London Banter

London Banter (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/forum.php)
-   London Transport (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/)
-   -   Skyfall (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/13260-skyfall.html)

[email protected] October 17th 12 08:33 PM

Skyfall
 
In article , ] (Steve
Fitzgerald) wrote:

In message , d
writes
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 09:47:54 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
There must be more to it than that. There's no reason they couldn't
have full acceleration but with the top speed still limited. The
signalling as an excuse makes no sense to me , there is a fixed
distance between signals and its up to the drivers how they get between
them. Surely getting up to line speed as fast as possible would benefit
everyone?

Not if that means you are travelling too fast (to stop) when the next
signal looms into view.


Thats down to driver training surely.


Not if the signalling system is designed for 59 stock and their
braking profiles.


38 stock, surely? Was the signalling redesigned at all for the 59 and 72
stock?

I understand the 95 traction package was designed to match the stock
they used to share with. No doubt this will be changed once the
signalling profiles are changed.

And then there's the energy consumption.


If that were a concern then all new trains on the system would be limited
to a snails pace. But thats not the case.


I don't think that's the issue.


--
Colin Rosenstiel


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk