2009 Stock loading gauge
 

chunky munky wrote:

Trials were carried out a few months back after close of traffic with
a 67TS with polystyrene strips on running on the Piccadilly to
Finsbury Park Victoria. I don't know the outcome though!

How primitive. Just because a train fits through once doesn't mean it will
fit through every time, especially with varying numbers of passengers in
varying distributions, and the new trains will have different suspension to
the old ones anyway. Has LU not heard of lasers and proximity sensors and
computer modelling?

2009 Stock loading gauge
 

On Apr 10, 12:23 pm, "John Rowland"
wrote:
How primitive. Just because a train fits through once doesn't mean it will
fit through every time, especially with varying numbers of passengers in
varying distributions, and the new trains will have different suspension to
the old ones anyway. Has LU not heard of lasers and proximity sensors and
computer modelling?

But they're not going to run in passenger service on the piccadilly
and no doubt they'll be driven slowly anyway on the curvy bits.

I still fail to understand why they've given themselves this much
grief for a few inches of extra headroom. Its not vertical height
thats needed since anyone under about 6'2 doesn't have any problems
standing up anyway in a tube train , its greater width thats needed so
theres more room to move - or more room to squeeze more people in -
but I din't think an inch here or there would make a lot of difference
to that.

B2003

2009 Stock loading gauge
 

On 10 Apr, 12:23, "John Rowland"
wrote:

chunky munky wrote:

Trials were carried out a few months back after close of traffic with
a 67TS with polystyrene strips on running on the Piccadilly to
Finsbury Park Victoria. I don't know the outcome though!

How primitive. Just because a train fits through once doesn't mean it will
fit through every time, especially with varying numbers of passengers in
varying distributions, and the new trains will have different suspension to
the old ones anyway. Has LU not heard of lasers and proximity sensors and
computer modelling?

These trials were to determine whether the 09TS would fit through the
Piccadilly tubes *not-in-service* - i.e. for the purpose of the new
trains being delivered.

Regarding computer modelling - I'm sure the people on the ground would
want to actually see a gauging trial run successful completed in
reality. Models are models and aren't the real thing.

2009 Stock loading gauge
 

On 10 Apr, 12:33, Boltar wrote:
On Apr 10, 12:23 pm, "John Rowland"

wrote:
How primitive. Just because a train fits through once doesn't mean it will
fit through every time, especially with varying numbers of passengers in
varying distributions, and the new trains will have different suspension to
the old ones anyway. Has LU not heard of lasers and proximity sensors and
computer modelling?

But they're not going to run in passenger service on the piccadilly
and no doubt they'll be driven slowly anyway on the curvy bits.

I still fail to understand why they've given themselves this much
grief for a few inches of extra headroom. Its not vertical height
thats needed since anyone under about 6'2 doesn't have any problems
standing up anyway in a tube train , its greater width thats needed so
theres more room to move - or more room to squeeze more people in -
but I din't think an inch here or there would make a lot of difference
to that.


I think the new carriages are fitted with air fans (to assist in
circulating the air better) which takes up space.

If the new stock fits through the Piccadilly line then they haven't
really given themselves any extra grief, apart perhaps from just
having to drive the trains slowly through the Picc line tunnels. Given
that this isn't going to be a regular event then there's not really a
problem.

2009 Stock loading gauge
 

In article ,
(John Rowland) wrote:

Mizter T wrote:
On 9 Apr, 22:13, Tom Anderson wrote:

Is there a connection to the West Anglia at Northumberland Park?
Presumably, even a chubby tube train is smaller than NR gauge. Don't
know if you could run to anywhere useful from there, though.

No connection whatsoever, nor am I aware that there ever has been.
I'm
curious as to whether there were ever any suggestions of putting in a
connection when the line was being planned?

Since the depot was previously a rail depot of some sort, the
connection must actually have been taken out when the Vic was
built.

There was a rail connection at Northumberland Park that was removed after
the depot was built. I have a feeling that most of the Victoria Line
stock was delivered over the connection.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

2009 Stock loading gauge
 

On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Q wrote:

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
h.li...

Is there a connection to the West Anglia at Northumberland Park?
Presumably, even a chubby tube train is smaller than NR gauge. Don't know
if you could run to anywhere useful from there, though.

A lack of suitable traction power might hamper any bid for freedom...
(unless dragged)

I have invented a folding pantograph which sellotapes on the front of the
tube train.

tom

--
Freedom, Beauty, Truth, and Love!

2009 Stock loading gauge
 

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
h.li...

I have invented a folding pantograph which sellotapes on the front of the
tube train.

Hmm ok. so that's the pan sorted, what about the switch gear, transformers
and the rest of the traction package :p

See now I have visions of a lil train making a bid for freedom and turning
up at LST one day as my train home!

heh

2009 Stock loading gauge
 

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 04:33:41AM -0700, Boltar wrote:

Its not vertical height
thats needed since anyone under about 6'2 doesn't have any problems
standing up anyway in a tube train

And damn anyone who's 6'2" or taller, eh? There are a *lot* of us, but
I suppose our comfort doesn't matter to you.

--
David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice

All children should be aptitude-tested at an early age and,
if their main or only aptitude is for marketing, drowned.

2009 Stock loading gauge
 

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, David Cantrell wrote:

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 04:33:41AM -0700, Boltar wrote:

thats needed since anyone under about 6'2 doesn't have any problems
standing up anyway in a tube train

And damn anyone who's 6'2" or taller, eh? There are a *lot* of us,

Fewer than 10% of the male population, i think.

but I suppose our comfort doesn't matter to you.

Nope. You guys get all the girls, and earn more, so bloody sod you! :)

tom

--
Ed editor textorum probatissimus est -- Cicero, De officiis IV.7

2009 Stock loading gauge
 

On 11 Apr, 13:09, David Cantrell wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 04:33:41AM -0700, Boltar wrote:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Its not vertical height
thats needed since anyone under about 6'2 doesn't have any problems
standing up anyway in a tube train

And damn anyone who's 6'2" or taller, eh? *There are a *lot* of us, but
I suppose our comfort doesn't matter to you.

Recent LU designs don't even accommodate people who have a top half to
their body (eg the perching cushions on the Jubilee directly below the
emergency call thing, so there is nowhere for your body to go, but
there would have been if there was a seat).

It would be inconsistent for them to start taking into account any
kind of human body shape now.