Ex-Underground train plan for Harrogate line

Brunel · Post by **Brunel** » Fri 15 Jul, 2011 1:06 am

Are they serious?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-yo ... e-14143032

Post by **chameleon** » Fri 15 Jul, 2011 1:09 am

Brunel wrote: Are they serious?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-yo ... e-14143032 I like the sound of the feed rail 'a couple of feet above grond level should reduce the number of vandals quite effectively

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Fri 15 Jul, 2011 1:28 am

You would have to wonder if the 2 mile long Bramhope tunnel was a major factor in all this, what a logistical nightmare it would be to install overhead catenary through there. The whole trackbed would have to be dropped several feet. It's far easier to fix a third rail, so my guess is they are deadly serious here.

dogduke · Post by **dogduke** » Fri 15 Jul, 2011 2:28 am

Signalling improvements and the return of twin tracks for the currentsingle line sections would be required and do NOT come cheap into todays world of beancounters etc.The present 'block section' from Rigton to Horsforth is in dire needof improvement.Various gradients which can cause havoc in the'leaf fall'season would not be suitable for tube rolling stock.London and the south have grown up with third rail systems,we may need to educate our vandals and trespassers to avoid widespread deaths and injury.Pie in the sky ?

LS1 · Post by **LS1** » Fri 15 Jul, 2011 8:51 am

dogduke wrote: Signalling improvements and the return of twin tracks for the currentsingle line sections would be required and do NOT come cheap into todays world of beancounters etc.The present 'block section' from Rigton to Horsforth is in dire needof improvement.Various gradients which can cause havoc in the'leaf fall'season would not be suitable for tube rolling stock.London and the south have grown up with third rail systems,we may need to educate our vandals and trespassers to avoid widespread deaths and injury.Pie in the sky ? Let's not educate them, and watch and get what the deserve when they try to nick the cable etc and ruin everyone else's journey!

BLAKEY · Post by **BLAKEY** » Fri 15 Jul, 2011 9:31 am

Its worked on the beautiful Isle of Wight for many decades now - although with the more compact ex London "tube" trains proper rather than the larger and more spacious sub surface vehicles, but that particular aspect is academic. I'm all in favour of such a scheme, admittedly in part because I'm a transport enthusiast, but there is one small item that may not have been considered - the seating capacity of the London trains is less than you would think, due to the large number of doors which are essential for speedy boarding and alighting "down there." All things considered, "bring it on" I say !!

Post by **mhoulden** » Fri 15 Jul, 2011 10:14 am

Tube trains don't have onboard toilets. Might be OK for short hops around central London but I wouldn't like to think what it would be like travelling from Leeds to Harrogate or Knaresborough without one even if it isn't delayed. From what I remember those small District Line trains don't have luggage racks either. Useful for the route that travels nearest the airport.

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Fri 15 Jul, 2011 10:22 am

From what I can gather these are the trains they meanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground_D78_StockD stock trains built way back in 1980, and due to be phased out in 2015.It just about sums up Leeds, and it's surrounds aspirations when we get 31 year old cast offs, refurbished or not.

Riponian · Post by **Riponian** » Fri 15 Jul, 2011 11:03 am

Unless they're going to have dedicated tracks for these going into Leeds it just isn't going to work.Underground trains work on direct current, the electrics into Leeds now are on alternating current. So the signalling system, notable the track circuits which indicate and interlock the points etc, are set up to deal with this. So where there is AC traction, they use DC track circuits.Trying to mix the two would be an accident waiting to happen. The return DC traction current would produce a false indication of track sections being clear.Why don't we just get that line under the wires? We'd have a better economy of scale, and a better case for getting the Colton Jn to Neville Hill gap closed as well.

jim · Post by **jim** » Fri 15 Jul, 2011 12:23 pm

Note that the proposition/suggestion comes from "business leaders", and not from local transport authority sources. What at first sight might appear practical has serious obstacles as several contributors above have pointed out.