London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old October 26th 12, 10:58 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,misc.transport.urban-transit
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 529
Default Ganz system (was: Amersham and Chesham)

On Oct 26, 11:22*pm, (Mark Brader) wrote:

one collector contacting both wires. *Obviously there must have
two separate contacts on that horizontal bar, with insulation
between them.



Also note how high the arm is above the locomotive. *You'd never
fit that thing into a Metropolitan or District tunnel. *They must
have had a different sort of collector in mind.



I've never really looked into the three phase ideas of the Met but I'd
always thought they were looking at the three phase "two wire" system
(i.e. three phases of two conductors and one running rail return) not
with overhead wires but rails, with lower supply voltage than Ganz.
Conductor rails something like the centre and outer rail (like todays
DC) would be the equivalent to Ganz two wires, and the running rails
the return in the same way as Ganz. That way you don't need to expand
tunnels. My interpretation of "not suitable for tunnels" was not
something about not enough wire clearances but one of having all
track rails in a three phase system at a voltage too high for exposed
ground level conductors. Like I said its not something I looked into,
so maybe I misunderstood the whole thing.

If you really wanted to run three phase for the tubes I suggest you
simply use a side contract pickup for all three phases - its complex
at points and crossings but providing one car of the set is in contact
you still have power, and thats no different to a lot of DC section
gaps on todays tube.

--
Nick
  #2   Report Post  
Old October 27th 12, 12:06 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,misc.transport.urban-transit
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 403
Default Ganz system (was: Amersham and Chesham)

Mark Brader:
Also note how high the arm is above the locomotive. You'd never
fit that thing into a Metropolitan or District tunnel. They must
have had a different sort of collector in mind.


"Nick":
I've never really looked into the three phase ideas of the Met but I'd
always thought they were looking at the three phase "two wire" system
...not with overhead wires but rails, with lower supply voltage than Ganz.


As I indicated in my previous posting, "A History of London Transport"
is quite explicit that it was Ganz and overhead wires.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Something doesn't become ethical just because
| you can get away with it." --Barry Margolin
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Commute from Chesham to S. Bush via A40 - bad idea? Steve-o London Transport 18 June 28th 11 04:15 PM
Chesham/Amersham changes decided Paul Scott London Transport 16 February 13th 09 09:45 PM
Marylebone Amersham via Beaconsfield Walter Briscoe London Transport 4 November 13th 07 09:02 AM
Chesham City trains doomed John Rowland London Transport 2 January 25th 05 10:36 AM
Chiltern Services Between Amersham & Harrow Joe London Transport 45 February 25th 04 11:29 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017