<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:47:30 +0100
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t1v77q$1nsv$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 15:05:30 on Tue, 29 Mar
>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>
>>>>> Though LT/TfL seem to alternate between small and large windows just as
>>>>> they do with door buttons which as the video points out seem to have
>>>>> made a return. No doubt a new generation of engineers re-inventing the
>>>>> mistakes of the past.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe the requirements are changing, over time, too.
>>>
>>> I don't see how. Its not as if new tunnels have been built or human anatomy
>>> has changed.
>>
>> There's probably more people travelling now (pre-Covid anyway).
>
> ?
>
> TfL decided door buttons were of little utility about 10 years-ish back when
> passenger numbers were high and the 95 stock were refurbed without them.
> Personally I think they were correct so why order trains with door buttons
> again? Just more expense and more to go wrong.

And a way to keep the air con under control when the train is more lightly
loaded.

Sam

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

In message <t1vmia$dtu$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:27:06 on Tue, 29 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 29/03/2022 16:25, Robin wrote:
>>> On 29/03/2022 16:05, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 10:17:53 +0100
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t1ug2j$efu$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 08:30:11 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 08:56:07 +0100
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <t1t6f1$81d$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:39:28 on Mon, 28 Mar
>>>>>>> 2022, NY <me@privacy.invalid> remarked:
>>>>>>>> "Marland" <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:jae8fhF567eU1@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Geoff Marshall reviews the mock up:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCMZqprWIU4
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I *really* don't like the small windows. Its a massive step
>>>>>>>>>> backwards IMO  and
>>>>>>>>>> will make the trains feel claustrophobic even with the walk
>>>>>>>>>> through now
>>>>>>>>>> available .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Most people on the tube seem to be staring at a hand held screen
>>>>>>>>> while they travel nowadays , they probably wouldn’t
>>>>>>>>>even notice if
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> windows had pretty scenes
>>>>>>>>> done in stained glass .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The crucial thing is: can a standing passenger still see the station
>>>>>>>> name on the roundel on the station wall as a train is coming into the
>>>>>>>> station, in case the on-board display is hidden by other passengers,
>>>>>>>> and the train is too noisy to hear the automated voice "We are now
>>>>>>>> arriving at King's Cross" or the passenger is deaf?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's an impressive confluence of edge cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A very plausible one in the rush hour.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stand by the doors if you an irregular user, commuters(sic) will know
>>>>> where they are.
>>>>
>>>> Not always if you're engrossed in a paper/phone/chatting.
>>>>
>>>>>> Though LT/TfL seem to alternate between small and large windows just as
>>>>>> they do with door buttons which as the video points out seem to have
>>>>>> made a return. No doubt a new generation of engineers re-inventing the
>>>>>> mistakes of the past.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe the requirements are changing, over time, too.
>>>>
>>>> I don't see how. Its not as if new tunnels have been built or human
>>>> anatomy
>>>> has changed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Air conditioning is new to the tube.
>>>
>>
>> One thing that I don't understand is how the NT4L address the question
>> of heat dissipation within the tunnel. IIRC, this has always been an
>> issue for tube trains and the main reason why up till now there never
>> was air conditioning.
>>
>> Having said that, I note that the cabs on 95ts have air conditioning.
>
>Including the aircon, these new trains will use significantly less energy
>(ie, produce less heat) than the ones they replace.

The heat people are concerned abut isn't that generated by the train
motors or even the aircon motors, but that which is pumped out by the
aircon as it cools the people, the interior fittings, and the on-train
air. The latter two in particular get "recharged" every time the doors
are open on surface sections of the line, as well as by solar gain on
those sections of line. The former is recharged every time hot and
bothered pax board the train (on all sections of the line).
--
Roland Perry

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:47:30 +0100
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t1v77q$1nsv$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 15:05:30 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>
>>>>>> Though LT/TfL seem to alternate between small and large windows just as
>>>>>> they do with door buttons which as the video points out seem to have
>>>>>> made a return. No doubt a new generation of engineers re-inventing the
>>>>>> mistakes of the past.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe the requirements are changing, over time, too.
>>>>
>>>> I don't see how. Its not as if new tunnels have been built or human anatomy
>>>> has changed.
>>>
>>> There's probably more people travelling now (pre-Covid anyway).
>>
>> ?
>>
>> TfL decided door buttons were of little utility about 10 years-ish back when
>> passenger numbers were high and the 95 stock were refurbed without them.
>> Personally I think they were correct so why order trains with door buttons
>> again? Just more expense and more to go wrong.
>
> And a way to keep the air con under control when the train is more lightly
> loaded.
>

I suspect that, like S Stock IIRC, it'll only get used at termini, or when
the train stands for more than a few minutes at stations. Procedure: train
arrives, all doors open. After a few minutes with nobody passing through,
each set of doors will close itself and the door buttons become active.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:14:08 +0100, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:

>On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 19:53:43 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <t1vjm7$mg3$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:38:00 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> Telegraph can be read free, and you can get sufficient of The Times
>>>> and FT via Google News. But if course only online. If they could adapt
>>>> their business model to accommodate those who want to live mainly
>>>> outside those publications' echo chambers, I'm sure I could find them
>>>> perhaps 1p per article. How you microbill that via a downloaded issue,
>>>> is another technical problem for them to solve.
>>>
>>>Why should a publication want to microbill?
>>
>>In order to get any revenue from one part of its readership at all.
>
>Microbilling has been hailed as the saviour of online publishing since
>the 1990s. In reality, despite several attempts to establish
>microbilling solutions, it hasn't taken off. The main problem, of
>course, is transaction fees, which become more significant as the
>transaction value itself decreases. And there's considerable friction
>involved in setting up an account with potentially multiple microbilling
>providers, since not every publication will use the same one.
>
>In practice, a combination of advertising and subscriptions (and, for
>magazines rather than newspapers, digital sales at edition rather than
>article level) has broved to be the most effective for publishers and
>the most acceptable to consumers. The technical and administrative
>hurdles involved in setting up microbilling as an additional payment
>method aren't justified by the likely returns.

Subscriptions are apparently working for the Times, which is now in the black for the first time. In other words, the
growing subscription revenue exceeds the print cover sales and advertising shrinkage. I think the Economist is similar,
but that was already profitable.

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 11:46:59 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:

>Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:47:30 +0100
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t1v77q$1nsv$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 15:05:30 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Though LT/TfL seem to alternate between small and large windows just as
>>>>>>> they do with door buttons which as the video points out seem to have
>>>>>>> made a return. No doubt a new generation of engineers re-inventing the
>>>>>>> mistakes of the past.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe the requirements are changing, over time, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't see how. Its not as if new tunnels have been built or human anatomy
>>>>> has changed.
>>>>
>>>> There's probably more people travelling now (pre-Covid anyway).
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> TfL decided door buttons were of little utility about 10 years-ish back when
>>> passenger numbers were high and the 95 stock were refurbed without them.
>>> Personally I think they were correct so why order trains with door buttons
>>> again? Just more expense and more to go wrong.
>>
>> And a way to keep the air con under control when the train is more lightly
>> loaded.
>>
>
>I suspect that, like S Stock IIRC, it'll only get used at termini, or when
>the train stands for more than a few minutes at stations. Procedure: train
>arrives, all doors open. After a few minutes with nobody passing through,
>each set of doors will close itself and the door buttons become active.

Yes, I think you're right. It happens quite a bit with Met trains (eg, at driver change locations), and not just at
termini, and I expect the Picc trains will be the same.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:14:08 +0100, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:

>> In practice, a combination of advertising and subscriptions (and, for
>> magazines rather than newspapers, digital sales at edition rather than
>> article level) has broved to be the most effective for publishers and
>> the most acceptable to consumers. The technical and administrative
>> hurdles involved in setting up microbilling as an additional payment
>> method aren't justified by the likely returns.
>
> Subscriptions are apparently working for the Times, which is now in the
> black for the first time. In other words, the
> growing subscription revenue exceeds the print cover sales and
> advertising shrinkage. I think the Economist is similar,
> but that was already profitable.
>

There must be a saving in not having to transport and destroy unsold paper
editions though, I don’t know how that was apportioned between publisher
,wholesaler and retail shop.

GH

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:09:53 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <t1vmia$dtu$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:27:06 on Tue, 29 Mar
>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 29/03/2022 16:25, Robin wrote:
>>>> On 29/03/2022 16:05, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 10:17:53 +0100
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <t1ug2j$efu$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 08:30:11 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>>>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 08:56:07 +0100
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <t1t6f1$81d$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:39:28 on Mon, 28 Mar
>>>>>>>> 2022, NY <me@privacy.invalid> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> "Marland" <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:jae8fhF567eU1@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Geoff Marshall reviews the mock up:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCMZqprWIU4
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I *really* don't like the small windows. Its a massive step
>>>>>>>>>>> backwards IMO  and
>>>>>>>>>>> will make the trains feel claustrophobic even with the walk
>>>>>>>>>>> through now
>>>>>>>>>>> available .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Most people on the tube seem to be staring at a hand held screen
>>>>>>>>>> while they travel nowadays , they probably wouldn’t
>>>>>>>>>>even notice if
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> windows had pretty scenes
>>>>>>>>>> done in stained glass .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The crucial thing is: can a standing passenger still see the station
>>>>>>>>> name on the roundel on the station wall as a train is coming into the
>>>>>>>>> station, in case the on-board display is hidden by other passengers,
>>>>>>>>> and the train is too noisy to hear the automated voice "We are now
>>>>>>>>> arriving at King's Cross" or the passenger is deaf?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's an impressive confluence of edge cases.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A very plausible one in the rush hour.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Stand by the doors if you an irregular user, commuters(sic) will know
>>>>>> where they are.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not always if you're engrossed in a paper/phone/chatting.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Though LT/TfL seem to alternate between small and large windows just as
>>>>>>> they do with door buttons which as the video points out seem to have
>>>>>>> made a return. No doubt a new generation of engineers re-inventing the
>>>>>>> mistakes of the past.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe the requirements are changing, over time, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't see how. Its not as if new tunnels have been built or human
>>>>> anatomy
>>>>> has changed.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Air conditioning is new to the tube.
>>>>
>>>
>>> One thing that I don't understand is how the NT4L address the question
>>> of heat dissipation within the tunnel. IIRC, this has always been an
>>> issue for tube trains and the main reason why up till now there never
>>> was air conditioning.
>>>
>>> Having said that, I note that the cabs on 95ts have air conditioning.
>>
>>Including the aircon, these new trains will use significantly less energy
>>(ie, produce less heat) than the ones they replace.
>
>The heat people are concerned abut isn't that generated by the train
>motors or even the aircon motors, but that which is pumped out by the
>aircon as it cools the people, the interior fittings, and the on-train
>air. The latter two in particular get "recharged" every time the doors
>are open on surface sections of the line, as well as by solar gain on
>those sections of line. The former is recharged every time hot and
>bothered pax board the train (on all sections of the line).

The heat people are concerned about is caused by the energy consumed by the train, which turns into heat in the tunnels.
That will be lower with the new trains, despite the power consumed by the aircon compressors.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 11:46:59 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:47:30 +0100
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t1v77q$1nsv$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 15:05:30 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Though LT/TfL seem to alternate between small and large windows just as
>>>>>>>> they do with door buttons which as the video points out seem to have
>>>>>>>> made a return. No doubt a new generation of engineers re-inventing the
>>>>>>>> mistakes of the past.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe the requirements are changing, over time, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't see how. Its not as if new tunnels have been built or human anatomy
>>>>>> has changed.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's probably more people travelling now (pre-Covid anyway).
>>>>
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> TfL decided door buttons were of little utility about 10 years-ish back when
>>>> passenger numbers were high and the 95 stock were refurbed without them.
>>>> Personally I think they were correct so why order trains with door buttons
>>>> again? Just more expense and more to go wrong.
>>>
>>> And a way to keep the air con under control when the train is more lightly
>>> loaded.
>>>
>>
>> I suspect that, like S Stock IIRC, it'll only get used at termini, or when
>> the train stands for more than a few minutes at stations. Procedure: train
>> arrives, all doors open. After a few minutes with nobody passing through,
>> each set of doors will close itself and the door buttons become active.
>
> Yes, I think you're right. It happens quite a bit with Met trains (eg, at
> driver change locations), and not just at
> termini, and I expect the Picc trains will be the same.

Was it the D stock which had door open buttons but no close buttons and no
timed closing, so at the termini they tended to sit with all the doors open
and the cold wind whistling through?

Sam

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

In message <lg784h9gsg2h8li8epc3jk4ql2ln9jjtgp@4ax.com>, at 10:14:08 on
Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
>On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 19:53:43 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <t1vjm7$mg3$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:38:00 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> Telegraph can be read free, and you can get sufficient of The Times
>>>> and FT via Google News. But if course only online. If they could adapt
>>>> their business model to accommodate those who want to live mainly
>>>> outside those publications' echo chambers, I'm sure I could find them
>>>> perhaps 1p per article. How you microbill that via a downloaded issue,
>>>> is another technical problem for them to solve.
>>>
>>>Why should a publication want to microbill?
>>
>>In order to get any revenue from one part of its readership at all.
>
>Microbilling has been hailed as the saviour of online publishing since
>the 1990s. In reality, despite several attempts to establish
>microbilling solutions, it hasn't taken off. The main problem, of
>course, is transaction fees, which become more significant as the
>transaction value itself decreases. And there's considerable friction
>involved in setting up an account with potentially multiple microbilling
>providers, since not every publication will use the same one.
>
>In practice, a combination of advertising and subscriptions (and, for
>magazines rather than newspapers, digital sales at edition rather than
>article level) has broved to be the most effective for publishers and
>the most acceptable to consumers. The technical and administrative
>hurdles involved in setting up microbilling as an additional payment
>method aren't justified by the likely returns.

I wasn't expecting every page to literally create a credit card bill,
but a consolidation site could gather the data and bill/credit say once
a month, a bit like [I presume] a music download site like Spotify.
--
Roland Perry

In message <h4884h59umv8u1ub8snove204panu7gu11@4ax.com>, at 10:21:44 on
Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
>On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 20:04:12 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <t1vk3i$pnp$3@dont-email.me>, at 18:45:06 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>
>>>You're permitted to have more than one newspaper downloaded to your phone
>>>at once.
>>
>>Permitted yes, but it seems like a huge waste of money to have several
>>subscribed to when you know you only want to read a few articles a day
>>spread across them.
>
>Readly offers an "all you can eat" subscription which allows unlimited
>reading and downloading (subject to storage limits on your device,
>obviously) for a flat monthly fee. If you do read several different
>magazines, that's more cost-effective than individual subscriptions.

For £9.99 that's approaching acceptability (and a lot less than The
Times's £26pm for just one publication).

Like I said, I'll probably give it try one day. But not with almost 100
unread postings in just this one newsgroup.
--
Roland Perry

In message <jaj425F355gU1@mid.individual.net>, at 13:25:25 on Wed, 30
Mar 2022, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> remarked:
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:14:08 +0100, Mark Goodge
>><usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> In practice, a combination of advertising and subscriptions (and, for
>>> magazines rather than newspapers, digital sales at edition rather than
>>> article level) has broved to be the most effective for publishers and
>>> the most acceptable to consumers. The technical and administrative
>>> hurdles involved in setting up microbilling as an additional payment
>>> method aren't justified by the likely returns.
>>
>> Subscriptions are apparently working for the Times, which is now in the
>> black for the first time. In other words, the
>> growing subscription revenue exceeds the print cover sales and
>> advertising shrinkage. I think the Economist is similar,
>> but that was already profitable.
>
>There must be a saving in not having to transport and destroy unsold paper
>editions though, I don’t know how that was apportioned between publisher
>,wholesaler and retail shop.

I think the scheme was sale-or-return, but for magazines at least, the
retailers could just tear off and send back the front covers
--
Roland Perry

In message <t1vl5r$2r1$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:03:23 on Tue, 29 Mar
2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t1vjm7$mg3$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:38:00 on Tue, 29 Mar
>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t1v33a$b4j$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:54:50 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>> Which newspapers are best for downloading and reading offline?
>>>>>
>>>>> Any with an app, such as the Times and Telegraph.
>>>>
>>>> I'm thinking more about the User interface than the content.
>>>>
>>>>>> I have to say my own preference is to read small bits of a dozen
>>>>>> newspapers, rather than most of just one. You get a far more balanced
>>>>>> view.
>>>>>
>>>>> Only if it's free to read. So, no Times, Telegraph or FT.
>>>>
>>>> Telegraph can be read free, and you can get sufficient of The Times
>>>> and FT via Google News. But if course only online. If they could adapt
>>>> their business model to accommodate those who want to live mainly
>>>> outside those publications' echo chambers, I'm sure I could find them
>>>> perhaps 1p per article. How you microbill that via a downloaded issue,
>>>> is another technical problem for them to solve.
>>>
>>> Why should a publication want to microbill?
>>
>> In order to get any revenue from one part of its readership at all.
>>
>>> Just so you can cherry pick and not support the costs of the whole
>>> publication. Decent journalism is expensive.
>>
>> Google news also cherry-picks (or as they prefer to call it "curates") a
>> wide range of media to individuals' needs, and the sky hasn't fallen in.
>
>Have you not seen what has happened to local newspapers?

They've gone down the "flood with clickbait" route. But if you are
reading just one or two articles a day, it's preferable to paying £26pm.

The news-stands in all the local supermarkets have print copies
available, and from time to time I buy one if there's a very relevant
article that I wish to keep. Like the time the front page read (and I
quote verbatim):

100PT SPLASH HEADING HERE <-in 100pt naturally

THIS IS A STRAP OVER TWO DECKS WITH A CROSS REFERENCE TO A /PAGE HERE/

But sometimes there's an article I want for the scrapbook too.

I get more current affairs news from Facebook local groups (where our
newspaper also posts links to articles).
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:00:44 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:47:30 +0100
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t1v77q$1nsv$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 15:05:30 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>
>>>>>> Though LT/TfL seem to alternate between small and large windows just as
>>>>>> they do with door buttons which as the video points out seem to have
>>>>>> made a return. No doubt a new generation of engineers re-inventing the
>>>>>> mistakes of the past.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe the requirements are changing, over time, too.
>>>>
>>>> I don't see how. Its not as if new tunnels have been built or human anatomy
>
>>>> has changed.
>>>
>>> There's probably more people travelling now (pre-Covid anyway).
>>
>> ?
>>
>> TfL decided door buttons were of little utility about 10 years-ish back when
>> passenger numbers were high and the 95 stock were refurbed without them.
>> Personally I think they were correct so why order trains with door buttons
>> again? Just more expense and more to go wrong.
>
>And a way to keep the air con under control when the train is more lightly
>loaded.

Yes, that could be it.

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:31:18 +0100
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:09:53 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>The heat people are concerned abut isn't that generated by the train
>>motors or even the aircon motors, but that which is pumped out by the
>>aircon as it cools the people, the interior fittings, and the on-train
>>air. The latter two in particular get "recharged" every time the doors
>>are open on surface sections of the line, as well as by solar gain on
>>those sections of line. The former is recharged every time hot and
>>bothered pax board the train (on all sections of the line).
>
>The heat people are concerned about is caused by the energy consumed by the
>train, which turns into heat in the tunnels.
>That will be lower with the new trains, despite the power consumed by the
>aircon compressors.

Its all of the above. The human body - give or take depending which source
you read - gives off about 100W of heat when at rest. Times that by 1000 pax
in the rush hour and thats a lot of heat to shift out of the train.

In message <8qm84hd1nht5m160um37d4jhjl2fviochv@4ax.com>, at 14:31:18 on
Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:09:53 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <t1vmia$dtu$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:27:06 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 29/03/2022 16:25, Robin wrote:
>>>>> On 29/03/2022 16:05, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 10:17:53 +0100
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <t1ug2j$efu$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 08:30:11 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>>>>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 08:56:07 +0100
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <t1t6f1$81d$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:39:28 on Mon, 28 Mar
>>>>>>>>> 2022, NY <me@privacy.invalid> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> "Marland" <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:jae8fhF567eU1@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Geoff Marshall reviews the mock up:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCMZqprWIU4
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I *really* don't like the small windows. Its a massive step
>>>>>>>>>>>>backwards IMO  and will make the trains feel
>>>>>>>>>>>>claustrophobic even with the walk through now available .
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Most people on the tube seem to be staring at a hand held
>>>>>>>>>>>screen while they travel nowadays , they probably
>>>>>>>>>>>wouldn’t even notice if the windows had pretty scenes done in stained glass .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The crucial thing is: can a standing passenger still see the station
>>>>>>>>>> name on the roundel on the station wall as a train is coming into the
>>>>>>>>>> station, in case the on-board display is hidden by other passengers,
>>>>>>>>>> and the train is too noisy to hear the automated voice "We are now
>>>>>>>>>> arriving at King's Cross" or the passenger is deaf?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's an impressive confluence of edge cases.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A very plausible one in the rush hour.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Stand by the doors if you an irregular user, commuters(sic) will know
>>>>>>> where they are.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not always if you're engrossed in a paper/phone/chatting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Though LT/TfL seem to alternate between small and large windows just as
>>>>>>>> they do with door buttons which as the video points out seem to have
>>>>>>>> made a return. No doubt a new generation of engineers re-inventing the
>>>>>>>> mistakes of the past.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe the requirements are changing, over time, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't see how. Its not as if new tunnels have been built or
>>>>>>human anatomy has changed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Air conditioning is new to the tube.
>>>>
>>>> One thing that I don't understand is how the NT4L address the question
>>>> of heat dissipation within the tunnel. IIRC, this has always been an
>>>> issue for tube trains and the main reason why up till now there never
>>>> was air conditioning.
>>>>
>>>> Having said that, I note that the cabs on 95ts have air conditioning.
>>>
>>>Including the aircon, these new trains will use significantly less energy
>>>(ie, produce less heat) than the ones they replace.
>>
>>The heat people are concerned abut isn't that generated by the train
>>motors or even the aircon motors, but that which is pumped out by the
>>aircon as it cools the people, the interior fittings, and the on-train
>>air. The latter two in particular get "recharged" every time the doors
>>are open on surface sections of the line, as well as by solar gain on
>>those sections of line. The former is recharged every time hot and
>>bothered pax board the train (on all sections of the line).
>
>The heat people are concerned about is caused by the energy consumed by
>the train, which turns into heat in the tunnels.
>That will be lower with the new trains, despite the power consumed by
>the aircon compressors.

And what of the heat pumped out from the inside of the train?

Wikipedia cites a broken link to the Times for:

"Conventional air conditioning was initially ruled out on the deep lines
because of the lack of space for equipment on trains and the problems of
dispersing the waste heat these would generate. Different systems were
proposed to cool Underground trains, including the use of large blocks
of ice inside the train."

Maybe as a subscriber, you would have better luck getting the fuller
text.
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:49:13 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:

>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:31:18 +0100
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:09:53 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>The heat people are concerned abut isn't that generated by the train
>>>motors or even the aircon motors, but that which is pumped out by the
>>>aircon as it cools the people, the interior fittings, and the on-train
>>>air. The latter two in particular get "recharged" every time the doors
>>>are open on surface sections of the line, as well as by solar gain on
>>>those sections of line. The former is recharged every time hot and
>>>bothered pax board the train (on all sections of the line).
>>
>>The heat people are concerned about is caused by the energy consumed by the
>>train, which turns into heat in the tunnels.
>>That will be lower with the new trains, despite the power consumed by the
>>aircon compressors.
>
>Its all of the above. The human body - give or take depending which source
>you read - gives off about 100W of heat when at rest. Times that by 1000 pax
>in the rush hour and thats a lot of heat to shift out of the train.

Yes, but that's not affected by whether or not the new trains are air-conditioned. Overall, there will still be less
heat to extract from the tunnels than now.

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 16:06:36 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <8qm84hd1nht5m160um37d4jhjl2fviochv@4ax.com>, at 14:31:18 on
>Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:09:53 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>In message <t1vmia$dtu$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:27:06 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 29/03/2022 16:25, Robin wrote:
>>>>>> On 29/03/2022 16:05, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 10:17:53 +0100
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <t1ug2j$efu$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 08:30:11 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>>>>>>> 2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 08:56:07 +0100
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <t1t6f1$81d$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:39:28 on Mon, 28 Mar
>>>>>>>>>> 2022, NY <me@privacy.invalid> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> "Marland" <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:jae8fhF567eU1@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Geoff Marshall reviews the mock up:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCMZqprWIU4
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I *really* don't like the small windows. Its a massive step
>>>>>>>>>>>>>backwards IMO  and will make the trains feel
>>>>>>>>>>>>>claustrophobic even with the walk through now available .
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Most people on the tube seem to be staring at a hand held
>>>>>>>>>>>>screen while they travel nowadays , they probably
>>>>>>>>>>>>wouldn’t even notice if the windows had pretty scenes done in stained glass .
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The crucial thing is: can a standing passenger still see the station
>>>>>>>>>>> name on the roundel on the station wall as a train is coming into the
>>>>>>>>>>> station, in case the on-board display is hidden by other passengers,
>>>>>>>>>>> and the train is too noisy to hear the automated voice "We are now
>>>>>>>>>>> arriving at King's Cross" or the passenger is deaf?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That's an impressive confluence of edge cases.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A very plausible one in the rush hour.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Stand by the doors if you an irregular user, commuters(sic) will know
>>>>>>>> where they are.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not always if you're engrossed in a paper/phone/chatting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Though LT/TfL seem to alternate between small and large windows just as
>>>>>>>>> they do with door buttons which as the video points out seem to have
>>>>>>>>> made a return. No doubt a new generation of engineers re-inventing the
>>>>>>>>> mistakes of the past.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe the requirements are changing, over time, too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't see how. Its not as if new tunnels have been built or
>>>>>>>human anatomy has changed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Air conditioning is new to the tube.
>>>>>
>>>>> One thing that I don't understand is how the NT4L address the question
>>>>> of heat dissipation within the tunnel. IIRC, this has always been an
>>>>> issue for tube trains and the main reason why up till now there never
>>>>> was air conditioning.
>>>>>
>>>>> Having said that, I note that the cabs on 95ts have air conditioning.
>>>>
>>>>Including the aircon, these new trains will use significantly less energy
>>>>(ie, produce less heat) than the ones they replace.
>>>
>>>The heat people are concerned abut isn't that generated by the train
>>>motors or even the aircon motors, but that which is pumped out by the
>>>aircon as it cools the people, the interior fittings, and the on-train
>>>air. The latter two in particular get "recharged" every time the doors
>>>are open on surface sections of the line, as well as by solar gain on
>>>those sections of line. The former is recharged every time hot and
>>>bothered pax board the train (on all sections of the line).
>>
>>The heat people are concerned about is caused by the energy consumed by
>>the train, which turns into heat in the tunnels.
>>That will be lower with the new trains, despite the power consumed by
>>the aircon compressors.
>
>And what of the heat pumped out from the inside of the train?
>
>Wikipedia cites a broken link to the Times for:
>
>"Conventional air conditioning was initially ruled out on the deep lines
>because of the lack of space for equipment on trains and the problems of
>dispersing the waste heat these would generate. Different systems were
>proposed to cool Underground trains, including the use of large blocks
>of ice inside the train."
>
>Maybe as a subscriber, you would have better luck getting the fuller
>text.

I remember those proposals, but nothing came of them. The station tunnels do have more forced ventilation now, which is
obviously essential to disperse the heat. By going for an articulated design, fewer bogies are required, freeing up more
space under the trains, and the trains are lighter, with regen, which saves energy.

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 15:17:10 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <lg784h9gsg2h8li8epc3jk4ql2ln9jjtgp@4ax.com>, at 10:14:08 on
>Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>remarked:

>>Microbilling has been hailed as the saviour of online publishing since
>>the 1990s. In reality, despite several attempts to establish
>>microbilling solutions, it hasn't taken off. The main problem, of
>>course, is transaction fees, which become more significant as the
>>transaction value itself decreases. And there's considerable friction
>>involved in setting up an account with potentially multiple microbilling
>>providers, since not every publication will use the same one.
>>
>>In practice, a combination of advertising and subscriptions (and, for
>>magazines rather than newspapers, digital sales at edition rather than
>>article level) has broved to be the most effective for publishers and
>>the most acceptable to consumers. The technical and administrative
>>hurdles involved in setting up microbilling as an additional payment
>>method aren't justified by the likely returns.
>
>I wasn't expecting every page to literally create a credit card bill,
>but a consolidation site could gather the data and bill/credit say once
>a month, a bit like [I presume] a music download site like Spotify.

Spotify et al don't microbill, though. They charge the consumer a flat
rate subscription for as much music as you can listen to, and then
apportion a percentage of that revenue to record companies according to
their algorithms. There's no PAYG music streaming service that bills you
according to your actual consumption.

The equivalent for digital content you read, rather than listen to, are
the monthly flat rate subscriptions from the likes of Readly.

Mark

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 16:49:53 +0100
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:49:13 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:31:18 +0100
>>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:09:53 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>The heat people are concerned abut isn't that generated by the train
>>>>motors or even the aircon motors, but that which is pumped out by the
>>>>aircon as it cools the people, the interior fittings, and the on-train
>>>>air. The latter two in particular get "recharged" every time the doors
>>>>are open on surface sections of the line, as well as by solar gain on
>>>>those sections of line. The former is recharged every time hot and
>>>>bothered pax board the train (on all sections of the line).
>>>
>>>The heat people are concerned about is caused by the energy consumed by the
>>>train, which turns into heat in the tunnels.
>>>That will be lower with the new trains, despite the power consumed by the
>>>aircon compressors.
>>
>>Its all of the above. The human body - give or take depending which source
>>you read - gives off about 100W of heat when at rest. Times that by 1000 pax
>>in the rush hour and thats a lot of heat to shift out of the train.
>
>Yes, but that's not affected by whether or not the new trains are
>air-conditioned. Overall, there will still be less
>heat to extract from the tunnels than now.

We'll see. TfL promised the regen braking on the 2009 stock would stop the
victoria line getting so hot but it still got pretty toasty down there last
summer probably due to more frequent trains which offset any reduction in
individual train power usage.

In message <5uu84h15ejksqsgbdcea97rr4vgdm4aseb@4ax.com>, at 16:54:28 on
Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 15:17:10 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <lg784h9gsg2h8li8epc3jk4ql2ln9jjtgp@4ax.com>, at 10:14:08 on
>>Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>remarked:
>
>>>Microbilling has been hailed as the saviour of online publishing since
>>>the 1990s. In reality, despite several attempts to establish
>>>microbilling solutions, it hasn't taken off. The main problem, of
>>>course, is transaction fees, which become more significant as the
>>>transaction value itself decreases. And there's considerable friction
>>>involved in setting up an account with potentially multiple microbilling
>>>providers, since not every publication will use the same one.
>>>
>>>In practice, a combination of advertising and subscriptions (and, for
>>>magazines rather than newspapers, digital sales at edition rather than
>>>article level) has broved to be the most effective for publishers and
>>>the most acceptable to consumers. The technical and administrative
>>>hurdles involved in setting up microbilling as an additional payment
>>>method aren't justified by the likely returns.
>>
>>I wasn't expecting every page to literally create a credit card bill,
>>but a consolidation site could gather the data and bill/credit say once
>>a month, a bit like [I presume] a music download site like Spotify.
>
>Spotify et al don't microbill, though. They charge the consumer a flat
>rate subscription

I knew there must have been a reason I never signed up.

>for as much music as you can listen to, and then
>apportion a percentage of that revenue to record companies according to
>their algorithms.

That's half the problem solved then - sharing the proceeds out. Should
be simple to count which newspaper articles are being read.

Aren't we drifting a bit off-topic of "railways", here?
--
Roland Perry

In message <cvu84h1tot1seu9i2iobj527m8vpe88fk6@4ax.com>, at 16:49:53 on
Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:49:13 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:31:18 +0100
>>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:09:53 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>The heat people are concerned abut isn't that generated by the train
>>>>motors or even the aircon motors, but that which is pumped out by the
>>>>aircon as it cools the people, the interior fittings, and the on-train
>>>>air. The latter two in particular get "recharged" every time the doors
>>>>are open on surface sections of the line, as well as by solar gain on
>>>>those sections of line. The former is recharged every time hot and
>>>>bothered pax board the train (on all sections of the line).
>>>
>>>The heat people are concerned about is caused by the energy consumed by the
>>>train, which turns into heat in the tunnels.
>>>That will be lower with the new trains, despite the power consumed by the
>>>aircon compressors.
>>
>>Its all of the above. The human body - give or take depending which source
>>you read - gives off about 100W of heat when at rest. Times that by 1000 pax
>>in the rush hour and thats a lot of heat to shift out of the train.
>
>Yes, but that's not affected by whether or not the new trains are
>air-conditioned.

How does the heat get from the bodies to the air in the tunnels if
there's no aircon?

>Overall, there will still be less heat to extract from the tunnels than
>now.

That is a possibility. But it's also reported that current levels of
waste heat are significant issue.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t1v84h9ptb8p1ckhakmm7milqbichufdoo@4ax.com>, at 16:53:20 on
Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>>>>>>> Air conditioning is new to the tube.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One thing that I don't understand is how the NT4L address the question
>>>>>> of heat dissipation within the tunnel. IIRC, this has always been an
>>>>>> issue for tube trains and the main reason why up till now there never
>>>>>> was air conditioning.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Having said that, I note that the cabs on 95ts have air conditioning.
>>>>>
>>>>>Including the aircon, these new trains will use significantly less energy
>>>>>(ie, produce less heat) than the ones they replace.
>>>>
>>>>The heat people are concerned abut isn't that generated by the train
>>>>motors or even the aircon motors, but that which is pumped out by the
>>>>aircon as it cools the people, the interior fittings, and the on-train
>>>>air. The latter two in particular get "recharged" every time the doors
>>>>are open on surface sections of the line, as well as by solar gain on
>>>>those sections of line. The former is recharged every time hot and
>>>>bothered pax board the train (on all sections of the line).
>>>
>>>The heat people are concerned about is caused by the energy consumed by
>>>the train, which turns into heat in the tunnels.
>>>That will be lower with the new trains, despite the power consumed by
>>>the aircon compressors.
>>
>>And what of the heat pumped out from the inside of the train?
>>
>>Wikipedia cites a broken link to the Times for:
>>
>>"Conventional air conditioning was initially ruled out on the deep lines
>>because of the lack of space for equipment on trains and the problems of
>>dispersing the waste heat these would generate. Different systems were
>>proposed to cool Underground trains, including the use of large blocks
>>of ice inside the train."
>>
>>Maybe as a subscriber, you would have better luck getting the fuller
>>text.
>
>I remember those proposals, but nothing came of them.

And the tunnels kept on heating up. Just because they didn't implement a
particular rather wacky cooling system doesn't detract from that.

--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 17:21:48 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

> In message <cvu84h1tot1seu9i2iobj527m8vpe88fk6@4ax.com>, at 16:49:53 on
> Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:49:13 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:31:18 +0100 Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:09:53 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>>The heat people are concerned abut isn't that generated by the train
>>>>>motors or even the aircon motors, but that which is pumped out by the
>>>>>aircon as it cools the people, the interior fittings, and the
>>>>>on-train air. The latter two in particular get "recharged" every time
>>>>>the doors are open on surface sections of the line, as well as by
>>>>>solar gain on those sections of line. The former is recharged every
>>>>>time hot and bothered pax board the train (on all sections of the
>>>>>line).
>>>>
>>>>The heat people are concerned about is caused by the energy consumed
>>>>by the train, which turns into heat in the tunnels.
>>>>That will be lower with the new trains, despite the power consumed by
>>>>the aircon compressors.
>>>
>>>Its all of the above. The human body - give or take depending which
>>>source you read - gives off about 100W of heat when at rest. Times that
>>>by 1000 pax in the rush hour and thats a lot of heat to shift out of
>>>the train.
>>
>>Yes, but that's not affected by whether or not the new trains are
>>air-conditioned.
>
> How does the heat get from the bodies to the air in the tunnels if
> there's no aircon?

Presumably through the end-car ventilation windows and any other
ventilation path - the same heat flows. It flows out naturally at high
temperature rather than being pushed against a temperature gradient by
the refrigeration equipment (which of course adds a bit more of its own).

nib

>
>>Overall, there will still be less heat to extract from the tunnels than
>>now.
>
> That is a possibility. But it's also reported that current levels of
> waste heat are significant issue.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:14:08 +0100, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 19:53:43 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <t1vjm7$mg3$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:38:00 on Tue, 29 Mar
>>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Telegraph can be read free, and you can get sufficient of The Times
>>>>> and FT via Google News. But if course only online. If they could adapt
>>>>> their business model to accommodate those who want to live mainly
>>>>> outside those publications' echo chambers, I'm sure I could find them
>>>>> perhaps 1p per article. How you microbill that via a downloaded issue,
>>>>> is another technical problem for them to solve.
>>>>
>>>> Why should a publication want to microbill?
>>>
>>> In order to get any revenue from one part of its readership at all.
>>
>> Microbilling has been hailed as the saviour of online publishing since
>> the 1990s. In reality, despite several attempts to establish
>> microbilling solutions, it hasn't taken off. The main problem, of
>> course, is transaction fees, which become more significant as the
>> transaction value itself decreases. And there's considerable friction
>> involved in setting up an account with potentially multiple microbilling
>> providers, since not every publication will use the same one.
>>
>> In practice, a combination of advertising and subscriptions (and, for
>> magazines rather than newspapers, digital sales at edition rather than
>> article level) has broved to be the most effective for publishers and
>> the most acceptable to consumers. The technical and administrative
>> hurdles involved in setting up microbilling as an additional payment
>> method aren't justified by the likely returns.
>
> Subscriptions are apparently working for the Times, which is now in the
> black for the first time. In other words, the
> growing subscription revenue exceeds the print cover sales and
> advertising shrinkage. I think the Economist is similar,
> but that was already profitable.
>

The Times claims 380,000 paying digital subscribers and the FT over a
million (over half outside UK). I don’t think either publication needs
cherry picking low paying micro payers.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:49:13 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:31:18 +0100
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:09:53 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> The heat people are concerned abut isn't that generated by the train
>>>> motors or even the aircon motors, but that which is pumped out by the
>>>> aircon as it cools the people, the interior fittings, and the on-train
>>>> air. The latter two in particular get "recharged" every time the doors
>>>> are open on surface sections of the line, as well as by solar gain on
>>>> those sections of line. The former is recharged every time hot and
>>>> bothered pax board the train (on all sections of the line).
>>>
>>> The heat people are concerned about is caused by the energy consumed by the
>>> train, which turns into heat in the tunnels.
>>> That will be lower with the new trains, despite the power consumed by the
>>> aircon compressors.
>>
>> Its all of the above. The human body - give or take depending which source
>> you read - gives off about 100W of heat when at rest. Times that by 1000 pax
>> in the rush hour and thats a lot of heat to shift out of the train.
>
> Yes, but that's not affected by whether or not the new trains are
> air-conditioned. Overall, there will still be less
> heat to extract from the tunnels than now.
>

The heat generated by the humans is in the system regardless. The only
delta is the energy required by the air con heat pump to move it from
inside the train to the tunnel.