|
|
Post by trc666 on Aug 22, 2007 21:39:16 GMT
Any idea where I could get details of the platform length and station tunnel diameters at Bank & Waterloo? This would be used for a MSTS route project.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2007 6:50:20 GMT
Lengthwise a 92 stock car is around 50 feet long and a 4 car fits suugly to the buffers so the platform area is about 200 feet long. Regarding the station tunnel diamaters, I have no idea.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2007 7:53:24 GMT
There is a book available about the W&C Railway, which contains lots of technical drawings which may include the information you are after.
|
|
|
|
Post by trc666 on Aug 26, 2007 19:08:40 GMT
200' sounds about right to me. Any idea what the particular book is called?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2007 21:31:28 GMT
200' sounds about right to me. Any idea what the particular book is called? The Waterloo & City Railway, by John Gillham, published Oakwood Press, ISBN0853615446, price £35, 464 pages. |
|
|
|
Post by trc666 on Aug 26, 2007 22:49:35 GMT
HOW MUCH?!?  I could always see if they have it down the library... |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Aug 27, 2007 19:26:01 GMT
<wanders off into library>
p105 of the Gillham book shews platform length at Waterloo (departure and arrival) to be 210', Bank (both) 230'. These dimensions come from the copy of the Inst. of Civil Engineers, and look suspiciously like they are lifted from the deposited plans.
p73 shews a cross-section of Bank with a station tunnel diameter of (I think) 23', platform width of 12'10", connecting tunnel between platforms of 7' 10.5" Diameter at platform edge; 7' 2" Diameter inside connecting tunnel; 6' 4" tunnel length exclusive of tunnel lining.
Waterloo bridge span each side of 30' less 4' 6" brick pier width - girders equidistant around piers. Platforms under two arches of the main concourse. Cross section through convergence seems to be 40' wide, 21' 1.5" radius roof, 13' down from apex of roof to top of pier side.
I must stress that these drawing are a right pain to read as they're a really tiiiiiiiiiiiny reproduction of a large drawing.
Anyone else care to look at pages 73 and 105 to check my reading of the figures?
Hope you find this information useful.........
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2007 0:28:05 GMT
<wanders off into library> p105 of the Gillham book shews platform length at Waterloo (departure and arrival) to be 210', Bank (both) 230'. These dimensions come from the copy of the Inst. of Civil Engineers, and look suspiciously like they are lifted from the deposited plans. My original estimate wasn't that far out was it <Proud smirk> |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Aug 28, 2007 0:29:20 GMT
Now then! Don't get too smug - still need someone to check my reading of the drawings. ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2007 15:31:55 GMT
That was the price when I bought it... might even me close on £40 now!!!
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Sept 2, 2007 1:32:58 GMT
If the platforms are 210'-230' in length, then how did five car trains of class 487 fit in?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2007 8:38:17 GMT
The old SR 1940 cars were a bit shorter, iirc...
Don't forget at Bank also, the stops were moved toward Waterloo by at least 3/4 of a car length...
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Sept 2, 2007 12:12:45 GMT
Didnt realise they had moved the buffers at Bank, had had suspected something similar. Many thanks! And yes; just did some research about the lengths. A 487 car was 49' 1.75", whereas a 482 car is 53' 3.76", which means the buffers would have been moved about 30'. Actually, whilst on a rant about length; when the 92's have to be moved to the central to cover the gap of three extra trains needed when Park Royal interchange is built (or maybe that bit's rubbish - who can say  ), a 5 car 67/72 tube stock consist will only be 17' longer than the 5car 487 consist; unfortunately now thats almost a 50' difference if they've shortend the platforms. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2007 13:35:18 GMT
Actually, whilst on a rant about length; when the 92's have to be moved to the central to cover the gap of three extra trains needed when Park Royal interchange is built . W&C 92s won't be moved to the Central. This was proposed several years ago and the City of London Corporation kicked up a stink, as they originally part funded the purchase of the 92s for the W&C. Any additional 92s required for the Central will be newly built complete with new sellotape. |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Sept 2, 2007 16:14:29 GMT
And yes; just did some research about the lengths. A 487 car was 49' 1.75", whereas a 482 car is 53' 3.76", which means the buffers would have been moved about 30'. I'd be surprised if that's what was done, bearing in mind there isn't even 30' slide length on those buffers now. |
|
), a 5 car 67/72 tube stock consist will only be 17' longer than the 5car 487 consist; unfortunately now thats almost a 50' difference if they've shortend the platforms.
