| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
DLR track gauge
As I was sitting on the DLR the other day with the train squeeling its
way round yet another sharp curve, it suddenly struck me - why did they use standard gauge track? Surely a narrow gauge would be far better suited to the tight curves on the line? Its not as if they'd have had any trouble procuring equipment for narrow gauge since plenty of light rail narrow gauge systems operate in europe. And the DLR is completely self contained with no physical links to any other railway so thats not a concern. Anyone know why they didn't use say metre gauge? B2003 |
DLR track gauge
"Boltar" wrote:
As I was sitting on the DLR the other day with the train squeeling its way round yet another sharp curve, it suddenly struck me - why did they use standard gauge track? Surely a narrow gauge would be far better suited to the tight curves on the line? Its not as if they'd have had any trouble procuring equipment for narrow gauge since plenty of light rail narrow gauge systems operate in europe. And the DLR is completely self contained with no physical links to any other railway so thats not a concern. Anyone know why they didn't use say metre gauge? Because metre gauge was "not invented here". |
DLR track gauge
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:14:30 +0100, Tony Polson
wrote: "Boltar" wrote: As I was sitting on the DLR the other day with the train squeeling its way round yet another sharp curve, it suddenly struck me - why did they use standard gauge track? Surely a narrow gauge would be far better suited to the tight curves on the line? Its not as if they'd have had any trouble procuring equipment for narrow gauge since plenty of light rail narrow gauge systems operate in europe. And the DLR is completely self contained with no physical links to any other railway so thats not a concern. Anyone know why they didn't use say metre gauge? Because metre gauge was "not invented here". ... and would also make it difficult for any kind of mixed running on or off the DLR which might occur in the future. -- _______ +---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //| | Charles Ellson: | | \\ // | +---------------------------------------------------+ | | | // \\ | Alba gu brath |//___\\| |
DLR track gauge
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message ... On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:14:30 +0100, Tony Polson wrote: "Boltar" wrote: As I was sitting on the DLR the other day with the train squeeling its way round yet another sharp curve, it suddenly struck me - why did they use standard gauge track? Surely a narrow gauge would be far better suited to the tight curves on the line? Its not as if they'd have had any trouble procuring equipment for narrow gauge since plenty of light rail narrow gauge systems operate in europe. And the DLR is completely self contained with no physical links to any other railway so thats not a concern. Anyone know why they didn't use say metre gauge? Because metre gauge was "not invented here". .. and would also make it difficult for any kind of mixed running on or off the DLR which might occur in the future. The Blackwall Railway, whose viaduct is used by the DLR, was originally constructed with a 5 foot gauge. It had to narrow this to standard when it wanted to connect with other railways. Peter |
DLR track gauge
"Boltar" wrote in message oups.com... As I was sitting on the DLR the other day with the train squeeling its way round yet another sharp curve, it suddenly struck me - why did they use standard gauge track? Surely a narrow gauge would be far better suited to the tight curves on the line? Its not as if they'd have had any trouble procuring equipment for narrow gauge since plenty of light rail narrow gauge systems operate in europe. And the DLR is completely self contained with no physical links to any other railway so thats not a concern. Anyone know why they didn't use say metre gauge? B2003 Sharp curves have been on standard gauge for years - trams in British systems were mostly of standard gauge, and they went around very sharp curves as they turned from one street to another. The new light rail systems are also of standard gauge. Have you noticed that most narrow gauge rolling stock is narrow, whereas DLR is quite wide. If you have wide stock on narrow gauge tracks, there is a potential problem with stability. If there is squealing on curves, this could be addressed by flange lubricators. I took quite a few trips on DLR a couple of months back, and I didn't notice that occurring. Regards David Bennetts Australia |
DLR track gauge
Charles Ellson wrote: On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:14:30 +0100, Tony Polson wrote: "Boltar" wrote: As I was sitting on the DLR the other day with the train squeeling its way round yet another sharp curve, it suddenly struck me - why did they use standard gauge track? Surely a narrow gauge would be far better suited to the tight curves on the line? Its not as if they'd have had any trouble procuring equipment for narrow gauge since plenty of light rail narrow gauge systems operate in europe. And the DLR is completely self contained with no physical links to any other railway so thats not a concern. Anyone know why they didn't use say metre gauge? Because metre gauge was "not invented here". .. and would also make it difficult for any kind of mixed running on or off the DLR which might occur in the future. And in the steady progression towards heavy rail, where they keep having to sell off the previous more flimsy vehicles, they are more likely to find buyers for standard guage stuff? |
DLR track gauge
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 07:40:29 +1000, "David Bennetts"
wrote: "Boltar" wrote in message roups.com... As I was sitting on the DLR the other day with the train squeeling its way round yet another sharp curve, it suddenly struck me - why did they use standard gauge track? Surely a narrow gauge would be far better suited to the tight curves on the line? Its not as if they'd have had any trouble procuring equipment for narrow gauge since plenty of light rail narrow gauge systems operate in europe. And the DLR is completely self contained with no physical links to any other railway so thats not a concern. Anyone know why they didn't use say metre gauge? B2003 Sharp curves have been on standard gauge for years - trams in British systems were mostly of standard gauge, and they went around very sharp curves as they turned from one street to another. The new light rail systems are also of standard gauge. Have you noticed that most narrow gauge rolling stock is narrow, whereas DLR is quite wide. If you have wide stock on narrow gauge tracks, there is a potential problem with stability. Like with 25NCs ? It depends how low you go in terms of gauge and what you do with the centre of gravity. snip -- _______ +---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //| | Charles Ellson: | | \\ // | +---------------------------------------------------+ | | | // \\ | Alba gu brath |//___\\| |
DLR track gauge
Charles Ellson wrote: Like with 25NCs ? It does look rather odd to see something that size on such a narrow track gauge. How common is modern narrow gauge light rail equipment elsewhere in the World? I would have thought that there would be more people building standard guage equipment, which might actually make it cheaper. |
DLR track gauge
On 29 Jul 2006 15:32:45 -0700, "MIG"
wrote: Charles Ellson wrote: On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:14:30 +0100, Tony Polson wrote: "Boltar" wrote: As I was sitting on the DLR the other day with the train squeeling its way round yet another sharp curve, it suddenly struck me - why did they use standard gauge track? Surely a narrow gauge would be far better suited to the tight curves on the line? Its not as if they'd have had any trouble procuring equipment for narrow gauge since plenty of light rail narrow gauge systems operate in europe. And the DLR is completely self contained with no physical links to any other railway so thats not a concern. Anyone know why they didn't use say metre gauge? Because metre gauge was "not invented here". .. and would also make it difficult for any kind of mixed running on or off the DLR which might occur in the future. And in the steady progression towards heavy rail, where they keep having to sell off the previous more flimsy vehicles, they are more likely to find buyers for standard guage stuff? Or going in the other direction, the DLR stuff possibly doesn't need much modification to tram standard for venturing out onto any local tramways that might be built (oink, oink, flap, flap) which would probably also be standard gauge. -- _______ +---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //| | Charles Ellson: | | \\ // | +---------------------------------------------------+ | | | // \\ | Alba gu brath |//___\\| |
DLR track gauge
On 29 Jul 2006 16:36:00 -0700, "Stephen Furley"
wrote: Charles Ellson wrote: Like with 25NCs ? It does look rather odd to see something that size on such a narrow track gauge. How common is modern narrow gauge light rail equipment elsewhere in the World? I would have thought that there would be more people building standard guage equipment, which might actually make it cheaper. OTMH you've got various bits of metre-gauge around Europe (a lot in Switzerland ?) which does in general seem to scale down the size of the bodywork while in Africa 3' 6" gauge seems to be "normal-sized" bodies running a bit closer to the ground. In both cases the trackwork is generally going to be cheaper while in the latter case the main difference is the bogies on the rolling stock which won't necessarily cost more while the locomotives in the past possibly had less "off the shelf" nature than now so the difference between standard and the larger narrow-gauges also might not have been significant or even extra. -- _______ +---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //| | Charles Ellson: | | \\ // | +---------------------------------------------------+ | | | // \\ | Alba gu brath |//___\\| |
DLR track gauge
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message ... On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 07:40:29 +1000, "David Bennetts" wrote: Have you noticed that most narrow gauge rolling stock is narrow, whereas DLR is quite wide. If you have wide stock on narrow gauge tracks, there is a potential problem with stability. Like with 25NCs ? It depends how low you go in terms of gauge and what you do with the centre of gravity. snip -- Whilst those South African locos were a big beast compared with British ones, compare their limited maximum speed on narrow gauge (60 miles per hour) with speeds achieved by British express passenger locos on standard gauge. Sure the DLR could have been built at metre or 3 ft 6 in gauge, with its low operating speeds, but what advantage would have been gained? Regards David Bennetts |
DLR track gauge
"David Bennetts" wrote:
Have you noticed that most narrow gauge rolling stock is narrow, whereas DLR is quite wide. If you have wide stock on narrow gauge tracks, there is a potential problem with stability. In Britain we use narrow gauge rolling stock on standard gauge track. The rolling stock on metre gauge railways in mainland Europe is often wider than Britain's main line stock, and their main line stock running on standard gauge is much wider. British standard gauge rolling stock functions perfectly well on 3' 6" gauge railways in New Zealand and other countries. |
DLR track gauge
Tony Polson wrote: British standard gauge rolling stock functions perfectly well on 3' 6" gauge railways in New Zealand and other countries. I'd sure have to disagree with Have you noticed that most narrow gauge rolling stock is narrow, from the earlier poster. Brasil has stock - and indeed locos - of the same type that runs on either 1000 mm and 1600 mm. They have GE U20C locos that identicval except for trucks. The iron ore carrying railways EFVM and EFC have full North American sized diesels and rolling stock. South Africa and Japan are further examples of 'large' 3 ft 6 in gage rolling stock. Much of the Austrailian less-than-standardard gauge stock don't look small to me either. -- Nick |
DLR track gauge
Charles Ellson wrote: .. and would also make it difficult for any kind of mixed running on or off the DLR which might occur in the future. I can't see that ever happening. I doubt much if any standard mainline stock would be able to negotiate the sharp bends or steep inclines on the DLR and the DLR stock uses a unique (in britain) 3rd rail system so it couldn't run under its own power anywhere else unless modified. And then theres the good old HSE to factor in with mixed running rules etc.... B2003 |
DLR track gauge
David Bennetts wrote: Sharp curves have been on standard gauge for years - trams in British systems were mostly of standard gauge, and they went around very sharp curves as they turned from one street to another. The new light rail systems are also of standard gauge. True , and I have to admit I didn't hear any squeal when I've been on the Croydon Tramlink but then that took over a large proportion of pre-existing ex-mainline track. However the tram on the (very nice) standard gauge NET system in Nottingham did sound rather in pain on a few corners when I rode on it last year. That could have done with being a narrower gauge too IMO. B2003 |
DLR track gauge
In message , Tony Polson
writes Because metre gauge was "not invented here". Er actually I think it may have been! I believe that Stephenson's Crich Mineral Railway in Derbyshire was the first recorded use of 1m gauge track. (That said, I can't find a reference on line and nor can I remember where I learned this.) -- Ian Jelf, MITG Birmingham, UK Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
DLR track gauge
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 08:09:52 -0700, D7666 wrote:
Much of the Austrailian less-than-standardard gauge stock don't look small to me either. It's isn't. Queensland narrow gauge (passenger) rolling stock is generally too wide to to run in Standard gauge NSW. (Assuming a bogie exchange :-) Sydney suburban stock is too wide to run in country NSW - suburban stock is 'medium' or 'wide' and can't leave the city. Broad gauge Victoria rolling stock is narrower than Sydney 'medium'. Track width is no indication of the width of the rolling stock carbody. |
DLR track gauge
Matthew Geier wrote: Much of the Austrailian less-than-standardard gauge stock don't look small to me either. Track width is no indication of the width of the rolling stock carbody. Which confirms my comment to which I was responding - which came from Australia - but I might have snipped to much out. -- Nick |
DLR track gauge
Charles Ellson wrote:
On 29 Jul 2006 15:32:45 -0700, "MIG" wrote: Charles Ellson wrote: On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:14:30 +0100, Tony Polson wrote: "Boltar" wrote: As I was sitting on the DLR the other day with the train squeeling its way round yet another sharp curve, it suddenly struck me - why did they use standard gauge track? Surely a narrow gauge would be far better suited to the tight curves on the line? Its not as if they'd have had any trouble procuring equipment for narrow gauge since plenty of light rail narrow gauge systems operate in europe. And the DLR is completely self contained with no physical links to any other railway so thats not a concern. Anyone know why they didn't use say metre gauge? Because metre gauge was "not invented here". .. and would also make it difficult for any kind of mixed running on or off the DLR which might occur in the future. And in the steady progression towards heavy rail, where they keep having to sell off the previous more flimsy vehicles, they are more likely to find buyers for standard guage stuff? Or going in the other direction, the DLR stuff possibly doesn't need much modification to tram standard for venturing out onto any local tramways that might be built (oink, oink, flap, flap) which would probably also be standard gauge. The problem is that the DLR has to be fully segregated because of the automatic operation - definitely no pedestrian crossings. To me, that makes it rather incompatible with any (proposed) tramways, with the exception of the bit on the Thames Gateway Bridge. Originally, the northern DLR terminus was to be Mile End, with street running along Mile End Road from Bow Church - but the choice of automatic operation ruled this out. Whenever Ken mentions public transport plans in the Thames Gateway, he talks about the Transit schemes, and then always mentions the possibility of upgrading them to tram or DLR. The only way to convert them to DLR would be to use the busways for the supporting pillars of an elevated track! -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
DLR track gauge
|
DLR track gauge
Charles Ellson wrote: Or going in the other direction, the DLR stuff possibly doesn't need much modification to tram standard for venturing out onto any local tramways that might be built (oink, oink, flap, flap) which would probably also be standard gauge. ....though the side-contact third rail system might not go down too well in Piccadilly Gardens... (Actually, I believe the original DLR stock which was sold on to Essen has had pantographs installed without too much trouble, so I'm just being facetious.) |
DLR track gauge
Ian Jelf wrote:
Er actually I think it may have been! I believe that Stephenson's Crich Mineral Railway in Derbyshire was the first recorded use of 1m gauge track. And the Malaysian state railway is both largely British-built and metre gauge. It even has Class 323-derived EMUs running around Kuala Lumpur. Scarily familiar! Neil |
DLR track gauge
In article ,
Ian Jelf wrote: In message , Tony Polson writes Because metre gauge was "not invented here". Er actually I think it may have been! I believe that Stephenson's Crich Mineral Railway in Derbyshire was the first recorded use of 1m gauge track. (That said, I can't find a reference on line and nor can I remember where I learned this.) And even before that, 3'3"-and-a-bit would be right in the middle of the range of gauges used in Shropshire-type railways (see, for example, M.J.T. Lewis' "Early wooden railways").. -- Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair) |
DLR track gauge
In message om, Rupert
Candy writes ...though the side-contact third rail system might not go down too well in Piccadilly Gardens... (Actually, I believe the original DLR stock which was sold on to Essen has had pantographs installed without too much trouble, so I'm just being facetious.) It has indeed, and been fitted with 'proper' driving cabs and was spotted a few months ago being driven down real streets on the U17. http://www.g7kkh.co.uk/Stuff/DSCN1372.JPG shows such a beast. -- 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) |
DLR track gauge
Boltar wrote: Charles Ellson wrote: .. and would also make it difficult for any kind of mixed running on or off the DLR which might occur in the future. I can't see that ever happening. I doubt much if any standard mainline stock would be able to negotiate the sharp bends or steep inclines on the DLR and the DLR stock uses a unique (in britain) 3rd rail system so it couldn't run under its own power anywhere else unless modified. And then theres the good old HSE to factor in with mixed running rules etc.... I think the OP was thinking more in terms of DLR trains running on Network Rail lines rather than vice versa (though you're probably still right about the HSE). Of course if/when the Stratford International extension happens, the DLR will be taking over Network Rail standard infrastructure (i.e. the end of the North London Line) and converting the electrical system from standard 3rd rail to side-contact. |
DLR track gauge
Steve Fitzgerald wrote: In message om, Rupert Candy writes ...though the side-contact third rail system might not go down too well in Piccadilly Gardens... (Actually, I believe the original DLR stock which was sold on to Essen has had pantographs installed without too much trouble, so I'm just being facetious.) It has indeed, and been fitted with 'proper' driving cabs and was spotted a few months ago being driven down real streets on the U17. I didn't know they did on-street running. Does that line have high platforms, then? (Dragging us back on topic, that shows that the DLR could, given pantographs, cope with street running extensions...) |
DLR track gauge
On 31 Jul 2006 07:06:24 -0700, "Rupert Candy"
wrote: Boltar wrote: Charles Ellson wrote: .. and would also make it difficult for any kind of mixed running on or off the DLR which might occur in the future. I can't see that ever happening. I doubt much if any standard mainline stock would be able to negotiate the sharp bends or steep inclines on the DLR and the DLR stock uses a unique (in britain) 3rd rail system so it couldn't run under its own power anywhere else unless modified. And then theres the good old HSE to factor in with mixed running rules etc.... I think the OP was thinking more in terms of DLR trains running on Network Rail lines rather than vice versa (though you're probably still right about the HSE). Of course if/when the Stratford International extension happens, the DLR will be taking over Network Rail standard infrastructure (i.e. the end of the North London Line) and converting the electrical system from standard 3rd rail to side-contact. Bearing in mind the coupled working of 508s and 313s, it might not be impossible for future parts of DLR to use tramway-style power supplies mixed (where necessary) with the existing system. The only thing that might be difficult is dual-equipped stock if such stock was also required to have retractable shoegear (i.e. the vehicles would need the space for the gear to retract into) in the event of street-running taking place. -- _______ +---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //| | Charles Ellson: | | \\ // | +---------------------------------------------------+ | | | // \\ | Alba gu brath |//___\\| |
DLR track gauge
Rupert Candy wrote:
Steve Fitzgerald wrote: In message om, Rupert Candy writes ...though the side-contact third rail system might not go down too well in Piccadilly Gardens... (Actually, I believe the original DLR stock which was sold on to Essen has had pantographs installed without too much trouble, so I'm just being facetious.) It has indeed, and been fitted with 'proper' driving cabs and was spotted a few months ago being driven down real streets on the U17. I didn't know they did on-street running. Does that line have high platforms, then? (Dragging us back on topic, that shows that the DLR could, given pantographs, cope with street running extensions...) No - the DLR would have to be given driving cabs as well, with a consequent change in the entire operation of the system (most likely for the worse). -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
DLR track gauge
In message .com,
Rupert Candy writes It has indeed, and been fitted with 'proper' driving cabs and was spotted a few months ago being driven down real streets on the U17. I didn't know they did on-street running. Does that line have high platforms, then? (Dragging us back on topic, that shows that the DLR could, given pantographs, cope with street running extensions...) Yes it does - high platforms at every station. -- 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) |
DLR track gauge
Dave Arquati wrote:
No - the DLR would have to be given driving cabs as well, with a consequent change in the entire operation of the system (most likely for the worse). Why would there be a 'consequent change to the entire operation of the system'? It's would be quite feasible to operate in auto mode as far as the last station on the segregated stretch, have a driver board, and switch to manual for the remainder of the journey. |
DLR track gauge
Rupert Candy wrote: and converting the electrical system from standard 3rd rail to side-contact. Bottom contact; side contact was Manchester - Bury, and I think after conversion, Holcombe Brook, which was originally overhead. The shoegear in New York is interesting; it's a sort of Manchester - Bury system turned on its side. It's top contact, but the rail is protceted except for a narrow gap on the inner side, and the shoe is a flate plate which comes in from the side to contact the top of the rail. Several conventional rail vehicles have been used on the DLR by contractors, both during construction , and for maintenance. |
DLR track gauge
On 31 Jul 2006 01:42:46 -0700, "Neil Williams"
wrote: Ian Jelf wrote: Er actually I think it may have been! I believe that Stephenson's Crich Mineral Railway in Derbyshire was the first recorded use of 1m gauge track. And the Malaysian state railway is both largely British-built and metre gauge. A fair chunk of the formely pink bits of the map have metre gauge railways: there is/was a massive secondary network on the Indian subcontinent (though the Indians are beavering away converting theirs to 5'6"), Malaysia, Myanmar, east Africa, etc. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
DLR track gauge
On 31 Jul 2006 13:54:10 -0700, wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote: No - the DLR would have to be given driving cabs as well, with a consequent change in the entire operation of the system (most likely for the worse). Why would there be a 'consequent change to the entire operation of the system'? It's would be quite feasible to operate in auto mode as far as the last station on the segregated stretch, have a driver board, and switch to manual for the remainder of the journey. Haven't the DLR trains already got a minimal "cab" in the form of a suitably-positioned set of controls for driving manually in an emergency ? -- _______ +---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //| | Charles Ellson: | | \\ // | +---------------------------------------------------+ | | | // \\ | Alba gu brath |//___\\| |
DLR track gauge
Charles Ellson wrote:
Haven't the DLR trains already got a minimal "cab" in the form of a suitably-positioned set of controls for driving manually in an emergency ? Yes, under a flap at each end of the unit. The controls aren't separated from the passenger compartment in any way, though. |
DLR track gauge
wrote in message ups.com... Charles Ellson wrote: Haven't the DLR trains already got a minimal "cab" in the form of a suitably-positioned set of controls for driving manually in an emergency ? Yes, under a flap at each end of the unit. The controls aren't separated from the passenger compartment in any way, though. and IMX most of the train captains seem to be quite happy for passengers to sit in the right hand front seats while they are driving from the left hand seat. Peter |
DLR track gauge
On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 01:03:07 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote:
No - the DLR would have to be given driving cabs as well, with a consequent change in the entire operation of the system (most likely for the worse). Why would there be a 'consequent change to the entire operation of the system'? It's would be quite feasible to operate in auto mode as far as the last station on the segregated stretch, have a driver board, and switch to manual for the remainder of the journey. I was thinking more in terms of reliability. The current automation means that the speed of every train can be controlled to ensure efficient operation, particularly through the bottlenecks at Minories Junction, If a DLR train ends up at Minories Junction, the bottleneck is probably the least of its problems... ITYM Royal Mint Street Junction. |
DLR track gauge
Boltar wrote: As I was sitting on the DLR the other day with the train squeeling its way round yet another sharp curve, it suddenly struck me - why did they use standard gauge track? Surely a narrow gauge would be far better suited to the tight curves on the line? Its not as if they'd have had any trouble procuring equipment for narrow gauge since plenty of light rail narrow gauge systems operate in europe. And the DLR is completely self contained with no physical links to any other railway so thats not a concern. Anyone know why they didn't use say metre gauge? B2003 Back in October I asked a more general question about railway guages concerning the cost advantage for 3ft 6in or metre gauge and whether this could make light rail, for example, more affordable. http://groups.google.com/group/uk.ra...03 614b6c9cd9 I also wondered whether rural lines might be better relaid in narrow guage or railways such as the Waverley route be reinstated for less cost. I got quite a few replies most informing me that there were absolutely no cost advantages for the narrower guages and that my suggestions were a complete waste of time. Of course, this still begs the question as to why so much of the World has railways with narrower guage than standard? Surely, someone must have thought it was a good idea at the time but why? |
DLR track gauge
asdf wrote:
On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 01:03:07 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote: No - the DLR would have to be given driving cabs as well, with a consequent change in the entire operation of the system (most likely for the worse). Why would there be a 'consequent change to the entire operation of the system'? It's would be quite feasible to operate in auto mode as far as the last station on the segregated stretch, have a driver board, and switch to manual for the remainder of the journey. I was thinking more in terms of reliability. The current automation means that the speed of every train can be controlled to ensure efficient operation, particularly through the bottlenecks at Minories Junction, If a DLR train ends up at Minories Junction, the bottleneck is probably the least of its problems... ITYM Royal Mint Street Junction. Indeed - whoops! -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
DLR track gauge
wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote: Haven't the DLR trains already got a minimal "cab" in the form of a suitably-positioned set of controls for driving manually in an emergency ? Yes, under a flap at each end of the unit. The controls aren't separated from the passenger compartment in any way, though. It's also not the ideal position for a driver to sit in - more central and higher up as on Croydon Tramlink would be better for street running. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:03 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk