|
|
Post by Christopher J on Aug 2, 2006 22:00:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by trc666 on Aug 2, 2006 22:22:03 GMT
The 2009 stock looks pretty good, can't wait to try out the real thing! But still, it will be a shame to see the 67 stock go...
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,763
|
Post by Chris M on Aug 2, 2006 22:26:27 GMT
It took me a while to work out why that picture looks slightly odd - there is no blue skirt on the first car. Anyone know if there is a reason for this?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2006 2:44:46 GMT
Bombadier hath no paint left ;D!
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Aug 3, 2006 3:47:21 GMT
Are LUL moving away from wedgelock couplers?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2006 6:41:34 GMT
Well found Mr Jolly!
|
|
|
|
Post by trc666 on Aug 3, 2006 11:12:53 GMT
Those look suspiciously like Dellners to me! Will the 62 stock pilots be used to transfer the 09 stock to NPK or will they be moved under their own power from Ruislip?
|
|
|
|
Post by setttt on Aug 3, 2006 11:20:08 GMT
Those look suspiciously like Dellners to me! Will the 62 stock pilots be used to transfer the 09 stock to NPK or will they be moved under their own power from Ruislip? They're too big to transfer by rail from the picc (apparently?), so they'll have to come in by road instead. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2006 11:22:39 GMT
Looks quite good i think. Althought looking at that picture, I can only see to carriages with shoebeams. In an 8 car train are four carriages going to be trailers cars then?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2006 11:34:23 GMT
Those look suspiciously like Dellners to me! Will the 62 stock pilots be used to transfer the 09 stock to NPK or will they be moved under their own power from Ruislip? Only if you want the 09TS trains to get very stuck in a tunnel! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2006 11:35:19 GMT
Looks quite good i think. Althought looking at that picture, I can only see to carriages with shoebeams. In an 8 car train are four carriages going to be trailers cars then? I think 6/8 cars are motor cars. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris W on Aug 3, 2006 11:50:49 GMT
Not sure why by having such small/narrow windows make the cars appear shorter - but then again I'm probably just strange  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2006 14:23:46 GMT
I think 6/8 cars are motor cars. In that case you would have more cariages in that rake of 4 with shoegear wouldnt you?? Unless of course im going blind?!  |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,763
|
Post by Chris M on Aug 3, 2006 15:29:11 GMT
Or it could just be that the formation is M-T-T-M-M-M-M-M. That would seem and odd way of doing it imho, but then what do I know?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2006 16:24:35 GMT
Or it could just be that the formation is M-T-T-M-M-M-M-M. That would seem and odd way of doing it imho, but then what do I know? Unless it is going to be M-T-M-M-M-M-T-M??? |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,763
|
Post by Chris M on Aug 3, 2006 16:54:23 GMT
That would make more sense, but doesn't tally with the location of the shoe beams on the image afaict
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2006 17:01:55 GMT
That would make more sense, but doesn't tally with the location of the shoe beams on the image afaict Which is why I presumed it would be M-T-T-M x 2, as is the case with A stock. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2006 18:24:17 GMT
The arrangement is:-
DM-T-NDM-SNDM-SNDM-NDM-T-DM
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2006 0:54:49 GMT
Sorry, stephenk, i don't get what you mean. What are NDMs and SNDMs?
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Aug 4, 2006 2:50:39 GMT
NDM - Non Driving Motor
SNDM - Shunting Non Driving Motor (more usually known as UNDM - Uncoupling Non Driving Motor)
Basically motor cars without cabs.
I have to say though, I can't see the point of only having one trailer car per 4 car unit, unless the motors are underpowered.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2006 5:50:50 GMT
Thanks COLIN!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2006 6:38:27 GMT
I have to say though, I can't see the point of only having one trailer car per 4 car unit, unless the motors are underpowered. Maybe the extra motor cars are needed for the improved acceleration in the 09TS over the 67TS. More motors (possibly underpowered) may also reduce the strain on each motor and associated equipment, thus reducing the chance of a Chancery Lane type incident. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2006 6:57:27 GMT
Interesting. If they want nice acceleration, why not have all cars motorised, like the 92TS on the Central and Drain?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2006 7:22:51 GMT
I'm not an expert in this area, so I may be wrong - but the need to motor all axles on the 92TS may have been due to the the unsuccessful frame hung motors. I would guess that the 09TS will have conventional bogie mounted motors, and thus may only require motoring on 24/32 axles for the same performance.
It is very rare for a metro train to need motors for all axles. Motoring 2/3 to 3/4 of axles is usually sufficient for acceleration rates of 1-1.3ms2 required for modern metro systems.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,763
|
Post by Chris M on Aug 4, 2006 8:18:54 GMT
Also, the more motors you have the more it costs (time and money) to build and maintain the train. For this reason you'll not often find a train with more motors than it needs.
Chris
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2006 10:07:02 GMT
I have to say though, I can't see the point of only having one trailer car per 4 car unit, unless the motors are underpowered. It gets back to the design of the best tube stock ever: 38ts. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2006 10:34:21 GMT
Maybe the extra motor cars are needed for the improved acceleration in the 09TS over the 67TS. More motors (possibly underpowered) may also reduce the strain on each motor and associated equipment, thus reducing the chance of a Chancery Lane type incident. If thats the case, why isnt every carriage motored? Whats the point in having one trailer car at each end of the train?  |
|
|
|
Post by agoodcuppa on Aug 4, 2006 11:51:45 GMT
Whats the point in having one trailer car at each end of the train? To allow space for the compressors perhaps? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2006 13:57:23 GMT
Whats the point in having one trailer car at each end of the train? To allow space for the compressors perhaps? Good point, very well made! |
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Aug 4, 2006 14:03:13 GMT
I came up with the same thought...or rather 'underfloor equipment' but thought it so stupid that I'd be ridiculed if I posted. Next time I'll suffer the ignominy!
I cannot stop thinking that the new Stock lreminds me so much of Standard Stock, or earlier...particularly the ESLs! Convergent evolution?*
*What's that? E.g. two independently arrived-at scenarios that fill the same niche but have nothing in common with each other...say placental and marsupial mammals that look alike but aren't.
|
|
