On Apr 9, 8:41*pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 9 Apr, 19:47, Paul Corfield wrote:





On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:00:30 -0700 (PDT), MIG

wrote:

On Apr 9, 5:57 pm, Mr Thant
wrote:

On 9 Apr, 15:47, Boltar wrote:

Is this true? It seems a strange thing to do. If it is , how much
larger are they?

Yes, it's true. They're a couple of inches taller and each train is a
few feet longer. Trains rarely need to leave their home line, though I
have heard talk of seeing if they can be squeezed down the Piccadilly
Line.

How silly to build a train that can't be moved on to another line for
whatever reason. *I had no appreciation that this nonsense had been
sneaked through.

This television news report on the new stock suggests that any extra
space will be put to good use for the benefit of passengers:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5BvJa5DwqQ

Nah, they'll just keep making the walls thicker and thicker.

Honestly, why must modern trains have four-inch thick hollow walls?
Thin, space-maximising walls with no poky-into-your-arm ledges are
attractive features of both A stock and Desiros.


Anyway the later pages of this thread on District Dave suggests that
the Vic line stock will be delivered by rail to Ruislip depot and will
then run via the Metropolitan and Piccadilly lines to reach the
Victoria line, and also that there have already been gauging test runs
to determine if this route will be possible (see in particular the
third post down by 'towerman'):

http://districtdave.proboards39.com/...ictoria&action...

So if this goes to plan the trains might not be able to run on other
tube lines in service (though really why would they need to?) but it
will be possible to move them by rail on and off the network.


When you look at the way the 1972 stock got shunted around (and mixed
with 1967 stock), and the way the 1938, 1959 and 1962 stock also got
moved around and reformed, it does seem as if all kinds of options for
for future cascades have been ruled out.

Or ... could they end up being cascaded to a sub-surface line at some
point in the future (the only other place they'll fit)?

On 9 Apr, 21:18, MIG wrote:
Nah, they'll just keep making the walls thicker and thicker.

Honestly, why must modern trains have four-inch thick hollow walls?
Thin, space-maximising walls with no poky-into-your-arm ledges are
attractive features of both A stock and Desiros.

Not to mention plenty of other trains on other metro systems such as
New York. It seems new train interiors in this country whether LU or
national rail seem to have a sort of pseudo nursery school look with
big chunky fittings everywhere. If Fischer Price were ever to design
train interiors they'd probably get a lot of business from the UK rail
industry.

B2003