In message <t3dv2m$gob$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:34:30 on Sat, 16 Apr
2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>>
>>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>>
>> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless unit.
>
>There are many alternate abbreviations for kilometres per hour.
>See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilometres_per_hour
>
>I’m afraid, if the above is to be believed, that kph is the favoured
>abbreviation by Reuters and The Economist.

And Alstom, who make the trams.
--
Roland Perry

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t3bo13$510$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:21:55 on Fri, 15 Apr
>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:04:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <t3a580$7o0$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:55:12 on Thu, 14 Apr
>>>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <ai6g5hpvbqljqikjek6bro4e4it6fgmlh2@4ax.com>, at 13:58:54 on
>>>>>>>>> Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 11:25:40 +0100, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tvqf5h9m93i1vfad5osiqsvq7fi5tm22uf@4ax.com>, at 10:41:33 on
>>>>>>>>>>> Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former 80 km/h limit was on segregated, former BR track,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and nothing to do with road speed limits. The accident
>>>>>>>>>>>>> occurred as a tram was coming off such a section, going round
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a tight right-angle bend to enter the on-street urban
>>>>>>>>>>>>> section. The Croydon trams have little on-street running, only
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on town centre roads probably with a 30mph limit or lower.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The speedo shows how 80 km/h was previously permitted:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/31194316805/in/album-
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7215767697
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6959855/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it shows anything of the sort. My car speedo goes up to
>>>>>>>>>>>> 140 mph but this does not show this speed was previously permitted.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Or even possible. When I was in short trousers we'd peer at through the
>>>>>>>>>>> window at the speedos on cars and assume the to speed was whatever the
>>>>>>>>>>> speedo went up to. One of the reasons for tram speed limits being
>>>>>>>>>>> reduced for 80 to 70 is reportedly that some networks have bought their
>>>>>>>>>>> second generation stock, which is only capable of 70kph (possibly a
>>>>>>>>>>> European thing).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it would be a European thing. They may simply have
>>>>>>>>>> decided to specify new trams with a lower top speed and
>>>>>>>>>> better acceleration. Overall, that might produce faster journey times.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What I mean is that the market for trams in Europe is allegedly for
>>>>>>>>> 70kph max, while they might have made some "80kph specials" for the UK
>>>>>>>>> 20yrs ago, maybe they are less inclined to now. [Not a Brexit thing]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there a European 70 km/h upper speed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In practice it looks like that's typically the fastest they operate with
>>>>>>> modern stock. Athens for example, built for 80mph is nevertheless
>>>>>>> introducing its 2nd generation using 70kph Alstom stock.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These are the actual top speeds available with European trams:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alstom Citadis — max speed 90 km/h
>>>>>> Alstom (nee Bombardier) Flexity — max speed 70-100 km/h
>>>>>> CAF Urbos — max speed 70-80 km/h
>>>>>> Siemens S70 — max speed 105 km/h
>>>>>> Stadler Tango, VARIOBAHN — max speed 80 km/h
>>>>>> Stadler Citylink — max speed 100 km/h
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>>>
>>>
>>> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless unit.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> There are many alternate abbreviations for kilometres per hour.
>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilometres_per_hour
>>
>> I’m afraid, if the above is to be believed, that kph is the favoured
>> abbreviation by Reuters and The Economist.
>>
>> Perhaps we ought to be using metres per second if we really want to be
>> using proper units.
>>
>
> As an engineer, I'm happy to use the SI unit, as do all official sources
> and metric countries.
>
>
Is an hour an SI unit?

Much to my surprise, in Germany rulers (and they seem to like these fold up
things with multiple hinged foot long sections in preference to tape
measures) are very often dual calibrated in metric and inches. They call
inches Zoll.

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t3bo13$510$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:21:55 on Fri, 15 Apr
>>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:04:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In message <t3a580$7o0$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:55:12 on Thu, 14 Apr
>>>>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <ai6g5hpvbqljqikjek6bro4e4it6fgmlh2@4ax.com>, at 13:58:54 on
>>>>>>>>>> Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 11:25:40 +0100, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tvqf5h9m93i1vfad5osiqsvq7fi5tm22uf@4ax.com>, at 10:41:33 on
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former 80 km/h limit was on segregated, former BR track,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and nothing to do with road speed limits. The accident
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> occurred as a tram was coming off such a section, going round
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a tight right-angle bend to enter the on-street urban
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> section. The Croydon trams have little on-street running, only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on town centre roads probably with a 30mph limit or lower.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The speedo shows how 80 km/h was previously permitted:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/31194316805/in/album-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7215767697
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6959855/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it shows anything of the sort. My car speedo goes up to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 140 mph but this does not show this speed was previously permitted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Or even possible. When I was in short trousers we'd peer at through the
>>>>>>>>>>>> window at the speedos on cars and assume the to speed was whatever the
>>>>>>>>>>>> speedo went up to. One of the reasons for tram speed limits being
>>>>>>>>>>>> reduced for 80 to 70 is reportedly that some networks have bought their
>>>>>>>>>>>> second generation stock, which is only capable of 70kph (possibly a
>>>>>>>>>>>> European thing).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it would be a European thing. They may simply have
>>>>>>>>>>> decided to specify new trams with a lower top speed and
>>>>>>>>>>> better acceleration. Overall, that might produce faster journey times.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What I mean is that the market for trams in Europe is allegedly for
>>>>>>>>>> 70kph max, while they might have made some "80kph specials" for the UK
>>>>>>>>>> 20yrs ago, maybe they are less inclined to now. [Not a Brexit thing]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there a European 70 km/h upper speed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In practice it looks like that's typically the fastest they operate with
>>>>>>>> modern stock. Athens for example, built for 80mph is nevertheless
>>>>>>>> introducing its 2nd generation using 70kph Alstom stock.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> These are the actual top speeds available with European trams:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alstom Citadis — max speed 90 km/h
>>>>>>> Alstom (nee Bombardier) Flexity — max speed 70-100 km/h
>>>>>>> CAF Urbos — max speed 70-80 km/h
>>>>>>> Siemens S70 — max speed 105 km/h
>>>>>>> Stadler Tango, VARIOBAHN — max speed 80 km/h
>>>>>>> Stadler Citylink — max speed 100 km/h
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless unit.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> There are many alternate abbreviations for kilometres per hour.
>>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilometres_per_hour
>>>
>>> I’m afraid, if the above is to be believed, that kph is the favoured
>>> abbreviation by Reuters and The Economist.
>>>
>>> Perhaps we ought to be using metres per second if we really want to be
>>> using proper units.
>>>
>>
>> As an engineer, I'm happy to use the SI unit, as do all official sources
>> and metric countries.
>>
>>
> Is an hour an SI unit?

No, but it’s acceptable to use it with SI units:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-SI_units_mentioned_in_the_SI>

> Much to my surprise, in Germany rulers (and they seem to like these fold up
> things with multiple hinged foot long sections in preference to tape
> measures) are very often dual calibrated in metric and inches. They call
> inches Zoll.

And the French use livres for weight and occasionally pieds and milles, but
they’re not the same as the pounds, feet and miles that we use, unlike the
German inches!

Mind you, given that the inch is now defined in metric units you could
argue that it’s perfectly acceptable.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

In message <t3e0ri$s6r$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:04:51 on Sat, 16 Apr
2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t3bo13$510$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:21:55 on Fri, 15 Apr
>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:04:18 +0100, Roland Perry
>>>>>><roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <t3a580$7o0$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:55:12 on Thu, 14 Apr
>>>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there a European 70 km/h upper speed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In practice it looks like that's typically the fastest they operate with
>>>>>>> modern stock. Athens for example, built for 80mph is nevertheless
>>>>>>> introducing its 2nd generation using 70kph Alstom stock.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These are the actual top speeds available with European trams:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alstom Citadis — max speed 90 km/h
>>>>>> Alstom (nee Bombardier) Flexity — max speed 70-100 km/h
>>>>>> CAF Urbos — max speed 70-80 km/h
>>>>>> Siemens S70 — max speed 105 km/h
>>>>>> Stadler Tango, VARIOBAHN — max speed 80 km/h
>>>>>> Stadler Citylink — max speed 100 km/h
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>>>
>>> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless unit.
>>
>> There are many alternate abbreviations for kilometres per hour.
>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilometres_per_hour
>>
>> I’m afraid, if the above is to be believed, that kph is the favoured
>> abbreviation by Reuters and The Economist.
>>
>> Perhaps we ought to be using metres per second if we really want to be
>> using proper units.
>
>The OTMR on an IET records speed in cm/s.

Surely something like chains per fortnight would be more appropriate for
an industry largely stuck in the 19th century.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t3e0v0$sr8$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:06:40 on Sat, 16 Apr
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t3bo13$510$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:21:55 on Fri, 15 Apr
>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:04:18 +0100, Roland Perry
>>>>>><roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <t3a580$7o0$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:55:12 on Thu, 14 Apr
>>>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <ai6g5hpvbqljqikjek6bro4e4it6fgmlh2@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>13:58:54 on
>>>>>>>>> Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 11:25:40 +0100, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tvqf5h9m93i1vfad5osiqsvq7fi5tm22uf@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>>10:41:33 on
>>>>>>>>>>> Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former 80 km/h limit was on segregated, former BR track,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and nothing to do with road speed limits. The accident
>>>>>>>>>>>>> occurred as a tram was coming off such a section, going round
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a tight right-angle bend to enter the on-street urban
>>>>>>>>>>>>> section. The Croydon trams have little on-street running, only
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on town centre roads probably with a 30mph limit or lower.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The speedo shows how 80 km/h was previously permitted:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/31194316805/in/album-
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7215767697
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6959855/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it shows anything of the sort. My car speedo
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 140 mph but this does not show this speed was previously permitted.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Or even possible. When I was in short trousers we'd peer at
>>>>>>>>>>>through the
>>>>>>>>>>> window at the speedos on cars and assume the to speed was
>>>>>>>>>>>whatever the
>>>>>>>>>>> speedo went up to. One of the reasons for tram speed limits being
>>>>>>>>>>> reduced for 80 to 70 is reportedly that some networks have
>>>>>>>>>>>bought their
>>>>>>>>>>> second generation stock, which is only capable of 70kph (possibly a
>>>>>>>>>>> European thing).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it would be a European thing. They may simply have
>>>>>>>>>> decided to specify new trams with a lower top speed and
>>>>>>>>>> better acceleration. Overall, that might produce faster
>>>>>>>>>>journey times.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What I mean is that the market for trams in Europe is allegedly for
>>>>>>>>> 70kph max, while they might have made some "80kph specials" for the UK
>>>>>>>>> 20yrs ago, maybe they are less inclined to now. [Not a Brexit thing]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there a European 70 km/h upper speed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In practice it looks like that's typically the fastest they operate with
>>>>>>> modern stock. Athens for example, built for 80mph is nevertheless
>>>>>>> introducing its 2nd generation using 70kph Alstom stock.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These are the actual top speeds available with European trams:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alstom Citadis — max speed 90 km/h
>>>>>> Alstom (nee Bombardier) Flexity — max speed 70-100 km/h
>>>>>> CAF Urbos — max speed 70-80 km/h
>>>>>> Siemens S70 — max speed 105 km/h
>>>>>> Stadler Tango, VARIOBAHN — max speed 80 km/h
>>>>>> Stadler Citylink — max speed 100 km/h
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>>>
>>> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless unit.
>>>
>> There are many alternate abbreviations for kilometres per hour.
>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilometres_per_hour
>>
>> I’m afraid, if the above is to be believed, that kph is the favoured
>> abbreviation by Reuters and The Economist.
>>
>> Perhaps we ought to be using metres per second if we really want to be
>> using proper units.
>
>As an engineer, I'm happy to use the SI unit, as do all official sources
>and metric countries.

Metres per second then.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t3dv2m$gob$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:34:30 on Sat, 16 Apr
> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>>>
>>> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless unit.
>>
>> There are many alternate abbreviations for kilometres per hour.
>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilometres_per_hour
>>
>> I’m afraid, if the above is to be believed, that kph is the favoured
>> abbreviation by Reuters and The Economist.
>
> And Alstom, who make the trams.

<https://www.alstom.com/press-releases-news/2021/12/alstoms-citadis-x05-trams-enter-passenger-service-athens>

<https://www.alstom.com/sites/alstom.com/files/2021/01/19/20201105_PR_Alstom_Casablanca_Citadis_EN.pdf>

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

> Much to my surprise, in Germany rulers (and they seem to like these fold up
> things with multiple hinged foot long sections in preference to tape

For a lot of uses I prefer them as well, don’t suddenly collapse just as
you get the end into somewhere awkward or suddenly ping pack as the end
unhooks just before you make a mark.

> measures) are very often dual calibrated in metric and inches. They call
> inches Zoll.
>
>

They are familiar with using inches to measure TV screens and car tyre
sizes.
They still use a lot of BSP threads in some of their plumbing as well
although they don’t always call it that.

GH

On 16/04/2022 10:26, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <t3e0ri$s6r$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:04:51 on Sat, 16 Apr
> 2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t3bo13$510$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:21:55 on Fri, 15 Apr
>>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:04:18 +0100, Roland Perry
>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In message <t3a580$7o0$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:55:12 on Thu, 14 Apr
>>>>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there a European 70 km/h upper speed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In practice it looks like that's typically the fastest they
>>>>>>>> operate with
>>>>>>>> modern stock. Athens for example, built for 80mph is nevertheless
>>>>>>>> introducing its 2nd generation using 70kph Alstom stock.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> These are the actual top speeds available with European trams:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alstom Citadis — max speed 90 km/h
>>>>>>> Alstom (nee Bombardier) Flexity — max speed 70-100 km/h
>>>>>>> CAF Urbos — max speed 70-80 km/h
>>>>>>> Siemens S70 — max speed 105 km/h
>>>>>>> Stadler Tango, VARIOBAHN — max speed 80 km/h
>>>>>>> Stadler Citylink — max speed 100 km/h
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>>>>
>>>> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless
>>>> unit.
>>>
>>> There are many alternate abbreviations for kilometres per hour.
>>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilometres_per_hour
>>>
>>> I’m afraid, if the above is to be believed, that kph is the favoured
>>> abbreviation by Reuters and The Economist.
>>>
>>> Perhaps we ought to be using metres per second if we really want to be
>>> using proper units.
>>
>> The OTMR on an IET records speed in cm/s.
>
> Surely something like chains per fortnight would be more appropriate for
> an industry largely stuck in the 19th century.

The official El Reg subunit is decifurlongs per fortnight.

On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 14:31:26 +0100
Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>On 15/04/2022 12:59, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> Would be tricky to have a metro or tram in bristol given the hills. As for
>> Bradford, don't know, never been there.
>
>Edinburgh gets around that by running rails (train and tram) east-west
>along the flat bits and buses north-south up and down the hills. I

Bristol AFAIR doesn't have many flat bits :)

On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:40:22 +0100
Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On 15/04/2022 14:31, Certes wrote:
>> On 15/04/2022 12:59, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> Would be tricky to have a metro or tram in bristol given the hills. As
>>> for
>>> Bradford, don't know, never been there.
>>
>> Edinburgh gets around that by running rails (train and tram) east-west
>> along the flat bits and buses north-south up and down the hills.  I
>> can't recall ever making a local journey by rail here, but the routes
>> will suit a few people who live and work in the right places.
>
>Trams in Sheffield seem to cope with the hills without problems. Both

I have to admit I was surprised at the gradiant the sheffield trams climbed
just using friction.

On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:19:38 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 10:33:22 -0000 (UTC)
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Isn't the engine running all the time?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, but it very definitely is used to spin the flywheel up to speed before
>>> departure. You can hear it, feel it and IIRC see it on the desk gauges.
>>
>> Sounds like a solution looking for a problem.
>
>Parry has been a solution looking for a problem for around 30 years now.
>
>Even when its niche became mainstream, it was beaten to it by improved
>battery and capacitor tech.
>
>> Why don't they just bin the
>> flywheel and use the engine directly with a small battery and motor for some
>> regen and mild hybrid assistance.
>>
>
>When the Parry principle was developed, and even when the Stourbridge
>vehicles were introduced, the battery technology wasn't available to
>achieve this.

I suppose not for all use cases. But for the short stourbridge line I imagine
a milk floats worth of lead acids could cope quite nicely. Not much of an ask
in a 10 ton vehicle.

>I doubt that Parry will move on from flywheel to battery; the company's
>sole reason for existence is to promote John Parry's flywheel propulsion
>ideas.

Sounds like their days are numbered then.

On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:19:39 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>Water between bottom of railhead and top of railhead, 5mph.
>
>Between top of sleepers and bottom of railhead, NR say linespeed, gWr say
>20mph (143 150 769) 50mph (158 16x 387 57/Sleeper HST) or linespeed (IET).

Why the difference between classes? Are some more waterproof than others?

On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 10:39:37 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:

>On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:19:38 -0000 (UTC)
>Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 10:33:22 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Isn't the engine running all the time?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but it very definitely is used to spin the flywheel up to speed before
>>>> departure. You can hear it, feel it and IIRC see it on the desk gauges.
>>>
>>> Sounds like a solution looking for a problem.
>>
>>Parry has been a solution looking for a problem for around 30 years now.
>>
>>Even when its niche became mainstream, it was beaten to it by improved
>>battery and capacitor tech.
>>
>>> Why don't they just bin the
>>> flywheel and use the engine directly with a small battery and motor for some
>>> regen and mild hybrid assistance.
>>>
>>
>>When the Parry principle was developed, and even when the Stourbridge
>>vehicles were introduced, the battery technology wasn't available to
>>achieve this.
>
>I suppose not for all use cases. But for the short stourbridge line I imagine
>a milk floats worth of lead acids could cope quite nicely. Not much of an ask
>in a 10 ton vehicle.
>
>>I doubt that Parry will move on from flywheel to battery; the company's
>>sole reason for existence is to promote John Parry's flywheel propulsion
>>ideas.
>
>Sounds like their days are numbered then.
>

I get the impression that the company is basically in suspense.

On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 22:58:31 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> The Mestre-Venice 'tram' is actually one of the single-rail-guided, rubber
>>> tyre systems, and has OLE throughout. It doesn't enter any historic areas
>>> of Venice, it terminates next to the bus station, near the railway station,
>>> as soon as it's crossed the causeway from the mainland.
>>>
>>>
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Fair enough. I was there before the line was commissioned.
>>
>
><https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157678628717496>

What on earth possesed them to buy that system? We rode on the one in Clermond
Ferrand in france. It was bumpy due to it being just as susceptable to potholes
and poor road surface as any road vehicle and it ran at a snails pace
apparently due to a large number of derailments, one of which caused the
tram to headbutt a wall. In fact looks like there another nasty one only
last year with 5 injured:

https://france3-regions.francetvinfo.fr/auvergne-rhone-alpes/puy-de-dome/clermon
t-ferrand/photos-accident-de-tram-a-clermont-ferrand-5-blesses-2233012.html

On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:09:42 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <t3bmnp$sr5$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 11:59:53 on Fri, 15 Apr
>2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>How do you know? If there isn't a convenient way of commuting to the city
>>centre other than some slow manky bus then they won't do it as much.
>
>Especially if a large section of the workforce is working at t'mill at
>end o't'street, they don't need any transport to the City Centre.

I didn't realise it was still 1890 in Leeds.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:19:39 -0000 (UTC)
> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>> Water between bottom of railhead and top of railhead, 5mph.
>>
>> Between top of sleepers and bottom of railhead, NR say linespeed, gWr say
>> 20mph (143 150 769) 50mph (158 16x 387 57/Sleeper HST) or linespeed (IET).
>
> Why the difference between classes? Are some more waterproof than others?

The way they churn up the air and the water service may well differ
depending on the configuration of the underside of the vehicle, and there
may well be considerable differences in the way equipment is arranged so
that yes, some may well be more waterproof. You might also think that the
ones with hydraulic transmissions (143, 150, 158, 16x) might be more
inherently waterproof than the those with electric, but that doesn’t seem
to be the case.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:20:24 +0000, Recliner wrote:

> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t3bo13$510$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:21:55 on Fri, 15 Apr
>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:04:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <t3a580$7o0$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:55:12 on Thu, 14 Apr
>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <ai6g5hpvbqljqikjek6bro4e4it6fgmlh2@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>> 13:58:54 on Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 11:25:40 +0100, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In message <tvqf5h9m93i1vfad5osiqsvq7fi5tm22uf@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>> 10:41:33 on Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Scott
>>>>>>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The former 80 km/h limit was on segregated, former BR track,
>>>>>>>>>>> and nothing to do with road speed limits. The accident
>>>>>>>>>>> occurred as a tram was coming off such a section, going round
>>>>>>>>>>> a tight right-angle bend to enter the on-street urban
>>>>>>>>>>> section. The Croydon trams have little on-street running, only
>>>>>>>>>>> on town centre roads probably with a 30mph limit or lower.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The speedo shows how 80 km/h was previously permitted:
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/31194316805/in/album-
>>>>>>>>>>> 7215767697 6959855/>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it shows anything of the sort. My car speedo goes
>>>>>>>>>> up to 140 mph but this does not show this speed was previously
>>>>>>>>>> permitted.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Or even possible. When I was in short trousers we'd peer at
>>>>>>>>> through the window at the speedos on cars and assume the to
>>>>>>>>> speed was whatever the speedo went up to. One of the reasons for
>>>>>>>>> tram speed limits being reduced for 80 to 70 is reportedly that
>>>>>>>>> some networks have bought their second generation stock, which
>>>>>>>>> is only capable of 70kph (possibly a European thing).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think it would be a European thing. They may simply have
>>>>>>>> decided to specify new trams with a lower top speed and better
>>>>>>>> acceleration. Overall, that might produce faster journey times.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What I mean is that the market for trams in Europe is allegedly
>>>>>>> for 70kph max, while they might have made some "80kph specials"
>>>>>>> for the UK 20yrs ago, maybe they are less inclined to now. [Not a
>>>>>>> Brexit thing]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a European 70 km/h upper speed?
>>>>>
>>>>> In practice it looks like that's typically the fastest they operate
>>>>> with modern stock. Athens for example, built for 80mph is
>>>>> nevertheless introducing its 2nd generation using 70kph Alstom
>>>>> stock.
>>>>
>>>> These are the actual top speeds available with European trams:
>>>>
>>>> Alstom Citadis — max speed 90 km/h Alstom (nee Bombardier) Flexity —
>>>> max speed 70-100 km/h CAF Urbos — max speed 70-80 km/h Siemens S70 —
>>>> max speed 105 km/h Stadler Tango, VARIOBAHN — max speed 80 km/h
>>>> Stadler Citylink — max speed 100 km/h
>>>
>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>
>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>
>
> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless unit.

I'm surprised that so many use "kph". I think every car I've owned with a
dial-type speedo has had the two scales labelled "MPH" and "km/h", so
it's not as is we haven't seen it often enough!

nib

On 16/04/2022 09:20, Recliner wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t3bo13$510$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:21:55 on Fri, 15 Apr
>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:04:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <t3a580$7o0$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:55:12 on Thu, 14 Apr
>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <ai6g5hpvbqljqikjek6bro4e4it6fgmlh2@4ax.com>, at 13:58:54 on
>>>>>>> Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 11:25:40 +0100, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In message <tvqf5h9m93i1vfad5osiqsvq7fi5tm22uf@4ax.com>, at 10:41:33 on
>>>>>>>>> Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The former 80 km/h limit was on segregated, former BR track,
>>>>>>>>>>> and nothing to do with road speed limits. The accident
>>>>>>>>>>> occurred as a tram was coming off such a section, going round
>>>>>>>>>>> a tight right-angle bend to enter the on-street urban
>>>>>>>>>>> section. The Croydon trams have little on-street running, only
>>>>>>>>>>> on town centre roads probably with a 30mph limit or lower.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The speedo shows how 80 km/h was previously permitted:
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/31194316805/in/album-
>>>>>>>>>>> 7215767697
>>>>>>>>>>> 6959855/>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it shows anything of the sort. My car speedo goes up to
>>>>>>>>>> 140 mph but this does not show this speed was previously permitted.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Or even possible. When I was in short trousers we'd peer at through the
>>>>>>>>> window at the speedos on cars and assume the to speed was whatever the
>>>>>>>>> speedo went up to. One of the reasons for tram speed limits being
>>>>>>>>> reduced for 80 to 70 is reportedly that some networks have bought their
>>>>>>>>> second generation stock, which is only capable of 70kph (possibly a
>>>>>>>>> European thing).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think it would be a European thing. They may simply have
>>>>>>>> decided to specify new trams with a lower top speed and
>>>>>>>> better acceleration. Overall, that might produce faster journey times.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What I mean is that the market for trams in Europe is allegedly for
>>>>>>> 70kph max, while they might have made some "80kph specials" for the UK
>>>>>>> 20yrs ago, maybe they are less inclined to now. [Not a Brexit thing]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a European 70 km/h upper speed?
>>>>>
>>>>> In practice it looks like that's typically the fastest they operate with
>>>>> modern stock. Athens for example, built for 80mph is nevertheless
>>>>> introducing its 2nd generation using 70kph Alstom stock.
>>>>
>>>> These are the actual top speeds available with European trams:
>>>>
>>>> Alstom Citadis — max speed 90 km/h
>>>> Alstom (nee Bombardier) Flexity — max speed 70-100 km/h
>>>> CAF Urbos — max speed 70-80 km/h
>>>> Siemens S70 — max speed 105 km/h
>>>> Stadler Tango, VARIOBAHN — max speed 80 km/h
>>>> Stadler Citylink — max speed 100 km/h
>>>
>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>
>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>
>
> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless unit.
>

Rate of consumption of pie and chips at a Premier League football match?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 16/04/2022 10:26, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <t3e0ri$s6r$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:04:51 on Sat, 16 Apr
> 2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t3bo13$510$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:21:55 on Fri, 15 Apr
>>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:04:18 +0100, Roland Perry
>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In message <t3a580$7o0$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:55:12 on Thu, 14 Apr
>>>>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there a European 70 km/h upper speed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In practice it looks like that's typically the fastest they
>>>>>>>> operate with
>>>>>>>> modern stock. Athens for example, built for 80mph is nevertheless
>>>>>>>> introducing its 2nd generation using 70kph Alstom stock.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> These are the actual top speeds available with European trams:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alstom Citadis — max speed 90 km/h
>>>>>>> Alstom (nee Bombardier) Flexity — max speed 70-100 km/h
>>>>>>> CAF Urbos — max speed 70-80 km/h
>>>>>>> Siemens S70 — max speed 105 km/h
>>>>>>> Stadler Tango, VARIOBAHN — max speed 80 km/h
>>>>>>> Stadler Citylink — max speed 100 km/h
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>>>>
>>>> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless
>>>> unit.
>>>
>>> There are many alternate abbreviations for kilometres per hour.
>>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilometres_per_hour
>>>
>>> I’m afraid, if the above is to be believed, that kph is the favoured
>>> abbreviation by Reuters and The Economist.
>>>
>>> Perhaps we ought to be using metres per second if we really want to be
>>> using proper units.
>>
>> The OTMR on an IET records speed in cm/s.
>
> Surely something like chains per fortnight would be more appropriate for
> an industry largely stuck in the 19th century.

Furlongs per Fortnight is the recognised unit, allegedly.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 16/04/2022 11:50, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:09:42 +0100
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t3bmnp$sr5$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 11:59:53 on Fri, 15 Apr
>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>> How do you know? If there isn't a convenient way of commuting to the city
>>> centre other than some slow manky bus then they won't do it as much.
>>
>> Especially if a large section of the workforce is working at t'mill at
>> end o't'street, they don't need any transport to the City Centre.
>
> I didn't realise it was still 1890 in Leeds.
>
Well it's still 1774 in Wesminster according to one Mr Mogg.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:19:39 -0000 (UTC)
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>> Water between bottom of railhead and top of railhead, 5mph.
>>>
>>> Between top of sleepers and bottom of railhead, NR say linespeed, gWr say
>>> 20mph (143 150 769) 50mph (158 16x 387 57/Sleeper HST) or linespeed (IET).
>>
>> Why the difference between classes? Are some more waterproof than others?
>
> The way they churn up the air and the water service may well differ
> depending on the configuration of the underside of the vehicle, and there
> may well be considerable differences in the way equipment is arranged so
> that yes, some may well be more waterproof. You might also think that the
> ones with hydraulic transmissions (143, 150, 158, 16x) might be more
> inherently waterproof than the those with electric, but that doesn’t seem
> to be the case.

… and I expect Anna will be along shortly to explain in detail.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 16/04/2022 12:30, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless unit.
>
> Rate of consumption of pie and chips at a Premier League football match?

Interesting. "Kilos per hour" is literally thousands of something
dimensionless, e.g. they sold 1,000 pies in the 15-minutes interval,
which is 4 kilos (or kilopies) per hour. Somehow, a kilo has also come
to mean kg but not km, kPa or 1000 times any other base unit.

Moving my rant slightly, why do people stress the word as kil_O_metre,
when they wouldn't dream of talking about kil_O_grams or mill_I_metres?

nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:20:24 +0000, Recliner wrote:
>
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t3bo13$510$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:21:55 on Fri, 15 Apr
>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:04:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <t3a580$7o0$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:55:12 on Thu, 14 Apr
>>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <ai6g5hpvbqljqikjek6bro4e4it6fgmlh2@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>> 13:58:54 on Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 11:25:40 +0100, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In message <tvqf5h9m93i1vfad5osiqsvq7fi5tm22uf@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>> 10:41:33 on Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Scott
>>>>>>>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The former 80 km/h limit was on segregated, former BR track,
>>>>>>>>>>>> and nothing to do with road speed limits. The accident
>>>>>>>>>>>> occurred as a tram was coming off such a section, going round
>>>>>>>>>>>> a tight right-angle bend to enter the on-street urban
>>>>>>>>>>>> section. The Croydon trams have little on-street running, only
>>>>>>>>>>>> on town centre roads probably with a 30mph limit or lower.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The speedo shows how 80 km/h was previously permitted:
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/31194316805/in/album-
>>>>>>>>>>>> 7215767697 6959855/>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it shows anything of the sort. My car speedo goes
>>>>>>>>>>> up to 140 mph but this does not show this speed was previously
>>>>>>>>>>> permitted.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Or even possible. When I was in short trousers we'd peer at
>>>>>>>>>> through the window at the speedos on cars and assume the to
>>>>>>>>>> speed was whatever the speedo went up to. One of the reasons for
>>>>>>>>>> tram speed limits being reduced for 80 to 70 is reportedly that
>>>>>>>>>> some networks have bought their second generation stock, which
>>>>>>>>>> is only capable of 70kph (possibly a European thing).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't think it would be a European thing. They may simply have
>>>>>>>>> decided to specify new trams with a lower top speed and better
>>>>>>>>> acceleration. Overall, that might produce faster journey times.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What I mean is that the market for trams in Europe is allegedly
>>>>>>>> for 70kph max, while they might have made some "80kph specials"
>>>>>>>> for the UK 20yrs ago, maybe they are less inclined to now. [Not a
>>>>>>>> Brexit thing]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there a European 70 km/h upper speed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In practice it looks like that's typically the fastest they operate
>>>>>> with modern stock. Athens for example, built for 80mph is
>>>>>> nevertheless introducing its 2nd generation using 70kph Alstom
>>>>>> stock.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are the actual top speeds available with European trams:
>>>>>
>>>>> Alstom Citadis — max speed 90 km/h Alstom (nee Bombardier) Flexity —
>>>>> max speed 70-100 km/h CAF Urbos — max speed 70-80 km/h Siemens S70 —
>>>>> max speed 105 km/h Stadler Tango, VARIOBAHN — max speed 80 km/h
>>>>> Stadler Citylink — max speed 100 km/h
>>>>
>>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>>
>>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>>
>>
>> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless unit.
>
> I'm surprised that so many use "kph". I think every car I've owned with a
> dial-type speedo has had the two scales labelled "MPH" and "km/h", so
> it's not as is we haven't seen it often enough!
>
> nib
>

It’s not illogical. If you accept MPH then substituting K for kilometres
instead of M for miles is entirely rational. It might offend the STEM
fraternity, but they don’t own the language. I guess that km/h is used more
internationally otherwise you’d have to cope with every language variant,
eg German Stundenkilometer or Kilometer pro Stunde (even the logical
Germans have at least two ways of expressing it). Mind you, I don’t think
I’ve ever seen KpS in German, a language famed for its abbreviations.

On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 12:09:58 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:20:24 +0000, Recliner wrote:
>>
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t3bo13$510$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:21:55 on Fri, 15 Apr
>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:04:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <t3a580$7o0$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:55:12 on Thu, 14 Apr
>>>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <ai6g5hpvbqljqikjek6bro4e4it6fgmlh2@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>> 13:58:54 on Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 11:25:40 +0100, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tvqf5h9m93i1vfad5osiqsvq7fi5tm22uf@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>> 10:41:33 on Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Scott
>>>>>>>>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former 80 km/h limit was on segregated, former BR track,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and nothing to do with road speed limits. The accident
>>>>>>>>>>>>> occurred as a tram was coming off such a section, going round
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a tight right-angle bend to enter the on-street urban
>>>>>>>>>>>>> section. The Croydon trams have little on-street running, only
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on town centre roads probably with a 30mph limit or lower.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The speedo shows how 80 km/h was previously permitted:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/31194316805/in/album-
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7215767697 6959855/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it shows anything of the sort. My car speedo goes
>>>>>>>>>>>> up to 140 mph but this does not show this speed was previously
>>>>>>>>>>>> permitted.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Or even possible. When I was in short trousers we'd peer at
>>>>>>>>>>> through the window at the speedos on cars and assume the to
>>>>>>>>>>> speed was whatever the speedo went up to. One of the reasons for
>>>>>>>>>>> tram speed limits being reduced for 80 to 70 is reportedly that
>>>>>>>>>>> some networks have bought their second generation stock, which
>>>>>>>>>>> is only capable of 70kph (possibly a European thing).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it would be a European thing. They may simply have
>>>>>>>>>> decided to specify new trams with a lower top speed and better
>>>>>>>>>> acceleration. Overall, that might produce faster journey times.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What I mean is that the market for trams in Europe is allegedly
>>>>>>>>> for 70kph max, while they might have made some "80kph specials"
>>>>>>>>> for the UK 20yrs ago, maybe they are less inclined to now. [Not a
>>>>>>>>> Brexit thing]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there a European 70 km/h upper speed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In practice it looks like that's typically the fastest they operate
>>>>>>> with modern stock. Athens for example, built for 80mph is
>>>>>>> nevertheless introducing its 2nd generation using 70kph Alstom
>>>>>>> stock.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These are the actual top speeds available with European trams:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alstom Citadis — max speed 90 km/h Alstom (nee Bombardier) Flexity —
>>>>>> max speed 70-100 km/h CAF Urbos — max speed 70-80 km/h Siemens S70 —
>>>>>> max speed 105 km/h Stadler Tango, VARIOBAHN — max speed 80 km/h
>>>>>> Stadler Citylink — max speed 100 km/h
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m leaning towards Roland’s 80mph being a typo,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, should have been 80kph.
>>>
>>>
>>> No, it should have been 80 km/h. 'Kilos per hour' is a meaningless unit.
>>
>> I'm surprised that so many use "kph". I think every car I've owned with a
>> dial-type speedo has had the two scales labelled "MPH" and "km/h", so
>> it's not as is we haven't seen it often enough!
>>
>> nib
>>
>
>It’s not illogical. If you accept MPH then substituting K for kilometres
>instead of M for miles is entirely rational.

K isn't a recognised abbreviation for kilometres. It stands for kilo.

> It might offend the STEM
>fraternity, but they don’t own the language. I guess that km/h is used more
>internationally otherwise you’d have to cope with every language variant,
>eg German Stundenkilometer or Kilometer pro Stunde (even the logical
>Germans have at least two ways of expressing it).

It's the universal abbreviation in metric countries, and should be here, too.

> Mind you, I don’t think
>I’ve ever seen KpS in German, a language famed for its abbreviations.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:19:38 -0000 (UTC)
> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 10:33:22 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Isn't the engine running all the time?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but it very definitely is used to spin the flywheel up to speed before
>>>> departure. You can hear it, feel it and IIRC see it on the desk gauges.
>>>
>>> Sounds like a solution looking for a problem.
>>
>> Parry has been a solution looking for a problem for around 30 years now.
>>
>> Even when its niche became mainstream, it was beaten to it by improved
>> battery and capacitor tech.
>>
>>> Why don't they just bin the
>>> flywheel and use the engine directly with a small battery and motor for some
>>> regen and mild hybrid assistance.
>>>
>>
>> When the Parry principle was developed, and even when the Stourbridge
>> vehicles were introduced, the battery technology wasn't available to
>> achieve this.
>
> I suppose not for all use cases. But for the short stourbridge line I imagine
> a milk floats worth of lead acids could cope quite nicely. Not much of an ask
> in a 10 ton vehicle.
>
>> I doubt that Parry will move on from flywheel to battery; the company's
>> sole reason for existence is to promote John Parry's flywheel propulsion
>> ideas.
>
> Sounds like their days are numbered then.
>

They've survived for over 30 years so far trying to push the same idea!

Anna Noyd-Dryver