Basil Jet wrote:
On 2018\07\20 23:55, Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:56:59 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 10:41:18 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
I also suspect that the 345s have different performance parameters than the=
710s given the need for very rapid acceleration and braking on Crossrail p=
lus higher speeds to run skip stop out west. Their cabs should also be dif=
ferent to reflect the different signalling tech that the trains work with.

Is there any case for a common cab EMU control panel to be mandated so that
cross training between various stocks is less of a chore in the same way
that all airliners by airbus (don't know about boeing) tend to have the
controls in similar locations no matter what the aircraft?

Just because they have similar controls doesn't mean you, the pilot,
can walk off an A320 straight onto an A380. Airbus do indeed tout
that possibility but there is a requirement for additional training if
only because of the increased weight and 4 engines. Not only that
but the differences between early A320s and the latest neo models
isn't simply a matter of new engines; display systems in the cockpits
have moved on as well.

I would suggest that the continuous evolution of control systems means
that a single cab configuration, designed now, would be seen as
obsolete quite quickly


Not if Boltar was in charge, because he would have bought enough
aeroplanes for 150 years in 1903.


�

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 23:55:57 +0100
Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:56:59 +0000 (UTC), wrote:
Is there any case for a common cab EMU control panel to be mandated so that
cross training between various stocks is less of a chore in the same way
that all airliners by airbus (don't know about boeing) tend to have the
controls in similar locations no matter what the aircraft?

Just because they have similar controls doesn't mean you, the pilot,
can walk off an A320 straight onto an A380. Airbus do indeed tout

Sure, I understand that but it makes it easier.

that possibility but there is a requirement for additional training if
only because of the increased weight and 4 engines. Not only that
but the differences between early A320s and the latest neo models
isn't simply a matter of new engines; display systems in the cockpits
have moved on as well.

I would suggest that the continuous evolution of control systems means
that a single cab configuration, designed now, would be seen as
obsolete quite quickly

But you could say the same about cars and lorries, however the controls have
had the same basic layout for about 100 years now meaning with only a small
amount of familiarisation someone can jump from one road vehicle to another
and be driving it fairly quickly.

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 09:48:28 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2018\07\20 23:55, Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:56:59 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 10:41:18 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
I also suspect that the 345s have different performance parameters than
the=
710s given the need for very rapid acceleration and braking on Crossrail p=

lus higher speeds to run skip stop out west. Their cabs should also be
dif=
ferent to reflect the different signalling tech that the trains work with.

Is there any case for a common cab EMU control panel to be mandated so that
cross training between various stocks is less of a chore in the same way
that all airliners by airbus (don't know about boeing) tend to have the
controls in similar locations no matter what the aircraft?

Just because they have similar controls doesn't mean you, the pilot,
can walk off an A320 straight onto an A380. Airbus do indeed tout
that possibility but there is a requirement for additional training if
only because of the increased weight and 4 engines. Not only that
but the differences between early A320s and the latest neo models
isn't simply a matter of new engines; display systems in the cockpits
have moved on as well.

I would suggest that the continuous evolution of control systems means
that a single cab configuration, designed now, would be seen as
obsolete quite quickly


Not if Boltar was in charge, because he would have bought enough
aeroplanes for 150 years in 1903.

Oh do give it a rest. What exactly is the major advance in technology from
the 378s to the 710s? Very little I'd venture, perhaps a weight reduction
and thats about it. And I bet the seats in the latter will have all the
padding of concrete so will be less pleasent for passengers.

On 22/07/2018 09:27, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 09:48:28 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2018\07\20 23:55, Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:56:59 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 10:41:18 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
I also suspect that the 345s have different performance parameters than
the=
710s given the need for very rapid acceleration and braking on Crossrail p=

lus higher speeds to run skip stop out west. Their cabs should also be
dif=
ferent to reflect the different signalling tech that the trains work with.

Is there any case for a common cab EMU control panel to be mandated so that
cross training between various stocks is less of a chore in the same way
that all airliners by airbus (don't know about boeing) tend to have the
controls in similar locations no matter what the aircraft?

Just because they have similar controls doesn't mean you, the pilot,
can walk off an A320 straight onto an A380. Airbus do indeed tout
that possibility but there is a requirement for additional training if
only because of the increased weight and 4 engines. Not only that
but the differences between early A320s and the latest neo models
isn't simply a matter of new engines; display systems in the cockpits
have moved on as well.

I would suggest that the continuous evolution of control systems means
that a single cab configuration, designed now, would be seen as
obsolete quite quickly


Not if Boltar was in charge, because he would have bought enough
aeroplanes for 150 years in 1903.

Oh do give it a rest. What exactly is the major advance in technology from
the 378s to the 710s? Very little I'd venture, perhaps a weight reduction
and thats about it. And I bet the seats in the latter will have all the
padding of concrete so will be less pleasent for passengers.


You don't get to tell the entire group to **** off and then have us at
your beck and call to answer questions that you've already been given
answers to in the last six months.

--
Basil Jet - listening to (Mi-Mz)... Michael Chapman. Michael Karoli.
Michael Nyman. Michael Rother. Mick Karn. Mick Ronson. Mickey Hart.
Midlake. Mike Oldfield. Mike Watt. Miles Davis. Million Dead. Mini
Mansions. Ministry. Minutemen. Mission Of Burma. Mister Modo and Ugly
Mac Beer. Modest Mouse. Modified Man. Moebius. Mogwai. Moloko. Momus.
Monaco. Monks. Monstrance. Monte Cazazza. Moonshake. Mordant Music.
Morrissey. Morton Subotnick. Motörhead. Mouse On Mars. Mozart. Mr
Wright. Mudhoney. Mumford & Sons. Muse. MX-80 Sound. My Bloody
Valentine. My Brightest Diamond

Basil Jet wrote:
On 22/07/2018 09:27, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 09:48:28 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2018\07\20 23:55, Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:56:59 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 10:41:18 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
I also suspect that the 345s have different performance parameters than
the=
710s given the need for very rapid acceleration and braking on Crossrail p=

lus higher speeds to run skip stop out west. Their cabs should also be
dif=
ferent to reflect the different signalling tech that the trains work with.

Is there any case for a common cab EMU control panel to be mandated so that
cross training between various stocks is less of a chore in the same way
that all airliners by airbus (don't know about boeing) tend to have the
controls in similar locations no matter what the aircraft?

Just because they have similar controls doesn't mean you, the pilot,
can walk off an A320 straight onto an A380. Airbus do indeed tout
that possibility but there is a requirement for additional training if
only because of the increased weight and 4 engines. Not only that
but the differences between early A320s and the latest neo models
isn't simply a matter of new engines; display systems in the cockpits
have moved on as well.

I would suggest that the continuous evolution of control systems means
that a single cab configuration, designed now, would be seen as
obsolete quite quickly


Not if Boltar was in charge, because he would have bought enough
aeroplanes for 150 years in 1903.

Oh do give it a rest. What exactly is the major advance in technology from
the 378s to the 710s? Very little I'd venture, perhaps a weight reduction
and thats about it. And I bet the seats in the latter will have all the
padding of concrete so will be less pleasent for passengers.


You don't get to tell the entire group to **** off and then have us at
your beck and call to answer questions that you've already been given
answers to in the last six months.


Yup, I've decided not to provide any more free education to Neil (Boltar).

On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 10:56:19 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
On 22/07/2018 09:27, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 09:48:28 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2018\07\20 23:55, Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:56:59 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 10:41:18 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
I also suspect that the 345s have different performance parameters than
the=
710s given the need for very rapid acceleration and braking on Crossrail
p=

lus higher speeds to run skip stop out west. Their cabs should also be
dif=
ferent to reflect the different signalling tech that the trains work
with.

Is there any case for a common cab EMU control panel to be mandated so
that
cross training between various stocks is less of a chore in the same way
that all airliners by airbus (don't know about boeing) tend to have the
controls in similar locations no matter what the aircraft?

Just because they have similar controls doesn't mean you, the pilot,
can walk off an A320 straight onto an A380. Airbus do indeed tout
that possibility but there is a requirement for additional training if
only because of the increased weight and 4 engines. Not only that
but the differences between early A320s and the latest neo models
isn't simply a matter of new engines; display systems in the cockpits
have moved on as well.

I would suggest that the continuous evolution of control systems means
that a single cab configuration, designed now, would be seen as
obsolete quite quickly


Not if Boltar was in charge, because he would have bought enough
aeroplanes for 150 years in 1903.

Oh do give it a rest. What exactly is the major advance in technology from
the 378s to the 710s? Very little I'd venture, perhaps a weight reduction
and thats about it. And I bet the seats in the latter will have all the
padding of concrete so will be less pleasent for passengers.


You don't get to tell the entire group to **** off and then have us at
your beck and call to answer questions that you've already been given
answers to in the last six months.

I've yet to here any technical details beyond "oh, they're better".

On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 10:13:19 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Yup, I've decided not to provide any more free education to Neil (Boltar).

Am I supposed to be impressed? Its amazing what you can dig up from old
usenet post addresses correlated with company names isn't it as someone
demonstrated to me , oh, at least 10 years ago.

wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 10:13:19 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Yup, I've decided not to provide any more free education to Neil (Boltar).

Am I supposed to be impressed? Its amazing what you can dig up from old
usenet post addresses correlated with company names isn't it as someone
demonstrated to me , oh, at least 10 years ago.

Why would I try and impress you, Mr Neil J Robertson?

On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 10:46:56 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 10:13:19 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Yup, I've decided not to provide any more free education to Neil (Boltar).

Am I supposed to be impressed? Its amazing what you can dig up from old
usenet post addresses correlated with company names isn't it as someone
demonstrated to me , oh, at least 10 years ago.

Why would I try and impress you, Mr Neil J Robertson?

Good old companies house. No doubt if you're not too thick you've also found a
couple of my old addresses too and the name of my late stepmum bless her. Well
done. Now you're probably trying to figure out which is my profile on
facebook - I can save you the trouble, I'm not on it and there is no picture
of me anywhere on the internet. But do carry on searching since you inevitably
won't believe me.

If I wanted anonymity on here I wouldn't still be using this old handle. HTH.

It's a foot tunnel. I've never heard of a foot ferry in Woolwich.
Pedestrians are of course allowed on the car ferry.

There used to also be a railway-operated ferry at North Woolwich, the burned out remains of the pier which it once served were still there a few years ago and may still be there now, I haven’t been there recently. It was killed off many decades ago by the mearby free ferry and foot tunnel. I think it may have been around First World War time, but I’m not sure.