North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 6, 2015 21:56:36 GMT
It will still be S40, but just with the (presumably VOBC software) based upgrades from the Northern line as implied by North End hereI don't mind the victoria line's kamikaze style braking - I don't find it very noticable, and during rush hours, it's not too bad, although those human-sized cushions help! Although experience of riding trams whilst not being able to reach the strap hangers and having to lean into the movements may have helped Well we know one big difference is that the SSR system is set to use radio, rather than the inductive loops. An older London Reconnections article cites a press release as saying: Accompanying the quote with the commentary: Exactly what that means is not 100% clear, but I think it'll surely have to be more than just the latest, most upgraded version of what's on the Northern and Jubilee. They need to find a solution to the issue of braking rates in the open. The system offers the ability to vary brake rates, for example during the wet. The difficulty is devising a reliable way of predicting when you need to alter the brake rate. To be fair, no ATO system is immune from this. The Central Line runs rail adhesion trains during the autumn, and basically accepts that there will occasionally be station overruns. The big flaw with Seltrac is that a sliding trains cannot accurately reports its speed/position, therefore the system is designed to halt the VOBCs, sending the train non-communicating, and meaning it has to be re-entered into the system, which requires driving in RM to the next loop boundary, wherever that may be. PM driving does not help, as the driver has no way of predicting when the system is going to request a change in speed, as under the current setup the TOD will only give the standard 3 seconds warning before dropping down (I can't see any technical reason why this couldn't be extended, but then you'd have a problem that drivers would be braking early in dry conditions!). So on the Jubilee and Northern Lines the brake rates are set to gentle rates in open sections. Imagine the effect on journey times for the whole of the SSR!
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 6, 2015 21:43:06 GMT
The Victoria line uses Distance To Go-Radio (DTG-R), supplied by "Invensys" (which, I believe, is what Westinghouse became). I believe - according to a comment on London Reconnections - that they were actually Metronet's original choice for the SSR. But, in any case, I'm not sure whether Invensys even put in a bid this time - nor even if they're still supplying DTG-R systems. By the way I absolutely cannot agree with you. Victoria line trains stop like they've hit a brick wall everywhere, accelerate very hard and transition between accelerating and braking with all the smoothness of the Giant's Causeway. So uncomfortable. I don't entirely agree with this. I agree that the Victoria Line trains stop with a jolt (as do the Jubilee and Northern Lines), but the normal driving style is smooth. The trains recognise the line characteristics, and when running early the trains coast. So, with a clear run, for most sections you can expect the train to motor up to maximum permitted speed, coast (either later or earlier depending on late running), and then brake to a stand. By contact, the Seltrac way of driving is simply that the train is given a speeed and the train tries to maintain that speed. If running early, the train will be given a lower maximum permitted speed for the entire section. So even if running downhill, the train will brake down to that speed rather than coast. The result is constant on/off of motors and braking. By a similar token, the Northern Line also has a horrible characteristic that when slowing down for a speed restriction, the train will over-brake by sometimes up to 5 mph, sit too slow for a few seconds, then motor back up to the speed it should have achieved -- wasted time, and uncomfortable for the passenger. The only time you get the motor/brake effect on the Victoria Line is when closely following another train, but the benefit in this situation can be appreciated seeing the Victoria Line's daily achievement of 34tph. Platform re-occupation with Seltrac is nowhere near as impressive. At Stockwell southbound, always one of the biggest pinch-points on the Northern Line during the evening peak, with a train sitting in the platform, the following train sits still for *ages*, then motors into the platform in one go. Granted the following train will be marginally closer to the platform than under the old signalling, but it waits *way* longer than under signals before moving. The same happens at loads of locations across the Northern Line - the glossy publicity of trains smoothly following each other is complete rubbish.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 6, 2015 21:33:44 GMT
Oh don't mistake me. I have no love for S40 and TBTC, although we are getting some kind of S40+ on the SSR aren't we? I didn't think S40 was up to the job. Not that I expect the improvements to be of ride quality. Actually, the funny thing is, even though Jubilee and Northern line trains spend an absolute age slowing down, they still manage to stop with a jerk - it's quite remarkable, really. I'd describe the ATO on the Jubilee and Northern as childish in its driving style. *Go*. *Stop*. *Go*. I'd describe ATO on the Victoria as downright violent. I hate having to stand on the Vic and I dread to think what it must be like in rush hour. The driving style, bad as it may be, is the least of Seltrac's failings. Issues and glitches by the dozen, every 'fix' seems to create a new problem, and a "take it or lump it" attitude from the supplier. It's sad that LU have allowed things to reach a situation where Thales appear to be the only realistic contractor.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 3, 2015 2:18:48 GMT
Simon, each station has a set of plans that include all areas for emergency services including disused platforms, staircases, passageways, lift shafts etc. For operational reasons, these are not published. Thanks for your answer, piccboy. Enthusiasts would love access to that information, but alas I can almost guarantee that it would be abused... by which I mean that explorers holding battery torches would try to explore closed sections of stations - without permission. Anyway, I did wonder whether such data did exist and would be available to staff and emergency services on a 'need to know' basis. Simon Whilst the axonometric plans (which appear to be the frontispiece for the station plans drawings used internally) are quite good for giving an idea of the layout, I can say definitively that they quite often omit features or areas, for example some disused areas or vent shafts. Even the detailed plans omit some areas which are not maintained as part of the 'station', which in practice can include disused, ventilation or cable tunnels. I have more than one much more detailed set of civils plans (needless to say not publically available), but for a complex station like Tottenham Court Road I've not yet come across any one document that gives a full plan. Every time one resolves one unknown, it tends to throw up a new one!
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Aug 1, 2015 2:51:51 GMT
There's no truth in it. Both sidings are a tight berth for 72 stock, and both end against a solid wall. The only extra length is to provide space for the crossover. The original BS&WR sidings appear almost certainly to be partially or wholly backfilled, probably as part of the construction of the current ones - and as far as I can tell there is no access to any remains.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 21, 2015 19:16:50 GMT
That would have been for brake testing on the South Ealing test track. A few thoughts, can't say for definite as on leave at moment. I wonder if the testing is connected to the plans to run at 100kph on certain sections of the Northern. 95 stock now has had its tripcocks removed, so no possibility of running under old signalling. I don't think gauge would be an issue as 96 stock has been taken to and from Highgate via the Picc line, boxed in with battery locos on each end. Obviously relevant paperwork would need to be signed off for 95 stock though.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 16, 2015 23:02:20 GMT
I've had someone contact me privately via my email inbox and point out that the DLR really is a law unto itself and according to them anyone at a station for longer than 10 minutes IS deemed to be filming commercially. This seems very visitor unfriendly and would make me think twice about speaking up if I saw something untoward - because they might turn round and throw the book at me for being at a station for too long. In addition, there is a rule against filming in the rush hour. This is a very different issue, and quite understandable. Simon I'm dubious, however if true it's a silly policy as how do they expect to enforce this when virtually all their stations are unstaffed? Likewise, a bit pointless for the PSA to interfere, when it's obvious there's nothing they can do once their train departs. I don't think BTP would be impressed being called for a dispute over someone taking photos, nor would it be a good use of their time. I'd be tempted to complain to DLR and see what they have to say on the matter.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 15, 2015 15:06:09 GMT
But you assume that the plan is to resolve transport issues. Tony Blair made it clear that the plan was to alter the British culture forever. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.htmlObviously, Cameron shares that opinion, because despite the rhetoric, is has clearly bought in. We have been here before, USA was settled by folk from all over Europe, all with different cultures, but over a couple hundred years they developed an "American" culture, and now it is difficult to tell apart those with German, British or Dutch descent. That is what they want here, and so the minor issue of infrastructure is irrelevant to the end aim, as was the expansion of New York during the development of USA. Clearly, they are developing a United States of Europe, and seek a pan-European culture. Britain has clearly agreed to act as an escape valve for European refugees to support a "Common Purpose". There is no intention of solving the crisis, because for the European project, filling London to the brim is part of the solution. It is not that the missed the nail with the hammer, it is that they wanted to hit the log. I've no idea what multiculturalism has to do with this pridley. It's the numbers of people that are causing the problem, not where they're from. There's multiculturalism everywhere in the UK but nowhere else suffers the same amount of increasingly monumental overcrowding you'll be swamped with down there. If, as you say, "filling London to the brim" is part of the grand plan then why on earth did you move to a run-down part of it on the off chance that it might someday get better? I don't follow the rationale. People are living longer too. This doesn't directly affect commuting as retirement age has stayed roughly the same, but it does mean people occupying houses for longer, so even without immigration you have a situation of more people seeking to live in the same amount of housing. Since supply can't easily be increased, you're then down to basic economics - an increase in demand without an equivalent increase in supply *will* lead to an increase in price. So people will look to move to cheaper areas, leading to price increasing in those areas too, meanwhile commuting goes up, leading to an increase in demand for rail travel (and road use). This would all have happened anyway, but increasing the population size through immigration has simply made the problem massively worse. Taking out some seats from a few trains buys a bit of space (at the expense of comfort - so declining living standards), building a new line or two will help a bit, but as long as the population size is increasing out of control, any capacity created will simply be used up and we're back to where we started.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 15, 2015 13:47:03 GMT
Based on the limited comments from Ms Dedring in front of the Committee I think the issue is that 2050's demand is now expected to be 2035's demand level. That's a game changer and has massive implications for the scale of interventions, their timing and the associated funding requirements. Even the 2050 Plan had pretty amazing implied funding levels but an acceleration of schemes would vastly increase those demands in the short to medium term. I think even this under-estimates things. We just heard earlier this year that London breached its all time population peak reached in 1939. Well, the extent of London has not changed much since 1939 for this very reason. The outer suburbs were generally built either Victorian times or during the 1930s and these represent the city limits, beyond which we have Greenbelt, and the tube and rail network shrank since then. Not only that, but some lines had higher frequency services probably due to more relaxed approaches to health and safety. So we are stacking and racking them. My suspicion is that the 1939 peak was actually breached long before the official statistic, with the take off of London property prices relative to the rest of the UK after the 2008 crash suggesting pointing to the real acceleration and the figures telling us that London is now at capacity. But what happened in 2008 marks the shift, because Britain, with its independence, could launch a serious scheme for stabalising the banks, etc. and rather than go Greek, devalued. That devaluation caused Europeans to flood over and pick up bargain properties, bolstered by the relative confidence in the economy that the Chancellor was capable of providing. Meanwhile, many European countries have struggled to resolve anything. So with Greece, and goodness knows what next, we may see that 2008 marked the beginning of a trend towards Britain being more stable, lower taxed and more of a dynamic economy, whilst having open borders with a floundering European Union that will continue to flounder because it lacks a debt, fiscal or political union, like that found in USA. The issue is, that Greeks are now taking their cash and lives to London's safe ports as occurred to Cypriots during that crisis, as will occur in the next string of events that follow, and meanwhile, sentiment has firmly shifted in favour of London, with young people all over Europe, often very smart, ambitious folk, particularly those suffering high youth unemployment at home, gagging to get on a plane and pick up their first proper job. Also, despite political impasse with TTIP, it is clear that Europe will open up more to USA, and where will Americans move to on masse? You guessed it, London. So the question is, when did we really breach the prior 1939 population peak? A hint, it was long before early this year. Where is the population now? A hint, much higher than the official numbers. Where is it going? And this is the kicker, there is no way of predicting, because we have never been here before, and the European instability causing this shift appears to be a slow burn. I suspect that the one place where the figures are difficult to hid is in TFL ridership statistics. However, I do have a suspicion that many of new residents are being counted as tourists, with record "tourist numbers" actually being house hunters and settlers. One of the biggest failures in government policy since 1997 has been the complete absence of any strategy to control population size in Britain. There simply isn't the space, especially in the south-east, to accommodate increasing numbers of people, without compromising living standards. Eventually productivity will also suffer once transport reaches capacity - in some places the road system has already reached that point. The current trend seems to be encouraging re-housing of people out of London to (in relative terms) marginally cheaper housing in the south-east. This cannot realistically continue, as this is causing massive increases in commuting which the transport system simply cannot cope with. In some places it has also exported social problems from London to elsewhere. Take Stevenage as an example. Population size has increased rapidly in the last few years. Accompanied by absolutely no increase in provision of public services. A1(M) the same as it was back in the 1980s. Peak train timetable basically the same as 1997 with a few lengthened peak services. The town is now looking at expanding, such that it will have a motorway and large industrial area right through the middle. All in all, a worse quality of life for residents compared to 1997.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 13, 2015 23:19:47 GMT
This afternoon 17/5/15 i noticed that the Northern line Bank branch was suspended Northbound I believe due to a person on the track now my question is how did this person? Get onto the track if the line is single bore tube tunnel. It was a (particularly messy) one under in the platform area at Angel. The words 'person under train' are not broadcast nowadays as there is some evidence of copycat behaviour. Personally I'd prefer to use 'customer incident' which is more vague and covers a range of possibilities, as I think person on track is confusing all round, but perhaps still suggests one under to some - for example today's Angel incident closely followed one at Victoria earlier in the day.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 10, 2015 14:58:34 GMT
For something like a train operator this makes sense as otherwise they could just down tools wherever they happened to be at 21:30, even if that is between stations. Instructions from the Trade Unions was for staff not to book-on after 1830 (RMT/TSSA), 2130 (ASLEF) and that staff already at work should complete their shifts. It seems Management decided to withdraw services early, fearing staff would simply walk-out at the designated hour. I heard it said that the main issue was the Power Control and Shift Supply Engineer positions not being covered. Presumably the safety implication of that would be that any required recharge or reconfiguration of supplies could either not happen or take longer. There seems to have been a rumour that one of the unions (ASLEF?) was intending for train staff to stable once the designated hour came. This seemed to go out of the window as the start of the strike came near. I can't recall any strikes in recent years where this has happened -- it's always the case that any duty started is worked through to completion. Anyone know different?
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jun 9, 2015 18:04:05 GMT
Does anyone have the exact date for the accident in Walthamstow Depot in ?1994? which caused cars 3016 and 4016 to be written off? 06/09/1993.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jun 3, 2015 13:17:58 GMT
One thing i have always wondered since takeover is why LO have bothered with taking over any 317s. If anything, i would have thought that the characteristics of these trains would be the opposite of what LO require. They are slower of the mark than the 315s and are more suited to cambridge and stanstead journeys. Why do tfl need 100mph units which are going to be restricted to chingford services? Under AGA, i understood using them there as they could be rotated around with other longer distance routes, this is now no longer possible. Im sure there is an explanation as to why LO are using 317s on these routes and i am really interested to know why! I would guess it's partly because dividing the area into two operating units, with separate diagrams, is less efficient. So more units are likely required to mitigate against this, and perhaps if TFL plan to run extra or longer services. Whilst not ideal, the 317/7s were the only AC EMUs currently spare. I wish TFL would end their empire-building flirtation with mainline services, and concentrate on running their own network.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jun 3, 2015 10:48:44 GMT
i thought station was closed and secured after service was ended and enginners would be around in area Yes correct. However, I recently came across an 'urban explorer' site where people had clearly just walked into stations after close of traffic, and then gone off down the tunnels. Quite shocking really that people can just walk into a station and go walking off down the tracks - especially as in some cases they clearly did it with the traction current live, which during engineering hours generally means it is being kept on to allow an engineers train to run on that section. It's amazing how stupid some people can be just in pursuit of some photographs or to graffiti a train.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 19, 2015 0:34:49 GMT
If they're around, yes. However there is an agreement that management will not contact staff when off-duty, so technically there's no way to contact staff who are off duty for whatever reason. Depending on relations at a given location there are one or two ways round this however. OK, I guess in a depot of hundreds of drivers you might not know everyone - but surely you kind of know enough about your colleagues to know that Alf walks to the station and gets NR, Bert drives, Charlie zipwires in etc? Assuming you've asked people in advance, only those on A/L would be missed and you could presumably work out the smaller number. Are additional staff put on standby, managers on call, people who can definitely get in told to turn up on overtime? Would LUL arrange for taxis if a crucial member of staff was unable to attend work? As an aside - when there is disruption to public transport, many employers will make sympathetic noises but ultimately state that "it is the responsibility of the employee to get him/herself to work at the start of their shift" - what happens with LUL staff when there are delays? It'd be rather hypocritical if the same were applied. Is there a difference if there is a delay on NR? First of all, many depots have more than 100 drivers. Morden, for example, has a headcount of 230. LUL is generally moving back to the idea of smaller depots for the very reason that they are easier to manage. The era of the "superdepot" is coming to an end, and the large depots like Arnos Grove and Acton Town are unlikely to be repeated. For train staff, it's a case of identifying which duties are likely to be affected, and then attempting to juggle the coverage to find a way of covering the duty. Ideally, an affected driver would seek to swap their rest days with someone else in order to avoid the issue - at the end of the day it still remains the driver's responsibility to get to work. Any planned training or other release might be cancelled, with those drivers either reverting to their rostered duty (if enough notice given) or becoming additional spares. If duties remain uncovered by close of traffic the previous day, all depots on a line will work together to devise a coverage plan that seeks to cover all duties, and failing that will as far as possible aim to cancel as few trains as possible, picking the least disruptive trains/duties. The bigger problem is when one hour before the book-on time the desk gets a phone-call along the lines of "I'm stuck at X, my mainline train isn't running and I've no idea when I will be in". This is where the spares get called upon, so having as many spares as possible in the messroom is generally the best way to avoid disruption. Staff are generally very professional and in my experience this is quite rare, however there will always be someone who gets caught out. In management grades, again training can be cancelled - this also has the benefit of releasing trainers as well to perform duties as required. Overtime is an option, or duties can be re-arranged to that some less vital duties are left uncovered. The caveat however is that staff can only perform tasks they are licensed to do, and must be familiar with the location. Under normal circumstances, a member of staff late or absent will be booked such. In the case of lateness, any item of lateness will trigger an interview with a manager where the circumstances will be discussed and documented. At the locations I'm familiar with, normally a national rail delay will be accepted, however I would certainly ask the employee to provide supporting evidence. If the employee was making a habit of being delayed on national rail, there would likely be a discussion along the lines of whether enough time is being allowed for the journey. If unable to come to work at all, again the circumstances would be discussed and documented upon returning to work, again I would expect evidence to be provided. The interview would also consider how proactive the employee has been in attempting to get to work. Normally the employee would be expected to take the day as annual leave. If this can't be done for whatever reason, the day could remain recorded as "absent", which would result in pay being deducted, and will also count towards the employee's sickness record.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 16, 2015 22:23:59 GMT
I saw a refurbished 1972 train at Harrow & Wealdstone station and the end off the cab of the 4 car set In the centre of the train was painted maroon! Is this now the new livery or a one off? XF I can't remember how many units have been done, however at least one unit was done in order to allow a single unit to operate on the Network Rail section. LU's derogation from the standard yellow cab is based on their trains having red cabs. I can't recall if the white/blue cabs of the middle cars have ever operated on the NR section - obviously pre-refurbishment the 72 stock cabs were completely unpainted. If I recall correctly, at the time the reason was that a complete train could work to Acton Works, then the 4-car unit could if required return to Stonebridge Park alone. Since the Jubilee Line went over to Seltrac this isn't now possible under normal operations, but presumably a 4-car unit with red 33XX cab could work singly back from Queen's Park or London Road if there was ever a need. It's worth adding that the Aldwych 72TS unit also has red cabs, but my understanding is this was done for filming reasons to make the train look more like modern stocks.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 16, 2015 17:03:04 GMT
Thank you for your explanation. But if the Marlow Branch line is not getting electrified, why are the trees along the line either trimmed, or cut completly? I think it is lunacy not to electrify the Marlow Branch as this requires the retention of diesel units with the associated empty/ additional workings on an what is ti become a very congested GWML! The service to Marlow and Borne End is to be doubled in frequency and this will be achieved by making both platforms at Bourne End accessible from both the Maidenhead and Marlow lines thereby providing a passing point for trains on the branch. This branch was originally planned to be electrified however there was an an issue with the EMU's being to lo long to fit into the platforms at Bourne End so rather than find a solution to this problem the Luddites that run the railways had their day! XF Have you ever been to Bourne End? The station is wedged between the Marlow branch junction at the south end, which is already on a sharp curve, and a road at the north end. The junction is also constrained by the Thames bridge which is close as well. The trackbed of the former route northwards to High Wycombe is now an industrial estate - if you could get this removed then it would be possible to resite the station north of the road, but then you would need either a level crossing or road overbridge or underbridge. The level crossing would likely be resisted due to the potential to cause traffic congestion, whilst the road bridge would be disruptive and expensive. All this might be justifiable if this was the only diesel route in the area, but as there will be a requirement for DMUs at Reading (?) for the Reigate and Greenford lines this makes it much less of a problem. Having said all this, it does seem disappointing that the Reading-Redhill route doesn't seem to be up for electrification, especially as large parts of this already have the 3rd rail. It doesn't help that Network Rail is still flirting with the idea of replacing the whole DC network with AC, whether this ever turns out to be realistic remains to be seen, but in the meantime it imposes a planning blight on any potential DC schemes. There's no way the missing sections of Reading-Redhill could be realistically done with AC due to the number of AC/DC interfaces this would require. If this line were done on DC, and Greenford were then electrified, this might change the economics such that a costly complete remodelling of Bourne End could be more justifiable.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 16, 2015 16:53:54 GMT
I'd expect each business will look through which staff are booked to be working on the days concerned and identify any staff who might use NR to get to work, especially the line control rooms, and make arrangements as necessary. "Might" use NR to get to work? Can you not ask staff how they get to work? If they're around, yes. However there is an agreement that management will not contact staff when off-duty, so technically there's no way to contact staff who are off duty for whatever reason. Depending on relations at a given location there are one or two ways round this however.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 15, 2015 23:47:45 GMT
If I were to guess, I'd suspect that the crane is to be installed into the crown of the tunnel that forms the crossover cavern. There ought to be enough headroom there for it to remain permanently in position while train pass beneath. Engineering notice refers to installation of a gantry crane in the tunnel crown.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 15, 2015 23:38:50 GMT
For the most part, the only effect will be making lines busier, especially those that serve/parallel mainline services. However, assuming the strike does go ahead, we can expect to see the bakerloo line being spannered north of Queens park, and on the District line, between Richmond and Turnham green, and between Wimbledon and East Putney. What will happen then service-wise if the strike does go ahead? I'm assuming the service will simply be abandoned south of Turnham Green, and North of Queen's park, but what will happen with the Wimbledon Branch. Reversing at East Putney will be out of the question because the points are Network Rail controlled, so I am assuming that most services will only get as far as Parson's Green. Will there be a token number of services to Putney Bridge using the crossover on the bridge, or is that also Network Rail controlled? If the relevant signalling centre panels or desks can't be staffed, then yes LUL would not be able to run over the NR sections. Also, possibly look out for a bit of disruption on LUL due to staff not being able to get to work if mainline trains don't run. This could cause a few cancelled trains, or maybe some stations could end up short of staff. The latter may be able to be mitigated against by using licensed staff (qualified managers or overtime) to make up numbers. Worst case for LUL is if control room staff can't get to work, but I'd expect plans to be put into place to ensure this doesn't happen, again using qualified managers or overtime. I'd expect each business will look through which staff are booked to be working on the days concerned and identify any staff who might use NR to get to work, especially the line control rooms, and make arrangements as necessary. Generally LUL puts a lot of effort into developing contingencies for these sorts of events, so I'd expect disruption to be minimised.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 9, 2015 16:17:13 GMT
It has always been far, far from ideal but of the last couple of years concerns raised have either had lip-service responses or 'fixes' that have only lasted weeks. Time for the firm to be made to grasp the nettle and do a thorough job down there. Agree that the situation at Elephant needs to be addressed. What I don't like is the feeling that a local issue has resulted in a blanket, network-wide, instruction going out. Maybe I'm being cynical and the two aren't related, but reading the RMT material I get the impression they are trying to link the two. I object to the RMT trying to influence whether I need traction current on or off to undertake an action I have safely carried out many times in the past.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 9, 2015 14:55:05 GMT
You said it yourself, you are 'not familiar with the current state of Elephant & Castle sidings'. I, and other Bakerloo Drivers are, and see this as a sensible, preventative measure before someone electrocutes themselves tripping over wiring that is not pinned down properly or where lighting is constantly failing. If there are specific hazards at this particular location then they should be addressed, which is a better approach than bringing in what appears to be a blanket ban on boarding/leaving trains via the M door. I haven't seen the actual wording from the ORR, but where I am it has been interpreted that staff must not enter or leave a train via the M door when traction current is switched on, unless there is a designated walkboard. Is there any particular reason why Elephant & Castle has deteriorated to the point where staff now find it unsafe? Has something changed, or has it always been an issue?
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 9, 2015 13:27:07 GMT
Yep, no 252 train as a result now with the new WTT40. I don't know of one single Driver that is unhappy about this change - should have happened years ago! The change though still only applies to a ban on 'scheduling' no trains to stable in the sidings. In an 'emergency' they can still be used, though, as with training a Trainee on the move (which still takes place), it would be the case that the juice was taken out before exiting the sidings when previously only Key Protection systems would apply. I'm not familiar with the current state of Elephant & Caste sidings. However, I can see no good reason why traction current needs to be switched off as a matter of routine when picking up a train from a siding. I've accessed trains stabled in Kennington and Tooting Broadway sidings on numerous occasions, and unless carrying heavy equipment I feel perfectly comfortable doing it with traction current live. Neither of these locations have a walkway at all, so I find it hard to see the facilities at Elephant & Castle can be worse. The ORR's involvement came after a complaint following a train being accessed in this manner at Kennington, there was no 'incident', just someone afterwards complained to the ORR that they felt it unsatisfactory that traction current was not switched off 'as a matter of routine'. It is common practice for staff to enter and leave trains via the 'M' door in a tunnel. Technical staff and operating officials do it on a regular basis, for example when inspecting or repairing trackside equipment, or being dropped off at a location where something needs inspecting. I don't see why a tunnel siding is any different. My view is that it should be up to the staff on site in requesting whatever protection measures they feel they require for a given task.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 6, 2015 12:50:44 GMT
Given what you said in your first sentence, would they not be be better mounted 20' in front? (Assuming an 'SPT' is some kind of telephone.) Others have outlined what is "in advance of" and "in the rear of", similar (but not necessarily the same) from "behind" and "in front of". An SPT is a Signal Post Telephone, which are now no longer on the signal post! Bit of a bugbear of mine, but the terms 'in advance' and 'in the rear' seem to be slipping out of common use. I was recently asked by a controller to check for something "100 yards before the tunnel mouth". When I tried to clarify whether he meant in advance or in the rear, I was surprised to find he had no idea what I meant. The terms are there for a reason, namely that other language can introduce scope for confusion. I know it is, or certainly was, covered in training for this reason.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 4, 2015 22:56:37 GMT
Royal Oak will also give you the FGW services, although the direction of the sun can be a pain for photography. Royal Oak station is closed until mid-May for "station upgrade works" (read: replacing the staircase). Good luck with the station staff. In theory you are supposed to tell them before spotting so that they know that you are not "loitering" at the station. The trouble is that it gives them the chance to say "no", especially if you intend to use cameras. So I rarely do this myself. Note however that if filming you must not use tripods, even if you are right at the end of the platforms where few passengers go. As usual, I find your comments about station staff interesting, borderlining on the scaremongering. The *vast majority* of my station colleagues across the combine are extremely friendly and will have absolutely no problem with enthusiasts photographing or filming on platforms - provided that no tripod or flash is used, and enthusiasts are respecting the operation of the railway (remaining behind the yellow line and in public areas, etc). Always exceptions, but it's by no means as regular or as much of a problem as you seem to make it out, here and elsewhere. And, for clarity, I speak as both a member of station staff and as an enthusiast whilst writing this post (although comments do not reflect those of the company etc.). That said - I would echo your suggestion of using a ODTC if the OP & friend are planning to spend time at stations without exiting, and/or are unfamiliar with Oyster. Although there is a considerable cost difference if staying within zones 1/2 (£6.40 versus £12) it can get more complicated if you don't touch out before the maximum journey time is reached. I'd be happy to advise further if you *do* want to go down the Oyster route, though. HTH. I know there were a few issues during the most recent 38TS on the Northern Line, unfortunately there do still seem to be a few staff who seem to like making trouble on this issue. Depends on the individual personality, however there are a small minority of station staff who can be a right royal pain in the backside even towards staff in the legitimate execution of their duties, so I can well understand enthusiasts may get issues with some people.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Apr 28, 2015 0:51:33 GMT
I read the excellent book Moorgate: Anatomy of a Railway Disaster by Sally Holloway some years ago (library book). I seem to remember that some time after the event a biologist/pathologist put forward the theory that the driver, Leslie Newsom, may have developed a condition similar to locked-in syndrome causing him to remain motionless, failing to react to the impact. Such a theory cannot be proven or disproven as Mr Newsom's brain was no longer available. IMO nothing is to be gained 40 years later by speculating, claiming it was suicide or any undiagnosed condition, as the material evidence has long since gone. If the experts cannot argue the evidence one way or another, what chance do we, as lay-people, have There is also some quite disturbing tripe on other forums about this. We can do without it here. There's never been a shred of new evidence produced, simply speculation of one sort or another based on guesswork or worse. And what's worse than bad science is guess science, making the 'facts' fit your theory. As a good example, there was a fascinating documentary on Horizon some years ago, which apparently suggested sedimentary evidence proved a Tsunami hit the area of the Severn Estuary in January 1607. It was several years later that thorough examination of church records etc on the EAST coast showed equally devastating floods there the next day, and no tsunami could have gone right round our coast having made its first landfall in such devastating fashion on the opposite coast. The clear evidence of a storm surge similar to 1953 in records of the time continue to be overlooked by the conspiracy theorists! My view is that it's reasonable to debate the possibilities, we will never fully satisfy the curiousity into knowing what happened. However I don't agree with claiming that something is fact without being able to provide proper supporting evidence, as the RAIL letter seems to do. It's a subject which does get discussed at work from time to time, there are still a handful of staff on the Underground who were around at the time. I know one who actually went down the overrun tunnel in the aftermath. The only real consensus is that no one can fully explain what happened based on the evidence available, every theory put forward contains 'buts'. One aspect which was recently pointed out to me, the terminal protection measures introduced were, I believe, intended to mitigate against the possibility of a deliberate act. However the main appartus in providing protection was the tripcock, a piece of equipment that can be easily isolated by a driver. Modern rolling stocks enforce slow-speed running with the tripcock isolated, I am open to correction on this as I have never worked with the stock in question, however I have a feeling there remains at least one stock on the Underground where this does not apply.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Apr 27, 2015 18:33:09 GMT
Don't recall seeing this before: The first half is a Nationwide programme which has interesting footage of the line after closure by LT, but before opening by BR. There was a letter in a recent RAIL magazine, where the writer claimed he had obtained evidence that the driver's brain exhibited signs of psychosis, suggesting the crash was the result of suicide. No idea of the validity of this, I don't think it's appropriate to post any further opinion except to say I'm not convinced.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Apr 23, 2015 17:22:52 GMT
Apologies for the language, but as it is Mr Hendy I hope it is okay. He has some less than complementary views regarding Mainline services. In an interview with Management Today, Peter Hendy said: “People hate the suburban rail service, they hate it. If you make a mistake on your oyster card on the tube, we’ll refund it. On South West Trains, they’ll fine you. That’s a big philosophical difference.” He continued: “On Southeastern, the trains are like the wild west. They are s**t, awful. And then every now and then some people who look like the Gestapo get on and fine everyone they can. It doesn’t improve your day, does it?” Link to full interview is here: InterviewWell he would say that wouldn't he? More potential railway for the TfL empire. For what it's worth, I would prefer suburban rail services to remain in the hands of the TOCs. The rail industry needs less fragmentation not more. As an example, the divide between Overground and Greater Anglia has already resulted in less efficient unit diagrams. London Overground may have been successful in some respects, but it's a completely different thing to a suburban network like Southeastern which stretches to the likes of Tunbridge Wells or Gillingham. My view is that TfL should focus their efforts on running their existing rail services. SSR resignalled yet?
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Apr 23, 2015 14:19:19 GMT
There's a certain generation who stand way, way back from the edge at all stations. That generation is the one that grew up with slam-door trains. No, it's the generation that grew up with politeness. Can't agree with that. Many railway staff will testify that older people can be amongst the rudest, and - at times - most troublesome. My experience would tend to confirm this. If the 'older generation' are characterised by such politeness, wouldn't one have expected this to pass on to their offspring?
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Apr 18, 2015 14:34:07 GMT
Well this is very good and welcomed news for the 1938 stock, however the maybe not so good fo the chances of one of the remaining A Stock units be preserved due to budgetary considerations! I will believe it when I see it for the 38 stock getting fitted and operational with Seltrac. Although it's fitted to engineers trains, the prospect for successful sustained PM driving, during traffic hours, on a non-WSP-fitted EP/Westinghouse brake train is not good. On the Northern Line there are still loads of places where the target speed drops with no warning. Sometimes it does this because of catching up with the train in front and gives insufficient warning, other times it's due to issues with the system. Do this in the open and in the wet and the 38 stock will have 4 cars of flatted wheels, as well as the train going non-communicating and delaying the railway.
|
|