|
|
Post by dave1 on Oct 25, 2016 12:21:00 GMT
I have been doing some research and came across mention of Voluntary classes and on looking further found that they also did them through the second world war. I found this a bit hard as there was a war on, I have yet to find out if they still do them.
|
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Oct 25, 2016 14:32:30 GMT
I have been doing some research and came across mention of Voluntary classes and on looking further found that they also did them through the second world war. I found this a bit hard as there was a war on, I have yet to find out if they still do them. I don't know about the Operating department but I believe it used to run voluntary classes at the Wood Lane RTC for rolling stock knowledge, such were open to all Underground employees AFAIAA. Engineering voluntary evening classes were held at the Earls Court signal school. Subjects included LT traditional auto signalling, LT traditional controlled signalling also Basic and Advanced Victoria Line signalling, there were also IIRC telephony classes. To do the Victoria line courses one had to have attended and passed the traditional signalling courses. In my first year with LT I attended the auto signalling course which covered 'three homes and a starter' and all the standard auto signalling circuits. I was based at Whitechapel and day shift clocking off time was 1615 so I was allowed to leave at 1545 to travel to Earls Court and arrive in time for the start of the class. The evening class instructors were all unpaid volunteers and were training school instructors, drawing office technical grades and signal and telephone department executives. Back in the day the way to get on in the signal department was to take the voluntary evening classes and then apply for trade tests to gain promotion. I believe the signal training school in the war years was in a disused tunnel at South Kensington (these days part of the lower concourse area) and voluntary classes could have been held then. I believe the operating department school at that time was at Lambeth North in the station basement area and I expect it would also have been host to voluntary classes. I have no idea if any voluntary classes are held today, particularly as training seems to be very modular, more intensive and interspersed with periods of normal work. Also from an operating standpoint I am fairly certain that training is line based and I expect that all staff receive multiple formal training courses. Back in the day LT was very much steeped in 'on the job' and 'monkey see, monkey do' training and only those who put themselves out to further their careers would get more than basic and mandatory training for the role they were initially employed in. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Oct 25, 2016 15:46:24 GMT
I have been doing some research and came across mention of Voluntary classes and on looking further found that they also did them through the second world war. I found this a bit hard as there was a war on, I have yet to find out if they still do them. I don't know about the Operating department but I believe it used to run voluntary classes at the Wood Lane RTC for rolling stock knowledge, such were open to all Underground employees AFAIAA. Engineering voluntary evening classes were held at the Earls Court signal school. Subjects included LT traditional auto signalling, LT traditional controlled signalling also Basic and Advanced Victoria Line signalling, there were also IIRC telephony classes. To do the Victoria line courses one had to have attended and passed the traditional signalling courses. In my first year with LT I attended the auto signalling course which covered 'three homes and a starter' and all the standard auto signalling circuits. I was based at Whitechapel and day shift clocking off time was 1615 so I was allowed to leave at 1545 to travel to Earls Court and arrive in time for the start of the class. The evening class instructors were all unpaid volunteers and were training school instructors, drawing office technical grades and signal and telephone department executives. Back in the day the way to get on in the signal department was to take the voluntary evening classes and then apply for trade tests to gain promotion. I believe the signal training school in the war years was in a disused tunnel at South Kensington (these days part of the lower concourse area) and voluntary classes could have been held then. I believe the operating department school at that time was at Lambeth North in the station basement area and I expect it would also have been host to voluntary classes. I have no idea if any voluntary classes are held today, particularly as training seems to be very modular, more intensive and interspersed with periods of normal work. Also from an operating standpoint I am fairly certain that training is line based and I expect that all staff receive multiple formal training courses. Back in the day LT was very much steeped in 'on the job' and 'monkey see, monkey do' training and only those who put themselves out to further their careers would get more than basic and mandatory training for the role they were initially employed in. RT Thanks for that I did not even think that the engineering side would have had voluntary classes. I have found that the operating department did have certain courses that you had to pass others before taking them which is just like you have said, so very similar although I don't know if the operating instructors did it for free or given some monetary reward. I have seen a film about training which I believe was at Lambeth I will see if I can find the link. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Oct 25, 2016 15:48:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Oct 26, 2016 2:08:52 GMT
I have seen that before, there are also black & white films of the Lambeth school online. I have never seen a film taken in the engineering schools of which there have been several through the years. I worked in the Earl's Court signal training school and also at the South Woodford school which was joint Signals and Communications and then I opened my own Comms Training School at Wood Lane just along the road from the RTC. I also ran training courses at Maxwell House (Ealing Common depot) and Ash House (Arnos Grove) Picc line offices. Over the years I was trained in several places within and without LU, my signal lineman training being done in the first of the two signal training schools in Acton Works. AFAIK the second school which was the Metronet school is extant but the Tube Lines school was built in the Stratford Market depot and the original Acton Works school closed. I did my CET training at Earls Court signal school, my own former Comms school and the Electrical section school at Alperton. Other courses took place at Baker Street offices, Edgware Road Offices and off the job at MSC Letchworth, Ericsson Horsham and at the Transmitton factory in Ashby-de-la-Zouche. AFAIAA voluntary engineering classes fizzled out at or before devolution of engineering although some training was done in the grounds of Signal House in Acton Works. In my days as an instructor at South Woodford in the 1980s I was quite happy to give training in my own time at the end of a day for an hour or two for those who showed an interest in more than the basic course syllabus. The old training culture I think was pretty good because it encouraged those who wanted to get on and showed it by taking an interest in the job. In those days one could transfer from any LT department to any other department in the combine and moving around to different depots and different departments was a great way to gain knowledge and experience of overall railway engineering and operating standards and practices. Of course one could also move to and from the bus departments too. I think these days with devolved lines and everything tending to be line based today's workforce has much less general knowledge of the railway as a whole. The changes in rules & regulations over the years since devolution tend to support that argument for staff in many roles who tend to be almost 'glued' to one line. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Oct 26, 2016 12:58:12 GMT
RT That video has been around for quite some time. I now have to investigate the engineering side re Voluntary classes I never really knew like I said and to find that they used numerous locations. The operating side from what I have found so far it was Lambeth then White City and they tried some other locations I think to encourage staff who lived some distance from White City, I don't know if Ashfield House was used.
|
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Oct 27, 2016 2:42:45 GMT
RT That video has been around for quite some time. I now have to investigate the engineering side re Voluntary classes I never really knew like I said and to find that they used numerous locations. The operating side from what I have found so far it was Lambeth then White City and they tried some other locations I think to encourage staff who lived some distance from White City, I don't know if Ashfield House was used. I think Ashfield House was originally used for line based training, presumably for District line operational staff but I believe staff from other lines may subsequently have been trained there. Certainly Ash House at Arnos Grove was very much used for Picc operational staff training, I used to use the same facility to deliver Comms training to Picc line engineering staff. When I think about training in general another popular venue is Paddington College near Edgware Road Bakerloo station where lift & escalator training is/was undertaken for engineering staff and I would not be surprised to learn that operating staff were/can be trained there although I suspect once again that they would be trained in line based locations. Substation access training for engineering was done originally at 10A Wood Lane offices where the management side of signals training division were based. When HT Mains was outsourced to Seeboard/Powerlink the training then moved to their depot between Archway and Tufnell Park stations (the same estate locale where LU dustcarts were located!) and subsequently then moved again to somewhere near Waterloo station. Seeboard/Powerlink also ran familiarisation courses before granting permits and keys for access to some locations. I had to attend one of those for a building that I had worked in on and off for 20 years and I could not help but chuckle when the 21 year old 'house manager' delivered the one day course. I suspect that skills training for Bill Posters was done at Jamestown Road Offices in Camden Town, those offices subsequently being ceded to the company that took over the LT Advertising department (the name of which escapes me after all these years!) You will find that there were different types of training on the engineering side, formal training and informal training. For instance, prior to the establishment of the signal new works training facility at South Woodford station (right next to the 1980s temporary Central Line Post Run depot) staff were trained in signal wiring skills at Hatton Cross station before the Picc line extension to Heathrow was completed. Other locations where informal existing staff led wiring training took place were the signals equipment 'prefabbing' sites such as the old Angel tram depot (these days a covered market) and the basement of Pelham Street offices at South Kensington. That was informal training for new starters to teach them the basics of wiring signalling equipment correctly to standard. I had no such training when I started, I learnt those skills on the job, the chargehand of a gang would oversee wiring done by new wiremen and report to the supervisor anyone who couldn't acquire the necessary skills in a reasonable time. In those days many staff started one week and resigned or were sacked before completing probation. The staff throughput in the late 1970s was conspicuous, back then one could easily walk into another job unlike recent decades. Being from the 'old school' and having been an training school instructor, I constantly delivered informal training to my own staff as a chargehand, installation inspector and as a signal & comms Technical Officer. Modularised formal training interspersed with 'on the job informal training' is IMHO the best way for willing candidates to succeed and for the wheat to be separated from the chaff. It isn't politically correct but I never shrunk from telling anyone to go and find something they were good at when they simply couldn't grasp the skills and knowledge that LU required of them. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Oct 28, 2016 15:19:59 GMT
RT Thanks even more I thought about if you could use any room for these sort of classes and it shows that you can use just about anywhere unless you need the piece of equipment to demonstrate. Ad hoc training I think is used in a lot of companies and if you have the right people it can be most useful. I have some material from a course but not understanding it as I have not been trained so to speak.
|
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Oct 28, 2016 16:21:37 GMT
RT Thanks even more I thought about if you could use any room for these sort of classes and it shows that you can use just about anywhere unless you need the piece of equipment to demonstrate. Ad hoc training I think is used in a lot of companies and if you have the right people it can be most useful. I have some material from a course but not understanding it as I have not been trained so to speak. What kind of course? Operational, SE&C Engineering, P-Way, Substation, H&S, Management ? |
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Oct 29, 2016 8:52:29 GMT
RT Thanks even more I thought about if you could use any room for these sort of classes and it shows that you can use just about anywhere unless you need the piece of equipment to demonstrate. Ad hoc training I think is used in a lot of companies and if you have the right people it can be most useful. I have some material from a course but not understanding it as I have not been trained so to speak. What kind of course? Operational, SE&C Engineering, P-Way, Substation, H&S, Management ? RT They are operational for train operators, the notes for the course are train equipment which I can understand some of the terms dead mans handle but its when it goes into more detail. I wish it was for signals as I am sure you would be able to help perhaps one day. |
|
|
|
Post by Nortube on Oct 29, 2016 16:05:30 GMT
I'm rather late catching up on things, as usual  If you have any train equipment queries, post them here and I#ll probably be able to help you. By material for the course, do you mean the course handouts? Over time, I gradually made up a series of notes based on the Guards / Motorman courses, including diagrams etc. for use by others and for helping Guards to refresh their knowledge before going up got driver (the contents Motorman's course at the school was very similar to that of the Guard's course in most respects as the Guard was trained as an emergency Motorman and expected to know almost everything that a driver would. This made it easier for the prospective Motorman as he would already be familiar with the subjects rather than having to learn totally alien things like a Guard would. There are a couple of subjects here, but I don't think I included any notes with my own diagrams: [ Click here ]At the school (White City, then), both the Guard's and Motorman courses included one week Rules and Regs (signalling, traction current, etc.) and one week Train Equipment (the equipment on the train, how it worked, faults, dealing with defects etc. There were usually lots of handouts given out on most of the course subjects. One difference between the Guard and Motorman courses was that, especially with the train equipment, the course was more detailed in that the subjects the Motorman would have covered on the Guard were covered more quickly, but some of the more finer points skimmed over in the Guards course were covered in more detail, such as the RPI operation. There was also at least one (that I can remember) additional subject that was not covered in the Guards course - Compressors. This covered the detailed 50v control of the compressors (that eventually switched in / out the 630v supply to them) and included the Compressor Isolating Switch, Compressor Governor, Compressor Governor Cut Out Switch and also the compressor control buttons in the cab. I think the whole section was allocated two hours. The main difference between the two courses was the exam at the end of the time at the school. The exam was a verbal one and usually taken in groups of 2 or 3 and was based on the theory of what had been taught at the school (practical stock training and line information / familiarisation training would be given locally on the trainee's allocated line after passing out at the school). The Guard was expected to know all the basics but was given some leeway as long as they didn't kill anyone as a result of their actions (even then, they often got a second chance to correct things. Generally most Guards would pass first time. If not, they were put back in a class for a few days and told to revise. It was different for a Motorman. He could be asked questions on anything that he had been taught over the past few weeks and expected to know the answer in every minute detail. More importantly, he had to understand what he had been taught. It was not enough to know the sequence in which a defect was carried out, he had to know WHY he was doing it. HOW other equipment was involved, the position of any piece of relevant equipment at any stage of the defect, the air pressure, the voltage, the fuse rating etc. as applicable and so on. The Motorman had to be on his toes all the while, especially if there were two or three being examined together. The examiner would give the symptoms of a defect to a Motorman and then part way through say to the next - you, carry on. If the previous Motorman had made a mistake and you carried on without correcting it, you were also at fault. Often an examiner would not correct an error and see how far the Motorman dug himself into a very big pit as he gave himself multiple defects because he forgot to isolate something or change a fuse. The examiner may ask several non-defect questions to test the person's knowledge, such as "name the position of all the RPA contactors as you motor from Off to Parallel", although more likely it was just "what are the positions of the P S and G contactors in Off, Shunt, Series and Parallel". However, you had to know everything just in case! If there was a group of three, it was not unknown for one of them to have been eliminated by the mid morning break and possibly the second person eliminated by lunch break, leaving just one for the rest of the day. Generally, if you weren't too bad, you were put back in a class to be re-examined the next day or by the end of the week. Occasionally, you could be put back for the whole week to do train equipment again. If you killed someone or really screwed up, you were normally sent back to your depot. Options (on the examiner's recommendation) were usually either return in a month just for re exam, or re-take the course afresh some time in the future. |
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Oct 30, 2016 2:44:53 GMT
What kind of course? Operational, SE&C Engineering, P-Way, Substation, H&S, Management ? RT They are operational for train operators, the notes for the course are train equipment which I can understand some of the terms dead mans handle but its when it goes into more detail. I wish it was for signals as I am sure you would be able to help perhaps one day. Dave, I am no expert but I do have notes about train equipment, my interest in LT was the whole combine including all departments to a greater or lesser extent as I dealt with many of them over the years. Your starter for 5 is B for bucket, for 5 more points BIC for brake isolating cock ........... I cannot recall all the abbreviations OTTOMH but I do have rolling stock notes and of course it helps to have some idea of what is beneath the seats in the various stocks such as door operating valves, train radio base station, train radio junction unit, compressor gauge, shorting bar and so much more etc. Now into my twelfth year of retirement and not only away from the job but away from London such things are far from the forefront of my mind these days. Back in the day when the Car Examiner would work on a train while in passenger service many pieces of equipment were seen as he asked passengers to leave their seats to work on sticky door valves and other problems. Before I joined LTE I used to wonder what all those abbreviations above the seats such as TRV meant but once 'in the family' it becomes easier to deduce what an indicator refers to but keeping one's ears and eyes open in the right quarters. |
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Oct 30, 2016 3:10:51 GMT
I'm rather late catching up on things, as usual If you have any train equipment queries, post them here and I#ll probably be able to help you. By material for the course, do you mean the course handouts? Over time, I gradually made up a series of notes based on the Guards / Motorman courses, including diagrams etc. for use by others and for helping Guards to refresh their knowledge before going up got driver (the contents Motorman's course at the school was very similar to that of the Guard's course in most respects as the Guard was trained as an emergency Motorman and expected to know almost everything that a driver would. This made it easier for the prospective Motorman as he would already be familiar with the subjects rather than having to learn totally alien things like a Guard would. There are a couple of subjects here, but I don't think I included any notes with my own diagrams: [ Click here ]At the school (White City, then), both the Guard's and Motorman courses included one week Rules and Regs (signalling, traction current, etc.) and one week Train Equipment (the equipment on the train, how it worked, faults, dealing with defects etc. There were usually lots of handouts given out on most of the course subjects. One difference between the Guard and Motorman courses was that, especially with the train equipment, the course was more detailed in that the subjects the Motorman would have covered on the Guard were covered more quickly, but some of the more finer points skimmed over in the Guards course were covered in more detail, such as the RPI operation. There was also at least one (that I can remember) additional subject that was not covered in the Guards course - Compressors. This covered the detailed 50v control of the compressors (that eventually switched in / out the 630v supply to them) and included the Compressor Isolating Switch, Compressor Governor, Compressor Governor Cut Out Switch and also the compressor control buttons in the cab. I think the whole section was allocated two hours. The main difference between the two courses was the exam at the end of the time at the school. The exam was a verbal one and usually taken in groups of 2 or 3 and was based on the theory of what had been taught at the school (practical stock training and line information / familiarisation training would be given locally on the trainee's allocated line after passing out at the school). The Guard was expected to know all the basics but was given some leeway as long as they didn't kill anyone as a result of their actions (even then, they often got a second chance to correct things. Generally most Guards would pass first time. If not, they were put back in a class for a few days and told to revise. It was different for a Motorman. He could be asked questions on anything that he had been taught over the past few weeks and expected to know the answer in every minute detail. More importantly, he had to understand what he had been taught. It was not enough to know the sequence in which a defect was carried out, he had to know WHY he was doing it. HOW other equipment was involved, the position of any piece of relevant equipment at any stage of the defect, the air pressure, the voltage, the fuse rating etc. as applicable and so on. The Motorman had to be on his toes all the while, especially if there were two or three being examined together. The examiner would give the symptoms of a defect to a Motorman and then part way through say to the next - you, carry on. If the previous Motorman had made a mistake and you carried on without correcting it, you were also at fault. Often an examiner would not correct an error and see how far the Motorman dug himself into a very big pit as he gave himself multiple defects because he forgot to isolate something or change a fuse. The examiner may ask several non-defect questions to test the person's knowledge, such as "name the position of all the RPA contactors as you motor from Off to Parallel", although more likely it was just "what are the positions of the P S and G contactors in Off, Shunt, Series and Parallel". However, you had to know everything just in case! If there was a group of three, it was not unknown for one of them to have been eliminated by the mid morning break and possibly the second person eliminated by lunch break, leaving just one for the rest of the day. Generally, if you weren't too bad, you were put back in a class to be re-examined the next day or by the end of the week. Occasionally, you could be put back for the whole week to do train equipment again. If you killed someone or really screwed up, you were normally sent back to your depot. Options (on the examiner's recommendation) were usually either return in a month just for re exam, or re-take the course afresh some time in the future. Having worked in the RTC installing additional fire alarm cabling and call points circa 1980 I had a good look around all the demo rooms, mocked up train cabs and the model railway too. The equipment was there for all to see and thus I had a better idea than none at all of what systems were installed on the stocks at the time. As a CET I quickly learned about on board train radio, PA and PEA equipment. Later when I ran the CSDE trackside installation work packages on the H&C I came to know and understand the on board CSDE equipment after meeting the train technicians who had to maintain that end of the system. I also knew a couple of LT PIcc line guards socially before joining LTE and got some insight from them into operating shift patterns, rostering, incidents etc. At the time it meant little but of course once 'in the family' such memories of otherwise forgotten chatter became useful pieces in the jigsaw that was the combine. Of course when I joined the firm it was practice for the Traffic Circular to contain useful snippets of train equipment diagrams so that train crews could refresh their knowledge of such things as fuse and switch locations and circuitry, the compressed air distribution etc. I used to read them all. These days I think the whole of LUL is probably full of people who have been given so many courses, manuals and handouts that they will never have the knowledge in their memory that many of us did decades ago when we had to teach ourselves the details of many topics that weren't given more than a scant airing in the classroom. The rule book alone has been expanded to a point that makes it impossible to 'know word for word' the rules pertaining to any given task but back in the day that was what was expected of staff in most departments. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Oct 30, 2016 7:33:49 GMT
I'm rather late catching up on things, as usual If you have any train equipment queries, post them here and I#ll probably be able to help you. By material for the course, do you mean the course handouts? Over time, I gradually made up a series of notes based on the Guards / Motorman courses, including diagrams etc. for use by others and for helping Guards to refresh their knowledge before going up got driver (the contents Motorman's course at the school was very similar to that of the Guard's course in most respects as the Guard was trained as an emergency Motorman and expected to know almost everything that a driver would. This made it easier for the prospective Motorman as he would already be familiar with the subjects rather than having to learn totally alien things like a Guard would. There are a couple of subjects here, but I don't think I included any notes with my own diagrams: [ Click here ]At the school (White City, then), both the Guard's and Motorman courses included one week Rules and Regs (signalling, traction current, etc.) and one week Train Equipment (the equipment on the train, how it worked, faults, dealing with defects etc. There were usually lots of handouts given out on most of the course subjects. One difference between the Guard and Motorman courses was that, especially with the train equipment, the course was more detailed in that the subjects the Motorman would have covered on the Guard were covered more quickly, but some of the more finer points skimmed over in the Guards course were covered in more detail, such as the RPI operation. There was also at least one (that I can remember) additional subject that was not covered in the Guards course - Compressors. This covered the detailed 50v control of the compressors (that eventually switched in / out the 630v supply to them) and included the Compressor Isolating Switch, Compressor Governor, Compressor Governor Cut Out Switch and also the compressor control buttons in the cab. I think the whole section was allocated two hours. The main difference between the two courses was the exam at the end of the time at the school. The exam was a verbal one and usually taken in groups of 2 or 3 and was based on the theory of what had been taught at the school (practical stock training and line information / familiarisation training would be given locally on the trainee's allocated line after passing out at the school). The Guard was expected to know all the basics but was given some leeway as long as they didn't kill anyone as a result of their actions (even then, they often got a second chance to correct things. Generally most Guards would pass first time. If not, they were put back in a class for a few days and told to revise. It was different for a Motorman. He could be asked questions on anything that he had been taught over the past few weeks and expected to know the answer in every minute detail. More importantly, he had to understand what he had been taught. It was not enough to know the sequence in which a defect was carried out, he had to know WHY he was doing it. HOW other equipment was involved, the position of any piece of relevant equipment at any stage of the defect, the air pressure, the voltage, the fuse rating etc. as applicable and so on. The Motorman had to be on his toes all the while, especially if there were two or three being examined together. The examiner would give the symptoms of a defect to a Motorman and then part way through say to the next - you, carry on. If the previous Motorman had made a mistake and you carried on without correcting it, you were also at fault. Often an examiner would not correct an error and see how far the Motorman dug himself into a very big pit as he gave himself multiple defects because he forgot to isolate something or change a fuse. The examiner may ask several non-defect questions to test the person's knowledge, such as "name the position of all the RPA contactors as you motor from Off to Parallel", although more likely it was just "what are the positions of the P S and G contactors in Off, Shunt, Series and Parallel". However, you had to know everything just in case! If there was a group of three, it was not unknown for one of them to have been eliminated by the mid morning break and possibly the second person eliminated by lunch break, leaving just one for the rest of the day. Generally, if you weren't too bad, you were put back in a class to be re-examined the next day or by the end of the week. Occasionally, you could be put back for the whole week to do train equipment again. If you killed someone or really screwed up, you were normally sent back to your depot. Options (on the examiner's recommendation) were usually either return in a month just for re exam, or re-take the course afresh some time in the future. Nortube Thanks for the link some of the material I have is on there and it is much clearer than what I have so I will look at your site a bit more and come back on what I don't understand. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Oct 30, 2016 7:36:58 GMT
RT They are operational for train operators, the notes for the course are train equipment which I can understand some of the terms dead mans handle but its when it goes into more detail. I wish it was for signals as I am sure you would be able to help perhaps one day. Dave, I am no expert but I do have notes about train equipment, my interest in LT was the whole combine including all departments to a greater or lesser extent as I dealt with many of them over the years. Your starter for 5 is B for bucket, for 5 more points BIC for brake isolating cock ........... I cannot recall all the abbreviations OTTOMH but I do have rolling stock notes and of course it helps to have some idea of what is beneath the seats in the various stocks such as door operating valves, train radio base station, train radio junction unit, compressor gauge, shorting bar and so much more etc. Now into my twelfth year of retirement and not only away from the job but away from London such things are far from the forefront of my mind these days. Back in the day when the Car Examiner would work on a train while in passenger service many pieces of equipment were seen as he asked passengers to leave their seats to work on sticky door valves and other problems. Before I joined LTE I used to wonder what all those abbreviations above the seats such as TRV meant but once 'in the family' it becomes easier to deduce what an indicator refers to but keeping one's ears and eyes open in the right quarters. RT Thanks again as you can see in my post to Nortube some of the material is on his site the other material I have looks at brake positions and pressure going into the brake cylinders. How I wish there was a site where all this could be put and it would increase not just my understanding/knowledge but others as well. |
|
