|
Post by snoggle on May 8, 2018 23:50:04 GMT
Heaven forfend TfL have published an authority paper seeking permission for funding and procurment authority to award the contract for new Picc Line trains with options for the supply of stock on other lines! I've not read the paper in detail but here's the link. content.tfl.gov.uk/pic-20180516-item08-deep-tube-update.pdfMODS - you may well move this post elsewhere as I've not extensively checked if we already have a Deep Tube Upgrade thread.
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on May 9, 2018 6:17:15 GMT
some items:
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on May 9, 2018 6:31:51 GMT
MODS - you may well move this post elsewhere as I've not extensively checked if we already have a Deep Tube Upgrade thread. There have been various threads dotted around, but as the plans are now becoming more concrete, I think it’s best to leave this thread here and rename it to a general Piccadilly Line upgrade thread. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by brigham on May 9, 2018 7:48:26 GMT
I notice that running costs, environmental impact &c. have been included in the tendering specifications, which is good. I haven't noticed any reference to the human cost, though. How many long and short term jobs will each bidder be creating or safeguarding?
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on May 9, 2018 7:51:11 GMT
Unlike the last invitation to tender (18 January 2016) there's no mention of platform edge doors which the TfL feasibility study (October 2014) said would be necessary for driverless operation. Obviously that will significantly reduce the cost and avoid having to hold lengthy (and probably expensive) negotiations with the unions in order to get the drivers to train on new stock that would make their job redundant (negotiations allegedly took four years on the Paris Metro when M-1 went driverless).
There is still a slim hope that I'll be trained on the new stock as the Central Line will be getting new trains after the Piccadilly (August 2023-2026) and Bakerloo (2026-202?). I retire January 2028.
|
|
|
Post by melikepie on May 9, 2018 8:15:58 GMT
This does bring up some interesting questions.
With it mentioning Ealing Broadway after the upgrade, does that mean the Piccadilly Line is going to absorb the District Line branch or will there be three lines serving Ealing Broadway?
What is the remodelling for and needed around Chiswick Park?
What impact will the upgrade have on the ability to run Piccadilly Line trains as replacement District Line trains between Barons Court and Acton Town?
Why is there no mention of Turnham Green, despite the previous consultation?
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on May 9, 2018 8:22:35 GMT
This does bring up some interesting questions. With it mentioning Ealing Broadway after the upgrade, does that mean the Piccadilly Line is going to absorb the District Line branch or will there be three lines serving Ealing Broadway? What is the remodelling for and needed around Chiswick Park? What impact will the upgrade have on the ability to run Piccadilly Line trains as replacement District Line trains between Barons Court and Acton Town? Why is there no mention of Turnham Green, despite the previous consultation? And of course District trains would still need to run to Ealing in order to access the depot.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on May 9, 2018 8:33:16 GMT
This does bring up some interesting questions. With it mentioning Ealing Broadway after the upgrade, does that mean the Piccadilly Line is going to absorb the District Line branch or will there be three lines serving Ealing Broadway? What is the remodelling for and needed around Chiswick Park? What impact will the upgrade have on the ability to run Piccadilly Line trains as replacement District Line trains between Barons Court and Acton Town? Why is there no mention of Turnham Green, despite the previous consultation? And of course District trains would still need to run to Ealing in order to access the depot. That suggests the District will no longer serve Ealing Broadway. I've never worked the District or Piccadilly but I'm pretty sure the depot can be accessed from Acton Town so District line trains can access it from there rather than having to go to Ealing
|
|
|
Post by harbour on May 9, 2018 8:39:22 GMT
With it mentioning Ealing Broadway after the upgrade, does that mean the Piccadilly Line is going to absorb the District Line branch or will there be three lines serving Ealing Broadway? From the "New Tube For London" 2014 Feasibility report: Ealing Broadway - The Ealing Broadway branch of the District line could in future be served by the Piccadilly line. The Piccadilly line upgrade would provide sufficient train paths through central London to enable this change, which would allow a significant uplift in District line services to Richmond and Wimbledon, greatly benefiting customers on those branches. In order to achieve this, Chiswick Park platforms would need to be relocated to the Richmond branch of the District line. This would increase the number of trains stopping at this station from the current 6-7tph to 12-15tph.
|
|
bigvern
Posts: 1,019
Member is Online
|
Post by bigvern on May 9, 2018 8:46:33 GMT
The remodeling at chiswick park I would presume is to have new pointwork to the east of chiswick park to allow picadilly line trains to cross from the fast onto the local line and vica versa to serve this station without the need to run over the local lines to/from Hammersmith, if a new signalling system is installed may not be the same as the 4LM, and avoids conflicts,
only question is how they manage District trains to Ealing Common depot.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on May 9, 2018 8:47:22 GMT
And of course District trains would still need to run to Ealing in order to access the depot. That suggests the District will no longer serve Ealing Broadway. I've never worked the District or Piccadilly but I'm pretty sure the depot can be accessed from Acton Town so District line trains can access it from there rather than having to go to Ealing From what I understand, Ealing Common depot can’t be accessed from the WB line at Acton.
|
|
|
Post by PiccNT on May 9, 2018 8:52:18 GMT
That suggests the District will no longer serve Ealing Broadway. I've never worked the District or Piccadilly but I'm pretty sure the depot can be accessed from Acton Town so District line trains can access it from there rather than having to go to Ealing From what I understand, Ealing Common depot can’t be accessed from the WB line at Acton. That's correct. Only accessible at the moment from the two EB platforms.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on May 9, 2018 8:59:08 GMT
From what I understand, Ealing Common depot can’t be accessed from the WB line at Acton. That's correct. Only accessible at the moment from the two EB platforms. So District trains would still need to run to Ealing Broadway as reversing in the WB platform at Ealing Common would be a pain.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on May 9, 2018 9:00:28 GMT
Chiswick Park station (which is Grade II listed) is going to need some major engineering work, the Ealing Broadway branch goes over a bridge on the north side of Acton Lane with the platforms on the same level while the Richmond branch goes under the road on the south side of Acton Lane.
|
|
|
Post by alicarr on May 9, 2018 9:36:27 GMT
For those who haven't seen it, there is a nice article (from 2014) at London Reconnections on the Piccadilly Line upgrade. It has a section on the Piccadilly Line taking over the Ealing Broadway branch, and some of the possible consequences (particularly for Chiswick Park and Turnham Green). Edit: London Reconnections have put out a new article today on the Piccadilly upgrade, although the longer 2014 article is still well worth a read.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on May 9, 2018 9:45:39 GMT
The remodeling at chiswick park I would presume is to have new pointwork to the east of Chiswick Park to allow picadilly line trains to cross from the fast onto the local line and vica versa to serve this station . I don't think it's as simple as that This means resiting them about fifty yards further south, and about thirty feet lower. Assuming the existing entrance can be adapted for access to platforms below, rather than above, the concourse, there seems to be space for an eastbound platform just to the west of the bridge carrying Acton Lane across the Richmond branch, which could be accessed by a subway under the road. Westbound is trickier (because the eastbound track is in the way) but east of the road bridge there may be space between the tracks where they diverge to allow the eastbound to dive under the Ealing branch. (This would be an island, but there is insufficient length to accommodate an eastbound platform face before the diveunder) However, I do wonder whether it would be worth it, as Gunnersbury, which would then be on the same line, is only ten minutes walk away. View from the bridge carrying Acton Lane over the Richmond branch (which is the line seen on the right (e/b track hidden by tree)). Bridge carrying Ealing branch over Acton Lane in centre, station entrance on left
|
|
|
Post by toby on May 9, 2018 10:54:01 GMT
It mentions walkthrough trains. Are there any turns sharper/harsher than on the subsurface line that could make it dangerous to stand on the gangway?
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on May 9, 2018 11:18:56 GMT
ISTR employees on here discounting Chiswick Park moving to the Richmond branch last time it was mentioned, because the line is on a gradient. Has something changed now plans are firming up?
The District will look very odd, with residual services to Acton/Ealing and Olympia. I wonder whether swapping Northfields and Ealing was ever investigated.
3.4 Following on from the modernisation of the Victoria, Jubilee, Northern and Sub- Surface lines, the DTUP will form the final phase of LU’s current line modernisation programme
Tacit acknowledgement that anything further for the Jub and Northern will not happen (which was known anyway).
Six metres longer - the same length then as the 59ts. Wonder whether this is a co-incidence, or based on new surveys of platforms, or just playing safe by going for a known value?
|
|
|
Post by melikepie on May 9, 2018 13:19:10 GMT
If Chiswick Park was moved to the Richmond Branch, would District trains still run to Acton Town? And if not, what would be the point of the four tracks? More test tracks instead?
|
|
|
Post by ted672 on May 9, 2018 15:05:01 GMT
It's an interesting plan for Ealing Broadway, however, had sufficient S stock been ordered, (probably too late to order more) it may have been better to transfer the Rayners Lane branch to the District. This would give common stock using the same signalling for the District and Met and also solve the Ealing Common depot and Chiswick Park issues. Or is that too simple an idea?
|
|
|
Post by nig on May 9, 2018 15:45:11 GMT
It's an interesting plan for Ealing Broadway, however, had sufficient S stock been ordered, (probably too late to order more) it may have been better to transfer the Rayners Lane branch to the District. This would give common stock using the same signalling for the District and Met and also solve the Ealing Common depot and Chiswick Park issues. Or is that too simple an idea? not that simple think the problem is they want more trains on richmond branch so cant physically fit enough trains on the line to do this possibly because of earls court but not certain why also the bridges are too low for S stock to run full speed on rayners branch so need a lot of track lowering
|
|
|
Post by nig on May 9, 2018 15:45:59 GMT
If Chiswick Park was moved to the Richmond Branch, would District trains still run to Acton Town? And if not, what would be the point of the four tracks? More test tracks instead? would still need the line to move trains to and from ealing common depot
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on May 9, 2018 15:56:05 GMT
It's an interesting plan for Ealing Broadway, however, had sufficient S stock been ordered, (probably too late to order more) it may have been better to transfer the Rayners Lane branch to the District. This would give common stock using the same signalling for the District and Met and also solve the Ealing Common depot and Chiswick Park issues. Or is that too simple an idea? District to Rayners would need cutbacks elsewhere. Someone with a better knowledge of the timetables than me might be able to say what the peak frequencies and journey times on the Rayners and Ealing branches are: the number of extra S stocks needed being the difference between the round trip time/service interval ratios on the two branches. Cutting back the service to terminate at Rayners would help, but would probably not be enough. There would of course be one supernumary S8 thanks to cancellation of the Watford extension, but that on its own would not be enough. With the advent of TfL-X-Liz at Ealing Broadway, is there scope for the Ealing Broadway service (whether operated by the Picc or the District) to be cut back to an Acton Town - Ealing Broadway shuttle, thereby improving capacity on the other branches? (It could be operated by either S stock or 1973 stock, (or anything in the Acton museum that's in working order..........................) Another thought is to do with how to deal with compromise height and/or platform doors at Ealing Common if different stocks are in use there. The use of platform doors would make it straiughtforward and safe to have only one of the two types call there - i.e Ealing Common would be served by only one of the two lines passing through. The doors would remain shut when trains of the other type whizz through.
|
|
|
Post by nig on May 9, 2018 17:24:03 GMT
It's an interesting plan for Ealing Broadway, however, had sufficient S stock been ordered, (probably too late to order more) it may have been better to transfer the Rayners Lane branch to the District. This would give common stock using the same signalling for the District and Met and also solve the Ealing Common depot and Chiswick Park issues. Or is that too simple an idea? District to Rayners would need cutbacks elsewhere. Someone with a better knowledge of the timetables than me might be able to say what the peak frequencies and journey times on the Rayners and Ealing branches are: the number of extra S stocks needed being the difference between the round trip time/service interval ratios on the two branches. Cutting back the service to terminate at Rayners would help, but would probably not be enough. There would of course be one supernumary S8 thanks to cancellation of the Watford extension, but that on its own would not be enough. With the advent of TfL-X-Liz at Ealing Broadway, is there scope for the Ealing Broadway service (whether operated by the Picc or the District) to be cut back to an Acton Town - Ealing Broadway shuttle, thereby improving capacity on the other branches? (It could be operated by either S stock or 1973 stock, (or anything in the Acton museum that's in working order..........................) Another thought is to do with how to deal with compromise height and/or platform doors at Ealing Common if different stocks are in use there. The use of platform doors would make it straiughtforward and safe to have only one of the two types call there - i.e Ealing Common would be served by only one of the two lines passing through. The doors would remain shut when trains of the other type whizz through. Acton reversers would really mess up the piccadilly line as you cant send a pic line east while a train is going into the sidings and most of the time they are held outside .. at the moment there is no mention of platform edge doors and the height issues havent been a problem for the last 50 odd years although if the piccadilly did ealing broadway there wouldn't be an issue
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2018 18:02:38 GMT
You could send them east if you ran them down the local but again that wouldn’t be always practical either
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on May 9, 2018 18:36:36 GMT
You could send them east if you ran them down the local but again that wouldn’t be always practical either Why not? - there wouldn't be any of those pesky District Line trains needing it until Turnham Green.
|
|
|
Post by nig on May 10, 2018 11:40:54 GMT
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on May 11, 2018 6:26:14 GMT
It mentions walkthrough trains. Are there any turns sharper/harsher than on the subsurface line that could make it dangerous to stand on the gangway? The trains are planned to be articulated. The end throw of conventional cars would be too great to permit anyways.
|
|
|
Post by countryman on May 11, 2018 7:52:53 GMT
It mentions walkthrough trains. Are there any turns sharper/harsher than on the subsurface line that could make it dangerous to stand on the gangway? The trains are planned to be articulated. The end throw of conventional cars would be too great to permit anyways. Yes, in the area of South Kensington.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on May 12, 2018 19:36:01 GMT
It's an interesting plan for Ealing Broadway, however, had sufficient S stock been ordered, (probably too late to order more) it may have been better to transfer the Rayners Lane branch to the District. This would give common stock using the same signalling for the District and Met and also solve the Ealing Common depot and Chiswick Park issues. Or is that too simple an idea? District to Rayners would need cutbacks elsewhere. Someone with a better knowledge of the timetables than me might be able to say what the peak frequencies and journey times on the Rayners and Ealing branches are: the number of extra S stocks needed being the difference between the round trip time/service interval ratios on the two branches. Cutting back the service to terminate at Rayners would help, but would probably not be enough. There would of course be one supernumary S8 thanks to cancellation of the Watford extension, but that on its own would not be enough. With the advent of TfL-X-Liz at Ealing Broadway, is there scope for the Ealing Broadway service (whether operated by the Picc or the District) to be cut back to an Acton Town - Ealing Broadway shuttle, thereby improving capacity on the other branches? (It could be operated by either S stock or 1973 stock, (or anything in the Acton museum that's in working order..........................) Another thought is to do with how to deal with compromise height and/or platform doors at Ealing Common if different stocks are in use there. The use of platform doors would make it straiughtforward and safe to have only one of the two types call there - i.e Ealing Common would be served by only one of the two lines passing through. The doors would remain shut when trains of the other type whizz through. I was never sold on the concept of transferring Ealing Broadway to the Piccadilly. Building extra platforms at Chiswick Park seems about as sensible as electrifying the Ongar branch instead of the Ally Pally branch. It would be far cheaper to just have the Piccadilly Line trains which are going to call here use the correct tracks between Acton Town and a new junction to the east of Chiswick Park. This will also maintain some semblance of existing connections between stations Acton Town - Turnham Green for local passengers. If extra trains are needed on the Richmond branch then get London Overground to supply them. Its also part of the TfL empire - and will soon be getting more trains! The planned new station at Old Oak Common will offer connections to areas of Central London (via Crossrail) that will provide greater choice than currently exists. As for the Wimbledon branch, the loss of platform at Putney Bridge complicates life, as otherwise a Putney Bridge - High St. Kensington shuttle would have possibly have been the cheapest solution, along with getting SWR to reintroduce through trains that also call at East Putney, Southfields and Wimbledon Park. This would have boosted the service without needing Ealing trains diverting to Wimbledon. For extra rolling stock get all S7's off the Met* plus if need be free up stock by making some Hammersmith and City trains which reverse at Barking reverse at Plaistow instead. *If need be also run more Piccadilly trains to Uxbridge and reverse some Met trains at Rayners Lane! re: 33 trains an hour on the Piccadilly, I wonder how the eastern end of the line will manage. Maybe it will be possible with stepping back at Cockfosters? At present some trains reverse at Arnos Grove, would this continue? If so, would it be managed in a way which means that eastbound trains no longer need to queue because the terminating train is waiting for a free platform? Ideally the Piccadilly needs a second eastern branch, but I suspect that this is a topic for another thread. Simon
|
|