On 2 Aug, 09:34, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 17:31:29 -0700 (PDT), MIG





wrote:
On 1 Aug, 13:39, "Richard J." wrote:
Miles Bader wrote on 01 August 2009 02:53:13 *...

Paul Corfield writes:
I have never seen the inside of these trains. *I cannot understand why
they are not fitted with straps and a hanging rail after the manner of
tube trains.
They are -http://www.flickr.com/photos/24759744@N02/3769795952/
The amount of bars and straps doesn't seem all that high though; maybe
they don't expect so much overcrowding.

It looks to me as if the straps were a last-minute addition, perhaps for
the benefit of shorter passengers. *They didn't feature in earlier
photos, e.g.http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/c...ain.php?id=765

The 376s were in service for a long time with nothing to hold on to in
the door area. *You'd think the lesson would have been learned before
the 378s were built, but apparently not.

I stood in the door area when I rode one last week and held on to the
fixed handrail. It's no different to the D78 refurbs on the District
Line.

Yes, that seems to have a similar function in the door area to the
rails that were belatedly fitted to 376s. Really I was referring to
the suggestion that the straps were a "last minute addition". You'd
think that it would have been properly thought through this time after
the 376 debacle.

I can reach the new rails in the 376s and probably the rail in the
378s, but plenty of people wouldn't be able to, so the straps are
needed.


In the seating area of the 376s, there is a yellow stripe along the
edge of the luggage rack, but I don't know if that means that people
are specifically directed to hold on to it. *There is nothing else.

On the 378s there are vertical stanchions as well as almost continuous
handrails and strap hangers to hold on to.

I note that the 378s are going to have think, chunky obstructions in
the standing area (surprise surprise) that will not be quite big
enough to act as dividing areas that people can lean on, but will be
big enough to force people away from the edges, to rattle about in the
middle.

What is the chunky obstruction you refer to? Is it the double vertical
stanchion between some of the seats? *I cannot see why you would to have
people leaning on such things as they'd be almost leaning on people
sitting down. That sort of happens on deep tube stock but then there is
not the same space profile. The 378s do, at least, have some width to
allow for plenty of standees and hopefully for people to circulate down
the train. If the design means people can get on the train they wish to
rather than waiting for the next one or the one after due to the crush
then surely that is an advantage?

Really I'd prefer that the one near the seats was a little wider (but
not so thick), so that it would provide something to lean on and
protect the heads of seated passengers. I'd prefer that the one
nearer to the door could be removed if possible to allow a greater
with for the perch. Does it serve a support function? It's not there
on other somethingStars.


What's the betting that that perch area is only wide enough for one
and a half bums, thanks to the obstructions. *So, once again, a space
that could have had two flip-up seats can now only accommodate one
perching person, with legs probably splayed out for balance, further
than those of a seated person.

I think I agree with you about the width of the perch seat - it does
look adequate only for one person. Not sure why you'd want tip up seats
given these trains are designed to carry large numbers of people over
short distances. I suspect you won't agree with this last comment so I'm
off to retire to the bunker ;-)

I was thinking of the Northern Line, where the ambience is so much
better than on the otherwise similar trains on the Jubilee. A person
leaning splays out their legs quite a long way and a person in a flip-
up seat can tuck their feet under, and there's no problem with two
side-by-side, as there is on the Jubilee.

In article
,
(MIG) wrote:

In the seating area of the 376s, there is a yellow stripe along the
edge of the luggage rack, but I don't know if that means that people
are specifically directed to hold on to it. There is nothing else.

The 365 luggage racks have a grab all along the edge.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Aug 1, 12:06*pm, Andy wrote:

Isn't it the case that the loading gauge is the maximum size of train
allowed to fit with the structure gauge.

No.

There is a gap between the the loading gauge and the structure gauge -
the ''clearance'' I think the correct term is.

--
Nick

On Aug 2, 6:20*pm, D7666 wrote:
On Aug 1, 12:06*pm, Andy wrote:

Isn't it the case that the loading gauge is the maximum size of train
allowed to fit with the structure gauge.

No.

There is a gap between the the loading gauge and the structure gauge -
the ''clearance'' I think the correct term is.


Nick, do you ever read all of a post before commenting?

"A train has to fit the defined loading gauge for the route and this
means it will
automatically within the structure gauge (plus clearance)"

The loading gauge for a route is the minium space available once the
structure gauge and the clearance have been taken into account. In
most locations, the structure gauge will be actually be greater than
the loading gauge, but when looking at the route as the whole, the
loading gauge is the important describer as it takes into account
tight spots and relevant speed restrictions.

Loading gauge... structure gauge...

Where does the 'kinematic envelope' fit in here?
Does that one allow for bounce, sway and wobble?

(Serious question).


Regards,

DigitisED (Eddie Bellass)

Eddie & Margaret Bellass,
Merseyside, United Kingdom.

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free and checked
by a leading anti-virus system - updated continuously.

In message , at
18:16:23 on Sun, 2 Aug 2009, Eddie Bellass
remarked:
Where does the 'kinematic envelope' fit in here?
Does that one allow for bounce, sway and wobble?

Don't forget yaw and pitch.
--
Roland Perry

On Aug 2, 7:16*pm, "Eddie Bellass"
wrote:
Loading gauge... structure gauge...

Where does the 'kinematic envelope' fit in here?
Does that one allow for bounce, sway and wobble?

(Serious question).


The loading gauge takes this into account. The clearance allowed on
top of the minimum points of the structure gauge includes space for
the kinematic envelope; a larger clearance is needed at higher speeds,
or with bouncier trains and speed restrictions (reducing the kinematic
envelope) might be needed to allow trains to fit through any tight
spots.

On Aug 2, 7:02*pm, Andy wrote:



, do you ever read all of a post before commenting?

Yes.

"A train has to fit the defined loading gauge for the route and this
means it will
automatically within the structure gauge (plus clearance)"



I was responding this paragraph:


Isn't it the case that the loading gauge is the maximum size of train
allowed to fit with the structure gauge.
A train has to fit the
defined loading gauge for the route and this means it will
automatically within the structure gauge (plus clearance).


The first sentence is at variance with the second - the first is not
correct because you imply the two gauges are the same. They are not
the same.

The 2nd sentence is more or less correct, so I did not comment.

--
Nick

On Aug 2, 7:45*pm, D7666 wrote:
On Aug 2, 7:02*pm, Andy wrote:



, do you ever read all of a post before commenting?

Yes.

"A train has to fit the defined loading gauge for the route and this
means it will
automatically within the structure gauge (plus clearance)"

I * was responding *this paragraph:


Isn't it the case that the loading gauge is the maximum size of train
allowed to fit with the structure gauge.
A train has to fit the
defined loading gauge for the route and this means it will
automatically within the structure gauge (plus clearance).



The first sentence is at variance with the second - the first is not
correct because you imply the two gauges are the same. They are not
the same.

The 2nd sentence is more or less correct, so I did not comment.


No the first sentence says loading gauge gives the allowable
dimensions for the train to fit (within) the structure gauge, it most
definately does say that they are the same. The second sentence then
expands on this.

I was answering your point which seemed to suggest that the loading
gauge is defined by the train and not by the route.

"As I understand the term, a 378 does fit the loading gauge ...
because the term loading gauge refers to the train itself ... so a 378
always fits itself )", which is not correct at all. Loading gauge
has always been defined by the limits of the infrastructure, not by
the train.

A new train can either be built to fit the existing loading gauge for
a route, or the tight spots on the route can be relaxed to allow a new
design to fit within a larger loading gauge. One of the classic
examples of the latter is the singling of track through the tunnels on
the Tonbridge - Hastings route upon electrification, adjusting the
infrastructure to fit larger sized trains. There are many other recent
examples too.

On Sun, 2 Aug 2009, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 18:16:23 on
Sun, 2 Aug 2009, Eddie Bellass remarked:
Where does the 'kinematic envelope' fit in here?
Does that one allow for bounce, sway and wobble?

Don't forget yaw and pitch.

Not to mention nutation.

tom

--
quick good