Talk:London Underground 1983 Stock

Latest comment: 3 months ago by NearEMPTiness in topic Measuring Error

Video edit

A video can found in 'youtube' w/1983 is drew in colors www.youtube.com/ 218.102.110.210 02:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Measuring Error edit

Shouldn't it be mentioned that the new coaches built by Metro-Cammell for London Transport have been returned because they were 18mm too wide?[1][2]

@NearEMPTiness This has been added to the article. :) Turini2 (talk) 16:30, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Better late than never. Thank you very much. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 23:09, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ Duffy, Hazel (12 January 1984). "Train fault may hinder Singapore metro bid". Financial Times. Factiva. p. 5. {{cite news}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
  2. ^ "New coaches built by Metro-Cammell for London Transport have been returned because they are 18mm too wide". Textline Multiple Source Collection. Factiva. 12 January 1984.

Trains versus units versus cars edit

Should the number of trains refer to the 3112 6-car trains built or the 63 3-car units built (which ran as two units = 1 train)? Or both! Looks like the London Underground D78 Stock calls them "sets" - so I might go with that. Turini2 (talk) 16:28, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

In
  • Hardy, Brian (1997) [1976]. London Underground Rolling Stock (14th ed.). Harrow: Capital Transport. pp. 26–27. ISBN 1-85414-193-7.
the terms "train" and "unit" are both used (with "train" in the majority), but not "set". On page 78 of the same book, only the term "unit" is used. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:50, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
What do you think of the wording in the article of " 31 12 sets, (63 3-car units, 189 cars)"? Turini2 (talk) 15:30, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'd write "63 3-car units, sufficient to form 31 trains with one unit spare". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:37, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Ah, I was talking about the infobox - so 63 3-car units (189 cars) ? Turini2 (talk) 20:37, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply