|
|
Trains
Jun 18, 2005 1:35:53 GMT
Post by q8 on Jun 18, 2005 1:35:53 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Trains
Jun 18, 2005 1:56:07 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2005 1:56:07 GMT
I wish I knew what I was doing with this Photoshop thing! If I did, I'd try painting them into LU corporate!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Trains
Jun 18, 2005 2:01:07 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2005 2:01:07 GMT
What an ugly train, was it the the designers last day before leaving the job. |
|
|
|
Trains
Jun 18, 2005 10:10:44 GMT
Post by q8 on Jun 18, 2005 10:10:44 GMT
www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?24443I actually think this is an excellent design but for the lif of me cannot see the purpose of the step irons below the drivers window unless it is for widow cleaning? Also the sunken middle door is a good notion too. If there were a blow up rubber seal around it it would be an excellent walk through feature
|
|
|
|
Trains
Jun 18, 2005 10:16:26 GMT
Post by q8 on Jun 18, 2005 10:16:26 GMT
This is an EXCELLENT interior layout. If the seats were upholstered it would be SUPERB. www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?3404www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?17695The more I look at these the more I think that is a superb layout for the circle line. I just noticed something about this interior. The seats being wall hung can be re-arranged very quickly and easily to whatever config is required. So the toffs at Chorleywood and the Chavs at Elm Park can have an arrangment that is suitable for them. Personally I think the arrangment in the photo is perfect for the chavs meself. |
|
|
|
Trains
Jun 18, 2005 10:32:21 GMT
Post by yellowsignal on Jun 18, 2005 10:32:21 GMT
www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?24443I actually think this is an excellet design but for the lif of me cannot see the purpose of the step irons below the drivers window unless it is for widow cleaning? There's also a grab iron below the window, so it's most likely meant for windowcleaning |
|
|
|
Trains
Jun 18, 2005 15:19:12 GMT
Post by q8 on Jun 18, 2005 15:19:12 GMT
 In this photo; www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?5730There are two things that puzzle me. Firstly the dutch ovens on the coupler have no covers. Secondly there are TWO shafts drive from the axles of the leading truck. One, I guess, is for a speedo, but the other?... I also think that the New York Subway designers could teach our lot a thing or two. Our stocks look tatty and lumpy while these things look smooth clean and functional and are pleasing to the eye.
|
|
|
|
Trains
Jun 18, 2005 19:24:49 GMT
Post by banana on Jun 18, 2005 19:24:49 GMT
Yeah, but they drive on the wrong side!
|
|
|
|
Trains
Jun 18, 2005 20:04:16 GMT
Post by Christopher J on Jun 18, 2005 20:04:16 GMT
Our stocks look tatty and lumpy while these things look smooth clean and functional and are pleasing to the eye. I'll agree that some of the Trains look very smart and pleasing. But comparing some of the other stocks such as www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?28295 to an A stock, the A stock defiantly gets my vote, that thing looks like a Garden Shed on wheels.  On LUL I find the 92 stock one of the smartest looking Trains, the 95/96 stocks coming a close second. |
|
|
|
Trains
Jun 18, 2005 21:11:43 GMT
Post by banana on Jun 18, 2005 21:11:43 GMT
The grass is always greener on the other side. You should experience the ride.........rubbish!
|
|
|
|
Trains
Jun 19, 2005 3:14:55 GMT
Post by q8 on Jun 19, 2005 3:14:55 GMT
The grass is always greener on the other side. You should experience the ride.........rubbish!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you referring to the LUL stock or the NYS?
|
|
|
|
Trains
Jun 19, 2005 3:22:32 GMT
Post by q8 on Jun 19, 2005 3:22:32 GMT
But comparing some of the other stocks such as www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?28295 to an A stock, the A stock defiantly gets my vote, that thing looks like a Garden Shed on wheels. On LUL I find the 92 stock one of the smartest looking Trains, the 95/96 stocks coming a close second. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ I'll agree with you about the New York stock but I disagree with about the 92 stock. An uglier LU train I never saw in my life. The 95/96 stocks while "plastic playthings" are far superior. Any way the 92 stock will be going out of the window ASAP due to so many design faults |
|
|
|
Trains
Jun 19, 2005 3:27:21 GMT
Post by q8 on Jun 19, 2005 3:27:21 GMT
I wish I knew how to start a poll?
I know we have had one for favourite LU stock but I'd like to see one for the best designed/looking Underground stock stock ever. My own vote would go to the "F" stock of 1920. Apart from the oval windows they still don't look "dated" to me. Incidentally they were designed by an American
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Trains
Jun 19, 2005 4:17:06 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2005 4:17:06 GMT
CO/CP and R stocks, for me, the flared bottom really looked good.
|
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,970
|
Trains
Jun 19, 2005 5:48:41 GMT
Post by towerman on Jun 19, 2005 5:48:41 GMT
59/62TS,A60/62 simple trains,easy to operate and maintain.In my opinion LUL did it rear upwards they should have done the Northern Line before the Central,there were years left on the 62TS they could have gone on as long as the A60/62's
|
|
|
|
Trains
Jun 19, 2005 9:11:38 GMT
Post by q8 on Jun 19, 2005 9:11:38 GMT
LUL did it rear upwards. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ I thought that was managements permanent posture  |
|
In this photo;
