In message , Peter Corser
writes
OTOH, it was one of the 1960 stock sets.
The stock was 59 stock.
--
Clive

Cheeky wrote:
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:35:00 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

Boltar wrote:
could see, on platforms. Even at the terminus, if you fail to
alight, they take you into the reversing siding for a few minutes
before starting the return journey.

The HSE would be wetting their nappies over that if it happened
here. Don't forget on the tube we have to have the farce of a
driver walking down the train checking its empty and closing each
carriage one by one before he takes it out of service.

That's because the car-end doors can be opened by passengers. On
Line 14 in Paris, there are full-width gangways between cars, so
there's no risk of a passenger getting on to the track. (And on
other lines with older stock, it needs the Métro equivalent of a
J-door key to open the car-end doors.)

Are the new trains for LUL going to have corridor connections and if
not, why not?

Sub-surface lines: yes. Deep-level tubes: no.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Sorry...do you mean sub-surface are paying for extra cars but tube
aren't?

Or articulation is only viable on deep tubes? (if so why?).

In article .com,
() wrote:

Sorry...do you mean sub-surface are paying for extra cars but tube
aren't?

Or articulation is only viable on deep tubes? (if so why?).

Other way round, surely?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote:
Richard J. wrote:
Cheeky wrote:

Are the new trains for LUL going to have corridor connections and if
not, why not?

Sub-surface lines: yes. Deep-level tubes: no.

Sorry...do you mean sub-surface are paying for extra cars but tube
aren't?

Or articulation is only viable on deep tubes? (if so why?).

Cheeky asked about corridor connections, by which I assume he meant
passenger-accessible corridors between cars. The answer is that that
the new sub-surface trains will have, in Metronet's words
"interconnecting gangways, allowing passengers to walk through the
entire train". But the mock-ups of the new Victoria Line trains show
conventional inter-car doors as at present.

I don't understand your point about extra sub-surface cars.

Articulation, by which I assume you mean sharing one bogie between two
cars, is a different issue altogether. The Paris Métro has wide
inter-car connections on its latest stock, but the cars are not
articulated in that sense.

Finally, you're very welcome to join this conversation, but please quote
the previous text (which I've reconstructed above), otherwise it gets
very difficult to work out which sub-thread you've attached yourself to.
In Google Groups, you do that by clicking on "show options", then on the
"Reply" immediately after the Subject line, not the "Reply" at the end
of the message.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

asdf wrote:
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:35:00 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

That's because the car-end doors can be opened by passengers. On
Line 14 in Paris, there are full-width gangways between cars, so
there's no risk of a passenger getting on to the track. (And on
other lines with older stock, it needs the Métro equivalent of a
J-door key to open the car-end doors.)

So how do the passengers get out in an emergency?

Good question, and I don't know the answer (and can't find it in Brian
Hardy's Paris Metro Handbook). Maybe there's an emergency release on
the sliding doors. I've seen emergency ladders clipped in place at car
ends. Métro trains don't have front doors in the cabs like LU,
presumably because the tunnels are mainly double-track.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:50:47 +0100, asdf
wrote:

So how do the passengers get out in an emergency?

I think it would be necessary to have side platforms and emergency
release on the side doors like the DLR underground sections do, as
passengers may well try to leave the train while others are still
moving in an emergency, in the absence of any supervision.

OOI, does it have this?

I believe the control centre can broadcast on a train's PA to tell
passengers what to do. I assume there must be an emergency release on
some of the side doors. Only Line 14 has an evacuation walkway in the
tunnels.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

"Mike Bristow" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Clive wrote:
Anyone know which of the tube lines are now driven automatically?

Central and Victoria. And DLR.

Further is the system the same as was used
on the Woodford loop and Victoria line?

I don't know what was used on the Woodford Loop,
but the two systems in use today are different.

Woodford to Hainault was used as a prototype for the Victoria Line, and so
was presumably identical or similar to the system still in use on the
Victoria. I think it was removed years or even decades before the Central
Line ATO was introduced.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

Until it breaks a kid's neck...

A kid could break their neck in a bus door which can be quite
violent. Perhaps you could campaign for them to be made out of
marshmallows with cotton wool sides?

They already close quite hard enough IMO.

Well I can hold a tube door open with 3 fingers so unless you're a
3 stone midget with a muscle wasting disease I hardly think they close
hard at all. Besides , I'm sure other countries have had the usual
"think of the children/pensioners/some-other-sobsville-group"
argument and ignored them. Just like we should.

B2003

I thought non-emergency inter-car connection wouldn't work on
sub-surface without articulation because of some of the tight curves
and consequential outswing at car ends. This is very pronounced on the
D Stock but obviously would be less so on the new SSL 'S Stock' cars
which will be shorter. Not so much a problem on the Victoria Line which
was built to more modern standards I would have thought.

If pasengers can walk through an entire train as Metronet suggest, and
not just within a unit, this implies block-formed trains, or at least
no double-ended units (i.e. occasional middle cabs). As soon as you
lose the flexibility to swop units and split trains easily, you will
need more trains overall to ensure that one defective car doesn't
'stop' an entire 6, 7 or 8-car train.

Richard J. wrote:
wrote:
Richard J. wrote:
Cheeky wrote:

Are the new trains for LUL going to have corridor connections and if
not, why not?

Sub-surface lines: yes. Deep-level tubes: no.

Sorry...do you mean sub-surface are paying for extra cars but tube
aren't?

Or articulation is only viable on deep tubes? (if so why?).

Cheeky asked about corridor connections, by which I assume he meant
passenger-accessible corridors between cars. The answer is that that
the new sub-surface trains will have, in Metronet's words
"interconnecting gangways, allowing passengers to walk through the
entire train". But the mock-ups of the new Victoria Line trains show
conventional inter-car doors as at present.

I don't understand your point about extra sub-surface cars.

Articulation, by which I assume you mean sharing one bogie between two
cars, is a different issue altogether. The Paris Métro has wide
inter-car connections on its latest stock, but the cars are not
articulated in that sense.

Finally, you're very welcome to join this conversation, but please quote
the previous text (which I've reconstructed above), otherwise it gets
very difficult to work out which sub-thread you've attached yourself to.
In Google Groups, you do that by clicking on "show options", then on the
"Reply" immediately after the Subject line, not the "Reply" at the end
of the message.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)