|
Post by christopher125 on Oct 31, 2019 23:54:18 GMT
It's a bit niche, but I'm intrigued by the apparent difference in floor height between the Standard Stock and the 38TS/483s. Was the original floor height of the Standard Stock and 38TS more-or-less the same? Photos of the two in the museum depot don't suggest any obvious difference... ...however photos of two types on the Isle of Wight clearly suggest a change, perhaps most obviously below: Island Line Class 483 by EUPARO, on Flickr 485 043 - Ryde Pier Head c1987-88 by Dave Rowland, on Flickr Presumably the 483s were lifted during their conversion but I've never seen this mentioned in any book - does anyone know more, such as the actual change (1 inch has been suggested but it looks like more) and the reason for it?
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Nov 1, 2019 0:06:02 GMT
The 38TS that runs for events came back from the Isle of Wight so I doubt if it was lifted as you put it.
|
|
|
Post by christopher125 on Nov 1, 2019 0:14:40 GMT
The 38TS that runs for events came back from the Isle of Wight so I doubt if it was lifted as you put it. You must be getting confused with the Standard Stock train that returned, the museum's 38TS has never been to the Island.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Nov 1, 2019 2:52:26 GMT
It's a bit niche, but I'm intrigued by the apparent difference in floor height between the Standard Stock and the 38TS/483s. Was the original floor height of the Standard Stock and 38TS more-or-less the same? Photos of the two in the museum depot don't suggest any obvious difference... ...however photos of two types on the Isle of Wight clearly suggest a change, perhaps most obviously below: Island Line Class 483 by EUPARO, on Flickr 485 043 - Ryde Pier Head c1987-88 by Dave Rowland, on Flickr Presumably the 483s were lifted during their conversion but I've never seen this mentioned in any book - does anyone know more, such as the actual change (1 inch has been suggested but it looks like more) and the reason for it? Hi christopher125 The 38ts had its running height raised slightly during conversion for use on the IOW. If you compare the given height for 1938 tube stock to that recorded by BR for class 483 [https://www.networksoutheast.net/dc.html], the values are ~2.883m and 2.946m respectively*. Incidentally, some comments about the suspension appear in this report: www.railfuture.org.uk/DL1236
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Nov 1, 2019 12:00:57 GMT
I suspect the change of floor height on the class 483 was a deliberate attempt to mitigate the mis-match with the Island Line platform heights which were obviously chosen to match standard gauge steam hauled rolling stock.
At Shanklin I recall that even with the raised floor level there was still quite a step down into the Class 483 trains.
With Class 484 (Vivarail units) now on order, and given the financial viability of the Island Line it is perhaps fortuitous that they never chose to spend serious money rebuilding all the platforms to match the floor height in the Class 483 stock.
As for the new Island Line rolling stock, I wonder if they will be the last revamped units completed at Long Marston or will be the first to emerge from their new Southam base - just up the road in Leamington Spa.
I guess with so much work lined up, it was only a matter of time before the space available to Vivarail at Long Marston restricted their output. Likewise with so many batches of new mainline rolling stock arriving, it seems test track capacity is currently quite scarce. Hence their decision to establish a new test track facility at Barry is an interesting sign of just how confident their financial backers are that there is untapped demand for class 230 (all variants).
|
|
|
Post by christopher125 on Nov 1, 2019 13:21:36 GMT
Hi christopher125 The 38ts had its running height raised slightly during conversion for use on the IOW. If you compare the given height for 1938 tube stock to that recorded by BR for class 483 [https://www.networksoutheast.net/dc.html], the values are ~2.883m and 2.946m respectively*. Incidentally, some comments about the suspension appear in this report: www.railfuture.org.uk/DL1236That's incredibly helpful Ben, thanks - more evidence too that NSE were going to fit modern light clusters.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,358
|
Post by Chris M on Nov 1, 2019 15:51:56 GMT
Platforms on the Island Line are lower than on the mainland. Most of them are at their original Victorian height and Smallbrook Junction is obviously at Class 483 floor level, such that most stations have access without a significant step. D stocks are lower-floored than modern mainline units, so the 230s had their suspension raised but this will not be done with the 484s and platforms will need to be altered.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Nov 2, 2019 1:29:21 GMT
At the time of electrification the track was raised at various platforms to provide a better match (IIRC however, Esplanade had its platforms lowered). Chris is right that various platforms were still what would be considered low anyway, a legacy of their Victorian construction.
|
|