Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

Is some/all of the Victoria Line stock going to Eastleigh for scrapping? I
ask because I caught a glimpse of one carriage on a low loader going through
Eastleigh.

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

On Jul 6, 10:26*am, "Graham Harrison"
wrote:
Is some/all of the Victoria Line stock going to Eastleigh for scrapping? * I
ask because I caught a glimpse of one carriage on a low loader going through
Eastleigh.

Most of the tube stock that's ever headed in that sort of direction
has been en route for the Isle of Wight. I've heard it said that
Victoria Line stock would be no use for the Island but maybe someone's
decided to have a closer look. Just a thought.

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

"Graham Harrison" wrote in
message

Than you for that. I can't tell you anything about the one I saw
other than that it had a driving cab.

Presumably it's the 67 DMs that are the least useful now?

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

"W14_Fishbourne" wrote in message
...
On Jul 6, 10:26 am, "Graham Harrison"
wrote:
Is some/all of the Victoria Line stock going to Eastleigh for scrapping? I
ask because I caught a glimpse of one carriage on a low loader going
through
Eastleigh.

Most of the tube stock that's ever headed in that sort of direction
has been en route for the Isle of Wight. I've heard it said that
Victoria Line stock would be no use for the Island but maybe someone's
decided to have a closer look. Just a thought.


I've heard the IOW will be getting replacement stock soon.

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

As far as im aware, it remains the case that ex-Picc stock will be
heading for the Island - with its withdrawal now pushed back, SWT have
stated that the current trains will not be replaced during the current
franchise (up to 2018 i believe).

Chris

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

In article ,
(Graham Harrison) wrote:

Is some/all of the Victoria Line stock going to Eastleigh for
scrapping? I ask because I caught a glimpse of one carriage on a
low loader going through Eastleigh.

Are they being sensible enough to send some to the Isle of Wight?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 22:50:24 +0100, wrote:
loops and much simpler signaling. Longer term save money pumping
the tunnel dry and return to the street route used by the original
pier trams.

Isn't the tunnel the only reason for the need for tiny trains?

Trams might well offer a solution, especially if they could be run by
Southern Vectis as part of their bus network.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

On 07/07/2011 22:50, wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jul 2011 17:54:13 -0500,
wrote:

In ,
(Graham Harrison) wrote:

Is some/all of the Victoria Line stock going to Eastleigh for
scrapping? I ask because I caught a glimpse of one carriage on a
low loader going through Eastleigh.

Are they being sensible enough to send some to the Isle of Wight?

At the risk of being branded a heretic isn't it time the Isle of Wight
got offered something a little more up to date than 40 year old trains
When tube stock was first sent across the traffic still needed 4 car
and 7 car trains and the line had more double track than it has now. 2
car operation is now the norm.
Perhaps Trams could be more suitable,lighter on power demand, lighter
on the track, easier to increase the service with a couple of passing
loops and much simpler signaling. Longer term save money pumping
the tunnel dry and return to the street route used by the original
pier trams. New vehicles will probably be too expensive but possibly
there are some second hand ones around as Continental cities upgrade
their fleets.
G.Harman


Why can't they just put in the money to raise the bridge?

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

In message ,
" writes

Why can't they just put in the money to raise the bridge?

It's a quarter of a mile long tunnel, not a bridge.

--
Paul Terry

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

In message ,
writes

Perhaps Trams could be more suitable

That has been proposed. The scheme (from Bombardier) is to build a tram
tunnel under the Solent to Gosport, from where trams would use the
existing road network to Fort Rowner, and then disused rail track to a
terminus at Fareham, offering cross-platform interchange with Network
Rail.

On the island, once the SWT franchise expires, the trams would take over
the island line, and there is an ambition to reopen the Sandown to
Newport line for trams.

I don't think it was particularly well received. A lot of traffic is
seasonal, making it difficult to justify the cost of the Solent tunnel
(although the underwater part needs only to be about a mile in length).
There was huge opposition from the ferry companies, naturally, and the
residents seem to feel that a major part of the island's attraction is
its relative inaccessibility!

This proposal didn't include using the St John's Road tunnel, though,
where I think there wouldn't be enough clearance for a tram's overhead
gear - although I wouldn't have thought it beyond the wit of engineers
to use battery power plus a system for automatically lowering the
overhead gear (as on the Rome trolleybus network).
--
Paul Terry

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

In message ,
writes

Longer term save money pumping the tunnel dry and return to the street
route used by the original pier trams.

The original route could be problematic - it passed through the middle
of a private house! See second photo down at:

http://www.insula.vecta.btinternet.c...agePlaces.html
--
Paul Terry

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

In article ,
(Paul Terry) wrote:

This proposal didn't include using the St John's Road tunnel,
though, where I think there wouldn't be enough clearance for a
tram's overhead gear - although I wouldn't have thought it beyond
the wit of engineers to use battery power plus a system for
automatically lowering the overhead gear (as on the Rome trolleybus
network).

Space for the overhead line isn't the problem. Single deck trams are much
taller than tube trains.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

On 08/07/2011 00:37, Neil Williams wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 22:50:24 +0100, wrote:
loops and much simpler signaling. Longer term save money pumping the
tunnel dry and return to the street route used by the original
pier trams.

Isn't the tunnel the only reason for the need for tiny trains?

Trams might well offer a solution, especially if they could be run by
Southern Vectis as part of their bus network.

Neil

Will the new trains have guards or will they be one-man operation?

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

In message ,
writes

Space for the overhead line isn't the problem. Single deck trams are much
taller than tube trains.

There's quite a bit of clearance above the height of a tube train:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/richard...s/z/in/photost
ream/

In fact, at one stage BR class 503s from Merseyside were going to be
used on the line. Here's a rare picture of clearance trials:

http://www.gscalecentral.co.uk/f/dow...?file=1;127888

However, the length of the 503s proved to be a problem, as there is a
tight S-bend in the tunnel, hence the adoption of tube stock (plus, the
aluminium-bodied stock was much better able to cope with salt spray on
the pier).

If the tram proposal does go ahead (which I think is unlikely), it is
more likely to adopt street running, as the proposal for the Ryde Relief
Road would take traffic away from the Esplanade (which is currently the
main road through the town).

--
Paul Terry

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

"Paul Terry" wrote in message

In message ,
writes

Space for the overhead line isn't the problem. Single deck trams are
much taller than tube trains.

There's quite a bit of clearance above the height of a tube train:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/richard...s/z/in/photost
ream/

In fact, at one stage BR class 503s from Merseyside were going to be
used on the line. Here's a rare picture of clearance trials:

http://www.gscalecentral.co.uk/f/dow...?file=1;127888

However, the length of the 503s proved to be a problem, as there is a
tight S-bend in the tunnel, hence the adoption of tube stock (plus,
the aluminium-bodied stock was much better able to cope with salt
spray on the pier).

But they haven't used aluminium-bodied tube stock on the IoW. I seem to
remember reading that these might have more bimetallic corrosion
problems than steel-bodied stock, which is why they still have some of
the last steel-bodied LU stock.

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

In article ,
(Paul Terry) wrote:

In message ,
writes

Space for the overhead line isn't the problem. Single deck trams are
much taller than tube trains.

There's quite a bit of clearance above the height of a tube train:


http://www.flickr.com/photos/richard...z/in/photostre
am/

Is that enough for a modern tram though?

In fact, at one stage BR class 503s from Merseyside were going to
be used on the line. Here's a rare picture of clearance trials:

http://www.gscalecentral.co.uk/f/dow...?file=1;127888

However, the length of the 503s proved to be a problem, as there is
a tight S-bend in the tunnel, hence the adoption of tube stock
(plus, the aluminium-bodied stock was much better able to cope with
salt spray on the pier).

Ho-ho! Aluminium-bodied stock has never been used on the island though
there was a bit of aluminium in the 1934 Standard stock. I understand that
electrolytic corrosion on the pier (all ali-bodied stock has some steel in
it) was the reason why no stock withdrawn since the 1938 steel-bodied
stock has been used on the Island.

If the tram proposal does go ahead (which I think is unlikely), it
is more likely to adopt street running, as the proposal for the
Ryde Relief Road would take traffic away from the Esplanade (which
is currently the main road through the town).

Wow! Would that be the second new road on the island in 70 years? I still
use my parents' 1940s 1" OS map of the island. Apart from the railway
closures and the Newport bypass there has been surprisingly little change.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

In message ,
writes

In article ,
(Paul Terry) wrote:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/richard...z/in/photostre
am/

Is that enough for a modern tram though?

Not for the large Croydon-type, but they come in many sizes and the
low-floor ones are often under 3m (excluding overhead). But low-floor
would mean rebuilding platforms along the line, and there's never been
enough money for any serious work on the island line.

Ho-ho! Aluminium-bodied stock has never been used on the island

Ah, thanks to you (and recliner) for correcting faulty memory.

--
Paul Terry

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

In message , Graham Harrison
writes

Is some/all of the Victoria Line stock going to Eastleigh for
scrapping? I ask because I caught a glimpse of one carriage on a low
loader going through Eastleigh.

I passed another this morning, just before Heathrow, going west down the
M4. I guess it could have been heading for Eastleigh via the M25 and M3.
--
Paul Terry

Scrapping Victoria Line stock?
 

"Paul Terry" wrote in message
...
In message , Graham Harrison
writes

Is some/all of the Victoria Line stock going to Eastleigh for scrapping?
I ask because I caught a glimpse of one carriage on a low loader going
through Eastleigh.

I passed another this morning, just before Heathrow, going west down the
M4. I guess it could have been heading for Eastleigh via the M25 and M3.

According to the Eastleigh works website, some 67 stock is there for
storage...

Paul S