London Underground is closed down completely again.  Reports of explosions 
at Warren Street and Oval



-- 
Bob

In news:3qMDe.2790$Cu3.82@newsfe4-win.ntli.net,
Bob Wood  typed:


> London Underground is closed down completely again.  Reports of
> explosions at Warren Street and Oval


The above was from Radio Kent.

Radio Five says Northern and Victoria Lines closed and FB attending Warren 
Street after reports of smoke issuing.



-- 
Bob

There has been emergency vehicles heading south along Albert Embankment
for about the last hour or so, so we realised that something had
happened. Usually all the emergency vehicles are heading into London
not out.

Kevin

In news:1121948903.275231.279750@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com,
kajr@mwfree.net  typed:


> There has been emergency vehicles heading south along Albert
> Embankment for about the last hour or so, so we realised that
> something had happened. Usually all the emergency vehicles are
> heading into London not out.



Eyewitness claiming small explosion in a rucksack   -   no casualties.  I 
don't know which site this refers to.

Also, train managed to continue to Warren Street where it was evacuated.  I 
don't know whether this is the same incident.






-- 
Bob

Now picked up by the BBC site:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4703777.stm


Emergency services have been called to three Tube stations after 
"incidents", Scotland Yard said.
Police confirmed they had been called to Warren Street, Oval and Shepherd's 
Bush stations.

There have been reports of smoke coming from two of the stations and all 
three have been evacuated.

The whole of the Northern Line has been suspended, along with the Victoria 
Line and the Hammersmith and City. There are no reports of any casualties.

A spokesman for London Underground said the nature of the incidents was 
unknown.

One hospital, near Warren St station, has started its emergency plan.

Sosiane Mohellavi, 35, was travelling from Oxford Circus to Walthamstow when 
she was evacuated from a train at Warren Street.

"I was in the carriage and we smelt smoke - it was like something was 
burning.

"Everyone was panicked and people were screaming. We had to pull the alarm. 
I am still shaking."

But a BBC reporter outside Warren St station said there was no sign of smoke 
outside.



-- 
Bob

"Bob Wood"  wrote in message
news:3qMDe.2790$Cu3.82@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...

> London Underground is closed down completely again.  Reports of explosions
> at Warren Street and Oval
>

Now reports of a bus explosion on Hackney Road/Columbia Road in east London.
Warren St, Oval and Shepherds Bush stns all evacuated due to smoke.

Nick

In news:vHMDe.7101$je1.3004@newsfe7-win.ntli.net,
Bob Wood  typed:


> In news:1121948903.275231.279750@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com,
> kajr@mwfree.net  typed:
>
> > There has been emergency vehicles heading south along Albert
> > Embankment for about the last hour or so, so we realised that
> > something had happened. Usually all the emergency vehicles are
> > heading into London not out.
>
>
> Eyewitness claiming small explosion in a rucksack   -   no
> casualties.  I don't know which site this refers to.
>
> Also, train managed to continue to Warren Street where it was
> evacuated.  I don't know whether this is the same incident.



Radio 5 has just reported that these might be very small explosions  -  they 
are suggesting "detonators only".






-- 
Bob

In news:dbo510$6e3$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk,
Nick Pedley  typed:


> "Bob Wood"  wrote in message
> news:3qMDe.2790$Cu3.82@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
> > London Underground is closed down completely again.  Reports of
> > explosions at Warren Street and Oval
> >
> Now reports of a bus explosion on Hackney Road/Columbia Road in east
> London. Warren St, Oval and Shepherds Bush stns all evacuated due to
> smoke.



Just heard this    -   Route 26, apparently.


-- 
Bob

In news:vHMDe.7101$je1.3004@newsfe7-win.ntli.net,
Bob Wood  typed:


> In news:1121948903.275231.279750@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com,
> kajr@mwfree.net  typed:
>
> > There has been emergency vehicles heading south along Albert
> > Embankment for about the last hour or so, so we realised that
> > something had happened. Usually all the emergency vehicles are
> > heading into London not out.
>
>
> Eyewitness claiming small explosion in a rucksack   -   no
> casualties.  I don't know which site this refers to.
>
> Also, train managed to continue to Warren Street where it was
> evacuated.  I don't know whether this is the same incident.



Radio 5 has just reported that these might be very small explosions  -  they 
are suggesting "detonators only".






-- 
Bob

In news:3DMDe.5725$jo3.5638@newsfe5-win.ntli.net,
Bob Wood  typed:


> Now picked up by the BBC site:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4703777.stm


This is being constantly updated  -  and is now reporting "detonators only"

LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at platforms and 
evacuated to ground level.



-- 
Bob

"Bob Wood"  wrote in message
news:8UMDe.7187$Ox6.5483@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...

> In news:vHMDe.7101$je1.3004@newsfe7-win.ntli.net,
> Bob Wood  typed:
>
> > In news:1121948903.275231.279750@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com,
> > kajr@mwfree.net  typed:
> >
> > > There has been emergency vehicles heading south along Albert
> > > Embankment for about the last hour or so, so we realised that
> > > something had happened. Usually all the emergency vehicles are
> > > heading into London not out.
> >
> >
> > Eyewitness claiming small explosion in a rucksack   -   no
> > casualties.  I don't know which site this refers to.
> >
> > Also, train managed to continue to Warren Street where it was
> > evacuated.  I don't know whether this is the same incident.
>
>
> Radio 5 has just reported that these might be very small explosions  -
they
> are suggesting "detonators only".
>

Small bang, lots of smoke, possible that one perpetrator ran away (Oval)....
could be a duff lot of explosive. Early speculation on my part though.

Nick

In news:3DMDe.5725$jo3.5638@newsfe5-win.ntli.net,
Bob Wood  typed:


> Now picked up by the BBC site:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4703777.stm


This is being constantly updated  -  and is now reporting "detonators only"

LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at platforms and 
evacuated to ground level.



-- 
Bob

"Bob Wood"  wrote in message
news:8UMDe.7187$Ox6.5483@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...

> In news:vHMDe.7101$je1.3004@newsfe7-win.ntli.net,
> Bob Wood  typed:
>
> > In news:1121948903.275231.279750@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com,
> > kajr@mwfree.net  typed:
> >
> > > There has been emergency vehicles heading south along Albert
> > > Embankment for about the last hour or so, so we realised that
> > > something had happened. Usually all the emergency vehicles are
> > > heading into London not out.
> >
> >
> > Eyewitness claiming small explosion in a rucksack   -   no
> > casualties.  I don't know which site this refers to.
> >
> > Also, train managed to continue to Warren Street where it was
> > evacuated.  I don't know whether this is the same incident.
>
>
> Radio 5 has just reported that these might be very small explosions  -
they
> are suggesting "detonators only".
>

Small bang, lots of smoke, possible that one perpetrator ran away (Oval)....
could be a duff lot of explosive. Early speculation on my part though.

Nick

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:52:20 GMT, Bob Wood wrote in
<8UMDe.7187$Ox6.5483@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>, seen in uk.railway:

> In news:vHMDe.7101$je1.3004@newsfe7-win.ntli.net,
> Bob Wood  typed:
[...]
> > Eyewitness claiming small explosion in a rucksack   -   no
> > casualties.  I don't know which site this refers to.
> >
> > Also, train managed to continue to Warren Street where it was
> > evacuated.  I don't know whether this is the same incident.
> 
> Radio 5 has just reported that these might be very small explosions  -  they 
> are suggesting "detonators only".


BBC News 24 report that LU "sources" are saying that nailbombs
*without explosive* are involved, and the explosions are indeed
detonators only. All unconfirmed, of course.

1 person injured at Warren Street according to BT Police (via BBC News
24).

No injuries reported at the other two LU locations, nor on the bus.


Some very sick copycats?
-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

Ross wrote:

> Some very sick copycats?



My immediate thought too.  Looks like an amateur copy, done because it
would be "funny".

PhilD

--
<><

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:52:20 GMT, Bob Wood wrote in
<8UMDe.7187$Ox6.5483@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>, seen in uk.railway:

> In news:vHMDe.7101$je1.3004@newsfe7-win.ntli.net,
> Bob Wood  typed:
[...]
> > Eyewitness claiming small explosion in a rucksack   -   no
> > casualties.  I don't know which site this refers to.
> >
> > Also, train managed to continue to Warren Street where it was
> > evacuated.  I don't know whether this is the same incident.
> 
> Radio 5 has just reported that these might be very small explosions  -  they 
> are suggesting "detonators only".


BBC News 24 report that LU "sources" are saying that nailbombs
*without explosive* are involved, and the explosions are indeed
detonators only. All unconfirmed, of course.

1 person injured at Warren Street according to BT Police (via BBC News
24).

No injuries reported at the other two LU locations, nor on the bus.


Some very sick copycats?
-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

Ross wrote:

> Some very sick copycats?



My immediate thought too.  Looks like an amateur copy, done because it
would be "funny".

PhilD

--
<><

The worry is how many of us could lay our hands on dets and the
knowledge to use them in less than 2 weeks in order to cash in on
someone else's work? No doubt the conspiracy theorists will be having
another field day soon.

In news:1121952907.440947.191070@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com,
PhilD  typed:


> Ross wrote:
> > Some very sick copycats?
>
>
> My immediate thought too.  Looks like an amateur copy, done because it
> would be "funny".



I doubt it.  I don't think a copy-cat would go to the extent of 4 almost 
simultaneous incidents.


-- 
Bob

The worry is how many of us could lay our hands on dets and the
knowledge to use them in less than 2 weeks in order to cash in on
someone else's work? No doubt the conspiracy theorists will be having
another field day soon.

In news:1121952907.440947.191070@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com,
PhilD  typed:


> Ross wrote:
> > Some very sick copycats?
>
>
> My immediate thought too.  Looks like an amateur copy, done because it
> would be "funny".



I doubt it.  I don't think a copy-cat would go to the extent of 4 almost 
simultaneous incidents.


-- 
Bob

Bob Wood wrote:

> In news:1121952907.440947.191070@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com,
> PhilD  typed:
> 
>>Ross wrote:
>>
>>>Some very sick copycats?
>>
>>My immediate thought too.  Looks like an amateur copy, done because it
>>would be "funny".
> 
> I doubt it.  I don't think a copy-cat would go to the extent of 4 almost 
> simultaneous incidents.


I think London got lucky this time.

One of the reports on BBC World service (30 minutes ago) had the bus
driver reporting a split open rucksack, with white powder spilling
out.

My suspicion is that these were real bombs, but the main charges
failed to detonate.

Modern high explosives are pretty insensitive, and it require a
detonator or blasting cap to get them going.

Perhaps they were constructed incompetantly, or home made explosives
were used which did not work.

We'll know in a few days, I guess.

pt

>> > London Underground is closed down completely again.  Reports of
>> > explosions at Warren Street and Oval
>> >
>> Now reports of a bus explosion on Hackney Road/Columbia Road in east
>> London. Warren St, Oval and Shepherds Bush stns all evacuated due to
>> smoke.


No disrespect to those involved in London two weeks ago and today, but news 
reports that Prime Minister's schedule was 'torn up' and he seems to taken 
control of what could be called a war cabinet, the entire parliament is now 
taking part in COBRA meetings and PM will address the nation 
shortly.....Would the same response have happened if the incedent had been 
north of Watford?

In message <87ODe.74590$G8.10645@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
          "turbo"  wrote:


> > > > London Underground is closed down completely again.  Reports of
> > > > explosions at Warren Street and Oval
> > > > 
> > > Now reports of a bus explosion on Hackney Road/Columbia Road in east
> > > London. Warren St, Oval and Shepherds Bush stns all evacuated due to
> > > smoke.
> 
> No disrespect to those involved in London two weeks ago and today, but news
> reports that Prime Minister's schedule was 'torn up' and he seems to taken 
> control of what could be called a war cabinet, 


It is not a war cabinet, do a google on COBRA and find out what you are
talking about


> the entire parliament is now taking part in COBRA meetings 


Hardly the whole of parliamemt, COBRA usually involves the PM and the
relevant ministers, Home and Foreign Secretaries and experts such as the Met
Police commissioner


> and PM will address the nation  shortly.....Would the same response have
> happened if the incedent had been  north of Watford? 
> 


Yes it would, don't be so juvenile.  Think back to the Birmingham pub bomb,
there was a similar political reaction.  The next attack could be Manchester
or Glasgow.  Lessons have to be learnt from what has happened in London to
try and avert attacks elsewhere in the country.

-- 
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html>

Bob Wood wrote:

> In news:1121952907.440947.191070@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com,
> PhilD  typed:
> 
>>Ross wrote:
>>
>>>Some very sick copycats?
>>
>>My immediate thought too.  Looks like an amateur copy, done because it
>>would be "funny".
> 
> I doubt it.  I don't think a copy-cat would go to the extent of 4 almost 
> simultaneous incidents.


I think London got lucky this time.

One of the reports on BBC World service (30 minutes ago) had the bus
driver reporting a split open rucksack, with white powder spilling
out.

My suspicion is that these were real bombs, but the main charges
failed to detonate.

Modern high explosives are pretty insensitive, and it require a
detonator or blasting cap to get them going.

Perhaps they were constructed incompetantly, or home made explosives
were used which did not work.

We'll know in a few days, I guess.

pt

Bob Wood wrote:


> London Underground is closed down completely again.  Reports of
> explosions at Warren Street and Oval


So listen to the radio or tv!

....and England are 10-0 after Australia collapsed for 190!

-- 
Chris Game

Double your drive space - delete Windows!

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:44:02 +0100, Graeme Wall wrote in
<c5fffb8d4d%rail@greywall.demon.co.uk>, seen in uk.railway:

> In message <87ODe.74590$G8.10645@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
>           "turbo"  wrote:
> 
[...]
> > and PM will address the nation  shortly.....


Well, the PM is holding a press conference about his meeting with the
Australian PM which seems to be concentrating on the events of 7th
July, although there has been some flannel (not real comment) about
today.

The impression has been given that the Met Police are about to issue a
press release which will answer all questions and there's now nothing
to worry about, which I suspect probably wouldn't be the case if this
were a bona-fide terrorist attack.



> > Would the same response have
> > happened if the incedent had been  north of Watford? 
> 
> Yes it would, don't be so juvenile.  Think back to the Birmingham pub bomb,
> there was a similar political reaction.  The next attack could be Manchester
> or Glasgow.  Lessons have to be learnt from what has happened in London to
> try and avert attacks elsewhere in the country.


If I were a terrorist I wouldn't be interested in London now. I'd be
looking at the other big cities, and probably not transport
infrastructure, to make the point that terrorists will move freely in
a free society. Birmingham's Bull Ring shopping centre, perhaps, or
another similar location where there will be a large number of people
gathered in a relatively small space.

-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 14:16:36 GMT someone who may be "turbo"
 wrote this:-


>No disrespect to those involved in London two weeks ago and today, but news 
>reports that Prime Minister's schedule was 'torn up' and he seems to taken 
>control of what could be called a war cabinet,


For once I will stand up for Mr Liar. In the early stages there will
have been much confusion. Had he not been seen to be doing something
then he would have been criticised by some. However, it didn't last
long as he is now droning on the radio in his usual smug style, "I
feel the hand of history is upon us", "I'm a pretty straight sort of
guy" and so on.


>the entire parliament is now taking part in COBRA meetings


A few ministers and others.

I was amused by the recent "exercise" though, as it appears they
have learnt nothing from the purple die amusement. The general plan
appears to be that if plebs are exposed to some chemical they are to
be kept where they are until decontaminated or they die or the scare
is over. However, party politicians in Westminster are too arrogant
to put up with the same approach. Instead they stream out of their
rogues gallery to contaminate others. If they were being treated the
same as plebs they would be locked in their rogues gallery until
decontaminated or they die or the scare is over.


>Would the same response have happened if the incedent had been 
>north of Watford? 


There certainly wasn't when bombs exploded in Manchester.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

"Chris Game"  wrote in message
news:18tsp49m4s6xu$.dlg@example.net...

> Bob Wood wrote:
>
> > London Underground is closed down completely again.  Reports of
> > explosions at Warren Street and Oval
>
> So listen to the radio or tv!
>
> ...and England are 10-0 after Australia collapsed for 190!
>
> -- 

Ahem. 18-3 now :-(

Peter Trei wrote:
[...]

> One of the reports on BBC World service (30 minutes ago) had the bus
> driver reporting a split open rucksack, with white powder spilling
> out.
>
> My suspicion is that these were real bombs, but the main charges
> failed to detonate.
>
> Modern high explosives are pretty insensitive, and it require a
> detonator or blasting cap to get them going.


Another theory - these guys were set to go but police nabbed the
explosives they were planning to use, but they decided to go ahead
anyway (with fake explosives!).

Doesn't seem likely, but neither does being as organised as they seem
to have been but none of the devices working...

Bob Wood wrote:

>
> LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at platforms and
> evacuated to ground level.


Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.
Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead has
been emptied and shunted forward?
-- 
Pat Ricroft, City of Salford, UK
================================

Peter Trei wrote:
[...]

> One of the reports on BBC World service (30 minutes ago) had the bus
> driver reporting a split open rucksack, with white powder spilling
> out.
>
> My suspicion is that these were real bombs, but the main charges
> failed to detonate.
>
> Modern high explosives are pretty insensitive, and it require a
> detonator or blasting cap to get them going.


Another theory - these guys were set to go but police nabbed the
explosives they were planning to use, but they decided to go ahead
anyway (with fake explosives!).

Doesn't seem likely, but neither does being as organised as they seem
to have been but none of the devices working...

Bob Wood wrote:

>
> LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at platforms and
> evacuated to ground level.


Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.
Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead has
been emptied and shunted forward?
-- 
Pat Ricroft, City of Salford, UK
================================

"Pat Ricroft"  wrote in message
news:1121959926.353492.204360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

> Bob Wood wrote:
> >
> > LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at platforms
and
> > evacuated to ground level.
>
> Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
> that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
> stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.
> Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
> station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead has
> been emptied and shunted forward?


If there is a case of more than one train between stations, the first pulls
in, unloads and then pulls forward, either by one car, or fully out of the
platform, enabling the second one to trip past the signals and into the
platform.

"Chris Game"  wrote in message 
news:18tsp49m4s6xu$.dlg@example.net...

> Bob Wood wrote:
>
>> London Underground is closed down completely again.  Reports of
>> explosions at Warren Street and Oval
>
> So listen to the radio or tv!
>
> ...and England are 10-0 after Australia collapsed for 190!


and England haven't collapsed yet as they are 35 for 5.

KW

Simon Lane wrote:

> Peter Trei wrote:
> [...]
> > One of the reports on BBC World service (30 minutes ago) had the bus
> > driver reporting a split open rucksack, with white powder spilling
> > out.
> >
> > My suspicion is that these were real bombs, but the main charges
> > failed to detonate.
> >
> > Modern high explosives are pretty insensitive, and it require a
> > detonator or blasting cap to get them going.
>
> Another theory - these guys were set to go but police nabbed the
> explosives they were planning to use, but they decided to go ahead
> anyway (with fake explosives!).
>
> Doesn't seem likely, but neither does being as organised as they seem
> to have been but none of the devices working...


There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
it's easy to test bombs.

> ...and England are 10-0 after Australia collapsed for 190!


Hmm, Are the ashes being played at the OVAL, whichle the austrailians
watch in the many ausie bars of SHEPHERDS BUSH and WARREN STREET?

"Pat Ricroft"  wrote in message
news:1121959926.353492.204360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

> Bob Wood wrote:
> >
> > LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at platforms
and
> > evacuated to ground level.
>
> Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
> that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
> stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.
> Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
> station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead has
> been emptied and shunted forward?


If there is a case of more than one train between stations, the first pulls
in, unloads and then pulls forward, either by one car, or fully out of the
platform, enabling the second one to trip past the signals and into the
platform.

I can't believe that 4 hours after this morning's attacks in London, my
MSN/MSNBC home page has nothing about it!??!!? What the .... I go
elsewhere for news, but this is very inept. They have a lead to another
attempted Rove leak smear, but no news lead about London. It seems like
they work for the Democratic party in the USA and want to put terrorist
attacks in the Western world on the back burner. I'm sick of this
selective news approach for political purposes!

Simon Lane wrote:

> Peter Trei wrote:
> [...]
> > One of the reports on BBC World service (30 minutes ago) had the bus
> > driver reporting a split open rucksack, with white powder spilling
> > out.
> >
> > My suspicion is that these were real bombs, but the main charges
> > failed to detonate.
> >
> > Modern high explosives are pretty insensitive, and it require a
> > detonator or blasting cap to get them going.
>
> Another theory - these guys were set to go but police nabbed the
> explosives they were planning to use, but they decided to go ahead
> anyway (with fake explosives!).
>
> Doesn't seem likely, but neither does being as organised as they seem
> to have been but none of the devices working...


There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
it's easy to test bombs.

Neil Sluman wrote:
[...]

> There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
> it's easy to test bombs.


I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction
to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they
had someone else provide detonators this time?

Neil Sluman wrote:
[...]

> There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
> it's easy to test bombs.


I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction
to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they
had someone else provide detonators this time?

In message 
          "Paul Weaver"  wrote:


> > ...and England are 10-0 after Australia collapsed for 190!
> 
> Hmm, Are the ashes being played at the OVAL, whichle the austrailians
> watch in the many ausie bars of SHEPHERDS BUSH and WARREN STREET?
> 


No, Lords

-- 
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html>

Oh well, still a theory, I'll send it off to prisonplanet :)

Neil Sluman wrote:
[...]

> There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
> it's easy to test bombs.


I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction
to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they
had someone else provide detonators this time?

Neil Sluman wrote:
[...]

> There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
> it's easy to test bombs.


I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction
to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they
had someone else provide detonators this time?

>Paul Weaver wrote:
>> Hmm, Are the ashes being played at the OVAL, whichle the austrailians
>> watch in the many ausie bars of SHEPHERDS BUSH and WARREN STREET?


Graeme Wall wrote:

>No, Lords


No, Lord's.

-- 
Neil Sunderland
Braunton, Devon

Please observe the Reply-To address

"Simon Lane"  wrote in message
news:1121962905.852458.133220@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

> Neil Sluman wrote:
> [...]
> > There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
> > it's easy to test bombs.
>
> I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction
> to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they
> had someone else provide detonators this time?
>


I imagine it'd be a bit hard to complain about faulty detonators too!

In news:1121959926.353492.204360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com,
Pat Ricroft  typed:


> Bob Wood wrote:
> >
> > LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at
> > platforms and evacuated to ground level.
>
> Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
> that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
> stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.
> Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
> station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead
> has been emptied and shunted forward?


I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more trains 
than stations only in your imagination.  I am sure that some body will be 
along in due course to give us the exact numbers.

I doubt if there would very often be two trains before a pair of stations, 
but it's not difficult to imagine that at times there could be a train in a 
station when the order to evacuate was given and another one already have 
left the station behind.  The choice would then be to move the first one 
into the tunnel to let the next one arrive  -  or to evacuate into the 
tunnel through end doors (but this couldn't happen while the power is still 
on  -  or to pull the second train up to the back of the first train and to 
evacuate through the front end door of the second train into the rear end 
door of the first train and then through that car to the platform.




-- 
Bob

"Simon Lane"  wrote in message
news:1121962905.852458.133220@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

> Neil Sluman wrote:
> [...]
> > There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
> > it's easy to test bombs.
>
> I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction
> to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they
> had someone else provide detonators this time?
>


I imagine it'd be a bit hard to complain about faulty detonators too!

In news:1121959926.353492.204360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com,
Pat Ricroft  typed:


> Bob Wood wrote:
> >
> > LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at
> > platforms and evacuated to ground level.
>
> Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
> that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
> stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.
> Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
> station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead
> has been emptied and shunted forward?


I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more trains 
than stations only in your imagination.  I am sure that some body will be 
along in due course to give us the exact numbers.

I doubt if there would very often be two trains before a pair of stations, 
but it's not difficult to imagine that at times there could be a train in a 
station when the order to evacuate was given and another one already have 
left the station behind.  The choice would then be to move the first one 
into the tunnel to let the next one arrive  -  or to evacuate into the 
tunnel through end doors (but this couldn't happen while the power is still 
on  -  or to pull the second train up to the back of the first train and to 
evacuate through the front end door of the second train into the rear end 
door of the first train and then through that car to the platform.




-- 
Bob

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:38:16 GMT someone who may be "Bob Wood"
 wrote this:-


>I think that there are more trains 
>than stations only in your imagination.


No exact numbers from me. However, I suspect that on certain lines
at certain times there are more trains than stations in the central
area (a term I use in a vague way). That may also be the case
outwith the central area, where the distance between stations is
much greater.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:37:52 +0100 someone who may be "Robin Mayes"
 wrote this:-


>> I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction
>> to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they
>> had someone else provide detonators this time?
>
>I imagine it'd be a bit hard to complain about faulty detonators too!


It would be rather difficult for private individuals to take their
suppliers to court. However, there are other ways they might
complain.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

"David Hansen"  wrote in message
news:3olvd198rfv2gndci75v29vdcgf61fbhe9@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:37:52 +0100 someone who may be "Robin Mayes"
>  wrote this:-
>
> >> I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction
> >> to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they
> >> had someone else provide detonators this time?
> >
> >I imagine it'd be a bit hard to complain about faulty detonators too!
>
> It would be rather difficult for private individuals to take their
> suppliers to court. However, there are other ways they might
> complain.


I would suspect those who deal with these scum are even scummier and nastier
so have a complaints department sign at the barrel end of an AK47.

yOn Thu, 21 Jul 2005 14:16:36 GMT, "turbo" 
wrote:

<snip>

>No disrespect to those involved in London two weeks ago and today, but news 
>reports that Prime Minister's schedule was 'torn up' and he seems to taken 
>control of what could be called a war cabinet, the entire parliament is now 
>taking part in COBRA meetings and PM will address the nation 
>shortly.....Would the same response have happened if the incedent had been 
>north of Watford? 
>

Probably not. There's something not very nice about the way that
certain politicians have been specifically referring to "Londoners"
when many, if not most, of the victims of the previous incidents were
from elsewhere. You would be forgiven for thinking that the rest of us
don't matter.

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:38:16 GMT someone who may be "Bob Wood"
 wrote this:-


>I think that there are more trains 
>than stations only in your imagination.


No exact numbers from me. However, I suspect that on certain lines
at certain times there are more trains than stations in the central
area (a term I use in a vague way). That may also be the case
outwith the central area, where the distance between stations is
much greater.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:37:52 +0100 someone who may be "Robin Mayes"
 wrote this:-


>> I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction
>> to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they
>> had someone else provide detonators this time?
>
>I imagine it'd be a bit hard to complain about faulty detonators too!


It would be rather difficult for private individuals to take their
suppliers to court. However, there are other ways they might
complain.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

"David Hansen"  wrote in message
news:3olvd198rfv2gndci75v29vdcgf61fbhe9@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:37:52 +0100 someone who may be "Robin Mayes"
>  wrote this:-
>
> >> I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction
> >> to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they
> >> had someone else provide detonators this time?
> >
> >I imagine it'd be a bit hard to complain about faulty detonators too!
>
> It would be rather difficult for private individuals to take their
> suppliers to court. However, there are other ways they might
> complain.


I would suspect those who deal with these scum are even scummier and nastier
so have a complaints department sign at the barrel end of an AK47.

In message <YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>, Bob Wood 
 writes


>I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more trains
>than stations only in your imagination.


I feel sure that the Waterloo and City has more trains than stations 
(and probably rather different procedures for evacuation than other 
lines).

-- 
Paul Terry

In message <YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>, Bob Wood 
 writes


>I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more trains
>than stations only in your imagination.


I feel sure that the Waterloo and City has more trains than stations 
(and probably rather different procedures for evacuation than other 
lines).

-- 
Paul Terry

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:09:54 +0100, David Hansen
 wrote:


>On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:38:16 GMT someone who may be "Bob Wood"
> wrote this:-
>
>>I think that there are more trains 
>>than stations only in your imagination.
>
>No exact numbers from me. However, I suspect that on certain lines
>at certain times there are more trains than stations in the central
>area (a term I use in a vague way). That may also be the case
>outwith the central area, where the distance between stations is
>much greater.


The Circle Line IME is likely got more trains than stations during the
rush hour due to "intruders" from the Met, District and Hammersmith
and City although the effect will be lessened to some degree when
clearance is required by use of various sidings/extra platforms or
escape routes to other lines. The central parts of the Northern Line
are possibly another candidate for having more trains than platforms
(rather than stations) during the rush hour but I suspect the "excess"
trains (if any) do not amount to more than a few.

On 21 Jul 2005 08:50:23 -0700, "Neil Sluman" 
wrote:


>
>
>Simon Lane wrote:
>> Peter Trei wrote:
>> [...]
>> > One of the reports on BBC World service (30 minutes ago) had the bus
>> > driver reporting a split open rucksack, with white powder spilling
>> > out.
>> >
>> > My suspicion is that these were real bombs, but the main charges
>> > failed to detonate.
>> >
>> > Modern high explosives are pretty insensitive, and it require a
>> > detonator or blasting cap to get them going.
>>
>> Another theory - these guys were set to go but police nabbed the
>> explosives they were planning to use, but they decided to go ahead
>> anyway (with fake explosives!).
>>
>> Doesn't seem likely, but neither does being as organised as they seem
>> to have been but none of the devices working...
>
>There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
>it's easy to test bombs.


"Co-op mixture" made with the wrong type of weedkiller wouldn't seem
to be too far-fetched a mistake for an amateur bomb-maker to make. One
of various news reports had mention of a "white powder" in conjunction
with a rucksack at one location.

Robin Mayes wrote:

<snip>


> I imagine it'd be a bit hard to complain about faulty detonators too!


Yep! The Sale of Goods Act is unlikely to be invoked here methinks.

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:09:54 +0100, David Hansen
 wrote:


>On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:38:16 GMT someone who may be "Bob Wood"
> wrote this:-
>
>>I think that there are more trains 
>>than stations only in your imagination.
>
>No exact numbers from me. However, I suspect that on certain lines
>at certain times there are more trains than stations in the central
>area (a term I use in a vague way). That may also be the case
>outwith the central area, where the distance between stations is
>much greater.


The Circle Line IME is likely got more trains than stations during the
rush hour due to "intruders" from the Met, District and Hammersmith
and City although the effect will be lessened to some degree when
clearance is required by use of various sidings/extra platforms or
escape routes to other lines. The central parts of the Northern Line
are possibly another candidate for having more trains than platforms
(rather than stations) during the rush hour but I suspect the "excess"
trains (if any) do not amount to more than a few.

On 21 Jul 2005 08:50:23 -0700, "Neil Sluman" 
wrote:


>
>
>Simon Lane wrote:
>> Peter Trei wrote:
>> [...]
>> > One of the reports on BBC World service (30 minutes ago) had the bus
>> > driver reporting a split open rucksack, with white powder spilling
>> > out.
>> >
>> > My suspicion is that these were real bombs, but the main charges
>> > failed to detonate.
>> >
>> > Modern high explosives are pretty insensitive, and it require a
>> > detonator or blasting cap to get them going.
>>
>> Another theory - these guys were set to go but police nabbed the
>> explosives they were planning to use, but they decided to go ahead
>> anyway (with fake explosives!).
>>
>> Doesn't seem likely, but neither does being as organised as they seem
>> to have been but none of the devices working...
>
>There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
>it's easy to test bombs.


"Co-op mixture" made with the wrong type of weedkiller wouldn't seem
to be too far-fetched a mistake for an amateur bomb-maker to make. One
of various news reports had mention of a "white powder" in conjunction
with a rucksack at one location.

Robin Mayes wrote:

<snip>


> I imagine it'd be a bit hard to complain about faulty detonators too!


Yep! The Sale of Goods Act is unlikely to be invoked here methinks.

"Bob Wood"  wrote in message 
news:YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...

> In news:1121959926.353492.204360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com,
> Pat Ricroft  typed:
>
>> Bob Wood wrote:
>> >
>> > LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at
>> > platforms and evacuated to ground level.
>>
>> Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
>> that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
>> stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.
>> Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
>> station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead
>> has been emptied and shunted forward?
>
> I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more trains 
> than stations only in your imagination.  I am sure that some body will be 
> along in due course to give us the exact numbers.


On the Victoria line there are 15 stations or 31 platforms and 37 trains 
during the peaks.

Peter Smyth

"Bob Wood"  wrote in message 
news:YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...

> In news:1121959926.353492.204360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com,
> Pat Ricroft  typed:
>
>> Bob Wood wrote:
>> >
>> > LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at
>> > platforms and evacuated to ground level.
>>
>> Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
>> that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
>> stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.
>> Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
>> station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead
>> has been emptied and shunted forward?
>
> I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more trains 
> than stations only in your imagination.  I am sure that some body will be 
> along in due course to give us the exact numbers.


On the Victoria line there are 15 stations or 31 platforms and 37 trains 
during the peaks.

Peter Smyth

"Peter Smyth"  wrote in message 
news:dbordb$a5$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...

>
> "Bob Wood"  wrote in message 
> news:YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>> In news:1121959926.353492.204360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com,
>> Pat Ricroft  typed:
>>
>>> Bob Wood wrote:
>>> >
>>> > LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at
>>> > platforms and evacuated to ground level.
>>>
>>> Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
>>> that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
>>> stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.
>>> Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
>>> station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead
>>> has been emptied and shunted forward?
>>
>> I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more trains 
>> than stations only in your imagination.  I am sure that some body will be 
>> along in due course to give us the exact numbers.
>
> On the Victoria line there are 15 stations or 31 platforms and 37 trains 
> during the peaks.


So where are there three platforms (or are you counting one at
Northumberland Road?)

tim

"Peter Smyth"  wrote in message 
news:dbordb$a5$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...

>
> "Bob Wood"  wrote in message 
> news:YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>> In news:1121959926.353492.204360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com,
>> Pat Ricroft  typed:
>>
>>> Bob Wood wrote:
>>> >
>>> > LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at
>>> > platforms and evacuated to ground level.
>>>
>>> Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
>>> that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
>>> stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.
>>> Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
>>> station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead
>>> has been emptied and shunted forward?
>>
>> I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more trains 
>> than stations only in your imagination.  I am sure that some body will be 
>> along in due course to give us the exact numbers.
>
> On the Victoria line there are 15 stations or 31 platforms and 37 trains 
> during the peaks.


So where are there three platforms (or are you counting one at
Northumberland Road?)

tim

>> On the Victoria line there are 15 stations or 31 platforms and 37 trains 
>> during the peaks.
>
>So where are there three platforms (or are you counting one at
>Northumberland Road?)


Seven Sisters?

>> On the Victoria line there are 15 stations or 31 platforms and 37 trains 
>> during the peaks.
>
>So where are there three platforms (or are you counting one at
>Northumberland Road?)


Seven Sisters?

Charles Ellson wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:09:54 +0100, David Hansen
>  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:38:16 GMT someone who may be "Bob Wood"
>>  wrote this:-
>>
>>> I think that there are more trains
>>> than stations only in your imagination.
>>
>> No exact numbers from me. However, I suspect that on certain lines
>> at certain times there are more trains than stations in the central
>> area (a term I use in a vague way). That may also be the case
>> outwith the central area, where the distance between stations is
>> much greater.
>
> The Circle Line IME is likely got more trains than stations during
> the rush hour due to "intruders" from the Met, District and
> Hammersmith and City


The Circle Line itself runs only every 8.5 minutes, thus allowing room
for the "intruders".  The timetabled interval between trains of the
combined service is not less than 2 minutes, whereas the stations are
generally 1.5 to 2 minutes' running time apart.  (Farringdon to King's
Cross is the main exception at 3.5 minutes.)  So there are, on average
anyway, more platforms than trains.



> although the effect will be lessened to some
> degree when clearance is required by use of various sidings/extra
> platforms or escape routes to other lines. The central parts of the
> Northern Line are possibly another candidate for having more trains
> than platforms (rather than stations) during the rush hour but I
> suspect the "excess" trains (if any) do not amount to more than a
> few.


I think that generally in the central area, trains run at 2-minute
intervals or more, and stations are 2 minutes apart or less.
-- 
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:51:46 +0100, Paul Terry
 wrote:


>I feel sure that the Waterloo and City has more trains than stations 
>(and probably rather different procedures for evacuation than other 
>lines).


Two and two (in service), I thought?

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:56:19 +0100, David Hansen
 wrote:


>There certainly wasn't when bombs exploded in Manchester.


The difference (and I was unfortunate enough to be there) with the
Manchester bomb was that no-one was killed, or even seriously injured,
because there was a warning given.  Instead, a fairly scummy area of
town and a hovel of a bus station were knocked out, which now they've
come back in a much nicer way I think most people are thankful for
(possibly with tongue slightly in cheek).

The only shame is that the Arndale Centre survived.

The London bombings this time are perhaps quite unusual in that
lightning very rarely strikes twice.  Many commented, however, that a
repeat attack in this case would *really* scare people, as there's
really no way to guard against it.  That, sadly, seems to have come
true.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Charles Ellson wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:09:54 +0100, David Hansen
>  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:38:16 GMT someone who may be "Bob Wood"
>>  wrote this:-
>>
>>> I think that there are more trains
>>> than stations only in your imagination.
>>
>> No exact numbers from me. However, I suspect that on certain lines
>> at certain times there are more trains than stations in the central
>> area (a term I use in a vague way). That may also be the case
>> outwith the central area, where the distance between stations is
>> much greater.
>
> The Circle Line IME is likely got more trains than stations during
> the rush hour due to "intruders" from the Met, District and
> Hammersmith and City


The Circle Line itself runs only every 8.5 minutes, thus allowing room
for the "intruders".  The timetabled interval between trains of the
combined service is not less than 2 minutes, whereas the stations are
generally 1.5 to 2 minutes' running time apart.  (Farringdon to King's
Cross is the main exception at 3.5 minutes.)  So there are, on average
anyway, more platforms than trains.



> although the effect will be lessened to some
> degree when clearance is required by use of various sidings/extra
> platforms or escape routes to other lines. The central parts of the
> Northern Line are possibly another candidate for having more trains
> than platforms (rather than stations) during the rush hour but I
> suspect the "excess" trains (if any) do not amount to more than a
> few.


I think that generally in the central area, trains run at 2-minute
intervals or more, and stations are 2 minutes apart or less.
-- 
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:51:46 +0100, Paul Terry
 wrote:


>I feel sure that the Waterloo and City has more trains than stations 
>(and probably rather different procedures for evacuation than other 
>lines).


Two and two (in service), I thought?

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"tim (moved to sweden)"  wrote in message
news:3kag9dFsfhrhU1@individual.net...

>
> "Peter Smyth"  wrote > >
> > On the Victoria line there are 15 stations or 31 platforms and 37 trains
> > during the peaks.
>
> So where are there three platforms (or are you counting one at
> Northumberland Road?)
>

Seven Sisters

Peter

"tim (moved to sweden)"  wrote in message
news:3kag9dFsfhrhU1@individual.net...

>
> "Peter Smyth"  wrote > >
> > On the Victoria line there are 15 stations or 31 platforms and 37 trains
> > during the peaks.
>
> So where are there three platforms (or are you counting one at
> Northumberland Road?)
>

Seven Sisters

Peter

In news:Qu4VctIyC+3CFAbu@main.machine,
Paul Terry  typed:


> In message <YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>, Bob Wood
>  writes
>
> > I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more
> > trains than stations only in your imagination.


> I feel sure that the Waterloo and City has more trains than stations


But not more trains than platforms.  Of the five trains, four are required 
to work the peak service; the fifth would be in the depot beyond the 
platforms at Waterloo.  There are two platforms at each of the two termini, 
so every train could get to a platform.



-- 
Bob

In news:dbordb$a5$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk,
Peter Smyth  typed:


> "Bob Wood"  wrote in message
> news:YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> > In news:1121959926.353492.204360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com,
> > Pat Ricroft  typed:
> >
> > > Bob Wood wrote:
> > > >
> > > > LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at
> > > > platforms and evacuated to ground level.
> > >
> > > Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help
> > > feeling that there are usually more trains on the system than
> > > there are stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped
> > > between stations. Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get
> > > them to walk along to a station? Or do they hold trains in the
> > > tunnel until the train ahead has been emptied and shunted forward?
> >
> > I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more
> > trains than stations only in your imagination.  I am sure that some
> > body will be along in due course to give us the exact numbers.
>
> On the Victoria line there are 15 stations or 31 platforms and 37
> trains during the peaks.


I think there are 16 stations on the Victoria Line  -  but your point is 
taken.


-- 
Bob

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Simon Lane wrote:


> Neil Sluman wrote:
> [...]
>> There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
>> it's easy to test bombs.
>
> I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction 
> to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they 
> had someone else provide detonators this time?


The detonators worked, though.

A theory i heard is that they were real bombs, made using the same batch 
of explosive as the 7/7 ones, but that in the intervening two weeks, this 
had basically gone off, and was no longer active. I'm slightly dubious 
about this; i believe the explosive in question is acetone peroxide, and 
i'm not aware of a 'going off' pathway for that which operates that 
quickly - there are mentions of it degrading in long-term storage, but two 
weeks is not what i think of as long term. IANAchemist, though.

My own personal theory is that there's a strict alternation between proper 
terrorists and what we might call 'joke terrorists' or perhaps 
'irritationists' - the September 11th terrorists, clearly very seriously 
proper terrorists, were followed by the shoe bomber, a man who PUT BOMBS 
IN HIS SHOES for fuck's sake. Our own 7/7 tube bombers, again proper 
terrorists, although by no means as successful as the September 11th mob, 
are followed by the clowns we had today. We should expect another proper 
bombing before too long, but after that, we can relax until the next round 
of no-hopers do their thing.

tom

-- 
Batman always wins

"Neil Williams"  wrote in message
news:42e0197d.4488584@news.tesco.net...

> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:51:46 +0100, Paul Terry
>  wrote:
>
> >I feel sure that the Waterloo and City has more trains than stations
> >(and probably rather different procedures for evacuation than other
> >lines).
>
> Two and two (in service), I thought?
>

IIRC at least in the peaks the W&C has 4 trains in service. Normally all
passengers alight from a loaded train each time it enters a platform, and at
Waterloo the train runs forward into the headshunt/depot in order to
reverse.

Presumably after the Code Amber evacuation, on other lines trains run
forward ecs to a depot, allowing a following train to enter the same
platform to evacuate.

Peter

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Ross wrote:


> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:52:20 GMT, Bob Wood wrote in
> <8UMDe.7187$Ox6.5483@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>, seen in uk.railway:
>> In news:vHMDe.7101$je1.3004@newsfe7-win.ntli.net,
>> Bob Wood  typed:
> [...]
>>> Eyewitness claiming small explosion in a rucksack   -   no
>>> casualties.  I don't know which site this refers to.
>>>
>>> Also, train managed to continue to Warren Street where it was
>>> evacuated.  I don't know whether this is the same incident.
>>
>> Radio 5 has just reported that these might be very small explosions  -  they
>> are suggesting "detonators only".
>
> BBC News 24 report that LU "sources" are saying that nailbombs
> *without explosive* are involved


I am curious as to what this "bomb without explosive", nail or otherwise, 
is. It seems to me that explosive is a rather important, perhaps even the 
defining, characteristic of a bomb. Are we perhaps dealing with some sort 
of zen buddhist or dadaist terror faction?

tom

-- 
Batman always wins

In news:Qu4VctIyC+3CFAbu@main.machine,
Paul Terry  typed:


> In message <YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>, Bob Wood
>  writes
>
> > I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more
> > trains than stations only in your imagination.


> I feel sure that the Waterloo and City has more trains than stations


But not more trains than platforms.  Of the five trains, four are required 
to work the peak service; the fifth would be in the depot beyond the 
platforms at Waterloo.  There are two platforms at each of the two termini, 
so every train could get to a platform.



-- 
Bob

In news:dbordb$a5$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk,
Peter Smyth  typed:


> "Bob Wood"  wrote in message
> news:YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> > In news:1121959926.353492.204360@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com,
> > Pat Ricroft  typed:
> >
> > > Bob Wood wrote:
> > > >
> > > > LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at
> > > > platforms and evacuated to ground level.
> > >
> > > Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help
> > > feeling that there are usually more trains on the system than
> > > there are stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped
> > > between stations. Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get
> > > them to walk along to a station? Or do they hold trains in the
> > > tunnel until the train ahead has been emptied and shunted forward?
> >
> > I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more
> > trains than stations only in your imagination.  I am sure that some
> > body will be along in due course to give us the exact numbers.
>
> On the Victoria line there are 15 stations or 31 platforms and 37
> trains during the peaks.


I think there are 16 stations on the Victoria Line  -  but your point is 
taken.


-- 
Bob

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Simon Lane wrote:


> Neil Sluman wrote:
> [...]
>> There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
>> it's easy to test bombs.
>
> I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction 
> to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they 
> had someone else provide detonators this time?


The detonators worked, though.

A theory i heard is that they were real bombs, made using the same batch 
of explosive as the 7/7 ones, but that in the intervening two weeks, this 
had basically gone off, and was no longer active. I'm slightly dubious 
about this; i believe the explosive in question is acetone peroxide, and 
i'm not aware of a 'going off' pathway for that which operates that 
quickly - there are mentions of it degrading in long-term storage, but two 
weeks is not what i think of as long term. IANAchemist, though.

My own personal theory is that there's a strict alternation between proper 
terrorists and what we might call 'joke terrorists' or perhaps 
'irritationists' - the September 11th terrorists, clearly very seriously 
proper terrorists, were followed by the shoe bomber, a man who PUT BOMBS 
IN HIS SHOES for fuck's sake. Our own 7/7 tube bombers, again proper 
terrorists, although by no means as successful as the September 11th mob, 
are followed by the clowns we had today. We should expect another proper 
bombing before too long, but after that, we can relax until the next round 
of no-hopers do their thing.

tom

-- 
Batman always wins

"Neil Williams"  wrote in message
news:42e0197d.4488584@news.tesco.net...

> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:51:46 +0100, Paul Terry
>  wrote:
>
> >I feel sure that the Waterloo and City has more trains than stations
> >(and probably rather different procedures for evacuation than other
> >lines).
>
> Two and two (in service), I thought?
>

IIRC at least in the peaks the W&C has 4 trains in service. Normally all
passengers alight from a loaded train each time it enters a platform, and at
Waterloo the train runs forward into the headshunt/depot in order to
reverse.

Presumably after the Code Amber evacuation, on other lines trains run
forward ecs to a depot, allowing a following train to enter the same
platform to evacuate.

Peter

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Ross wrote:


> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:52:20 GMT, Bob Wood wrote in
> <8UMDe.7187$Ox6.5483@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>, seen in uk.railway:
>> In news:vHMDe.7101$je1.3004@newsfe7-win.ntli.net,
>> Bob Wood  typed:
> [...]
>>> Eyewitness claiming small explosion in a rucksack   -   no
>>> casualties.  I don't know which site this refers to.
>>>
>>> Also, train managed to continue to Warren Street where it was
>>> evacuated.  I don't know whether this is the same incident.
>>
>> Radio 5 has just reported that these might be very small explosions  -  they
>> are suggesting "detonators only".
>
> BBC News 24 report that LU "sources" are saying that nailbombs
> *without explosive* are involved


I am curious as to what this "bomb without explosive", nail or otherwise, 
is. It seems to me that explosive is a rather important, perhaps even the 
defining, characteristic of a bomb. Are we perhaps dealing with some sort 
of zen buddhist or dadaist terror faction?

tom

-- 
Batman always wins

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:07:00 +0100, Tom Anderson
 wrote:


>On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Simon Lane wrote:
>
>> Neil Sluman wrote:
>> [...]
>>> There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
>>> it's easy to test bombs.
>>
>> I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction 
>> to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they 
>> had someone else provide detonators this time?
>
>The detonators worked, though.
>
>A theory i heard is that they were real bombs, made using the same batch 
>of explosive as the 7/7 ones, but that in the intervening two weeks, this 
>had basically gone off, and was no longer active. I'm slightly dubious 
>about this; i believe the explosive in question is acetone peroxide, and 
>i'm not aware of a 'going off' pathway for that which operates that 
>quickly - there are mentions of it degrading in long-term storage, but two 
>weeks is not what i think of as long term. IANAchemist, though.
>

If it was a fresh batch made up by amateurs then there could be plenty
of scope for the use of wrong ingredients (especially if domestic
preparations rather than "proper" chemicals were used, thus allowing
for e.g. the wrong type of drain cleaner not containing sulphuric
acid) resulting on this occasion in a benign mixture being produced.
<snip>

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:07:00 +0100, Tom Anderson
 wrote:


>On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Simon Lane wrote:
>
>> Neil Sluman wrote:
>> [...]
>>> There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made.  I can't imagine
>>> it's easy to test bombs.
>>
>> I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction 
>> to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they 
>> had someone else provide detonators this time?
>
>The detonators worked, though.
>
>A theory i heard is that they were real bombs, made using the same batch 
>of explosive as the 7/7 ones, but that in the intervening two weeks, this 
>had basically gone off, and was no longer active. I'm slightly dubious 
>about this; i believe the explosive in question is acetone peroxide, and 
>i'm not aware of a 'going off' pathway for that which operates that 
>quickly - there are mentions of it degrading in long-term storage, but two 
>weeks is not what i think of as long term. IANAchemist, though.
>

If it was a fresh batch made up by amateurs then there could be plenty
of scope for the use of wrong ingredients (especially if domestic
preparations rather than "proper" chemicals were used, thus allowing
for e.g. the wrong type of drain cleaner not containing sulphuric
acid) resulting on this occasion in a benign mixture being produced.
<snip>

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 14:16:36 GMT, turbo wrote:


> Would the same response have happened if the incedent had been 
> north of Watford?


In the current climate, almost certainly.
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13857151.html
(50 010 at Leamington Spa, Oct 1987)

On 21 Jul 2005 08:51:49 -0700, Paul Weaver wrote:


>> ...and England are 10-0 after Australia collapsed for 190!
> 
> Hmm, Are the ashes being played at the OVAL,


Yes, but not yet. Tickets are probably still available.


> which the Austrailians watch in the many Aussie bars of SHEPHERDS BUSH
> and WARREN STREET?


ITYM Earl's Court. Australians will, of course, gravitate to any nearby
watering hole, but EC is where the greatest concentration is.

-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p14486547.html
(37 073 at Wolverhampton, 1985)

In message <Qu4VctIyC+3CFAbu@main.machine>
          Paul Terry  wrote:


> In message <YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>, Bob Wood 
>  writes
> 
> >I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more trains
> >than stations only in your imagination.
> 
> I feel sure that the Waterloo and City has more trains than stations 
> (and probably rather different procedures for evacuation than other 
> lines).
> 


I thought the W&C had two trains and two stations.

-- 
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html>

In message <Qu4VctIyC+3CFAbu@main.machine>
          Paul Terry  wrote:


> In message <YbQDe.20$gN4.14@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>, Bob Wood 
>  writes
> 
> >I don't know exactly how it works, but I think that there are more trains
> >than stations only in your imagination.
> 
> I feel sure that the Waterloo and City has more trains than stations 
> (and probably rather different procedures for evacuation than other 
> lines).
> 


I thought the W&C had two trains and two stations.

-- 
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html>

In message <e4fd278e4d%rail@greywall.demon.co.uk>, Graeme Wall 
 writes


>I thought the W&C had two trains and two stations.


No. Four trains and, for the peak service, six drivers.

-- 
Paul Terry

In message <e4fd278e4d%rail@greywall.demon.co.uk>, Graeme Wall 
 writes


>I thought the W&C had two trains and two stations.


No. Four trains and, for the peak service, six drivers.

-- 
Paul Terry

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:15:08 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote in
, seen in
uk.railway:

> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Ross wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:52:20 GMT, Bob Wood wrote in
> > <8UMDe.7187$Ox6.5483@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>, seen in uk.railway:
> >> In news:vHMDe.7101$je1.3004@newsfe7-win.ntli.net,
> >> Bob Wood  typed:
> > [...]
> >>> Eyewitness claiming small explosion in a rucksack   -   no
> >>> casualties.  I don't know which site this refers to.
> >>>
> >>> Also, train managed to continue to Warren Street where it was
> >>> evacuated.  I don't know whether this is the same incident.
> >>
> >> Radio 5 has just reported that these might be very small explosions  -  they
> >> are suggesting "detonators only".
> >
> > BBC News 24 report that LU "sources" are saying that nailbombs
> > *without explosive* are involved
> 
> I am curious as to what this "bomb without explosive", nail or otherwise, 
> is. It seems to me that explosive is a rather important, perhaps even the 
> defining, characteristic of a bomb. Are we perhaps dealing with some sort 
> of zen buddhist or dadaist terror faction?


Buggered if I know, I'm only reporting what the BBC were telling us. 

Although I'm told by someone who used to play with such things that a
detonator alone is quite capable of taking your hand off, so perhaps,
had there been an intent to frighten rather than kill/injure huge
numbers, a detonator only option would be quite good from a terrorists
POV. Big perhaps as I don't have the faintest idea what I'm talking
about!

-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:15:08 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote in
, seen in
uk.railway:

> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Ross wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:52:20 GMT, Bob Wood wrote in
> > <8UMDe.7187$Ox6.5483@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>, seen in uk.railway:
> >> In news:vHMDe.7101$je1.3004@newsfe7-win.ntli.net,
> >> Bob Wood  typed:
> > [...]
> >>> Eyewitness claiming small explosion in a rucksack   -   no
> >>> casualties.  I don't know which site this refers to.
> >>>
> >>> Also, train managed to continue to Warren Street where it was
> >>> evacuated.  I don't know whether this is the same incident.
> >>
> >> Radio 5 has just reported that these might be very small explosions  -  they
> >> are suggesting "detonators only".
> >
> > BBC News 24 report that LU "sources" are saying that nailbombs
> > *without explosive* are involved
> 
> I am curious as to what this "bomb without explosive", nail or otherwise, 
> is. It seems to me that explosive is a rather important, perhaps even the 
> defining, characteristic of a bomb. Are we perhaps dealing with some sort 
> of zen buddhist or dadaist terror faction?


Buggered if I know, I'm only reporting what the BBC were telling us. 

Although I'm told by someone who used to play with such things that a
detonator alone is quite capable of taking your hand off, so perhaps,
had there been an intent to frighten rather than kill/injure huge
numbers, a detonator only option would be quite good from a terrorists
POV. Big perhaps as I don't have the faintest idea what I'm talking
about!

-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:53:21 +0100, Ross 
wrote:


>On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:15:08 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote in
>, seen in
>uk.railway:
<snip>
>> I am curious as to what this "bomb without explosive", nail or otherwise, 
>> is. It seems to me that explosive is a rather important, perhaps even the 
>> defining, characteristic of a bomb. Are we perhaps dealing with some sort 
>> of zen buddhist or dadaist terror faction?
>
>Buggered if I know, I'm only reporting what the BBC were telling us. 
>
>Although I'm told by someone who used to play with such things that a
>detonator alone is quite capable of taking your hand off, so perhaps,
>had there been an intent to frighten rather than kill/injure huge
>numbers, a detonator only option would be quite good from a terrorists
>POV. Big perhaps as I don't have the faintest idea what I'm talking
>about!


A railway detonator is somewhat larger than the usual explosives
detonator as exhibited occasionally in public. It's some time since I
was near a diagram for one but ISTR that an explosives detonator is
basically a tube with relatively non-secure ends unlike a railway
detonator which is a sealed unit which isn't going to "let go" until
rather more energy has been built up internally.

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 19:49:40 +0100, Charles Ellson wrote in
, seen in uk.railway:

> On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:53:21 +0100, Ross 
> wrote:
[...]
> >Although I'm told by someone who used to play with such things that a
> >detonator alone is quite capable of taking your hand off, so perhaps,
> >had there been an intent to frighten rather than kill/injure huge
> >numbers, a detonator only option would be quite good from a terrorists
> >POV. Big perhaps as I don't have the faintest idea what I'm talking
> >about!
> 
> A railway detonator is somewhat larger than the usual explosives
> detonator as exhibited occasionally in public. [...]


I wasn't talking about railway detonators. The person who spoke to me
used to play with detonators in the army and will happily discuss
(read: bore you silly) with the behaviour of the various explosives
they used. At least he did with me for far too long yesterday.

-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:53:21 +0100, Ross 
wrote:


>On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:15:08 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote in
>, seen in
>uk.railway:
<snip>
>> I am curious as to what this "bomb without explosive", nail or otherwise, 
>> is. It seems to me that explosive is a rather important, perhaps even the 
>> defining, characteristic of a bomb. Are we perhaps dealing with some sort 
>> of zen buddhist or dadaist terror faction?
>
>Buggered if I know, I'm only reporting what the BBC were telling us. 
>
>Although I'm told by someone who used to play with such things that a
>detonator alone is quite capable of taking your hand off, so perhaps,
>had there been an intent to frighten rather than kill/injure huge
>numbers, a detonator only option would be quite good from a terrorists
>POV. Big perhaps as I don't have the faintest idea what I'm talking
>about!


A railway detonator is somewhat larger than the usual explosives
detonator as exhibited occasionally in public. It's some time since I
was near a diagram for one but ISTR that an explosives detonator is
basically a tube with relatively non-secure ends unlike a railway
detonator which is a sealed unit which isn't going to "let go" until
rather more energy has been built up internally.

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 19:49:40 +0100, Charles Ellson wrote in
, seen in uk.railway:

> On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:53:21 +0100, Ross 
> wrote:
[...]
> >Although I'm told by someone who used to play with such things that a
> >detonator alone is quite capable of taking your hand off, so perhaps,
> >had there been an intent to frighten rather than kill/injure huge
> >numbers, a detonator only option would be quite good from a terrorists
> >POV. Big perhaps as I don't have the faintest idea what I'm talking
> >about!
> 
> A railway detonator is somewhat larger than the usual explosives
> detonator as exhibited occasionally in public. [...]


I wasn't talking about railway detonators. The person who spoke to me
used to play with detonators in the army and will happily discuss
(read: bore you silly) with the behaviour of the various explosives
they used. At least he did with me for far too long yesterday.

-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

In article , Pat 
Ricroft  writes

>> LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at platforms and
>> evacuated to ground level.
>
>Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
>that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
>stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.


The numbers vary. The Victoria Line has a peak of 38 trains for 16 
stations and 33 platforms. Overall, the current peak services (pre 7th 
July) involve:

Bakerloo:        32 trains (31 in the evening peak)
Central:         72 trains
Jubilee:         51 trains (see note)
Northern:        91 trains
Piccadilly:      76 trains
Victoria:        38 trains
Waterloo & City:  4 trains

Circle + H&C:    30 trains, plus 2 standing spare
District:        77 trains (67 D stock, 10 C stock)
East London:      6 trains
Metropolitan:    45 trains, plus a half train on the Chesham shuttle

[In the morning peak, one Jubilee train comes out of service shortly 
before the last of the 51 enters service.]


>Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
>station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead has
>been emptied and shunted forward?


The latter is more common, I believe.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather                       | Home: 
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work)             | Web:  <http://www.davros.org>
Fax: +44 870 051 9937                    | Work: 
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

In article , Pat 
Ricroft  writes

>> LT are reporting "Code Amber".  All trains being stopped at platforms and
>> evacuated to ground level.
>
>Just out of interest, how exactly does this work? I can't help feeling
>that there are usually more trains on the system than there are
>stations, and that therefore some trains get stopped between stations.


The numbers vary. The Victoria Line has a peak of 38 trains for 16 
stations and 33 platforms. Overall, the current peak services (pre 7th 
July) involve:

Bakerloo:        32 trains (31 in the evening peak)
Central:         72 trains
Jubilee:         51 trains (see note)
Northern:        91 trains
Piccadilly:      76 trains
Victoria:        38 trains
Waterloo & City:  4 trains

Circle + H&C:    30 trains, plus 2 standing spare
District:        77 trains (67 D stock, 10 C stock)
East London:      6 trains
Metropolitan:    45 trains, plus a half train on the Chesham shuttle

[In the morning peak, one Jubilee train comes out of service shortly 
before the last of the 51 enters service.]


>Do they detrain people in the tunnel and get them to walk along to a
>station? Or do they hold trains in the tunnel until the train ahead has
>been emptied and shunted forward?


The latter is more common, I believe.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather                       | Home: 
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work)             | Web:  <http://www.davros.org>
Fax: +44 870 051 9937                    | Work: 
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: