Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Commute from Chesham to S. Bush via A40 - bad idea? | London Transport | |||
Chesham/Amersham changes decided | London Transport | |||
Marylebone Amersham via Beaconsfield | London Transport | |||
Chesham City trains doomed | London Transport | |||
Chiltern Services Between Amersham & Harrow | London Transport |