Class 378 in service
 

Andy wrote:
On Aug 1, 9:06 pm, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

What is going to be the fate of the GOBLin? considering all the work
that they plan to do?
Will that line, for example, be electrified?
There are no current plans to electrify the GOBLin. A mistake, IMO.


There are plans and they are costed, what is lacking is the agreement
between TfL, DfT and Network Rail as to who pays for it.

Wouldn't they be able to hit up the DfT for the cash, or at least a
sizeable portion for it, under some rail development scheme? Then TfL
and Network Rail could each contribute whatever paltry sum they wanted to.

Are the 378s the same as the S stock for LUL's subsurface lines?

Class 378 in service
 

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 01:14:19 +0100, "
wrote:

Wouldn't they be able to hit up the DfT for the cash, or at least a
sizeable portion for it, under some rail development scheme?


This country is bankrupt, and then some. Haven't you noticed?

After 12 years of government handouts for this and that, economic
reality finally has to set in.

Class 378 in service
 

On Aug 2, 11:37*am, Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 01:14:19 +0100, "

wrote:

Wouldn't they be able to hit up the DfT for the cash, or at least a
sizeable portion for it, under some rail development scheme?

This country is bankrupt, and then some. *Haven't you noticed?

No it isn't. Ignorant ****tard.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

Class 378 in service
 

wrote in message


Are the 378s the same as the S stock for LUL's subsurface lines?

Nope. They're both built by Bombardier in the Derby factory at the same
time, but the designs are different. For example, the 378 carriages are
longer but they have fewer doors. The 378s are the latest incarnation of
the now quite long-running ElectroStar series, whereas the S Stock is
part of the Bombardier Movia family, like its cousin, the 2009 stock.

You'll be able to compare them side-by-side in a year or two on the
Richmond branch.

Class 378 in service
 

On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 12:57:18 +0100, Recliner wrote:

Are the 378s the same as the S stock for LUL's subsurface lines?

Nope. They're both built by Bombardier in the Derby factory at the same
time, but the designs are different. For example, the 378 carriages are
longer but they have fewer doors. The 378s are the latest incarnation of
the now quite long-running ElectroStar series, whereas the S Stock is
part of the Bombardier Movia family, like its cousin, the 2009 stock.

You'll be able to compare them side-by-side in a year or two on the
Richmond branch.

S Stock won't be on the District Line for quite some time (2020?).

Class 378 in service
 

"asdf" wrote in message

On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 12:57:18 +0100, Recliner wrote:


You'll be able to compare them side-by-side in a year or two on the
Richmond branch.

S Stock won't be on the District Line for quite some time (2020?).

I thought the S stock was all supposed to be in service by about 2014?
It's true that the District, with the newest current stock, will be the
last to be replaced, but I assume there will be test trains during
2010/11, with the first in service by 2013.

Class 378 in service
 

asdf wrote:
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 12:57:18 +0100, Recliner wrote:

Are the 378s the same as the S stock for LUL's subsurface lines?
Nope. They're both built by Bombardier in the Derby factory at the same
time, but the designs are different. For example, the 378 carriages are
longer but they have fewer doors. The 378s are the latest incarnation of
the now quite long-running ElectroStar series, whereas the S Stock is
part of the Bombardier Movia family, like its cousin, the 2009 stock.

You'll be able to compare them side-by-side in a year or two on the
Richmond branch.

S Stock won't be on the District Line for quite some time (2020?).

I figured that S Stock would initially start running on the Metropolitan
Line as the C and D stock haven't quite reached the end of their longevity.

Class 378 in service
 

wrote in message

asdf wrote:
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 12:57:18 +0100, Recliner wrote:

Are the 378s the same as the S stock for LUL's subsurface lines?
Nope. They're both built by Bombardier in the Derby factory at the
same time, but the designs are different. For example, the 378
carriages are longer but they have fewer doors. The 378s are the
latest incarnation of the now quite long-running ElectroStar
series, whereas the S Stock is part of the Bombardier Movia family,
like its cousin, the 2009 stock. You'll be able to compare them
side-by-side in a year or two on the
Richmond branch.

S Stock won't be on the District Line for quite some time (2020?).

I figured that S Stock would initially start running on the
Metropolitan Line as the C and D stock haven't quite reached the end
of their longevity.

Yes, the switchover will be in alphabetical order.

Class 378 in service
 

On Aug 2, 1:14*am, "
wrote:
Andy wrote:
On Aug 1, 9:06 pm, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
* * * * wrote:

What is going to be the fate of the GOBLin? considering all the work
that they plan to do?
Will that line, for example, be electrified?
There are no current plans to electrify the GOBLin. *A mistake, IMO.

There are plans and they are costed, what is lacking is the agreement
between TfL, DfT and Network Rail as to who pays for it.

Wouldn't they be able to hit up the DfT for the cash, or at least a
sizeable portion for it, under some rail development scheme? Then TfL
and Network Rail could each contribute whatever paltry sum they wanted to..


DfT has already offered to pay for the majority of the work, but is
expecting TfL to pay the remaining £20m and importantly take the full
risk for any cost overruns. It is the last bit that TfL has problems
with as things stand.

Class 378 in service
 

On 31 July, 18:41, MIG wrote:
On 31 July, 15:16, John B wrote:





On Jul 31, 3:06*pm, Neil *Williams wrote:

Why oh why do they still manufacture trains with such horrifically
slow procedures that result in completely unnecessarily extended dwell
times? Totally unsuitable for LO.

TBH, I'm amazed that these new trains weren't accompanied by a
conversion to DOO. *They could have been fitted with cameras to avoid
any need for station infrastructure.

I believe "that ******* Crow" is the reason. If the trains weren't
*originally planned* for DOO, then I'm the king of the monkey people.

I fail to see any need forguards(other than as a security presence
in the evenings, in which case one on their own is little use) on LO.

None whatsoever. Or on any other commuter stock. Sadly, unless we've
got the collective stomach for a Thatcher-and-the-miners standoff,
we're stuck with the buggers.

Maybe we could pay them extra to not open the doors and just stand
around looking reassuring, in the same way Victoria Line drivers get
paid more than other grades to not drive the trains.

But none of this is anything to do with having guards. *It's to do
with the procedure. *It would be even worse if drivers on DOO trains
had to open their door, step out etc.

And there were guards on the Underground till recently, with no such
delays. *In fact less delays, because they were already leaning out
when the train stopped, which a driver can't do.

Also, I note the slow procedure on SWT and LM, but not on South Eastern
in the sections and trains where there are guards.

I know it's hard to resist abusing Bob Crow, but I wonder if the
ridiculous procedures have been introduced by TOCs to create delays
that they can blame on guards.

To follow up: yesterday I travelled on a Southern Service from
Bletchley to Shepherds Bush, operated by LM stock on LM territory, and
the doors were always released instantly*.

They seem to have a different rule that allows the guard to lean out
of the back cab.


*The actual doors are still very slow.