been looking and shooting.

DW downunder

"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message
,
Mizter T writes

On Jan 30, 2:53 pm, "Basil Jet"
wrote:

MIG wrote:
This morning I've seen a three-unit train running on the DLR, with the
designation "Special", in between other services.

How many people does a three-car DLR hold, and how does that compare
with a
six-car C stock? How does the speed compare? I'm wondering about whether
the
"light" railway designation still means anything.

Closely spaced stations and lots of rapid acceleration and
deceleration are light rail-esque features in my mind.

Not that I'd want a rail vehicle of any kind, light or heavy, to fall
on my head - it's a rather relative term, me thinks!
I've always assumed the difference to be in the weight of the running
rail.
--
Clive


Nah, many "light rail" systems run on exactly the same track as the railway
line they replaced. Light rail refers to a combination of:

- lighter specification for equipment (end loading, coupling stress, etc);
- lighter systems of control, in the sense of either not a comprehensive
external safeworking system; or a signalling system limited to vehicles of a
common performance and specification standard;
- lighter "greenfields" infrastructure where only the LR equipment is to
operate (T&W might still have freight, they did in the early stages).
- lighter, in the sense of smaller, trains.

Perhaps I've put enough into the thread to keep the wheels turning?

DW downunder

"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message , "
writes
I would have thought so, I must be cheaper to use 70 lbs a yard steel
than 120 lbs a yard steel in base product alone before any pre-forming
takes place.
What do you mean by base product?
Steel bar to be converted into rails.
--
Clive


I'd like an accountant/quantity engineer/etc to chime in here, but AIUI, the
steel for the rails is such a small percentage of the cost that to skimp on
this may increase life cost due to rail maintenance and transfer of higher
incident loads to the substructure.

DW down under

On 03.02.10 19:47, Clive wrote:
In message , "
writes
I would have thought so, I must be cheaper to use 70 lbs a yard steel
than 120 lbs a yard steel in base product alone before any pre-forming
takes place.
What do you mean by base product?
Steel bar to be converted into rails.
Billets, you mean.

On 2 Feb, 21:35, MIG wrote:
On 30 Jan, 17:00, Mizter T wrote:





On Jan 30, 1:04*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:25:57 -0800 (PST), MIG
wrote:

This morning I've seen a three-unit train running on the DLR, with the
designation "Special", in between other services.

(Am I the only one having trouble perceiving the "articulated
vehicles" as anything other than units of two coaches?)

No you're not! Wonder if there's anyone who thinks the trains are
about to get 25% smaller!

Presumably it is some kind of test run. *The one I saw was made up of
the new units.

Probably heading for the possession area to test the signalling at Royal
Mint St junction as well as line into and out of Bank. *All supposed to
reopen on Monday with three unit trains being phased into service after
that.

More info here at the "DLR Press Room":http://pressroom.dlr.co.uk/news/details.asp?id=220

With the exact same press release available at the main TfL "New
centre":http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/14063.aspx

Have the DLR actually got their own PR operation or not? The contact
details shown at the end of the press release on the DLR site are the
main TfL press office, but that doesn't in and of itself mean
anything. Plus I thought that DLR did have its own people (and they
were DLRL as opposed to Serco Docklands).

Anyhow, that's all by the by. I see that the Director of DLR, Jonathan
Fox, says "[...] I'm confident our Bank passengers will really notice
the difference at the new and improved platforms". They weren't all
that scrubby were they - they're pretty new, after all!

They've gotbenchesnow (on both platforms). *If they weren't added in
the last few weeks, they were certainly added relatively recently.
The lack of anywhere to sit made Bank particularly uncivilised, I
thought.


Just to follow up after using Bank a couple of times this week,
another distinct improvement is that the trains no longer seem to jerk
violently almost to a halt half way out of the platform and make
people fall over.