In message <t2211b$iug$2@dont-email.me>, at 16:38:03 on Wed, 30 Mar
2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>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

Some will escape that way, but a great deal more will leave the carriage
if assisted by aircon. That's the whole point of having it.

>>>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

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 15:18:42 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>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
>
It used to vary by publication. SOR glossy/monthly magazines usually
went back whole while SOR newspapers tended to involve tearing off the
banner from the front page.

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 17:57:18 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

> In message <t2211b$iug$2@dont-email.me>, at 16:38:03 on Wed, 30 Mar
> 2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>>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
>
> Some will escape that way, but a great deal more will leave the carriage
> if assisted by aircon. That's the whole point of having it.

The temperature doesn't continue to go up without limit, the heat still
gets out.

The point of air-con is to maintain a lower temperature inside while
still getting the heat out.

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.
>>

In message <n3494h54tqljmkp180n5cd91v2q6m3tkcd@4ax.com>, at 18:19:49 on
Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
remarked:
>>>>> 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
>>
>It used to vary by publication. SOR glossy/monthly magazines usually
>went back whole while SOR newspapers tended to involve tearing off the
>banner from the front page.

This is getting a bit off-topic for railways, but when I was on the
fringe of the magazine publishing/distribution business (we had close
links with both Future and Dennis) I'm sure it was just the front
covers.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t221tb$v8u$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:52:59 on Wed, 30 Mar
2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:14:08 +0100, Mark Goodge
>><usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 19:53:43 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <t1vjm7$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.

Wow, they've got a penetration of 0.75% of the adult population. They've
got quite a big untapped market there.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t223kn$iug$3@dont-email.me>, at 17:22:31 on Wed, 30 Mar
2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 17:57:18 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> In message <t2211b$iug$2@dont-email.me>, at 16:38:03 on Wed, 30 Mar
>> 2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>>>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
>>
>> Some will escape that way, but a great deal more will leave the carriage
>> if assisted by aircon. That's the whole point of having it.
>
>The temperature doesn't continue to go up without limit, the heat still
>gets out.
>
>The point of air-con is to maintain a lower temperature inside while
>still getting the heat out.

I have serious issues with the physics of those propositions. There's no
particular reason why the ventilation forced by the passage of the train
will reach equilibrium at an acceptable temperature inside.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t2225v$1ti$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:57:35 on Wed, 30 Mar
2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>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.

The non-airconditioned train will heat up while in the tunnelled
sections, possibly very uncomfortably so, and cool off later while out
on surface sections (especially when doors are open). Rinse and repeat.
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 19:28:21 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <n3494h54tqljmkp180n5cd91v2q6m3tkcd@4ax.com>, at 18:19:49 on
>Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>remarked:
>>>>>> 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
>>>
>>It used to vary by publication. SOR glossy/monthly magazines usually
>>went back whole while SOR newspapers tended to involve tearing off the
>>banner from the front page.
>
>This is getting a bit off-topic for railways, but when I was on the
>fringe of the magazine publishing/distribution business (we had close
>links with both Future and Dennis) I'm sure it was just the front
>covers.
>
It certainly seems feasible where the nature of the publication makes
fraud unlikely or not regarded as worth worrying about. When
distributors started with just returning the banner, the main
anti-fraud measure seemed to be the requirement that the banners were
collected on the following morning by the van delivering the next
day's papers.

On 30/03/2022 19:28, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <n3494h54tqljmkp180n5cd91v2q6m3tkcd@4ax.com>, at 18:19:49 on
> Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> remarked:
>>>>>> 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
>>>
>> It used to vary by publication. SOR glossy/monthly magazines usually
>> went back whole while SOR newspapers tended to involve tearing off the
>> banner from the front page.
>
> This is getting a bit off-topic for railways, but when I was on the
> fringe of the magazine publishing/distribution business (we had close
> links with both Future and Dennis) I'm sure it was just the front covers.

It was certainly covers-only for some magazines in the 1970s. I
remember reading the information for retailers inside the cover of my
father's monthlies and considering it odd. I'd love to bring us back
on topic here but the only title I recall is Everyday Electronics.

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 17:20:00 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <5uu84h15ejksqsgbdcea97rr4vgdm4aseb@4ax.com>, at 16:54:28 on
>Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>remarked:

>>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.

That is, broadly, how Readly does it.

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

Replace "The Times" and "The FT" with "Rail" and "Heritage Railway" and
the arguments remain the same.

Mark

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> 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.
>

Yes, that could well be the case. I think those tunnels have been steadily
warming up, too, which doesn't help.

There's no money for the much-needed Piccadilly resignalling, so there may
not be the hoped-for increase in frequency.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t2225v$1ti$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:57:35 on Wed, 30 Mar
> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> 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.
>
> The non-airconditioned train will heat up while in the tunnelled
> sections, possibly very uncomfortably so, and cool off later while out
> on surface sections (especially when doors are open). Rinse and repeat.

You seem to forget that the trains stop in stations every couple of minutes
and open all the doors (three or four per carriage). The hot, humid air in
a non-airconditioned train will largely discharge into the station platform
tunnels. The trains also have ventilation fans, so the air won't just keep
heating up between stations.

As you proceed through a long tunnel, the trains don't just keep heating
up. They quickly get (unpleasantly) warm, and stay that way. The occasional
well-ventilated station helps control the temperature. LU has used various
means to keep underground station temperatures under control.

All that airconditioning will do is to cool and dry the air in the
passenger saloons, by pumping some heat out into the tunnels.

In message <t22ged$jtn$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:01:01 on Wed, 30 Mar
2022, Certes <none@nowhere.net> remarked:
>On 30/03/2022 19:28, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <n3494h54tqljmkp180n5cd91v2q6m3tkcd@4ax.com>, at 18:19:49
>>on Wed, 30 Mar 2022, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>>remarked:
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>> It used to vary by publication. SOR glossy/monthly magazines usually
>>> went back whole while SOR newspapers tended to involve tearing off the
>>> banner from the front page.

>> This is getting a bit off-topic for railways, but when I was [last]
>> on the fringe of the magazine publishing/distribution business (we
>> had close links with both Future and Dennis) I'm sure it was just
>> the front covers.

That was the 90's

>It was certainly covers-only for some magazines in the 1970s. I
>remember reading the information for retailers inside the cover of my
>father's monthlies and considering it odd. I'd love to bring us back
>on topic here but the only title I recall is Everyday Electronics.

I authored a couple of cover projects for Wireless World in the mid 70's
and by the early 80's the company I was working for wasn't just placing
articles, but had taken on editing and publishing Radio and Electronics
World.

The only railway connection I can think of is that Eastern Region were
directly responsible for me buying my first car during that first era. I
used to happily commute to work in the rush hour and there were plenty
of trains, but my homeward journey mid-evening was frustrated by long
waits for connections, so I bailed out.

Although during the second era, I did need to visit Manchester and had a
ride on the Pullman from Euston.

Railway stations were a good place to buy magazines, and to some extent
still are. Nowadays I pick up a copy of Private Eye to read on the train
every now and again. Ian Hislop is a train fan.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t22hoh$unq$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:23:29 on Wed, 30 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>As you proceed through a long tunnel, the trains don't just keep heating
>up. They quickly get (unpleasantly) warm, and stay that way.
....
>All that airconditioning will do is to cool and dry the air in the
>passenger saloons, by pumping some heat out into the tunnels.

And that's job done for the unpleasantly warm passengers.
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 21:23:29 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> The non-airconditioned train will heat up while in the tunnelled
>> sections, possibly very uncomfortably so, and cool off later while out
>> on surface sections (especially when doors are open). Rinse and repeat.
>
>You seem to forget that the trains stop in stations every couple of minutes
>and open all the doors (three or four per carriage). The hot, humid air in
>a non-airconditioned train will largely discharge into the station platform

If only. Unless there's a decent movement of air and there arn't many people
in the train then the air inside pretty much stays there in the 20 secs or
so the doors are open.

>tunnels. The trains also have ventilation fans, so the air won't just keep
>heating up between stations.

Unless you design a cooling system like in the 92 stock which seemed to draw
in air from low down so dragging in all the heat from the equipment and motors.
Genius.

On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 08:24:27 +0000, Muttley wrote:

....

> If only. Unless there's a decent movement of air and there arn't many
> people in the train then the air inside pretty much stays there in the
> 20 secs or so the doors are open.
>
....

But I think there must be air changing. Apart from the cooling aspect
there is the matter of ensuring breathable air. Not sure of guessing, but
a few figures from Googling suggest that say 100 people rammed into a
tube carriage won't have to wait long before the CO2 levels become
elevated, less than an hour to levels that might be fatal. That this
doesn't happen might suggest that the air inside does exchange with the
tunnel/station air?

What part of it is through the doors I wonder, rather than through other
paths?

nib

nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 08:24:27 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> If only. Unless there's a decent movement of air and there arn't many
>> people in the train then the air inside pretty much stays there in the
>> 20 secs or so the doors are open.
>>
> ...
>
> But I think there must be air changing. Apart from the cooling aspect
> there is the matter of ensuring breathable air. Not sure of guessing, but
> a few figures from Googling suggest that say 100 people rammed into a
> tube carriage won't have to wait long before the CO2 levels become
> elevated, less than an hour to levels that might be fatal. That this
> doesn't happen might suggest that the air inside does exchange with the
> tunnel/station air?
>
> What part of it is through the doors I wonder, rather than through other
> paths?
>

I'm sure the ventilation must be strong enough that even if a packed Tube
train gets stranded in a tunnel for an extended period, the passengers
don't suffocate. They may get hot and bothered, but nobody suffers from CO2
poisoning.

Tube train doorways extend well into the roofs of the carriages, so hot air
from the carriages will naturally rise out of the train in stations.

In message <t23utr$lku$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:14:19 on Thu, 31 Mar
2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 08:24:27 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>
>...
>
>> If only. Unless there's a decent movement of air and there arn't many
>> people in the train then the air inside pretty much stays there in the
>> 20 secs or so the doors are open.
>>
>...
>
>But I think there must be air changing. Apart from the cooling aspect
>there is the matter of ensuring breathable air.

No-one denies the air is flowing/changing to some limited extent.
However adding aircon makes it change much more often (as well as the
input air being cool rather than hot). That's the whole point.

>Not sure of guessing, but
>a few figures from Googling suggest that say 100 people rammed into a
>tube carriage won't have to wait long before the CO2 levels become
>elevated, less than an hour to levels that might be fatal. That this
>doesn't happen might suggest that the air inside does exchange with the
>tunnel/station air?
>
>What part of it is through the doors I wonder, rather than through other
>paths?
>
>nib

--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 12:48:31 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

> In message <t23utr$lku$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:14:19 on Thu, 31 Mar
> 2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 08:24:27 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>>
>>...
>>
>>> If only. Unless there's a decent movement of air and there arn't many
>>> people in the train then the air inside pretty much stays there in the
>>> 20 secs or so the doors are open.
>>>
>>...
>>
>>But I think there must be air changing. Apart from the cooling aspect
>>there is the matter of ensuring breathable air.
>
> No-one denies the air is flowing/changing to some limited extent.
> However adding aircon makes it change much more often (as well as the
> input air being cool rather than hot). That's the whole point.

If the air is changing fast enough to keep the air fresh then it is
changing several times per hour. More than enough to take the heat out as
well. The air-con doesn't need to change the refresh rate, just cool the
fresh air coming in.

nib

>>Not sure of guessing, but a few figures from Googling suggest that say
>>100 people rammed into a tube carriage won't have to wait long before
>>the CO2 levels become elevated, less than an hour to levels that might
>>be fatal. That this doesn't happen might suggest that the air inside
>>does exchange with the tunnel/station air?
>>
>>What part of it is through the doors I wonder, rather than through other
>>paths?
>>
>>nib

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t23utr$lku$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:14:19 on Thu, 31 Mar
> 2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 08:24:27 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> If only. Unless there's a decent movement of air and there arn't many
>>> people in the train then the air inside pretty much stays there in the
>>> 20 secs or so the doors are open.
>>>
>> ...
>>
>> But I think there must be air changing. Apart from the cooling aspect
>> there is the matter of ensuring breathable air.
>
> No-one denies the air is flowing/changing to some limited extent.
> However adding aircon makes it change much more often (as well as the
> input air being cool rather than hot). That's the whole point.
>

Actually, with aircon, the air will probably be changed *less often* than
with simple pressure ventilation.

nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 12:48:31 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> In message <t23utr$lku$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:14:19 on Thu, 31 Mar
>> 2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 08:24:27 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> If only. Unless there's a decent movement of air and there arn't many
>>>> people in the train then the air inside pretty much stays there in the
>>>> 20 secs or so the doors are open.
>>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> But I think there must be air changing. Apart from the cooling aspect
>>> there is the matter of ensuring breathable air.
>>
>> No-one denies the air is flowing/changing to some limited extent.
>> However adding aircon makes it change much more often (as well as the
>> input air being cool rather than hot). That's the whole point.
>
> If the air is changing fast enough to keep the air fresh then it is
> changing several times per hour. More than enough to take the heat out as
> well. The air-con doesn't need to change the refresh rate, just cool the
> fresh air coming in.
>

The aircon can reduce the refresh rate, because the cooled, dried air will
extract the passengers' body heat much more efficiently than ambient air.
So less is needed.

Also, people are much more likely to complain of drafts if cold air is
being blasted at them.

In message <t244v0$lku$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:57:20 on Thu, 31 Mar
2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 12:48:31 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> In message <t23utr$lku$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:14:19 on Thu, 31 Mar
>> 2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 08:24:27 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>>>
>>>...
>>>
>>>> If only. Unless there's a decent movement of air and there arn't many
>>>> people in the train then the air inside pretty much stays there in the
>>>> 20 secs or so the doors are open.
>>>>
>>>...
>>>
>>>But I think there must be air changing. Apart from the cooling aspect
>>>there is the matter of ensuring breathable air.
>>
>> No-one denies the air is flowing/changing to some limited extent.
>> However adding aircon makes it change much more often (as well as the
>> input air being cool rather than hot). That's the whole point.
>
>If the air is changing fast enough to keep the air fresh then it is
>changing several times per hour. More than enough to take the heat out as
>well.

It's not taking enough of the heat out, therefore the carriages are hot
and sweaty.

>The air-con doesn't need to change the refresh rate, just cool the
>fresh air coming in.

It's not fresh air, of course - it's hot, stale, air inside the tunnels.

--
Roland Perry

In message <t24581$b7s$2@dont-email.me>, at 12:02:09 on Thu, 31 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t23utr$lku$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:14:19 on Thu, 31 Mar
>> 2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 08:24:27 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> If only. Unless there's a decent movement of air and there arn't many
>>>> people in the train then the air inside pretty much stays there in the
>>>> 20 secs or so the doors are open.
>>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> But I think there must be air changing. Apart from the cooling aspect
>>> there is the matter of ensuring breathable air.
>>
>> No-one denies the air is flowing/changing to some limited extent.
>> However adding aircon makes it change much more often (as well as the
>> input air being cool rather than hot). That's the whole point.
>
>Actually, with aircon, the air will probably be changed *less often* than
>with simple pressure ventilation.

I'm not so sure about that, but the overall effect means the passengers
are more comfortable, so job done.
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 12:02:09 +0000, Recliner wrote:

> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t23utr$lku$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:14:19 on Thu, 31 Mar
>> 2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 08:24:27 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> If only. Unless there's a decent movement of air and there arn't many
>>>> people in the train then the air inside pretty much stays there in
>>>> the 20 secs or so the doors are open.
>>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> But I think there must be air changing. Apart from the cooling aspect
>>> there is the matter of ensuring breathable air.
>>
>> No-one denies the air is flowing/changing to some limited extent.
>> However adding aircon makes it change much more often (as well as the
>> input air being cool rather than hot). That's the whole point.
>>
>>
> Actually, with aircon, the air will probably be changed *less often*
> than with simple pressure ventilation.

OK, some numbers to play with. Basis: a person breathes out 400 mL/min of
CO2; a tube train is about 17x3x2 m so 100 m^2 volume; crush loading is
about 120 per carriage; background CO2 is about 350 ppm (0.035%); fatal
CO2 is about 8%; poor air quality is about 0.15%.

So our stuffed carriage will be adding 48 litres of CO2 per minute, which
in 100 m^3 will be increasing the CO2 concentration by 0.048% per minute.

That gives fatal levels in about 2.7 hours.

An FOI request I saw from measurements on running Vic line trains in a
busy period showed CO2 varying with an average of 0.1% and a peak of
0.22%. To get to that 0.22% from background level would take nearly 4
minutes. So if the levels are kept below that we can assume that the
ventilation is doing a complete change of air at least every 4 minutes;
or 15 changes per hour.

The recommendation for trains is 6 to 8 changes per hour, but another FOI
answer I found, actually about Covid, said that Tube trains have a higher
rate than this of 20 changes per hour.

So quesswork scribbling and that datum seem to confirm than the air in
the tube carriage is changed completely about every 3 or 4 minutes.

Any obvious errors?

nib

On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 13:25:47 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

> In message <t244v0$lku$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:57:20 on Thu, 31 Mar
> 2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 12:48:31 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> In message <t23utr$lku$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:14:19 on Thu, 31 Mar
>>> 2022, nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 08:24:27 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>>>>
>>>>...
>>>>
>>>>> If only. Unless there's a decent movement of air and there arn't
>>>>> many people in the train then the air inside pretty much stays there
>>>>> in the 20 secs or so the doors are open.
>>>>>
>>>>...
>>>>
>>>>But I think there must be air changing. Apart from the cooling aspect
>>>>there is the matter of ensuring breathable air.
>>>
>>> No-one denies the air is flowing/changing to some limited extent.
>>> However adding aircon makes it change much more often (as well as the
>>> input air being cool rather than hot). That's the whole point.
>>
>>If the air is changing fast enough to keep the air fresh then it is
>>changing several times per hour. More than enough to take the heat out
>>as well.
>
> It's not taking enough of the heat out, therefore the carriages are hot
> and sweaty.

Don't confuse heat (flow) and temperature. It is taking the heat out. It
just needs a higher source temperature to drive it.
>>The air-con doesn't need to change the refresh rate, just cool the fresh
>>air coming in.
>
> It's not fresh air, of course - it's hot, stale, air inside the tunnels.

It's fresh in that it's not full of CO2! The air in the tunnel is
ultimately refreshed via deliberate flow, mostly forced in at stations
and out at ventilation shafts (I think, with the trains pushing it
around).

nib