On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:47:07 +0100
Bruce wrote:
Well, as usual, you have comprehensively missed the point. The next

So have you. Catalysed petrol engines have been pretty clean since the 80s.
Saying that soon diesel engines will be as clean as petrol (ie they're not
yet) is just laughable. This is 2009 FFS, not 1985! Crap from vehicle
exhausts should have been a problem solved 20 years ago.

particulates. The oxides of nitrogen are more of a problem for petrol
cars.

Which is what the catalysts are for.

The legislation that is being tightened is that for pollutants in city
air. Obviously, the sources for these include cars, vans, lorries,
buses, trains and aircraft as as well as other industrial and domestic
sources. But the legislation is about air quality, not about
emissions from individual vehicles.

Err yes, but individual vehicles contribute towards air quality. And if I
had the power I'd say sod diesel engines altogether , sod the extra CO2 and
mandate petrol or some sort of spark ignition engine used in all vehicles
unless it simply wasn't possible (eg in high flammability risk areas or the
like).

B2003

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:09:33 -0500
wrote:
I see you have completely ignored oxides of Nitrogen, the main pollutant
exceedance problem, certainly where I am (central Cambridge). That it is a
NOx rather than a particulates problem is despite the preponderance of
diesels (mainly buses) in the pollution generation compared to the general
case.

Modern petrol engines hardly give off any NOx and haven't done so for years.
The only time they do is a very short period at startup while the catalyst
warms up. Have you ever seen the **** that comes out of a cold diesel engine?

B2003

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:40:33 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:

If apparently the 09 stock did get dragged through the piccadilly line
tunnels without incident then we can't be talking much difference between
09 and other tube stocks can we? Maybe a few centimeters one way or the
other at most which surely wouldn't make much difference to equipment?

Did it arrive that way? I thought it was delivered by road rather than
rail and then across the tube network. I'd genuinely like to know the
answer to this so if anyone can point me at the facts it'd be good.

Thats what people on here were saying. I've no idea if its true. But it
occured to me that the victoria line uses an old piccadilly line tunnel on
the northbound at finsbury park and I very much doubt they would have
bothered to spend a fortune to enlarge it by a few inches so as 09 stock
has to fit through it must be pretty close to standard tube gauge.

B2003

On 13 Aug, 09:51, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:40:33 +0100

Paul Corfield wrote:

If apparently the 09 stock did get dragged through the piccadilly line
tunnels without incident then we can't be talking much difference between
09 and other tube stocks can we? Maybe a few centimeters one way or the
other at most which surely wouldn't make much difference to equipment?

Did it arrive that way? *I thought it was delivered by road rather than
rail and then across the tube network. *I'd genuinely like to know the
answer to this so if anyone can point me at the facts it'd be good.

Thats what people on here were saying. I've no idea if its true. But it
occured to me that the victoria line uses an old piccadilly line tunnel on
the northbound at finsbury park and I very much doubt they would have
bothered to spend a fortune to enlarge it by a few inches so as 09 stock
has to fit through it must be pretty close to standard tube gauge.

B2003

Isn't it more to do with the bends rather than the diameter?

On 13 Aug, 09:23, Neil Williams wrote:
On Aug 12, 9:23*pm, "Colin McKenzie" wrote:

It really isn't all that dangerous, even when it's frightening. I doubt *
Ireland (if you're there) is much different from the UK, where government *
figures show cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.

It can still be unpleasant having a lorry zoom past a couple of feet
from you, however often you cycle, and however good your awareness
etc.

Segregation doesn't work, for the same reason that annoys you about white *
paint. It reduces the chances of rare collisions (being hit from behind *
between junctions) but greatly increases the chance of being hit at *
junctions, which is much more likely to start with. This is because to be *
seen by drivers you need to be where they're looking, which is on the main *
carriageway.

Or completely segregated Dutch-style. *I found this a lot more
pleasant as a cyclist than riding on a busy road, personally - and the
cycle paths are, unlike in the UK, largely up to standard and pleasant
to use. *As a UK example, while the Milton Keynes Redways have some
major design flaws (some of which, e.g. blind bends, results in them
actually being quite a lot less safe than they nominally should be),
they're in my view generally nicer than cycling on 70mph dual
carriageways. *Though a set of good Kevlar tyres is a must.

I don't fancy using segregated cycle paths in the UK until local
authorities find somewhere else to store their stocks of broken glass.



The priority over sideroads is a difficult one, though. *I suppose
traffic lights would have to be used, as the culture of cars-have-
priority is difficult to change.

Neil

wrote in message
news
In article ,
(Recliner) wrote:

I notice the press release says, "Requesting expressions of
interest from manufacturers is the first stage of the procurement
process leading to selection and contract award by Tube Lines,
anticipated at the end of 2008". Well, that's not happened yet, so
I guess the in-service date is also slipping.

I think the 2009 stock was ordered in about April 2003, and it took
more than six years for the first train to enter late night
service. I assume the full 2009 stock service won't be till 2011.
On that basis, if the new Picc stock really is ordered this year,
the 1973 TS will probably still be in daily use when it's 40 years
old in 2015.

And? The 1967 TS is already 42 years old and has been in full service
for over 41 years. It seems pretty fresh to me, unlike the ageing
standard stock of my youth.

I'd not complain if the 1973 TS survives for a good few years yet. I
prefer it to the newer tube trains, though I must admit I preferred the
transverse seat layout it enjoyed before the refurbishment. I fear that
the replacement stock will have fewer seats still, just as the 1995/6
trains do.

Incidentally, the oldest 1967 TS cars have only been in service for less
than 41 years, and some of the carriages are about four years younger,
as they're actually 1972 stock. The Victoria line was only fully open 38
years ago, so the trains aren't as old as they sound from their name.

On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 02:39:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIG wrote:
the northbound at finsbury park and I very much doubt they would have
bothered to spend a fortune to enlarge it by a few inches so as 09 stock
has to fit through it must be pretty close to standard tube gauge.

B2003

Isn't it more to do with the bends rather than the diameter?

Beats me. If the carraiges are the same length as the current 67 stock
then they're shorter than piccadilly line ones so bends should be less
of an issue.

B2003

On 13 Aug, 11:08, "Recliner" wrote:
wrote in message

news




In article ,
(Recliner) wrote:

I notice the press release says, "Requesting expressions of
interest from manufacturers is the first stage of the procurement
process leading to selection and contract award by Tube Lines,
anticipated at the end of 2008". *Well, that's not happened yet, so
I guess the in-service date is also slipping.

I think the 2009 stock was ordered in about April 2003, and it took
more than six years for the first train to enter late night
service. I assume the full 2009 stock service won't be till 2011.
On that basis, if the new Picc stock really is ordered this year,
the 1973 TS will probably still be in daily use when it's 40 years
old in 2015.

And? The 1967 TS is already 42 years old and has been in full service
for over 41 years. It seems pretty fresh to me, unlike the ageing
standard stock of my youth.

I'd not complain if the 1973 TS survives for a good few years yet. I
prefer it to the newer tube trains, though I must admit I preferred the
transverse seat layout it enjoyed before the refurbishment. I fear that
the replacement stock will have fewer seats still, just as the 1995/6
trains do.

Incidentally, the oldest 1967 TS cars have only been in service for less
than 41 years, and some of the carriages are about four years younger,
as they're actually 1972 stock. The Victoria line was only fully open 38
years ago, so the trains aren't as old as they sound from their name.

The first section of the Victoria line (Walthamstow - Highbury and
Islington) opened on 1st September 1968, so the stock has been in
service for very nearly 41 years and certainly was undergoing testing
well before that date.

The 'class' date of underground stock used to be the year of the
order, not the year of entry into service, the 2009 stock breaks this
'rule' but I think it applies to most of the other tube stock classes.

"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 13 Aug, 09:51, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:40:33 +0100

Paul Corfield wrote:

If apparently the 09 stock did get dragged through the piccadilly line
tunnels without incident then we can't be talking much difference
between
09 and other tube stocks can we? Maybe a few centimeters one way or the
other at most which surely wouldn't make much difference to equipment?

Did it arrive that way? I thought it was delivered by road rather than
rail and then across the tube network. I'd genuinely like to know the
answer to this so if anyone can point me at the facts it'd be good.

Thats what people on here were saying. I've no idea if its true. But it
occured to me that the victoria line uses an old piccadilly line tunnel on
the northbound at finsbury park and I very much doubt they would have
bothered to spend a fortune to enlarge it by a few inches so as 09 stock
has to fit through it must be pretty close to standard tube gauge.

B2003

Isn't it more to do with the bends rather than the diameter?



AIUI, the '09 units on test were road delivered. They are out of gauge for
other tube lines (we're talking maybe 20-25mm) with the appropriate
kinematic envelope for operational speeds. I suspect they could be crawled
through tight spots if the need arose. Current practice (as distinct from
past LT practice) would suggest little if any need for through operation on
other lines, and no plans to "cascade" stock.

Finsbury Park was extensively remodelled to provide UP-UP and DOWN-DOWN
train flows and cross platform interchanges between Picc and Vic. It
replaced the previous layout which provided for terminating GN&C trains of
"main line" loading gauge. The line of the Victoria route means that little
if any old Piccadilly running tunnel remains in use as such. As the Vic has
just been going through a rebuild from the track up, any minor structure
gauge anolomies would have been dealt with.

HTH

DW downunder

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:26:30AM +0100, Recliner wrote:

True, but the new Victoria line trains are longer, faster and more
frequent, so that may account for some of the extra power.

Longer? When did the platforms get lengthened then?

--
David Cantrell | A machine for turning tea into grumpiness

You can't judge a book by its cover, unless you're a religious nutcase