|
Post by russe on Sept 29, 2005 11:49:00 GMT
Can you see where my devious mind is going, to get the extra stock for DR to Rayners? Are you trying to get rid of the Richmond branch, Phil? As a flight of fancy, here's a possible rebuilt Gunnersbury to allow Districts to terminate there (I think the trackbed at Gunnersbury is still wide enough to allow it): Russ
|
|
|
Post by damengineer on Sept 29, 2005 13:15:40 GMT
On the every LU official map that I saw The new DLR extension was to be built not on the STF-NTH WOO but on a new part of the track from Canning Town via: West Silvertown, Pontoon Dock, London City Airport, King George V. Does any one has more info on this. See my message here districtdave.proboards39.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=ell&thread=1126118971&page=1The DLR will take over the trackbed from Stratford Low Level to Canning Town, thereafter it diverges onto a new formation and will dive under the river to terminate at Woolwich Arsenal. I would imagine the full monty is available on the tfl site somewhere. Russ Just to throw a bit of fact into the equation (I used to live in the old east end...) - the NLL is single tracked from Canning Town to North Woolwich. Without knowing how busy the rest of the NLL is, the service frequency was limited by the time it took/takes for a train to go from Canning town to North Woolwich and back again. As a former DLR user, I can't comment beyond that. As an aside, crossrail will use the part of this old formation before going under the river. The DLR plan involves stopping the NLR at Stratford and then running DLR services over the old formation between Canning Town and Stratford. With the death of the single track constriction, NLL service frequencies could increase over the remaing part of the line... Would be a shame to see D stock depart from Richmond though... damengineer
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Sept 29, 2005 13:27:06 GMT
Are you trying to get rid of the Richmond branch, Phil? Noooo- FAR more devious than that !!! LU acquires some 313s, trains some ops on them then uses them on the DR Richmond to wherever! ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by ikar on Sept 29, 2005 13:34:16 GMT
Just to throw a bit of fact into the equation (I used to live in the old east end...) - the NLL is single tracked from Canning Town to North Woolwich. Without knowing how busy the rest of the NLL is, the service frequency was limited by the time it took/takes for a train to go from Canning town to North Woolwich and back again. As a former DLR user, I can't comment beyond that. As an aside, crossrail will use the part of this old formation before going under the river. The DLR plan involves stopping the NLR at Stratford and then running DLR services over the old formation between Canning Town and Stratford. With the death of the single track constriction, NLL service frequencies could increase over the remaing part of the line... Would be a shame to see D stock depart from Richmond though... damengineer It's a single track from about 200m before Silverton
|
|
|
Post by russe on Sept 29, 2005 14:02:43 GMT
Noooo- FAR more devious than that !!! LU acquires some 313s, trains some ops on them then uses them on the DR Richmond to wherever! ;D ;D ;D ;D Hmmm - a cunning plan indeed, young Baldrick. So that means the District could form a dastardly alliance with Virgin on the Ridiculous to boot Sliverlink off the NLL all together, which means... [carrier pigeon arrives in dugout with an telegram from General Melchett Livingstone announcing new strategic plan]Captain B: "Hang on a moment...." Russ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2005 15:29:39 GMT
Can you see where my devious mind is going, to get the extra stock for DR to Rayners? Are you trying to get rid of the Richmond branch, Phil? As a flight of fancy, here's a possible rebuilt Gunnersbury to allow Districts to terminate there (I think the trackbed at Gunnersbury is still wide enough to allow it): Russ That layout wont work. Gunnersbury platform is too narrow at the east end to allow a centre road, this would make the platforms dangerously narrow on the east end, also the east end is where the staircase to street level is located.
|
|
|
Post by russe on Sept 29, 2005 16:13:59 GMT
That layout wont work. Gunnersbury platform is too narrow at the east end to allow a centre road, this would make the platforms dangerously narrow on the east end, also the east end is where the staircase to street level is located. You're quite right of course, Jim, although I was envisaging a widening of the Chiswick High Road bridge , and a relocation of staircases etc. As I indicated, it was a flight of fancy. Russ
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Sept 29, 2005 16:25:52 GMT
There may not be enough room at Gunnerbury for a sidng at the east end of the platform but there may enough space between the tracks west of the station.
|
|
|
Post by russe on Sept 29, 2005 17:32:42 GMT
There may not be enough room at Gunnerbury for a sidng at the east end of the platform but there may enough space between the tracks west of the station. (the revised plan is a tad more realistic, but hasn't got as many turnouts and signals) Russ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2005 18:25:01 GMT
What's the point of terminating trains at Gunnersbury anyway? It seems to me that the best way to kill the DR to Richmond is to use common sense and build a combined NLL/LU interchange station at Bollo Lane, beneath the bridge carrying the four-tracking over the NLL. You could then close Chiswick Park and South Acton stations and concentrate services at the new interchange. The only weak point is the relatively bad position in the road network, but with the derelict land next to Chiswick Business Park bashed into shape as a bus station and pedestrian interchange, the station is in clover Once the station is online, the chord between Turnham Green and Gunnersbury can then be closed and/or lifted and the 6tph Richmond service diverted to Rayners Lane via Acton Town, alongside the existing 6tph Ealing service. This is the most sensible option to solving several problems, which means that it will be deemed too expensive/hard/disruptive/difficult/painful and will thus never be done.
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Sept 29, 2005 18:30:41 GMT
Of course it would have been lovely if they had left the Acton Triangle in place. We could then have had the pleasure of seeing 313's at Earls Court bound for High Street. The Richmond DR service could then have been kyboshed. Ah dreams are better than wishes.
|
|
|
Post by trainopd78 on Sept 30, 2005 10:07:26 GMT
Are you trying to get rid of the Richmond branch, Phil? Noooo- FAR more devious than that !!! LU acquires some 313s, trains some ops on them then uses them on the DR Richmond to wherever! ;D ;D ;D ;D Yuk!! Don't even want to think about driving those things. Even C stock is more refined than them!! I would like to be able to reach Upminster occasionally. ;D Remember when crossrail was being planned to go to Richmond? There was a near riot when it was suggested to the inhabitants of Gunnersbury and Kew that they would lose their DR service even if it was to be replaced by crossrail! If they were to lose it to Silverlink they would all have coronary's. I cant see that proposal getting approval. Besides, there would be a certain act of parliament involved in withdrawing the service, and with no decent alternative on offer there would be too many objections, therefore the service is unlikely to be withdrawn. I like the idea of a connection at Gunnersbury, but major reconstruction of the station would be frquired as the main entrance to the platforms would need moving, but the concourse is tied in with the BSI building so would take some planning.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Sept 30, 2005 14:28:01 GMT
OK: replace Acton Triangle, 313s run Richmond, EC, Oly, Willesden junc, wherever. Kill 2 birds with one stone. Brilliant!!! (ok so it's Friday and I've missed something vital- what is it?)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2005 15:45:03 GMT
OK: replace Acton Triangle, 313s run Richmond, EC, Oly, Willesden junc, wherever. Kill 2 birds with one stone. Brilliant!!! (ok so it's Friday and I've missed something vital- what is it?) Hmmm, 313s? Through ECT?! That would mean they'd all have to be altered to run on 4th rail, as well as running on 3rd rail and OHLE! Can't see them splashing the cash on that! I quite like your idea of running from Richmond to Willesden via Olympia, but this woulod mean a complete remodelling of Olympia to provide a connection from the DR to the main, not to mention that coming from the west, they'd have to reverse at ECT which would take too long!
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Sept 30, 2005 18:09:18 GMT
not to mention that coming from the west, they'd have to reverse at ECT which would take too long! See? Told you I'd missed something vital! Oh well back to the drawing board
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2005 0:09:51 GMT
I've done a few calculations while riding to/from work, and it looks as if 5 extra D-stock trains would be needed to divert and extend the Ealing Bdwy service to Ruislip/Uxbridge. Another 6 would be needed to provide a 17 min service between Rayners Lane and High St Ken, making a total of 11 in all. Anyone on this forum know if LUL have sufficient D-stock for this?? The current D-stock numbers 75D-stock in current peak service 67D-stock if your callculations are right 78Thanks ikar. Ooo-err. Looks like it's 'back to the drawing board' for my idea as well!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by trainopd78 on Oct 1, 2005 10:49:20 GMT
By the time this plan comes to full fruition, ie. terminal 5 gets busy, there will be the C77's to help in the short term until D stocks are supplimented then replaced . Once the new stock starts replacing the C's, the 77's will only be 32 to 35 years old by then which isn't THAT old really. They could be used on the Olympia service, plus could be used on an Uxbridge to Tower Hill off peak service, say. Ok peaks as discussed would be a very different ball game, but some good ideas have been suggested. <runs off to buy more spanners> ;D
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 1, 2005 11:34:00 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2005 12:09:04 GMT
Once the new stock starts replacing the C's, the 77's will only be 32 to 35 years old by then which isn't THAT old really. Yes, but they'll still be C stocks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2005 14:00:19 GMT
Yes, but they'll still be C stocks. Indeed, ADW! The thought of driving a C stock all the way from Uxbridge to Tower Hill is frightening! Bad enough doing the Wimblewares! ;D At least apparently the idea of training us west-end crews on the Hammersmith and Circle has been dropped for now! Phew!
|
|
|
Post by trainopd78 on Oct 1, 2005 15:03:45 GMT
I'd hate working in an office. Once I can come up with an idea for the peaks, then I can be promoted. Until then i'm stuck firmly at the front (of a train anyway) I knew you guys would object. ;D ;D They're not that bad. Must admit, I used to hate them too, but i've actually grown to like them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2005 15:33:28 GMT
I know this is kinda late in the discussion, but would all the D78's have to go as far as Uxbridge? Can't they just turn around at Rayners?
<prepares to be shot down...>
|
|
|
Post by ikar on Oct 8, 2005 17:38:21 GMT
I know this is kinda late in the discussion, but would all the D78's have to go as far as Uxbridge? Can't they just turn around at Rayners? <prepares to be shot down...> IIRC that 1/2 turn around at Rayners Lane.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2005 20:33:03 GMT
The layout at Rayners Lane is not well suited to lots of reversers, as the train has to be detrained in the platform then run into the siding.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2005 23:31:38 GMT
The layout at Rayners Lane is not well suited to lots of reversers, as the train has to be detrained in the platform then run into the siding. That is so true unfortunately. Even if there are plenty of staff available - and the detrainment goes smoothly with no drunks/idiots/sleepers - any terminating train will be stopped in the platform for at least a minute. But that is 'perfection', with the average stop being just over 2 mins -- and then it has to run into the siding at a slow speed, further delaying the next train. The current Piccadilly service follows the destination pattern 'Rayners Lane - Ruislip - Uxbridge' during the peak, both for this reason and to allow good layover (recovery) times at each terminating point. My guess is that, if and when the District does take over this service, a similar arrangement will prevail.
|
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,893
|
Post by towerman on Oct 12, 2005 3:16:38 GMT
Re DR Richmond service being withdrawn,don't forget in 2006 Silverlink will be no more and Metro services are being taken over by TfL.
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 12, 2005 3:53:32 GMT
Now I am a bit confoozled by this. If Silverlink is going tits up and Tfl is going to take these services are they taking the rolling stock et al too?
|
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,893
|
Post by towerman on Oct 12, 2005 19:56:23 GMT
Silverlink Metro is coming under TfL Silverlink County is going into Central Trains another NEX company.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2005 0:37:16 GMT
Silverlink Metro is coming under TfL Silverlink County is going into Central Trains another NEX company. I learn something every day!! Hopefully then I'll be able to use my TfL staff pass on the entire NLL instead of just the bits we run over/adjacent to!
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 13, 2005 3:02:35 GMT
So if Silverlink metro is coming under TfL wonder if we could see s re-installing of the negative rail north of H & W and an extension of the Bakerloo to Watford? I assume that if TfL take over the present rolling stock we may see 313's in LUL corporate colours! Quite possibly this may be a catalyst for the Met link at Watford actually being built. Ooh an 'A' stock sitting in Euston main line platform. Now THERE'S a thought.
|
|