Hot (sorry) off the press ....

I caught a High Barnet train (train 26, as it turns out) at Leicester
Square this afternoon, boarding the fourth car back. We progressed
normally as far as East Finchley, arriving between 14:30 and 14:35. Some
people later said they'd smelled something, but I can't say I did (on
the other hand, I have a cold).

As we sat there, a member of staff walked in the (platform-facing) door
at the front end, walked along the car, and out the other. About that
point I noticed an odd smell, sort of burning. Others also started
wrinking their noses and commenting. Half a dozen or so decided to get
off, when the doors shut (separating at least one party). Then the doors
opened again, we sat for a bit longer, and then the platform staff
started shouting "all change", so we all got off.

There was smoke oozing out from between the train and the platform where
I was standing, and more coming out the other side of the train. After
three or four minutes the train departed under green signals. On the
negative rail, level with the location of the rear shoegear on that car,
was a nasty-looking burn mark on the rail. Rather odder was that there
is another such mark about 10m south, which is under the *fifth* car
(which doesn't have shoegear).

The following train (21, IIRC) was a Mill Hill East. Everyone got on and
we progressed normally to Finchley Central, where I alighted. The train
continued on normally and, in the north end siding, was what turned out
to be the original train with someone looking under it from the side.

We then had a High Barnet train come and go, followed by one showing
"Finchley Central" which came into platform 1. Then there was a second
High Barnet, after which train 26 came out of the siding (this would be
about 14:50) and proceeded southwards towards East Finchley - no signs
of smoke.

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

On Mon, 2 Feb 2004, Clive D. W. Feather wrote:

Hot (sorry) off the press ....

On a slightly related note, Inspector Sands has been at Liverpool Street
two or three times since new year; i never found out what any of the
incidents were about.

tom

--
If you had a chance to do any experiment you pleased, unconstrained by any considerations of humanity or decency, what would you choose?

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 2 Feb 2004, Clive D. W. Feather wrote:

Hot (sorry) off the press ....

On a slightly related note, Inspector Sands has been at Liverpool Street
two or three times since new year; i never found out what any of the
incidents were about.

Usually either one of the tenants using a fan heater that hasn't been used
for ages and the dust burning off or someone deciding that it's a good idea
to test a fire alarm call point for us, despite the fact two of them are
tested before opening, in rotation, so each of them tested at least monthly.

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message ...
Hot (sorry) off the press ....

I caught a High Barnet train (train 26, as it turns out) at Leicester
Square this afternoon, boarding the fourth car back. We progressed
normally as far as East Finchley, arriving between 14:30 and 14:35. Some
people later said they'd smelled something, but I can't say I did (on
the other hand, I have a cold).

As we sat there, a member of staff walked in the (platform-facing) door
at the front end, walked along the car, and out the other. About that
point I noticed an odd smell, sort of burning. Others also started
wrinking their noses and commenting. Half a dozen or so decided to get
off, when the doors shut (separating at least one party). Then the doors
opened again, we sat for a bit longer, and then the platform staff
started shouting "all change", so we all got off.

There was smoke oozing out from between the train and the platform where
I was standing, and more coming out the other side of the train. After
three or four minutes the train departed under green signals. On the
negative rail, level with the location of the rear shoegear on that car,
was a nasty-looking burn mark on the rail. Rather odder was that there
is another such mark about 10m south, which is under the *fifth* car
(which doesn't have shoegear).

The following train (21, IIRC) was a Mill Hill East. Everyone got on and
we progressed normally to Finchley Central, where I alighted. The train
continued on normally and, in the north end siding, was what turned out
to be the original train with someone looking under it from the side.

We then had a High Barnet train come and go, followed by one showing
"Finchley Central" which came into platform 1. Then there was a second
High Barnet, after which train 26 came out of the siding (this would be
about 14:50) and proceeded southwards towards East Finchley - no signs
of smoke.

Whoa!

Based upon your description, it sounds like a piece of combustible
debris got stuck between a collector shoe and the power rail, and
either the friction of the shoe passing over the rail or the residual
heat of said friction caused it to catch fire.

SO far I've not been lucky enough to be on a burning train, and
hopefully I never will be ;-)

Brad

In article ,
(Clive D. W. Feather) wrote:

Hot (sorry) off the press ....

I caught a High Barnet train (train 26, as it turns out) at Leicester
Square this afternoon, boarding the fourth car back. We progressed
normally as far as East Finchley, arriving between 14:30 and 14:35.
Some people later said they'd smelled something, but I can't say I did
(on the other hand, I have a cold).

As we sat there, a member of staff walked in the (platform-facing) door
at the front end, walked along the car, and out the other. About that
point I noticed an odd smell, sort of burning. Others also started
wrinking their noses and commenting. Half a dozen or so decided to get
off, when the doors shut (separating at least one party). Then the
doors opened again, we sat for a bit longer, and then the platform
staff started shouting "all change", so we all got off.

There was smoke oozing out from between the train and the platform
where I was standing, and more coming out the other side of the train.
After three or four minutes the train departed under green signals. On
the negative rail, level with the location of the rear shoegear on that
car, was a nasty-looking burn mark on the rail. Rather odder was that
there is another such mark about 10m south, which is under the *fifth*
car (which doesn't have shoegear).

I forget the proper term for this (I was given a good technical
explanation when I raised this point with somebody some months ago).

There are places on the negative rail where there are two patches, which
correspond to the spacing of the two negative shoes on a car - this would
probably be around 30 feet. When examined close up, the patches show that
they are areas where extreme arcing has been taking place. The patches are
probably around 2 feet long. This generally only seems to occur on the
negative rail and only seems to have occurred since the introduction of
the 95 stock. They do not actually have to line up with the normal
stopping point of a car.

The patches give the impression that the negative rail might be slightly
lower at that point, causing the shoe to break contact with the negative
rail and hence arc. Where there are two patches, this acts like a
miniature rail gap and the car actually comes off current for a second,
enough to give quite a large arc. The patches are generally on the section
of the line where the train would be motoring - i.e. in a platform (when
pulling away) or past the station. Examples are Just north of Golders
Green NB, just south of Brent Cross SB, south of Hendon SB (1 patch with a
rail gap at the same distance as a second patch would be, Burnt Oak NB
platform. Because the car is motoring at that point, it is drawing several
hundred amps. Often these patches are sufficiently long enough to cause
the traction equipment to reset - as happens departing Brent Cross SB,
usually twice as there one pairs of patches and one patch and a rail gap.

If the current rails are wet, there is often very little arcing or no loss
of motors when passing over the patches. This is because the thin film of
water on the rail acts as a conductor between the rail and the shoe.

The link below shows the first pair of patches departing BrentX SB.
Although they look close together, they are two negative shoes apart. The
single patch and rail gap are in the distance and can't be easily seen.

http://www.romilepa.pwp.blueyonder.c...entxsbarc1.jpg


Roger



The following train (21, IIRC) was a Mill Hill East. Everyone got on
and we progressed normally to Finchley Central, where I alighted. The
train continued on normally and, in the north end siding, was what
turned out to be the original train with someone looking under it from
the side.

We then had a High Barnet train come and go, followed by one showing
"Finchley Central" which came into platform 1. Then there was a second
High Barnet, after which train 26 came out of the siding (this would be
about 14:50) and proceeded southwards towards East Finchley - no signs
of smoke.

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

wrote:
In article ,
(Clive D. W. Feather) wrote:


Because the car is motoring at that point, it is drawing several
hundred amps.

In reality, several thousand. 59 stock and other trains prior to the present
generation drew about 3000 amps when pulling away. I would hazard a guess
that the newer trains draw somewhat more, although being "more efficient" I
could be wrong..

In article ,
(Cast_Iron) wrote:

wrote:
In article ,
(Clive D. W. Feather) wrote:

Because the car is motoring at that point, it is drawing several
hundred amps.

In reality, several thousand. 59 stock and other trains prior to the
present generation drew about 3000 amps when pulling away. I would
hazard a guess that the newer trains draw somewhat more, although being
"more efficient" I could be wrong..

Are you thinking of whole trains' current draw when Roger is referring to
a single motor car?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
(Cast_Iron) wrote:

wrote:
In article ,
(Clive D. W. Feather) wrote:


Because the car is motoring at that point, it is drawing several
hundred amps.

In reality, several thousand. 59 stock and other trains prior to the
present
generation drew about 3000 amps when pulling away. I would hazard a
guess
that the newer trains draw somewhat more, although being "more
efficient" I
could be wrong..



I seem to remember the 1959 stock motor cars were protected with 600A (or
possibly 800A) ribbon fuses. I'd have to dig the diagrams out to check. I
can't remember with the 85 stock, I'd have to dig around for the relevant
manuals.

Roger

"Colin Rosenstiel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Cast_Iron) wrote:

wrote:
In article ,
(Clive D. W. Feather) wrote:

Because the car is motoring at that point, it is drawing several
hundred amps.

In reality, several thousand. 59 stock and other trains prior to the
present generation drew about 3000 amps when pulling away. I would
hazard a guess that the newer trains draw somewhat more, although being
"more efficient" I could be wrong..

Are you thinking of whole trains' current draw when Roger is referring to
a single motor car?

Yup, my mistake.

Clive D. W. Feather wrote in message
...
Hot (sorry) off the press ....

I caught a High Barnet train (train 26, as it turns out) at Leicester
Square this afternoon, boarding the fourth car back. We progressed
normally as far as East Finchley, arriving between 14:30 and 14:35. Some
people later said they'd smelled something, but I can't say I did (on
the other hand, I have a cold).

As we sat there, a member of staff walked in the (platform-facing) door
at the front end, walked along the car, and out the other. About that
point I noticed an odd smell, sort of burning. Others also started
wrinking their noses and commenting. Half a dozen or so decided to get
off, when the doors shut (separating at least one party). Then the doors
opened again, we sat for a bit longer, and then the platform staff
started shouting "all change", so we all got off.

There was smoke oozing out from between the train and the platform where
I was standing, and more coming out the other side of the train. After
three or four minutes the train departed under green signals. On the
negative rail, level with the location of the rear shoegear on that car,
was a nasty-looking burn mark on the rail. Rather odder was that there
is another such mark about 10m south, which is under the *fifth* car
(which doesn't have shoegear).

The following train (21, IIRC) was a Mill Hill East. Everyone got on and
we progressed normally to Finchley Central, where I alighted. The train
continued on normally and, in the north end siding, was what turned out
to be the original train with someone looking under it from the side.

We then had a High Barnet train come and go, followed by one showing
"Finchley Central" which came into platform 1. Then there was a second
High Barnet, after which train 26 came out of the siding (this would be
about 14:50) and proceeded southwards towards East Finchley - no signs
of smoke.



I used to travel on the Northern line for many years ago and that sort of
thing occurred almost every 3 months!

One occasion I had to knock on the drivers door to tell him the train was on
fire and he replied "Bloody hell!". I can laugh about it now but at the time
I was sharing the carriage with a mother who had a baby in a pram and when
you actually see a flame its not at all nice.

daveF