|
Post by Tomcakes on Dec 3, 2006 17:31:54 GMT
I agree on the 72ts point - they're much worse than the 73ts, which IMO are the best refurbs and shall soldier on for a considerable time.
However, the 92ts is cheap tacky and IMHO needs replacement prior to the 72ts!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2006 5:51:23 GMT
I would imagine that the same principals would be used by Bombardier for any future BCV stock but not necessarily the exact same body shell. New project equals new ideas and also newer technological jumps in terms of equipment (smaller/lighter etc). The Piccadilly is next up in around 2016, so it will be interesting to see where Tubelines go. That is a good point in that whilst Metronet's new trains will be built by Bombardier as they are in the infraco, no train manufacturer is in Tubeline's infraco, thus the train could be manufactured by Alstom, CAF, Hitachi, or another company. My bets would go on Alstom though, due to their involvement with 2/3 of Tubeline's lines.
|
|
|
Post by dunois on Dec 22, 2006 20:08:32 GMT
Didn't someone say that we should be: "In it [the EU] and not ran by it" Also, we have missed the option to pull out of the EU Agreement by x amount of years, and even if we did do that then, we would have to undo a lot of [some would say unnecessary] EU Legislation... Most of it is complete hogwash, but some would disagree with me... I mean, take the EU Working Time Directive... they claim we work the longest hours in all of Europe! Why? because earnings are low in respect of living costs... Also, while on this subject, from April 1st [!], Germany will be putting up the VAT rate, to 'lead the way towards one single harmonised VAT rate for the entire EU'. The EU is indeed crazy and the law concerning contracts even if it starts from good intentions can and actually cause mess because of increased complication it can also disadvantage home manufacturers of buses, trains and anything as Alstom learnt recently. Back to the subject, if indeed the size of the trains are slightly different this won't happen but this is not much of a problem considering the fact that the 83 tube stock was based on the SSL D stock (or the other way round) so some kind of commonality is possible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2006 20:11:38 GMT
Didn't someone say that we should be: "In it [the EU] and not ran by it" Also, we have missed the option to pull out of the EU Agreement by x amount of years, and even if we did do that then, we would have to undo a lot of [some would say unnecessary] EU Legislation... Most of it is complete hogwash, but some would disagree with me... I mean, take the EU Working Time Directive... they claim we work the longest hours in all of Europe! Why? because earnings are low in respect of living costs... Also, while on this subject, from April 1st [!], Germany will be putting up the VAT rate, to 'lead the way towards one single harmonised VAT rate for the entire EU'. The EU is indeed crazy and the law concerning contracts even if it starts from good intentions can and actually cause mess because of increased complication it can also disadvantage home manufacturers of buses, trains and anything as Alstom learnt recently. Back to the subject, if indeed the size of the trains are slightly different this won't happen but this is not much of a problem considering the fact that the 83 tube stock was based on the SSL D stock (or the other way round) so some kind of commonality is possible. Perhaps it's not such a bad thing considering all the faults of the '83 stock!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2006 20:15:28 GMT
I heard that the '83s when delivered were too big for the tunnels (!) so perhaps there will be more thought when they build a derived stock.
What will be wanted/needed is the big windows for the Picc like they have on the '92s. These are omitted on the 09 but aren't really needed because there is nothing to look at.
|
|
|
Post by trainopd78 on Dec 22, 2006 22:41:42 GMT
The D stock was actually based more on the 73 tube stock than the 83 stock was based on the D. I know the D and 83's had a similar look and feel, but the 83's had mechanically less in common.
|
|
|
Post by johnb on Dec 28, 2006 11:43:51 GMT
This isn't the time or place for a general discussion about the rights and wrongs of the EU. However, I think you're exaggerating the impact of the legislation on tendering.
If the invitation to tender is properly drafted (ie if the spec makes clear that there are cost savings from making new stock compatible with previous stock, and that bidders must therefore either provide compatibility or cut their bid accordingly), then there is no disadvantage.
In other words (entirely made up numbers alert...), if Tube Lines would save £20m by buying Alstom stock for the Piccadilly because of commonalities with the 1995/96 stock, and this is set out in the invitation to tender, and Hitachi's final bid is only £15m lower than Alstom's, Tube Lines can accept the Alstom bid.
If Hitachi's bid is £25m lower than Alstom's, Tube Lines must accept the Hitachi bid - but that's fine because it'll save more money on the trains than it will lose on the lack of commonalities.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Dec 29, 2006 11:27:59 GMT
Thanks for the clarification johnb - I don't think many of us knew that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2006 21:51:28 GMT
I think the 83ts had all the characteristics of a hastily assembled Meccanno set with the important parts missing...
|
|
|
Post by agoodcuppa on Dec 29, 2006 22:27:45 GMT
I think the 83ts had all the characteristics of a hastily assembled Meccanno set with the important parts missing... That Sir, is a serious and unwarranted insult to the memory and legacy of the late Frank Hornby!
|
|