Chris M an all..... Pedant alert...... S stock, class 378 have wide walk though gangways but are not articulated.
Current DLR cars are articulated at the shared trailer bogie. Bogie spacing is currently about 10m. This works well on the very tight radius crossovers on the main line and the numerous points in the depots. Longer vehicles would lead to narrower bodies. Overgangs beyond the bogies are incompatible with open wide gangways because of the tight curves on the railway. This indicates something like an 8 car, 9 bogie train with approx. 14m end cars (with overhangs at the outer ends like current cars) and 10m intermediate cars. Expect at least 6 motor bogies. Of course it all depends on what the suppliers offer!
The points (sorry) being made about headways and timetabling are features of the Victoria line and, for that matter, any railway using a two platform terminus with a scissors crossover on the approach side. The timetabling is loaded into the signalling control system, and the trains are regulated at stations or on the run to prevent catching up the train in front as necessary.
The Infraco had little influence on the signalling as it was implemented by Invensys (now Siemens Automation) who also carried out the changes to enable the improvement from 33tph to 36tph.
Standing on the SB platform at Euston on Thursday, I had just missed a train. The next one was already less than 1 minute away, the 2nd indicated at 1 minute and even the 4th train was only 7 minutes away. That's pretty damn good. Now the platform VIDs need to be replrogrwmmed to count down in minutes and seconds.
There is no signal compatibility requirement for the MPU and Central line ATP. The 1992 tube stock will travel under its own power to Ruislip. From Ruislip, the MPU will take the half train to Acton under tripcock protection via the Ruislip depot to Met spur, and Rayners Lane. There had been speculation about running whole trains via Harrow on the Hill, the Circle and District where all track circuits are 'immunised', but I haven't heard the outcome.
I sincerely hope LU spends a few £ on the ability to run the trains under their own power from Ruislip to Acton ruther then all the b*gg*ration of splitting trains and running with the ancient relic/MPU. This would be good for the journey to Acton. However, there would be a risk in returning the 3-phase converted trains to Ruislip unless they are tested. Does anyone know whether the test track (27 road) at Acton will be retained?
The plan which I'm sure I've seen something in TfL Board papers was to have the work done at Acton. The reason is that it is much easier to get the trains to and from Acton quite possibly under their own power leading to reduced time in transit. My estimate is that Acton saves at least 4 days per train compared with shipping the trains to Derby.
However, doing the work on the first train in Derby makes perfect sense. It will take a lot longer to fit out the first train; indeed, Bombardier might want access to a train whilst the detail design for the conversion is worked though. In this context the time taken for the journey is immaterial. BT can then practice the fitting job; make changes if necessary and have access to test facilities including RIDC Melton comparatively nearby. I would guess that the "first train" could be away for "a long time".
firestorm.......The S stock design (and, originally 2009ts), the combination of obstacle detection and sensitive edge was indeed thought to make the sprung door not to be necessary. This has proved to be true for S stock and not for 2009ts.
jamesb. You are correct. This system applies to all LU's trains except S stock. As 2009ts Victoria line trains have obstacle detection sensitive edge, the spring pressure is higher so doors don't open with the combination of door/passenger inertia and acceleration/braking. It was retrofitted to the 2009ts as things were prone to be caught when people were inside the train but were sometimes hard to remove if the platform at the next staion was on thr other side.
You might ask why it hasn't been retrofittod to S stock? I stand to be corrected, but S stock doesn't seem to be prone to this problem....possibly due to the shape of the door relative to the floor.
Yes, '83ts did go on the Bakerloo for testing. I was on it and it scraped the floodgate in London Road Depot! However.....
1) this was more than 30 years ago and done purely to ensure a train could be diverted there in an emergency 2) managing the steps and gaps at some of the curved platforms would be an issue 3) this is all very speculative and LU have a very clear plan; buying this old design for Bakerloo is not on the agenda.
It's also worth remembering that the first ac/three phase traction systems weren't always trouble free. The BREL Networkers with Brush traction eventually had the inverter package replaced by a Hitachi system which improved their reliability.