In message . com,
TheOneKEA writes

The plan is to turn all trains on the last day the loop will be
available to us. Anything left over, I'm told arrangements will be
made for a Picc driver (Acton, I gather so no unusual moves for me
:-() to do a special stock move Northfields - Hammersmith - Mansion
House (not sure why they need to go this far?) - Reverse to High
Street Ken, reverse back to Hammersmith to use that triangle. He
will have a District 'conductor' with him who knows that route.

Why go all the way to Mansion House?

I don't know, that's why I asked the question.

Clive Feather states that lineside shielding for 1973TS is only
available on the District between Ealing Common and Gloucester Road.
Unless shielding has been extended to Mansion House, the signalling is
going to go out to lunch if a 73TS is turned during traffic hours.
Why not go via the Cromwell Triangle instead? Or even Lillie Bridge?

Which was my understanding too, although this is what I've been told
will happen.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

In message , Clive Coleman
writes

We were taught to use a square with a clip to attach it to the coupler
called a presspahn (If I recall correctly) which covers the "Dutch
oven" to allow a mechanical couple without an electrical couple. One on
each side of the coupler.

Oh yes we have those for when we want to mechanically couple only in
emergencies (double ended units as single enders only have mechanical
couplings anyway).

The OP was talking about being able to couple A-A or D-D and the Dutch
ovens wouldn't match up anyway.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

In article , ] (Steve
Fitzgerald) wrote:

In message .com,
Boltar writes

I've no idea how its actually done but couldn't they just be connected
with seperate cables (instead of via the coupler), which twist in the
middle so to match up with the other unit?

It's all done through the coupler face. There are no cables to be
connected/disconnected on this stock. A series of contacts are covered
up and as the trains come together this magically opens. The air is
connected in a similar fashion. It would require the whole coupling to
be redesigned (which would no doubt require a revised safety case),
tested, fitted and then training given to all involved. I can't see it
being worth it for a 20 month closure.

I agree. I'm more surprised they weren't modified to removed handedness or
replaced at refurb, though. There are plenty of unhanded couplers on the
Underground after all.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message ,
Colin Rosenstiel writes

I agree. I'm more surprised they weren't modified to removed handedness
or replaced at refurb, though. There are plenty of unhanded couplers on
the Underground after all.

--
Colin Rosenstiel
I'm in agreement as well, it cant take a lot to change form the old
handed couplers to universal ones.
--
Clive.

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article , ]
(Steve Fitzgerald) wrote:

In message .com,
Boltar writes

I've no idea how its actually done but couldn't they just be
connected with seperate cables (instead of via the coupler), which
twist in the middle so to match up with the other unit?

It's all done through the coupler face. There are no cables to be
connected/disconnected on this stock. A series of contacts are
covered up and as the trains come together this magically opens.
The air is connected in a similar fashion. It would require the
whole coupling to be redesigned (which would no doubt require a
revised safety case), tested, fitted and then training given to all
involved. I can't see it being worth it for a 20 month closure.

I agree. I'm more surprised they weren't modified to removed
handedness or replaced at refurb, though. There are plenty of
unhanded couplers on the Underground after all.

I suspect it's to do with the number of wires that need to pass across the
coupler from one unit to the other. AIUI the contact faces need to be of a
certain size to be effective which means there may not physically be enough
space on the coupler to duplicate every contact.

I was going to start a thread on the subject of Terminal 4 closure but since
this tjhread already exists, I hope I may be permitted to offer the following
opinion.

I have just read the TFL leaflet "Heathrow by Tue" which deals with the
closure, between January 2005 and September 2006. The most startling sentence
is "There are 33 stairs at Hatton Cross Station".

Those 8 words are enough to ensure that nobody with any luggage (and a fair
number of the rest of us, including the aged, disabled, those with children
etc.) is going to use the Mickey Mouse make-do-and mend "replacement" bus
service.

At a time when the Gatwick express link is under threat, is this nonsense
really the way to encourage people to use public transport to the airports?
Are, TFL, British Airways (the major user of Terminal 4) and BAA (in which I am
a shareholder) all hell-bent on destroying the market for Terminal 4
Underground services: those of us who choose other airports or other means of
travel are unlikely to go back to the Underground (with all of its ureliability
in any event: I was stuck on a Piccadilly Line train for almost half an hour
one day last week - I wasn't going to Heathrow, but judging by the luggage,
urgent looking at watches and general disquie, a fiar number of flights were
missed that morning!).

The irony is that all this disruption is being caused by the alleged lack of
capacity at Heathrow, hence the building of Terminal 5. Do the twits
responsible for this debacle really not give a fig for the massive
inconvenience being caused to millions of passengers whilst the closure
operates?

I have never used Hatton Cross but I am incredulous that there seem to be no
lifts or escalators there! In the overall scheme of things, would it have been
inordinately expensive to install lifts/escalators there even if just for this
temporary purpose?

The sentence "Porters will be available to assist with luggage if necessary" is
surely bad a sad joke!

Marc.

"Mait001" wrote in message
...
I was going to start a thread on the subject of Terminal 4 closure
but since
this tjhread already exists, I hope I may be permitted to offer the
following
opinion.

I have just read the TFL leaflet "Heathrow by Tue" which deals with
the
closure, between January 2005 and September 2006. The most startling
sentence
is "There are 33 stairs at Hatton Cross Station".

Those 8 words are enough to ensure that nobody with any luggage (and
a fair
number of the rest of us, including the aged, disabled, those with
children
etc.) is going to use the Mickey Mouse make-do-and mend
"replacement" bus
service.


33 steps isn't that far, though, probably no worse than any stairs
they may have had to use at the station they boarded the train from.
And, as you point out later on, for people with heavy luggage, there
will be people to assist.
What you did not mention, is the option for passengers to stay on the
train to T1,2,3 station and then get Heathrow Express on to terminal
4, without any steps to traverse.


The irony is that all this disruption is being caused by the alleged
lack of
capacity at Heathrow, hence the building of Terminal 5. Do the twits
responsible for this debacle really not give a fig for the massive
inconvenience being caused to millions of passengers whilst the
closure
operates?


I'm sure they do understand, hence the replacement bus service, and
the publicity of the works. Since Terminal 5 is happening, how would
you propose extending the Picadilly line to that terminal without an
enforced closure of parts of the line. Or would you rather the
Terminal 5 passengers (when complete) are inconvenienced by poor rail
links when it opens, just so people wanting Terminal 4 aren't
inconvenienced now.

What would you propose to do ?

In message , Matt Wheeler
writes

I'm sure they do understand, hence the replacement bus service, and the
publicity of the works. Since Terminal 5 is happening, how would you
propose extending the Picadilly line to that terminal without an
enforced closure of parts of the line. Or would you rather the Terminal
passengers (when complete) are inconvenienced by poor rail links when
it opens, just so people wanting Terminal 4 aren't inconvenienced now.

What would you propose to do ?
Seeing this debate is really quite an eye opener. Whilst I worked on
the tube (late 60s & early 70s) there were no rail services of any kind
with very little complaint from punters, but now they've had a choice of
Heathrow express or the Piccadilly line for years suddenly there is
uproar because a little bit needs to be closed to improve access. What
petty minded those of you lucky enough to have public transport are.
--
Clive.

33 steps isn't that far, though, probably no worse than any stairs
they may have had to use at the station they boarded the train from.

Not really: an increasingly large number of stations are now fully- disabled
compliant, as presumably ALL will have to be sooner or later. Or is it just
Routemasters that have to be abolished in the name of disability compliance?

And, as you point out later on, for people with heavy luggage, there
will be people to assist.

And I too believe in Santa Clause!

What you did not mention, is the option for passengers to stay on the
train to T1,2,3 station and then get Heathrow Express on to terminal
4, without any steps to traverse.

Is it really the case that nobody will have to use steps to get to the railway
platforms, whichever platform is used by the arriving Piccadilly Line train?
If so, I agree that this will be CONSIDERABLY easier (depending on the
frequency of the railway trains) than the bus nonsense.

Since Terminal 5 is happening, how would
you propose extending the Picadilly line to that terminal without an
enforced closure of parts of the line.

It's not the enforced closure of the line (although I fail to see how
installing a set of points and associated tunnel branching can take all of 18
months) that I object to as the ill-thought situation between Hatton Cross and
Heathrow.

What would you propose to do ?


Install lifts or escalators at Hatton Cross for a start!

If the poor District Line passengers can endure years of midget-sized platform
space at Earl's Court for years for lifts to be installed there, surely the
money could have been found for lifts at Hatton Cross?

Marc.

now they've had a choice of
Heathrow express or the Piccadilly line for years suddenly there is
uproar because a little bit needs to be closed to improve access.

The logical conclusion of your argument is that, since London had no public
transport whatsoever prior to the Victorians, if we closed down all public
transport for a few years, whilst all road junctions and bottlenecks were
sorted out, we would all in the long run be better off and should not be so
small-minded as to complain about the few years in which we would endure no
public transport whatsoever. All in the name of the light at the end of the
tunnel!

The point I am making is the ill-thought-out way in which the disruption is
being "handled" by TFL etc.

Just like the nonsense at St. Pancras! Has anyone tried getting a Northbound
train from there in the morning peak? It's like walking against a tidal-wave of
Southbound passengers for about half a mile before one even gets to the new
platforms!

It is a complete lack of "joined-up" thinking.

Marc.