<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:08:46 +0200
> Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 24.07.23 17:37, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200
>>> Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone is
>>>>> familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>>
>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>>>> other arrangement.
>>>
>>> Which is why they're generally called bendy buses
>>
>> By whom? Certainly nobody in the transportation industry
>>
>>> not articulated buses.
>>
>> Google produces 12.7 million hits for "articulated bus" and 8.7 million
>> hits for "bendy bus".
>>
>>> Its a bus pulling (or being pushed by) a trailer.
>>
>> A bus trailer is something different entirely, for example [1]. An
>> articulated bus can not be separated into parts that can function
>> independently from one another. A bus trailer can be detatched and the
>> bus operate on its own without the trailer.
>
> Take away the flexible cover between the 2 parts of a bendy bus and you'll
> find its just a posh trailer.

It's still an articulated bus; 'bendy' is just one of several colloquial
names for them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_bus

On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:16:41 +0000, Muttley wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:08:46 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>On 24.07.23 17:37, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone
>>>>> is familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>>
>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with
>>>> any other arrangement.
>>>
>>> Which is why they're generally called bendy buses
>>
>>By whom? Certainly nobody in the transportation industry
>>
>>> not articulated buses.
>>
>>Google produces 12.7 million hits for "articulated bus" and 8.7 million
>>hits for "bendy bus".
>>
>>> Its a bus pulling (or being pushed by) a trailer.
>>
>>A bus trailer is something different entirely, for example [1]. An
>>articulated bus can not be separated into parts that can function
>>independently from one another. A bus trailer can be detatched and the
>>bus operate on its own without the trailer.
>
> Take away the flexible cover between the 2 parts of a bendy bus and
> you'll find its just a posh trailer.

To me, non-expert (but with a dictionary), articulated means made up of
parts hinged together, as in bones.

So an articulated lorry is one that hinges in the middle, unlike most
lorries that don't.

And a articulated bus is also one that has parts hinged, as most don't.
One single bus that bends in the middle.

For a train it's not so obvious, but presumably a normal train is a
series of separate carriages whereas an articulated one is more like a
single long carriage that bends in places.

nib

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:08:46 +0200
> Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 24.07.23 17:37, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200
>>> Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone is
>>>>> familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>>
>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>>>> other arrangement.
>>>
>>> Which is why they're generally called bendy buses
>>
>> By whom? Certainly nobody in the transportation industry
>>
>>> not articulated buses.
>>
>> Google produces 12.7 million hits for "articulated bus" and 8.7 million
>> hits for "bendy bus".
>>
>>> Its a bus pulling (or being pushed by) a trailer.
>>
>> A bus trailer is something different entirely, for example [1]. An
>> articulated bus can not be separated into parts that can function
>> independently from one another. A bus trailer can be detatched and the
>> bus operate on its own without the trailer.
>
> Take away the flexible cover between the 2 parts of a bendy bus and you'll
> find its just a posh trailer.

I can’t find any definition of “trailer” which allows for the engine to be
in the rear part, which is true of many bendy buses.

Sam

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

On 24.07.23 18:16, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:08:46 +0200
> Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 24.07.23 17:37, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200
>>> Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone is
>>>>> familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>>
>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>>>> other arrangement.
>>>
>>> Which is why they're generally called bendy buses
>>
>> By whom? Certainly nobody in the transportation industry
>>
>>> not articulated buses.
>>
>> Google produces 12.7 million hits for "articulated bus" and 8.7 million
>> hits for "bendy bus".
>>
>>> Its a bus pulling (or being pushed by) a trailer.
>>
>> A bus trailer is something different entirely, for example [1]. An
>> articulated bus can not be separated into parts that can function
>> independently from one another. A bus trailer can be detatched and the
>> bus operate on its own without the trailer.
>
> Take away the flexible cover between the 2 parts of a bendy bus and you'll
> find its just a posh trailer.

If you take away the flexible cover you will find an unpowered 2 axle
segment with a driver and all of the driving controls, and a 1 axle
segment supported from the 2 axle segment with the engine and
transmission. Neither portion is a complete vehicle without the other,
it is a single integrated whole.

Robin

On 24/07/2023 17:19, Sam Wilson wrote:
> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 12:52:44 +0100
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>>>> other arrangement.
>>>
>>> Cue for Neil to tell us that they're not really articulated.
>>
>> Got it in one.
>
> So please can you tell us your unambiguous definition of “articulated” -
> different definitions as applied to road and rail vehicles if necessary.
> Thank you.
>

Is he articulate enough to tell the difference?

<I'll get my coat>

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:16:41 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:08:46 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>> On 24.07.23 17:37, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone
>>>>>> is familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>>>
>>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with
>>>>> any other arrangement.
>>>>
>>>> Which is why they're generally called bendy buses
>>>
>>> By whom? Certainly nobody in the transportation industry
>>>
>>>> not articulated buses.
>>>
>>> Google produces 12.7 million hits for "articulated bus" and 8.7 million
>>> hits for "bendy bus".
>>>
>>>> Its a bus pulling (or being pushed by) a trailer.
>>>
>>> A bus trailer is something different entirely, for example [1]. An
>>> articulated bus can not be separated into parts that can function
>>> independently from one another. A bus trailer can be detatched and the
>>> bus operate on its own without the trailer.
>>
>> Take away the flexible cover between the 2 parts of a bendy bus and
>> you'll find its just a posh trailer.
>
> To me, non-expert (but with a dictionary), articulated means made up of
> parts hinged together, as in bones.
>
> So an articulated lorry is one that hinges in the middle, unlike most
> lorries that don't.
>
> And a articulated bus is also one that has parts hinged, as most don't.
> One single bus that bends in the middle.
>
> For a train it's not so obvious, but presumably a normal train is a
> series of separate carriages whereas an articulated one is more like a
> single long carriage that bends in places.

Yes. In particular, sections in articulated trains share wheels, so can't
be uncoupled except in a suitably equipped depot that can support uncoupled
sections on jacks.

In some cases, the two sections are pivoted together, with one supported by
the track wheels, and then supporting the other; in others they are
separately supported on a shared bogie with two pivots (a Jacob's bogie).

Jacob's bogies are simple, but aren't good for powered axles or low floors.
That's why they're seldom used in low floor, multi-section vehicles that
need powered axles along the train (eg, low floor trams). Despite Neil's
uninformed rants, they wouldn't be right for LU Tube trains that need
articulation with low floors and powered axles.

I had expected a different arrangement, with each carriage having one power
bogie (not Jacob's). It would support the adjacent section with a pivot on
the overhang. It, in turn, would be supported by the adjacent section at
the other end. There would still be nine sections and 10 bogies. I assume
the chosen arrangement provides more space for the aircon packs.

On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 21:31:13 +0000, Recliner wrote:

> nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:16:41 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:08:46 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 24.07.23 17:37, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where
>>>>>>> everyone is familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from
>>>>>> the rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus
>>>>>> with any other arrangement.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which is why they're generally called bendy buses
>>>>
>>>> By whom? Certainly nobody in the transportation industry
>>>>
>>>>> not articulated buses.
>>>>
>>>> Google produces 12.7 million hits for "articulated bus" and 8.7
>>>> million hits for "bendy bus".
>>>>
>>>>> Its a bus pulling (or being pushed by) a trailer.
>>>>
>>>> A bus trailer is something different entirely, for example [1]. An
>>>> articulated bus can not be separated into parts that can function
>>>> independently from one another. A bus trailer can be detatched and
>>>> the bus operate on its own without the trailer.
>>>
>>> Take away the flexible cover between the 2 parts of a bendy bus and
>>> you'll find its just a posh trailer.
>>
>> To me, non-expert (but with a dictionary), articulated means made up of
>> parts hinged together, as in bones.
>>
>> So an articulated lorry is one that hinges in the middle, unlike most
>> lorries that don't.
>>
>> And a articulated bus is also one that has parts hinged, as most don't.
>> One single bus that bends in the middle.
>>
>> For a train it's not so obvious, but presumably a normal train is a
>> series of separate carriages whereas an articulated one is more like a
>> single long carriage that bends in places.
>
> Yes. In particular, sections in articulated trains share wheels, so
> can't be uncoupled except in a suitably equipped depot that can support
> uncoupled sections on jacks.
>
> In some cases, the two sections are pivoted together, with one supported
> by the track wheels, and then supporting the other; in others they are
> separately supported on a shared bogie with two pivots (a Jacob's
> bogie).
>
> Jacob's bogies are simple, but aren't good for powered axles or low
> floors.
> That's why they're seldom used in low floor, multi-section vehicles that
> need powered axles along the train (eg, low floor trams). Despite Neil's
> uninformed rants, they wouldn't be right for LU Tube trains that need
> articulation with low floors and powered axles.
>
> I had expected a different arrangement, with each carriage having one
> power bogie (not Jacob's). It would support the adjacent section with a
> pivot on the overhang. It, in turn, would be supported by the adjacent
> section at the other end. There would still be nine sections and 10
> bogies. I assume the chosen arrangement provides more space for the
> aircon packs.

Both of those arrangements come close to the two cars pivoting where
their ends come together, so allowing a wide stable connection between
them, so they then effectively work as one longer vehicle. Keeping the
link with the origin of the word articulation.

Conventional carriages, where they join, can have large lateral offsets
on curves, hence the narrow swaying corridor connections, and they do not
behave like one vehicle jointed.

nib

nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 21:31:13 +0000, Recliner wrote:
>
>> nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:16:41 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:08:46 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 24.07.23 17:37, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>>>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where
>>>>>>>> everyone is familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from
>>>>>>> the rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus
>>>>>>> with any other arrangement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which is why they're generally called bendy buses
>>>>>
>>>>> By whom? Certainly nobody in the transportation industry
>>>>>
>>>>>> not articulated buses.
>>>>>
>>>>> Google produces 12.7 million hits for "articulated bus" and 8.7
>>>>> million hits for "bendy bus".
>>>>>
>>>>>> Its a bus pulling (or being pushed by) a trailer.
>>>>>
>>>>> A bus trailer is something different entirely, for example [1]. An
>>>>> articulated bus can not be separated into parts that can function
>>>>> independently from one another. A bus trailer can be detatched and
>>>>> the bus operate on its own without the trailer.
>>>>
>>>> Take away the flexible cover between the 2 parts of a bendy bus and
>>>> you'll find its just a posh trailer.
>>>
>>> To me, non-expert (but with a dictionary), articulated means made up of
>>> parts hinged together, as in bones.
>>>
>>> So an articulated lorry is one that hinges in the middle, unlike most
>>> lorries that don't.
>>>
>>> And a articulated bus is also one that has parts hinged, as most don't.
>>> One single bus that bends in the middle.
>>>
>>> For a train it's not so obvious, but presumably a normal train is a
>>> series of separate carriages whereas an articulated one is more like a
>>> single long carriage that bends in places.
>>
>> Yes. In particular, sections in articulated trains share wheels, so
>> can't be uncoupled except in a suitably equipped depot that can support
>> uncoupled sections on jacks.
>>
>> In some cases, the two sections are pivoted together, with one supported
>> by the track wheels, and then supporting the other; in others they are
>> separately supported on a shared bogie with two pivots (a Jacob's
>> bogie).
>>
>> Jacob's bogies are simple, but aren't good for powered axles or low
>> floors.
>> That's why they're seldom used in low floor, multi-section vehicles that
>> need powered axles along the train (eg, low floor trams). Despite Neil's
>> uninformed rants, they wouldn't be right for LU Tube trains that need
>> articulation with low floors and powered axles.
>>
>> I had expected a different arrangement, with each carriage having one
>> power bogie (not Jacob's). It would support the adjacent section with a
>> pivot on the overhang. It, in turn, would be supported by the adjacent
>> section at the other end. There would still be nine sections and 10
>> bogies. I assume the chosen arrangement provides more space for the
>> aircon packs.
>
> Both of those arrangements come close to the two cars pivoting where
> their ends come together, so allowing a wide stable connection between
> them, so they then effectively work as one longer vehicle. Keeping the
> link with the origin of the word articulation.

Yes, that's right. They largely suppress relative movement in the
horizontal and vertical directions, better than using a Jacob's bogie. Of
course, there remains uncontrolled angular movement in three axes, so
bellows are still needed.

>
> Conventional carriages, where they join, can have large lateral offsets
> on curves, hence the narrow swaying corridor connections, and they do not
> behave like one vehicle jointed.

Yes, and that's very visible when there's an open ganyway, as on the S
stock. You can stand with one foot on each side of the sliding floor
joint, and feel the movement.

On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:

>On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>> Recliner wrote:
>>
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 20:30:49 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Yup, 9 min gap westbound. That looks about right. I was on it
>>> today and it >>> certainly wasn't a 2.5 service. When the a train
>>> finally rocked up at Hyde >>> Park we couldn't get on it was so
>>> packed. >>
>>>>> Today's Sunday, with a lower frequency. They run about every 2.5
>>> minutes on >> normal days.
>>>>
>>>> Thats the theory. The reality is it doesn't. I use it once a week
>>>> atm and the service is as bad as it ever was.
>>>>
>>>>>> Its not articulated. Oh, and its not low floor either. HTH.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course it's articulated. Just read any technical description of
>>> them, >> such as
>>>>>
>>> https://www.railengineer.co.uk/design-launch-of-the-new-london-undergr
>>> ound-picc >> adilly-line-trains/
>>>>
>>>> They're wrong.
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_car
>>>>
>>>> Articulation requires a bogie joining 2 cars. This train doesn't
>>>> have that ergo its not articulated now matter how much you want to
>>>> be right.
>>>
>>> You really ought to read the articles you cite:
>>> 'and/or have car elements without axles suspended by the neighbouring
>>> car elements'
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> It's lower floor, with larger gangways, than would be possible
>>> with Jacob's
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't look particularly low in that picture and given the curved
>>>> platforms on the picc if they lowered it for level boarding they
>>>> have to make the carraiges a lot narrower to fit in places such as
>>>> Holborn.
>>>
>>> As I said, it's lower than would be possible with Jacob's bogies. Not
>>> significantly lower than existing Tubes.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> bogies. It's why this is the preferred method for many low floor
>>> trams. For >> example, the low floor articulated Edinburgh trams also
>>> have suspended, >> wheelless sections that are supported by the
>>> adjacent sections.
>>>>
>>>> They're not articulated. There's 4 vehicles with bogies and
>>>> suspended sections. Thats NOT articulation.
>>>
>>> Stop demonstrating your ignorance. Of course they're articulated. Oh,
>>> and learn to count, too.
>>
>> One might start from the more general Wiki page at
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_vehicle
>>
>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone is
>> familiar with the articulated lorry.
>
>Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>other arrangement.
>
In the articulated buses used in Heathrow in the early 1960s there was
no passenger section ahead.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/46986413@N07/50941261877

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 00:37:46 +0100, Charles Ellson
<charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>
>>On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>> Recliner wrote:
>>>
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 20:30:49 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Yup, 9 min gap westbound. That looks about right. I was on it
>>>> today and it >>> certainly wasn't a 2.5 service. When the a train
>>>> finally rocked up at Hyde >>> Park we couldn't get on it was so
>>>> packed. >>
>>>>>> Today's Sunday, with a lower frequency. They run about every 2.5
>>>> minutes on >> normal days.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thats the theory. The reality is it doesn't. I use it once a week
>>>>> atm and the service is as bad as it ever was.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Its not articulated. Oh, and its not low floor either. HTH.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course it's articulated. Just read any technical description of
>>>> them, >> such as
>>>>>>
>>>> https://www.railengineer.co.uk/design-launch-of-the-new-london-undergr
>>>> ound-picc >> adilly-line-trains/
>>>>>
>>>>> They're wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_car
>>>>>
>>>>> Articulation requires a bogie joining 2 cars. This train doesn't
>>>>> have that ergo its not articulated now matter how much you want to
>>>>> be right.
>>>>
>>>> You really ought to read the articles you cite:
>>>> 'and/or have car elements without axles suspended by the neighbouring
>>>> car elements'
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's lower floor, with larger gangways, than would be possible
>>>> with Jacob's
>>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't look particularly low in that picture and given the curved
>>>>> platforms on the picc if they lowered it for level boarding they
>>>>> have to make the carraiges a lot narrower to fit in places such as
>>>>> Holborn.
>>>>
>>>> As I said, it's lower than would be possible with Jacob's bogies. Not
>>>> significantly lower than existing Tubes.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> bogies. It's why this is the preferred method for many low floor
>>>> trams. For >> example, the low floor articulated Edinburgh trams also
>>>> have suspended, >> wheelless sections that are supported by the
>>>> adjacent sections.
>>>>>
>>>>> They're not articulated. There's 4 vehicles with bogies and
>>>>> suspended sections. Thats NOT articulation.
>>>>
>>>> Stop demonstrating your ignorance. Of course they're articulated. Oh,
>>>> and learn to count, too.
>>>
>>> One might start from the more general Wiki page at
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_vehicle
>>>
>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone is
>>> familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>
>>Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>>other arrangement.
>>
>In the articulated buses used in Heathrow in the early 1960s there was
>no passenger section ahead.
>https://www.flickr.com/photos/46986413@N07/50941261877

A horse is a horse, of course... of course!

The pax area of the bus wasn't articulated though... so a horsebox
wiff seats?

Nobody <jock@soccer.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 00:37:46 +0100, Charles Ellson
> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>> Recliner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 20:30:49 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Yup, 9 min gap westbound. That looks about right. I was on it
>>>>> today and it >>> certainly wasn't a 2.5 service. When the a train
>>>>> finally rocked up at Hyde >>> Park we couldn't get on it was so
>>>>> packed. >>
>>>>>>> Today's Sunday, with a lower frequency. They run about every 2.5
>>>>> minutes on >> normal days.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thats the theory. The reality is it doesn't. I use it once a week
>>>>>> atm and the service is as bad as it ever was.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Its not articulated. Oh, and its not low floor either. HTH.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course it's articulated. Just read any technical description of
>>>>> them, >> such as
>>>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.railengineer.co.uk/design-launch-of-the-new-london-undergr
>>>>> ound-picc >> adilly-line-trains/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They're wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_car
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Articulation requires a bogie joining 2 cars. This train doesn't
>>>>>> have that ergo its not articulated now matter how much you want to
>>>>>> be right.
>>>>>
>>>>> You really ought to read the articles you cite:
>>>>> 'and/or have car elements without axles suspended by the neighbouring
>>>>> car elements'
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's lower floor, with larger gangways, than would be possible
>>>>> with Jacob's
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't look particularly low in that picture and given the curved
>>>>>> platforms on the picc if they lowered it for level boarding they
>>>>>> have to make the carraiges a lot narrower to fit in places such as
>>>>>> Holborn.
>>>>>
>>>>> As I said, it's lower than would be possible with Jacob's bogies. Not
>>>>> significantly lower than existing Tubes.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> bogies. It's why this is the preferred method for many low floor
>>>>> trams. For >> example, the low floor articulated Edinburgh trams also
>>>>> have suspended, >> wheelless sections that are supported by the
>>>>> adjacent sections.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They're not articulated. There's 4 vehicles with bogies and
>>>>>> suspended sections. Thats NOT articulation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stop demonstrating your ignorance. Of course they're articulated. Oh,
>>>>> and learn to count, too.
>>>>
>>>> One might start from the more general Wiki page at
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_vehicle
>>>>
>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone is
>>>> familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>
>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>>> other arrangement.
>>>
>> In the articulated buses used in Heathrow in the early 1960s there was
>> no passenger section ahead.
>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/46986413@N07/50941261877
>
> A horse is a horse, of course... of course!
>
> The pax area of the bus wasn't articulated though... so a horsebox
> wiff seats?
>

Basically an articulated lorry with seats. I wonder what that arrangement
achieved?

On 25.07.23 08:52, Recliner wrote:
> Nobody <jock@soccer.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 00:37:46 +0100, Charles Ellson
>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>>> Recliner wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 20:30:49 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Yup, 9 min gap westbound. That looks about right. I was on it
>>>>>> today and it >>> certainly wasn't a 2.5 service. When the a train
>>>>>> finally rocked up at Hyde >>> Park we couldn't get on it was so
>>>>>> packed. >>
>>>>>>>> Today's Sunday, with a lower frequency. They run about every 2.5
>>>>>> minutes on >> normal days.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thats the theory. The reality is it doesn't. I use it once a week
>>>>>>> atm and the service is as bad as it ever was.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Its not articulated. Oh, and its not low floor either. HTH.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course it's articulated. Just read any technical description of
>>>>>> them, >> such as
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.railengineer.co.uk/design-launch-of-the-new-london-undergr
>>>>>> ound-picc >> adilly-line-trains/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They're wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_car
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Articulation requires a bogie joining 2 cars. This train doesn't
>>>>>>> have that ergo its not articulated now matter how much you want to
>>>>>>> be right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You really ought to read the articles you cite:
>>>>>> 'and/or have car elements without axles suspended by the neighbouring
>>>>>> car elements'
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's lower floor, with larger gangways, than would be possible
>>>>>> with Jacob's
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Doesn't look particularly low in that picture and given the curved
>>>>>>> platforms on the picc if they lowered it for level boarding they
>>>>>>> have to make the carraiges a lot narrower to fit in places such as
>>>>>>> Holborn.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I said, it's lower than would be possible with Jacob's bogies. Not
>>>>>> significantly lower than existing Tubes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> bogies. It's why this is the preferred method for many low floor
>>>>>> trams. For >> example, the low floor articulated Edinburgh trams also
>>>>>> have suspended, >> wheelless sections that are supported by the
>>>>>> adjacent sections.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They're not articulated. There's 4 vehicles with bogies and
>>>>>>> suspended sections. Thats NOT articulation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Stop demonstrating your ignorance. Of course they're articulated. Oh,
>>>>>> and learn to count, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> One might start from the more general Wiki page at
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_vehicle
>>>>>
>>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone is
>>>>> familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>>
>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>>>> other arrangement.
>>>>
>>> In the articulated buses used in Heathrow in the early 1960s there was
>>> no passenger section ahead.
>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/46986413@N07/50941261877
>>
>> A horse is a horse, of course... of course!
>>
>> The pax area of the bus wasn't articulated though... so a horsebox
>> wiff seats?
>>
>
> Basically an articulated lorry with seats. I wonder what that arrangement
> achieved?

Cost savings by using tractors from articulated lorries that might
otherwise be under-utilised?

Robin

Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
> On 25.07.23 08:52, Recliner wrote:
>> Nobody <jock@soccer.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 00:37:46 +0100, Charles Ellson
>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>>>> Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 20:30:49 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Yup, 9 min gap westbound. That looks about right. I was on it
>>>>>>> today and it >>> certainly wasn't a 2.5 service. When the a train
>>>>>>> finally rocked up at Hyde >>> Park we couldn't get on it was so
>>>>>>> packed. >>
>>>>>>>>> Today's Sunday, with a lower frequency. They run about every 2.5
>>>>>>> minutes on >> normal days.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thats the theory. The reality is it doesn't. I use it once a week
>>>>>>>> atm and the service is as bad as it ever was.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Its not articulated. Oh, and its not low floor either. HTH.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course it's articulated. Just read any technical description of
>>>>>>> them, >> such as
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.railengineer.co.uk/design-launch-of-the-new-london-undergr
>>>>>>> ound-picc >> adilly-line-trains/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They're wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_car
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Articulation requires a bogie joining 2 cars. This train doesn't
>>>>>>>> have that ergo its not articulated now matter how much you want to
>>>>>>>> be right.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You really ought to read the articles you cite:
>>>>>>> 'and/or have car elements without axles suspended by the neighbouring
>>>>>>> car elements'
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's lower floor, with larger gangways, than would be possible
>>>>>>> with Jacob's
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Doesn't look particularly low in that picture and given the curved
>>>>>>>> platforms on the picc if they lowered it for level boarding they
>>>>>>>> have to make the carraiges a lot narrower to fit in places such as
>>>>>>>> Holborn.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I said, it's lower than would be possible with Jacob's bogies. Not
>>>>>>> significantly lower than existing Tubes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> bogies. It's why this is the preferred method for many low floor
>>>>>>> trams. For >> example, the low floor articulated Edinburgh trams also
>>>>>>> have suspended, >> wheelless sections that are supported by the
>>>>>>> adjacent sections.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They're not articulated. There's 4 vehicles with bogies and
>>>>>>>> suspended sections. Thats NOT articulation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Stop demonstrating your ignorance. Of course they're articulated. Oh,
>>>>>>> and learn to count, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One might start from the more general Wiki page at
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_vehicle
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone is
>>>>>> familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>>>
>>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>>>>> other arrangement.
>>>>>
>>>> In the articulated buses used in Heathrow in the early 1960s there was
>>>> no passenger section ahead.
>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/46986413@N07/50941261877
>>>
>>> A horse is a horse, of course... of course!
>>>
>>> The pax area of the bus wasn't articulated though... so a horsebox
>>> wiff seats?
>>>
>>
>> Basically an articulated lorry with seats. I wonder what that arrangement
>> achieved?
>
> Cost savings by using tractors from articulated lorries that might
> otherwise be under-utilised?
>

Or perhaps higher performance on the fast run to the airport than was
achievable by the coaches of that era? The coach would also be more
comfortable without a vibrating, noisy engine under the floor (ie, why LHCS
is more comfortable than DMUs).

On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:19:06 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 12:52:44 +0100
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>>>> other arrangement.
>>>
>>> Cue for Neil to tell us that they're not really articulated.
>>
>> Got it in one.
>
>So please can you tell us your unambiguous definition of “articulated” -
>different definitions as applied to road and rail vehicles if necessary.
>Thank you.

Where a vehicle has a shared bogie/axles with the one next to it.

On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:19:07 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> Articulation means the weight is mounted over the wheels so yes, that would
>> be articulated. The suspended cars in this new train are just glorified
>> drawbars.
>
>So what supports the weight of a drawbar?

Same thing that supports the weight of a standard railway coupling but we
don't call everything that runs on rails articulated.

On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:23:47 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 09:02:49 -0000 (UTC)
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 20:30:49 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Thats NOT articulation.
>>>
>>> The first sentence of the Wikipedia article you quote, my emphasis added:
>>>
>>> “Articulated cars are rail vehicles which consist of a number of cars
>which
>>> are semi-permanently attached to each other and share common Jacobs bogies
>>> or axles ***and/or have car elements without axles suspended by the
>>> neighbouring car elements.***:”
>>
>> Based on something from germany in 1968.
>
>It hasn't changed its definition in the many decades since articulated
>carriages were invented.
>
>> Its not articulation.
>
>Neil, you should be thanking us for a free education, not repeatedly
>demonstrating your illiteracy and ignorance.

Railway couplings articulate and their weight is entirely supported by the
vehicle each side. Explain the different between them and a floating carraige
in a mechanical sense.

On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:41:25 +0200
Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>On 24.07.23 18:16, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:08:46 +0200
>> Take away the flexible cover between the 2 parts of a bendy bus and you'll
>> find its just a posh trailer.
>
>If you take away the flexible cover you will find an unpowered 2 axle
>segment with a driver and all of the driving controls, and a 1 axle
>segment supported from the 2 axle segment with the engine and
>transmission. Neither portion is a complete vehicle without the other,
>it is a single integrated whole.

The vast majority of the weight of the rear goes through its own wheels
hence its a trailer. Or do you think if you attach a little trailer to your
car it suddenly makes your car an articulated vehicle because maybe 20kg of
weight is going through the ball joint?

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 00:37:46 +0100
Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>>other arrangement.
>>
>In the articulated buses used in Heathrow in the early 1960s there was
>no passenger section ahead.
>https://www.flickr.com/photos/46986413@N07/50941261877

Its stretching the definition of a bus somewhat given its an hgv tractor unit
pulling a trailer with seats.

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 09:12:50 +0200
Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>On 25.07.23 08:52, Recliner wrote:
>>> The pax area of the bus wasn't articulated though... so a horsebox
>>> wiff seats?
>>>
>>
>> Basically an articulated lorry with seats. I wonder what that arrangement
>> achieved?
>
>Cost savings by using tractors from articulated lorries that might
>otherwise be under-utilised?

Wonder if it would be allowed today? Thats a genuine question, not sarcasm.
Perhaps the small risk of jacknifing would prevent it.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> It's still an articulated bus; 'bendy' is just one of several colloquial
> names for them.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulated_bus
>

"Wiggle Wagon"!! 🤣

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:16:41 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:08:46 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 24.07.23 17:37, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone
>>>>>>> is familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with
>>>>>> any other arrangement.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which is why they're generally called bendy buses
>>>>
>>>> By whom? Certainly nobody in the transportation industry
>>>>
>>>>> not articulated buses.
>>>>
>>>> Google produces 12.7 million hits for "articulated bus" and 8.7 million
>>>> hits for "bendy bus".
>>>>
>>>>> Its a bus pulling (or being pushed by) a trailer.
>>>>
>>>> A bus trailer is something different entirely, for example [1]. An
>>>> articulated bus can not be separated into parts that can function
>>>> independently from one another. A bus trailer can be detatched and the
>>>> bus operate on its own without the trailer.
>>>
>>> Take away the flexible cover between the 2 parts of a bendy bus and
>>> you'll find its just a posh trailer.
>>
>> To me, non-expert (but with a dictionary), articulated means made up of
>> parts hinged together, as in bones.
>>
>> So an articulated lorry is one that hinges in the middle, unlike most
>> lorries that don't.
>>
>> And a articulated bus is also one that has parts hinged, as most don't.
>> One single bus that bends in the middle.
>>
>> For a train it's not so obvious, but presumably a normal train is a
>> series of separate carriages whereas an articulated one is more like a
>> single long carriage that bends in places.
>
> Yes. In particular, sections in articulated trains share wheels, so can't
> be uncoupled except in a suitably equipped depot that can support uncoupled
> sections on jacks.
>
> In some cases, the two sections are pivoted together, with one supported by
> the track wheels, and then supporting the other; in others they are
> separately supported on a shared bogie with two pivots (a Jacob's bogie).
>
> Jacob's bogies are simple, but aren't good for powered axles or low floors.
> That's why they're seldom used in low floor, multi-section vehicles that
> need powered axles along the train (eg, low floor trams). Despite Neil's
> uninformed rants, they wouldn't be right for LU Tube trains that need
> articulation with low floors and powered axles.
>
> I had expected a different arrangement, with each carriage having one power
> bogie (not Jacob's). It would support the adjacent section with a pivot on
> the overhang. It, in turn, would be supported by the adjacent section at
> the other end. There would still be nine sections and 10 bogies. I assume
> the chosen arrangement provides more space for the aircon packs.
>

One potential problem I see with that arrangement is that it would
potentially give different vehicle dynamics depending which direction the
train is going?

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> nib <news@ingram-bromley.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:16:41 +0000, Muttley wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:08:46 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 24.07.23 17:37, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 13:47:51 +0200 Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 24.07.23 13:32, David Jones wrote:
>>>>>>>> The other is very USA-based and so wrong for the UK, where everyone
>>>>>>>> is familiar with the articulated lorry.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with
>>>>>>> any other arrangement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which is why they're generally called bendy buses
>>>>>
>>>>> By whom? Certainly nobody in the transportation industry
>>>>>
>>>>>> not articulated buses.
>>>>>
>>>>> Google produces 12.7 million hits for "articulated bus" and 8.7 million
>>>>> hits for "bendy bus".
>>>>>
>>>>>> Its a bus pulling (or being pushed by) a trailer.
>>>>>
>>>>> A bus trailer is something different entirely, for example [1]. An
>>>>> articulated bus can not be separated into parts that can function
>>>>> independently from one another. A bus trailer can be detatched and the
>>>>> bus operate on its own without the trailer.
>>>>
>>>> Take away the flexible cover between the 2 parts of a bendy bus and
>>>> you'll find its just a posh trailer.
>>>
>>> To me, non-expert (but with a dictionary), articulated means made up of
>>> parts hinged together, as in bones.
>>>
>>> So an articulated lorry is one that hinges in the middle, unlike most
>>> lorries that don't.
>>>
>>> And a articulated bus is also one that has parts hinged, as most don't.
>>> One single bus that bends in the middle.
>>>
>>> For a train it's not so obvious, but presumably a normal train is a
>>> series of separate carriages whereas an articulated one is more like a
>>> single long carriage that bends in places.
>>
>> Yes. In particular, sections in articulated trains share wheels, so can't
>> be uncoupled except in a suitably equipped depot that can support uncoupled
>> sections on jacks.
>>
>> In some cases, the two sections are pivoted together, with one supported by
>> the track wheels, and then supporting the other; in others they are
>> separately supported on a shared bogie with two pivots (a Jacob's bogie).
>>
>> Jacob's bogies are simple, but aren't good for powered axles or low floors.
>> That's why they're seldom used in low floor, multi-section vehicles that
>> need powered axles along the train (eg, low floor trams). Despite Neil's
>> uninformed rants, they wouldn't be right for LU Tube trains that need
>> articulation with low floors and powered axles.
>>
>> I had expected a different arrangement, with each carriage having one power
>> bogie (not Jacob's). It would support the adjacent section with a pivot on
>> the overhang. It, in turn, would be supported by the adjacent section at
>> the other end. There would still be nine sections and 10 bogies. I assume
>> the chosen arrangement provides more space for the aircon packs.
>>
>
> One potential problem I see with that arrangement is that it would
> potentially give different vehicle dynamics depending which direction the
> train is going?

Wouldn't that also be true of Talgo trains, where the asymmetry would be
much greater, and they go much faster?

On 25.07.23 09:29, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:23:47 -0000 (UTC)
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 09:02:49 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 20:30:49 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>> Thats NOT articulation.
>>>>
>>>> The first sentence of the Wikipedia article you quote, my emphasis added:
>>>>
>>>> “Articulated cars are rail vehicles which consist of a number of cars
>> which
>>>> are semi-permanently attached to each other and share common Jacobs bogies
>>>> or axles ***and/or have car elements without axles suspended by the
>>>> neighbouring car elements.***:”
>>>
>>> Based on something from germany in 1968.
>>
>> It hasn't changed its definition in the many decades since articulated
>> carriages were invented.
>>
>>> Its not articulation.
>>
>> Neil, you should be thanking us for a free education, not repeatedly
>> demonstrating your illiteracy and ignorance.
>
> Railway couplings articulate and their weight is entirely supported by the
> vehicle each side. Explain the different between them and a floating carraige
> in a mechanical sense.

In an articulated railway vehicle, there are shared elements of the
suspension/running gear such that one (or both) sides are not self
supporting in the absence of the other. In a conventional carriage, each
vehicle, either side of a coupling, is fully self-supporting, such that
when the coupling is un-made, each vehicle remains fully supported by
its own running gear, suspension etc. on the rails.

Robin

On 25.07.23 09:31, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:41:25 +0200
> Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 24.07.23 18:16, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:08:46 +0200
>>> Take away the flexible cover between the 2 parts of a bendy bus and you'll
>>> find its just a posh trailer.
>>
>> If you take away the flexible cover you will find an unpowered 2 axle
>> segment with a driver and all of the driving controls, and a 1 axle
>> segment supported from the 2 axle segment with the engine and
>> transmission. Neither portion is a complete vehicle without the other,
>> it is a single integrated whole.
>
> The vast majority of the weight of the rear goes through its own wheels
> hence its a trailer. Or do you think if you attach a little trailer to your
> car it suddenly makes your car an articulated vehicle because maybe 20kg of
> weight is going through the ball joint?

A trailer is by definition unpowered. The rear section of an articulated
bus contains the engine, so is not a trailer.

Robin

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Articulated buses, of course, suspend one end of one section from the
>>>>>> rear of the section ahead. I've never seen an articulated bus with any
>>>>>> other arrangement.
>>>>>>
>>>>> In the articulated buses used in Heathrow in the early 1960s there was
>>>>> no passenger section ahead.
>>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/46986413@N07/50941261877
>>>>
>>>> A horse is a horse, of course... of course!
>>>>
>>>> The pax area of the bus wasn't articulated though... so a horsebox
>>>> wiff seats?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Basically an articulated lorry with seats. I wonder what that arrangement
>>> achieved?
>>
>> Cost savings by using tractors from articulated lorries that might
>> otherwise be under-utilised?
>>
>
> Or perhaps higher performance on the fast run to the airport than was
> achievable by the coaches of that era? The coach would also be more
> comfortable without a vibrating, noisy engine under the floor (ie, why LHCS
> is more comfortable than DMUs).
>
>
ICBW as I was fairly young when I saw them regularly on visits Heathrow
,but I don’t remember seeing them in any role other than terminal to
aircraft transfer so would they needed to have run that fast?
The fast runs from the West London Air Terminal were done by the stylish
AEC Coaches

<https://www.londonbusmuseum.com/museum-exhibits/single-decker-buses/1953-aec-regal-iv-bea-coach-4rf4-mll740/>

Later replaced by a Routemaster variant with a trailer.
<
Both of those were BEA, BOAC just seemed to my childhood eyes operate
ordinary coaches not dissimilar those from Royal Blue, Associated Motorways
etc, though later they got a fleet of Atlanteans.

GH