"3rd rail no longer feasible"

Take a break from playing the game and chat here about real-world transportation issues!

Moderator: General Forums Moderators

User avatar
61653
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2095
Joined: 29 Sep 2009 09:13
Location: Batley, the People's Republic of West Yorkshire.

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by 61653 »

Geo Ghost wrote:
Ploes wrote:so it must have a normal platform height.
Doubt it. Part of the Bakerloo line shares with London Overground. You have to step down into the train or step up out of it.
This is of course, assuming you are referring to the height of the trains doors and not the platform itself.
But on the District line between Richmond & Gunnersbury the District line stock is used alongside 378s, and is a similar height- the Bakerloo line uses deep-level stock hence the step down. It used to be Metropolitan line, which didn't have this problem. Again, joined-up thinking, anyone? :roll:
I was social distancing before it was cool 8)
Formerly known as 47434
Last train journey I could be bothered to look up the headcode for: 04/02/2016, Mirfield to Batley, 2J34 1459 Huddersfield to Leeds, Northern Rail 144015
User avatar
Geo Ghost
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6565
Joined: 25 Oct 2004 10:06
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by Geo Ghost »

Ah I see. I was under the impression that LU stock was pretty much all the same kind of height from wheel-base to the door.
User avatar
JamieLei
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 7432
Joined: 10 Jan 2007 18:42
Location: Stratford, London

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by JamieLei »

Geo Ghost wrote:Ah I see. I was under the impression that LU stock was pretty much all the same kind of height from wheel-base to the door.
Sub-surface stock use normal platform heights, deep tunnel lines use a rather reduced set. The problem arises when you have the two calling at the same platform, ie: the shared Pic/Met section, and the Pic/District interchange platforms (ie: Hammersmith). Can't find a good pic at quick notice, but hopefully this illustrates the difference in door height

Image

Edit: Wait a minute?! £150 million to upgrade a rather rural line (compared to the Birmingham Snow Hill lines at least) with a non-standard electrification system with old trains from over 30 years ago!? Testicles to that. Since it costs about £1.5 million per brand new coach of a Class 172, you could buy 100 new coaches with that. Buy 20 new 3-car sets, capacity problem solved at half the price, and lovely new trains on the line instead of those old clapped-out ex-London things.
Any opinions expressed are purely mine and not that of any employer, past or present.
oberhümer
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1283
Joined: 23 Oct 2009 19:35
Location: Here and there, sometime or another

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by oberhümer »

JamieLei wrote:[...] upgrade a rather rural line (compared to the Birmingham Snow Hill lines at least) with a non-standard electrification system with old trains from over 30 years ago!?
Ah well, it's been done before... And in that case, they were even older.
--- Licenses: GNU LGPL, version 2 or newer, code and graphics. CC-By-SA, graphics, alternatively. If you're using any, I'd like to hear about it --- Call them "track types" ---
--- Mostly inactive developer for: NuTracks - Central European Train Set --- Running/compiling for: Linux (x86) - Android - Windows (32/64 bit) ---

--- Need a file packer? 7-Zip --- BOINC - use your computing power to benefit science --- Block trackers, not ads --- Unix in dispersible pellets, the formula for the future. ---
User avatar
61653
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2095
Joined: 29 Sep 2009 09:13
Location: Batley, the People's Republic of West Yorkshire.

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by 61653 »

Here we go: Piccadilly line train on the shared Met section to Uxbridge:

http://citytransport.info/Digi/P1120783P1120803a.jpg
I was social distancing before it was cool 8)
Formerly known as 47434
Last train journey I could be bothered to look up the headcode for: 04/02/2016, Mirfield to Batley, 2J34 1459 Huddersfield to Leeds, Northern Rail 144015
User avatar
JamieLei
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 7432
Joined: 10 Jan 2007 18:42
Location: Stratford, London

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by JamieLei »

oberhümer wrote:
JamieLei wrote:[...] upgrade a rather rural line (compared to the Birmingham Snow Hill lines at least) with a non-standard electrification system with old trains from over 30 years ago!?
Ah well, it's been done before... And in that case, they were even older.
I knew someone would throw that up. But that was for a specific reason (tunnel clearance issues).
Any opinions expressed are purely mine and not that of any employer, past or present.
User avatar
Badger
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 7040
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 19:12
Location: Adwick-Le-Street.

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by Badger »

JamieLei wrote:
oberhümer wrote:
JamieLei wrote:[...] upgrade a rather rural line (compared to the Birmingham Snow Hill lines at least) with a non-standard electrification system with old trains from over 30 years ago!?
Ah well, it's been done before... And in that case, they were even older.
I knew someone would throw that up. But that was for a specific reason (tunnel clearance issues).
Between Ryde Esplanade and Ryde St John's Road to be precise. I travelled that route less than a month ago and the units are in good shape, comfortable and clean.
|||| My OTTD/TTDP pics ||||Currently slighty obsessed with getting Platinum Trophies||||Retired moderator||||
User avatar
Ploes
President
President
Posts: 956
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 16:04
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by Ploes »

JamieLei wrote:I knew someone would throw that up. But that was for a specific reason (tunnel clearance issues).
That also only required conversion from 4 to 3 rail, not from 4 to side collector, and it was the 60s before new installations of 3rd rail was frowned upon!
User avatar
Geo Ghost
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6565
Joined: 25 Oct 2004 10:06
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by Geo Ghost »

JamieLei wrote: Image
Good grief. All the times I've been to London and on the Underground... I never noticed how much of a difference in size there was between stock.
Learn something new every day :P
User avatar
Ploes
President
President
Posts: 956
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 16:04
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by Ploes »

Geo Ghost wrote:Good grief. All the times I've been to London and on the Underground... I never noticed how much of a difference in size there was between stock.
Learn something new every day :P
Unless your out on the surface or cut and cover lines you would never notice.

As Jamie said: Pic/Met section and Pic/District are points you can easily notice the difference.
Also you have Met/Jubilee running side by side with Chiltern trains flying past non stop on their own lines south of Harrow.
P1170675a.jpg
P1170675a.jpg (204.3 KiB) Viewed 1282 times
Have a Class 165 next to A Stock.
582a.jpg
582a.jpg (194.06 KiB) Viewed 1281 times
And a Class 390 next to 1972 Stock
User avatar
Dave
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 17249
Joined: 26 Dec 2005 20:19
Location: North London

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by Dave »

Was gonna say actually - Chiltern share the tracks as the image shows. Pendo looks a bit out of place there haha.
Official TT-Dave Fan Club

Dave's Screenshot Thread! - Albion: A fictional Britain
Flickr


Why be a song when you can be a symphony? r is a...
User avatar
Ploes
President
President
Posts: 956
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 16:04
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by Ploes »

Dave W wrote:Was gonna say actually - Chiltern share the tracks as the image shows. Pendo looks a bit out of place there haha.
Chiltern only share with the Met Amersham to Harrow on the Hill, not the Jubbly.
South of Harrow on the Hill the Chiltern are on their own line again.
User avatar
Born Acorn
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 7596
Joined: 10 Dec 2002 20:36
Skype: bornacorn
Location: Wrexham, Wales
Contact:

Re: "3rd rail no longer feasible"

Post by Born Acorn »

Apparently third railing Wrexham-Bidston is prohibitively expensive, so they were going to look at OHL instead, but that would mean Merseyrail's next gen trains having both shoes and pantos.

This was 2006, mind.
Image
Post Reply

Return to “Real-World Transport Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests