More sweaty armpits on the new Overground stock
 

On Jul 29, 11:37*am, CJB wrote:
Seems like the open plan layout of the new Overground stock is ideal
for commuters to be crammed in cattle truck style armpit to armpit -
as usual. BUT it seems to me that the wide open layout is an accident
waiting to happen. With a long wide standing room only 'corridor'
running from one end to the other imagine what kind of a pile up of
bodies there could be in a Moorgate type crash. Or what would happen
if one train rear-ended another as a commuter train did in washington
recently. It seems to me that in creating so much standing room - with
very little to hang on to - that even an aggressive application of the
brakes - perhaps to avoid an obstruction on the line - would result in
a pile of bodies at one end. CJB.

AFIK these trains will not run into a terminal tunnel. This was a
major factor in the Moorgate crash. One hopes that we will soon have
signaling systems capable of halting trains before they can collide.
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.

More sweaty armpits on the new Overground stock
 

On Jul 29, 12:58*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:39:32 -0700 (PDT), 1506

wrote:
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/

Then, to me, they appear very suitable for their purpose.

More sweaty armpits on the new Overground stock
 

On Jul 29, 12:58*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:39:32 -0700 (PDT), 1506

wrote:
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/

If they would fit the loading guage, these trains would seem ideal for
District and Circle Lines.

More sweaty armpits on the new Overground stock
 

On Jul 31, 4:12*pm, 1506 wrote:
On Jul 29, 12:58*pm, Paul Corfield wrote: On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:39:32 -0700 (PDT), 1506

wrote:
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/

If they would fit the loading guage, these trains would seem ideal for
District and Circle Lines.

....and indeed, the same factory is in the process of building
something pretty similar for District and Circle lines.

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

More sweaty armpits on the new Overground stock
 

On Jul 31, 4:12*pm, 1506 wrote:

If they would fit the loading guage, these trains would seem ideal for
District and Circle Lines.

nitpick

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 :o)

The comment I think should be ... if 378s would fit the SSL structure
gauge with sufficient clearance.

However, it is a Friday and I have a reputation of pedant to
maintain ... and I knew exactly what you meant :o)

/ nitpick

--
Nick

More sweaty armpits on the new Overground stock
 

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.

[trains around here are like a jungle-gym inside...]

-Miles

--
We have met the enemy, and he is us. -- Pogo

More sweaty armpits on the new Overground stock
 

On Jul 31, 7:48*pm, D7666 wrote:
On Jul 31, 4:12*pm, 1506 wrote:

If they would fit the loading guage, these trains would seem ideal for
District and Circle Lines.

nitpick

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 :o)

The comment I think should be ... if 378s would fit the SSL structure
gauge with sufficient clearance.

However, it is a Friday and I have a reputation of pedant to
maintain ... and I knew exactly what you meant :o)

/ nitpick


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). So in the
UK we have routes being modifed to a W9 or W10 loading gauge for the
passage of the larger (9'6") shipping containers. In some places this
modification can be as simple as introducing a speed restriction
through a tight spot.

More sweaty armpits on the new Overground stock
 

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

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

More sweaty armpits on the new Overground stock
 

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.

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.

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'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.

More sweaty armpits on the new Overground stock
 

On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 09:34:21 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote:

Not sure why you'd want tip up seats
given these trains are designed to carry large numbers of people over
short distances.

Would agree with this - tip-up vestibule seats only really work on IC
stock where people aren't going to be asked to move very often. Even
then, they get in the way a bit.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.