North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Sept 12, 2021 14:06:30 GMT
Word around the mess rooms is that they're having trouble recruiting replacements, allegedly those who could do the job don't want it and those that want to do the job aren't good enough to get through training. Certainly some truth to this. Why would someone already on a similar salary subject themselves to the bother of doing it, especially running the risk of ending up at a location on the wrong side of London, or that has a reputation as an awful place to work (in the case of Hammersmith)? Those with the greatest relevant experience are likely to be on similar salary. There are certainly people who have got as far as getting through the selection process and who have decided to stay where they are. As usual LU’s HR and recruitment processes don’t help matters, especially in a situation where for once LU needs people more than the people need the role.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Sept 9, 2021 21:02:51 GMT
The Victoria line is built to have trains running at high speeds. I don't think the central section of the Northern line and the distance of those stations are helping with that... I think the real pinch point is Camden Town. Not sure that CBTC is thwt good at getting the best capacity out of the junctions. Camden is always going to be an issue for as long as a mixed service operates. The moment two trains turn up along side each other wanting to go down the same branch, the headway has been killed, and this is going to occur frequently during a disruption scenario. This is why on the Northern it is vitally important to chase minor late running or out of turn working, as if left alone at some point they will cause a conflict somewhere. But even if crossing moves at Camden were completely axed I think the line would still struggle. It simply isn’t laid out as well as the Vic.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Sept 9, 2021 16:23:38 GMT
There are rumours that if hospital admissions keep going up we might have to go back into lockdown in October and the Regs might be reinstated I think this has, for now at least, been largely quashed. The vast majority of hospitalisations are unvaccinated people, especially from older age groups. Unless data emerges that a high proportion are *unable* to be vaccinated, I think it would be a hard sell to reimpose restrictions on the basis of people who have chosen not to take it.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Sept 5, 2021 22:44:38 GMT
Was 32 TPH ever promised, in public, officially, as a timetabled, train service level ? ISTR the figure of 32 TPH was presented as the technical capability, the maximum achievable steady state capacity of TBTC. Which is not the same thing. Its' like the Central Line; read different sources and you can find any figure from 28 through 30-32 to 35 TPH, and different people citing different figures for different reasons. There are big big differences between the absolute minimum burst mode headway (i.e. during service recovery), maximum line wide state (i.e. with the core at maximum), and the normal practical achievable workable headway. Also, don't forget any figures that were quoted in 2014 would have been based on planning and simulation done in the mid-2000s. Dwell times have increased on all lines (pre covid obviously) because ridership was up on all lines. 32 TPH is 112.5 sec headway; 31 TPH is 116.1 sec headway. You only need one station to add 3.5 secs dwell to every peak train, or 7 stations to add 0.5 sec to RIRO, and you've lost 1 train per hour path. Accepting your detailed post, I still believe 32tph was the promised public service frequency on the Morden branch, but how to prove that now? The TfL site had quite some detail, but long gone! I find that the line boss back in 2008 is reported as saying “The new system will allow 32 trains or more south of Kennington, but 30 are planned initially to allow recovery time, ..” source He would have approved this report, but my notes of the meeting are that he said that the new system will allow 34 trains or more south of Kennington, but 32 are planned initially to allow recovery time. 32tph is also shown in a diagram here as the expected service from December 2014. Personal view, but I think the Northern would struggle to run much more than it does now, and especially during disruption when some of the nuances of the Thales system make themselves felt in unhelpful ways. The Vic Line seems to have had a lot more focus put into fine tuning, which to be fair is easier on a shorter and less complex line. The Northern is getting some of this fine tuning for sure, but it’s a slow process. By way of balance, the Vic project wasn’t without nuances either. The depot throat being left out of the resignalling spec by accident, and a massive price being subsequently quoted for the bi-di to Seven Sisters. As an aside, can anyone confirm what the current situation is with the Northumberland Park depot throat area? My understanding is the original interlocking frame was replaced by a Westrace interlocking, with some residual functions remaining carried out from the 1960s IMR. Does the old IMR still perform any function or is it redundant now?
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Sept 5, 2021 15:46:48 GMT
There is one other difference between 95 and 96 stocks which does spring to mind - the 7th car on the 96 stock, which could have a bearing on things especially as it's a trailer car, which will of course alter the disposition of friction braking compared to a 6-car. Good point(s). Actually obvious ones. Occams Razor ? Self smack wrists off topic. What I don’t know is if some or all of these 95 stock issues have been resolved in time for the 19th, when the new WTT comes in. Certainly there has been a massive amount of rail grinding on parts of the Northern recently. So who knows we might finally be up to 60 mph coinciding with Battersea opening. Certainly reducing run times has been a factor in allowing Battersea to happen without increasing the fleet size.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Sept 5, 2021 13:57:04 GMT
The reason for the TSR is the issue of the emergency brake performance of the 95 stock not being to spec, which in turn is believed to be due to glazing of the brake blocks. There’s a software modification been done recently so that some stops are being done in friction braking, as happens on the S stock. Of interest, given the similarity between the stocks it’s surprising this doesn’t appear to be an issue on the 96 stock as well, though of course although the two stocks are outwardly similar there are differences under the skin so that could be something to do with it. Most drivers would say that 95 stock emergency braking has always been rather mediocre, so perhaps none of this should be a surprise. From what I gather the speed profile for parts of the Northern has allowed for 60 mph since TBTC came in, but has always had a 50 mph ceiling superimposed on it pending the relevant assurance being achieved. It was the attempting to carry out that assurance which brought the brake performance issue to light. 60 mph was supposed to have come in for a previous timetable, but it never happened. That's interesting. Never heard that issue before. The power electronics on 95 and 96 stock are different, which might have explained a difference had this been dynamic braking, but if it's friction braking at fault, that's puzzling. I'll predict at the bottom of this, Occams Razor will apply, there will be something very simple and (with hindsight) obvious behind it. There is one other difference between 95 and 96 stocks which does spring to mind - the 7th car on the 96 stock, which could have a bearing on things especially as it's a trailer car, which will of course alter the disposition of friction braking compared to a 6-car.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Sept 4, 2021 23:45:14 GMT
Track quality and alignment are two factors which would influence whether or not the Northern could achieve 55mph (more accurately 88km/h), but they're not the only two. The reason for the TSR is the issue of the emergency brake performance of the 95 stock not being to spec, which in turn is believed to be due to glazing of the brake blocks. There’s a software modification been done recently so that some stops are being done in friction braking, as happens on the S stock. Of interest, given the similarity between the stocks it’s surprising this doesn’t appear to be an issue on the 96 stock as well, though of course although the two stocks are outwardly similar there are differences under the skin so that could be something to do with it. Most drivers would say that 95 stock emergency braking has always been rather mediocre, so perhaps none of this should be a surprise. From what I gather the speed profile for parts of the Northern has allowed for 60 mph since TBTC came in, but has always had a 50 mph ceiling superimposed on it pending the relevant assurance being achieved. It was the attempting to carry out that assurance which brought the brake performance issue to light. 60 mph was supposed to have come in for a previous timetable, but it never happened.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Sept 4, 2021 6:50:17 GMT
The Morden branch was promised 32tph with resignalling back in 2014! After 7 more years, it can only get to 31tph. Only a 3% uplift after all on what was the busiest section of tube line! Ditto the entire line has been running under a 50 mph temporary speed restriction since 2013, though to be fair this is more to do with the trains than the signalling as such. I know 60 mph is still the aspiration, but no idea when it’s likely to be achieved. There have been a few speed uplifts recently - trains come into a few more platforms at full brake rate, and a few curves have had speed lifted (for example coming into Archway SB).
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Sept 4, 2021 0:26:12 GMT
Will the new timetable start a week earlier, with empty running on the new line to help things settle in? IIRC it starts from the 19th. There has been trial running on some weekends over the last few weeks with something like 4tph running empty from Kennington. I’ve been off recently so am not really up to speed with exactly where they’re at, however the last I heard was it’s a pool of mainly Instructor Operators who will be doing the Battersea segment. I’ll add the caveat that this might have changed. Quite a few staff have been for a trip there and back on the cushions, for various reasons I haven’t been around at the right place/time, so feel a bit left out! There’s a few track walks taking place to familiarise station staff with various features including the two shafts. Regarding how things have gone, I haven’t heard the word shambles mentioned, so presumably the various test weekends have gone okay. To be fair this extension is so simple that there shouldn’t really be that much to go wrong. I suspect it might take a little while for service control to adjust to running the more complex service pattern.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 30, 2021 12:41:02 GMT
Video including the new announcement for Bank towards the end. Sounds awful IMO.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 25, 2021 12:04:43 GMT
It seems that things are being allowed to drift.... instead of proactively managed. The way London Underground is managed has certainly changed since I joined the company 20 years ago, though I expect anyone with a large company long term would probably say the same thing. I don't know that much about railway scheduling, but is the potential of the CBTC being constrained by the legacy signalling areas? If you ran the central section at maximum speed would that just lead to a queue of trains at the signalling boundary? The legacy signalling would only be a constraint if the frequency was increased. A straight speed increase only shouldn't make any difference. With proper management advantage would be taken of the quicker / shorter journey durations that are possible with CBTC. That's a good question. At least when SMA 5 goes live there is a chance for a permanent and faster Circle line journey. Thing is though, is the Sub Surface Railway actually suitable for Automatic Train Operation? Unlike simple deep level tube lines like the Jubilee or Victoria, for example, there are many junctions on the SSR where different lines cross each other. Places like Edgware Road, Baker Street and the Aldgate triangle can be significant bottle necks. A brief problem at say Tower Hill on the westbound can cause a devastating ripple effect across the whole SSR. As a railway professional, I remain to be convinced that the SSR will ever be able to get the best out ATO. This is an interesting question to consider. One big benefit of ATO is it reduces the problem of one slow driver holding everything up, and it also reduces the number of delays caused by operational incidents. However both of these issues can be reduced by better training, though probably not to the same extent as ATO. Beyond that there’s a benefit from centralised control, which of course could have been achieved with the old signalling, and there are features of the system which are certainly useful. But the flip side is the Thales system performs badly during disruption, though to be fair disruption happens less as its reliability is generally fairly strong. But given how much the SSR is prone to disruption caused by external events, this will no doubt be an issue long in to the future. By the same token resignalling SSR to conventional signalling wouldn’t have been perfect either, as no doubt there would have been some challenges matching current throughputs and meeting all current signalling design requirements.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 23, 2021 13:46:13 GMT
Thus the only discernible benefit of the "driverless" the elimination of staff on the train and the flexibility to add to the service without the constraint of finding an attendant. "The DfT-led driverless train study is looking at the possible future use of Grade-of-Automation 3 trains with an onboard attendant, as is used on London’s Docklands Light Railway automated light metro network." And like the DLR the "attendant" would be able to join a union and go on strike if they felt it necessary (as they did in November 2016 and March 2018) GoA4 or UTO (Unattended Train Operation) would be a nightmare if a train got stuck in a tunnel halfway between stations (or even out on the far fling fringes of the Central or Metropolitan Line, Mile End to Stratford is 2.83km/1.76 miles, Debden to Theydon Bois 3.35km/2.08 miles This is exactly what makes it politically motivated. As you say, there is no benefit in going for GOA3, as the member of staff requires full safety training, and most importantly of all there is still the requirement for duty schedules, which is the big thing which constrains flexibility. The only real benefit is quicker turnrounds, but again I think this is over-rated as in many cases the member of staff will still require to use facilities like the toilet, or have to detrain passengers which takes time. GOA4 would certainly bring performance benefits through the massive increase in flexibility, but this would have to be traded against a reduction in safety. There would need to be an absolutely massive step-change in the way LU operates in order to be able to address the safety issues, and I don't think we're anywhere near close to that, or indeed whether it's even possible without rebuilding the system from scratch. The question is no doubt whether anyone at TfL is strong enough to fend off being bamboozled into going down the GOA3 route by the politicians, who of course are never in power long enough to be accountable for picking up the pieces at the end.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 21, 2021 23:29:32 GMT
Is this related to the staffing difficulties being experienced in recent weekends? The full service couldn't be operated! No. It is generally the standard practice regardless of the Covid situation. However, the situation will have been compounded by the Met still being on an emergency timetable - 6tph on the Circle and 4tph Mets to Aldgate really isn't much (and even then, there were Met cancellations). A full Met TT would have likely solved the problem. The north side of the Circle was heaving at times during the afternoon, not helped by the Northern being closed north of Moorgate. To be honest the whole thing was a bit of a mess - the S7 services were at times leaving people behind, Moorgate was busier than in traditional rush hour. Information on the Met services left something to be desired too, conflicting information at Baker Street on stopping patterns. I took a train north which was up as semi-fast Amersham, CIS on the train was blank, no driver announcements, so a bit unclear where it was meant to be stopping. What with the Northern Line being utter chaos at Moorgate I certainly didn’t feel today’s performance reflected credit on TFL. One really notices how information provision quality on stations has declined since Fit For The Future. I know it’s tempting to reach for the rose-tinted spectacles, however LU has a distinctly second-rate atmosphere pervading it at the moment, a rather creaking-at-the-seams feel. I think this constant financial feeling of governance limbo is really starting to bite now. Let’s all hope this doesn’t lead to a repeat of the events of 1987, which is generally felt to be the result of the last time TFL was in a decline period.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 21, 2021 16:54:36 GMT
It's a good job TFL have such huge cash reserves available for expensive infrastructure projects such as full line automation. Oh, wait ... I think everyone who has a stake in London transport is going to get very sick of being stuck in the middle of this game of politics. Without getting too political, this sort of thing is toxic, and breeds apathy, which is all highly undesirable. Unfortunately I think we’re lumbered with it for the foreseeable.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 14, 2021 21:32:24 GMT
Hoping someone can help been doing some research and when this stock was being made ready for ATO on the Hainault branch one of the motor cars had a prototype combined controller now was this correct and if so which car. I find this hard to believe. The trains of that time had a cab no deeper than a broom cupboard. The driver's seat flapped down from the wall to leave room to get in. There was little room for the knees of taller men! Try the 38TS simulator in the museum! I say this because you couldn't just install the controller, but all the gubbins underneath that it connected with, and I don't think there was room for that. Also, on auto-trains of the time, it got little use except for slow-speed shunt moves, so would not have provided much experience. This was fortunate in a way, as the first combined traction/brake controller, it wasn't very good. The deadman feature wasn't built in, so a separate vigilance button had also to be held down. Then the handle had to be lifted rather than depressed before it could be turned, an unnatural movement for drivers. The version fitted to C69 and later trains was much improved. Also the 1967TS on the Victoria Line were the first to provide a decent sized cab, and later designs have grown further. The point about small cabs is interesting, as many drivers who have driven 38/59/62 stocks as well as their replacements will say they prefer the former, partly because of being able to have windows or the offside door open, but more because of the ability to drive standing up. Something like a 92 or 95 stock is very nice if one’s body happens to fit the driving position exactly, however that driving position is very specific, so a lot of people find it quite uncomfortable, especially after several hours. I can count with one hand the number of drivers who drive these trains standing up, as it’s not easy to do, especially if right handed. ATO has at least meant people can pace around. It’s interesting how the “handle” design has varied over the years. Personally I find the S stock one awful, but then I’ve never driven one on a sustained basis so perhaps it’s just a case of getting used to it. 92, 95 and 96 stocks are pretty good in my view, but a lot of people don’t like them. A 92 stock handle is fine if you drive it from scratch, but odd if you’re used to 95 or 96 stock as the twist angle is subtly different.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 14, 2021 11:21:11 GMT
Apologies if there is a thread on this but on the deep level stock, does the cab AC actually work? Just out of curiosity. On 95 & 96 stock it’s reasonably reliable, typical performance varies from “gives a bit of cool air” to a proper fridge environment. It isn’t uncommon to find cabs blowing out hot air however, so on hot days there will tend to be numerous trains being changed over due to defective cab air con. What does tend to get drivers backs up is when someone puts in the defect book that the air con is blowing out hot air, and the unit goes back into service the next day. To be fair it isn’t always possible for depots to attend to this straight away.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 14, 2021 1:20:45 GMT
To add further meat to the bones, I and my fellow instructor colleagues also regularly run additional empty trains outside the published timetable for training purposes to controllers timings. The special services run during Covid are another example. Certainly in my neck of the woods it was simply a case of someone (*) deciding how many trains were going to be out and about, and it was literally left up to the signallers to run them as they pleased. With the minimal passenger numbers at the time it did allow for some experimenting, or perhaps better termed playing, with system features not normally used. (* in theory that someone would be the controller, but in practice these things are often more determined by the crew managers depending on how many drivers they have, though these things also tend to be run through the line management as well). Having said all this, I do agree with the point that in general no train should be *planned* to run without a timetabled path. To give a non-LU example of how things can go wrong, on the BLS Merseyrail tour last year the train was run across a junction out of path, just running a couple of minutes early caused a load of reactionary delays at Liverpool Central, delaying a Hunts Cross train, which then was late on its next trip north, which then caused a further delay to something else at Liverpool Central. One of the managers on the train was conspicuously unimpressed that they’d ended up with delay minutes, having spent a lot of time planning the tour so it didn’t affect the normal service. Whilst signallers can certainly keep things moving, it is often the case that there will be unforeseen consequences, probably nothing more than a couple of minutes here or there, but the objective is of course to as far as possible run the railway *to* the timetable, not *near* to it.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 8, 2021 22:09:10 GMT
The photograph show what was something of a standard style on the UERL in the '20s. Almost all the C&SLR stations would have been refinished in this way during the reconstruction, as many of the stations were heavily rebuilt at this time (for example for escalators). That's too many "re-" words! I believe Piccadilly Circus looked similar at the lower levels after its rebuild. Embankment and St James's Park still show much evidence of this style. The original C&SLR stations were mainly white glazed tiled, with a frieze of a leaf motif at about waist height. Some of this survived at King William Street until relatively recently, but I think the only place it can be seen in situ on the Tube now is at Elephant & Castle, in the spiral stairs. It was certainly the case at one stage that the Bank works were supposed to make some effort to preserve the King William Street tiling as far as possible. As to whether this happened, we shall no doubt find out when the project finally vacates the site. The tiling at King William Street was fairly complete and in good condition as of a decade ago, so it would certainly be a shame for it to be lost. Perhaps the biggest issue is not so much whether it’s been lost, as to how much damage has been done. On a related note, someone has been round Brompton Road of all places fixing social distancing stickers everywhere, the mind boggles why that has been done. Fortunately in this case it’s only stickers.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 2, 2021 23:16:00 GMT
I thought that these were the best ones, because they had large text that could be read from a distance and could show different colours. Everything else from then has been downhill / retrograde 'improvement', even money wasted (to my eyes)! I’ve always had a soft spot for the Central Line ones. They’re very fit for purpose. To update my recent post regarding the original ones surviving on the Northern - as luck would have it I had business on the Charing Cross branch today. It is just Charing Cross and Embankment which remain. None of these use the original typeset, three of them are lower case, and one of them is upper case but the condensed small version. It therefore must by Moorgate and/or London Bridge which are still as per original. I’ll have a look next time I’m round that way, if no one else beats me to it. Incidentally, I was struck by how Embankment station still retains a very 1990s LU feel, complete of course with the Peter Lodge “Mind the Gap” announcement.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 1, 2021 23:59:02 GMT
I personally preferred the older displays too - they were much more visible from a distance than the current ones which LU seems to have bought from the same supplier as Network Rail. I found the Poltech ones DLR uses are pretty good too, though I understand Poltech have subsequently ceased trading. I have an idea they now go for more smaller indicators as this is supposed to encourage people to spread along the platform. I’m not sure this necessarily works in practice. Some of the newer indicators on the Vic Line are awful IMO. The various ones installed by Metronet look cheap, the design mainly used by Tube Lines isn’t so bad.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 1, 2021 20:50:06 GMT
There were several variants of sign. GEC provided many of them but Thorn were the other supplier. The one above was, from memory, a Thorn. The Northern line had an older design on Thorn sign which was more like this: (photo from LT Museum) Very nice. That design had an air of officialdom and presence about it which most of the later designs lacked. Having said that, I always quite liked the 1990s Central Line design - much better than some of what has come since, especially the way general messages are in a different colour and on a dedicated line. On a related note, the Central Line indicators occasionally used to display a Merry Christmas graphic and message in multiple colours, taking up the entire displays. Did anyone ever get a photo of this? In the 2000s there was still an option to set this up on the station terminal, but I could never get it to work.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 1, 2021 18:11:59 GMT
I think there are a fair few on the Northern line, but exactly where I'm not sure as I've not worked much on the line. There was some discussion in LU in the last year about having to modify them for the Northern line extension, and many of them hadn't been modified since the 1980s. There are a few, but it isn’t many. Mainly the ex Metronet stations which weren’t on their refurb list. The following is from memory, but is roughly along the right lines: Embankment Charing Cross London Bridge Moorgate There may be one or two others but that’s about it now. At least one of these I think retains the original upper-case typeset, but I can’t remember which one(s) off the top of my head. Tube lines did quite a cull of them in the 2000s, even at stations they didn’t refurb.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 20, 2021 17:14:30 GMT
If the passenger(s) stays put then all we need to carry them back over a shunt signal to Departures is authority from the service control manager although we might need the DRM to travel in the car with them to ensure they don't try to go through the interconnecting doors while going over the points (seriously dangerous) If for some reason we can't take them back on the train they would have to be walked out of the depot by the DRM or someone else licenced to do so If the passenger(s) decides to detrain themselves and go walkabout in the depot then obviously it gets a bit more complicated (don't think they won't). DRM = Duty Reliability Manager The passenger can’t simply self detrain - unless they have a J door key. Do the W&C units have inner inter car barriers? That is the mitigation against falling out. I agree it’s not ideal, but I’m not convinced it’s the end of the world, providing there are mitigations in place.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 20, 2021 16:54:43 GMT
It was suggested by the Prime Minister this morning that T fL are part of such a trial. Unions were quick to inform their members today that this is not the case. According to my union at least (ASLEF) T fL have not been invited to take part in any such trial and it has most certainly not been discussed or agreed via the negotiation machinery. We have only been asked to turn the app off in a covid safe environment such as a messroom where social distancing remains in place. Personally speaking, I'm not interested in all this removal of social distancing, face masks becoming optional and ignoring covid app notifications stuff. I have no wish to catch Coronavirus and I want to be made aware if I've been in close proximity to somebody that has tested positive. If that means I have to self isolate and my train gets cancelled as a result, so be it. My health is far more important than Government policy clearly designed to go down the herd immunity route. I'd best leave it there as this forum doesn't do politics. The problem is government policy has never been to stop everyone getting Covid. It’s endemic now, and it’s not going anywhere. All of us are pretty much certain to get it, whether we like it or not, it’s more a case of whether we get it with the protection of a vaccine or take our chances without. There’s perhaps an extra group of people in the “wait and see how the vaccine pans out” camp, which is a perfectly reasonable position IMO. But to go round taking the view “I don’t want to catch it” is completely unrealistic. The measures we’ve seen to date have essentially been to (1) limit the number of active cases to prevent hospitals going over capacity, and (2) shielding those at high risk of having a bad outcome. Every adult ha been offered a vaccine, and the vaccine doesn’t stop you getting it, nor does it stop you passing it on. I don’t like it, but it’s something I think we have to face up to - we’re all going to catch it at some point, and we can’t reasonably expect to avoid that, at least not without ending life as we knew it. Not a nice thing to have to accept, but a fact of life unfortunately. As regards the whole ping thing, one wonders how many people are fulfilling the self-isolate part, as opposed to merely treating it as 10 bonus days off work.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 20, 2021 15:25:28 GMT
Confirmed by the ASLEF rep "flash-and-dash" starts today but only for trains going into 5 Road, if its going into the other two roads or into the depot we close up on the porter buttons. And if there's a "carry over" its management's problem not ours, we were simply following their instructions. Aside from the issue of encountering a problem person whilst changing ends (not really an issue at Waterloo), I don’t really see the issue with it being management’s problem. If they’re comfortable with the risk of something going wrong then so be it. To be fair, it is a fairly low risk (in my view).
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 16, 2021 0:18:49 GMT
I suspect a lot of people don’t really know why detrainment happens. Originally it was because of shunt moves, but the Liverpool Street accident changed all that. Since then inner inter car barriers appeared (on some lines) which is supposed to address that issue. Stuck in the middle of all this is the potential for train operators to encounter an aggressive passenger whilst changing ends, and the fact that carrying passengers over shunt moves is now rather more permissible than it traditionally was. So who really knows why we detrain in most locations, but not at some (for example Kennington), it’s just one of those things which will run on and on until there’s another mishap. Kennington is a bit of a mess; I can see why detrainment doesn’t happen there as it is a complete nuisance, but there is the potential for bad things to happen, as indeed they have over the years. What Liverpool Street accident? By the 1990s LU weren’t tipping out when reversing via sidings or shunts, instead just making announcements and then closing the doors. Someone was over carried into Liverpool Street siding, and it seems the person attempted to either walk through the train, or perhaps climb out. No one knows what exactly happened, but the person ended up under the train and sustained fatal injuries. From that point on full detrainment was again mandated, which has been the case ever since, albeit with a few twists and turns along the way. I suspect it’s this incident which is why the Central Line does the announcements. For some reason the Picc always did a full detrainment.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 15, 2021 10:32:57 GMT
The Jubilee line has enough trains to replace the Bakerloo and partially boost the Northern line fleets if they are displaced by a new delivery. The Bakerloo is a back way of LU with no pressing passenger demand, with the last of the simpler old trains easier to maintain for an extended life. It is unclear how long the old trains can be economically retained. However, there is also a wish to delay a replacement fleet until the Lewisham extension is underway, so that a common fleet can be ordered. This would be better than one order for the current service and then, say ten years later, as many again for the extension, since they will likely be technically improved by then with compatibility problems. Would adaption of the current Bakerloo line for 6-cars of longer Jubilee trains save life-extension costs on the present old trains, and allow delay to an order for new Bakerloo trains until the Lewisham extension is certain? There may be need for planned gap fillers at some curved platforms, and a widening of the tunnels on some curves! I suspect that, subject to 96 stock being able to economically be made to fit on the Bakerloo, this is exactly what will happen. But I don’t think it’s on the radar yet.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 14, 2021 19:51:11 GMT
If management perceive the issue with detrainment is to avoid the driver having contact with T/Op, then as the W&C steps-back in the depot, that's not going to be problem. The main issue really is carrying passengers over non-passenger legal points and track. I suspect a lot of people don’t really know why detrainment happens. Originally it was because of shunt moves, but the Liverpool Street accident changed all that. Since then inner inter car barriers appeared (on some lines) which is supposed to address that issue. Stuck in the middle of all this is the potential for train operators to encounter an aggressive passenger whilst changing ends, and the fact that carrying passengers over shunt moves is now rather more permissible than it traditionally was. So who really knows why we detrain in most locations, but not at some (for example Kennington), it’s just one of those things which will run on and on until there’s another mishap. Kennington is a bit of a mess; I can see why detrainment doesn’t happen there as it is a complete nuisance, but there is the potential for bad things to happen, as indeed they have over the years.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 13, 2021 23:21:26 GMT
I think the Jubilee line is unique in having a northbound/southbound section (Green Park-Stanmore) and am eastbound/westbound section (Green Park to Stratford). I'm guessing that this is because the original Metropolitan/Bakerloo and Fleet line sections were signed as a north-south railway, carrying this convention through the extension would result in southbound trains heading almost due north between North Greenwich and Stratford. As the Green Park to Stanmore section of the line runs roughly north west-south east, changing the whole line to east-west wouldn't have had this issue (eastbound trains departing Kingsbury heading south west being the only real anomaly), so presumably switch costs were the deciding factor here? I suspect you’re right that it was largely a cost and familiarity issue - it would have meant redesignating stuff on the earlier section of line. There’s also the slight issue of how Charing Cross would have been handled, though that could easily have been made EB and WB too. All quite a bit of cost as well as change for staff. It would have been neater though. As I said elsewhere, there’s loads of places on LU where a train changes from one line designation to another. The sub surface lines in particular.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 13, 2021 23:17:12 GMT
To be honest with Wimbledon being its own branch, I’m surprised the official designations for the LU part aren’t NB and SB. In the same way that the Central has IR and OR on the Hainault loop. What do you mean by "Wimbledon being its own branch"? Are you referring to the Edgware Road service? Don't forget half the service on the Wimbledon branch goes to Tower Hill/Barking/Upminster and they're in the east! I meant that line designations on LU change - a Central Line train from Ealing to Hainault will be on the EB from Ealing to Leytonstone, and on the IR from Leytonstone to Hainault. It would be quite viable for an Upminster to Wimbledon train to start on the WB, change to SB at Earl’s Court, and finally be on the Down at East Putney. Personally I’d find that a lot more logical than what actually exists.
|
|