|
Post by piccboy on May 2, 2017 16:59:49 GMT
I understand that the train will lay-over in Northfields platform 4, as shown, rather than in the depot. Unlikely the fast lines will be used, but it's ultimately at the discretion of the operating official/service manager/service operator on the day. ("Signal Operators may vary the routing...in the best interests of the service" - though generally TTNs are not deviated from.) Cool, that does mean it will do the Local Eastbound between Northfields and Acton Town. I bet that will be the fastest a D stock has approached Acton Town Platform 4, unless they put a speed restriction on it through the tunnel.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Apr 30, 2017 22:13:03 GMT
I'm sure the 96 can (could) be driven manually without the need to cut anything out. The 72s (yes, I drove them too) had droplight cut out switch, to be able to drive with the windows down, on account of an Elephant driver head butting the signal plate as he came out of tunnel on approach to Queens pk in 1997 🙄 Aha I would have never had thought the 72's would have a cut out! Good to learn more stuff about stocks, and I just assumed the 96 had a similar set up to the 95, makes you wonder why the 95 has a cut out in th first place. Of course in ato it won't go with a cab door open. All trains need to have the cut out in some form, in case the cab door / drop light cannot be closed, or the switch / sensor fails. The cut out exists to get the train moving. The 72's droplight cut out (if memory serves me correctly) is a left over legacy from the 67 stock which was there to stop the train from being able to start with no one in the cab.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Apr 25, 2017 20:02:56 GMT
remove Park Royal, all ready for the new signalling system. "This is a Circle, District and Piccadilly line train via Paddington, Aldgate, Earl's Court and Acton Town." I think you mean Royal Oak. 😋 Yep that's it Can't even begin to tell you how long it took me, when I was on stations, to remember that Southgate is actually North London, and Northfields is West.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Apr 25, 2017 19:31:23 GMT
It would be technically easy to change some or all of the WB H&C trips in the S stock CIS to start from Upminster rather than Barking, well within the memory and equipment capacity. There is no instruction to deliver any of this at the moment. Trains starting from Barking etc would just pick up the same 'trip' so there's no need for extras. The post that mentioned lack of 'joinedupness' has a point! You'd still have an issue with H&C trains that go on to stable at Upminster though. The relevant LU marketing related department doesn't like trains going away from central London to claim to be Circles or H&C except when on bits of line coloured yellow or pink on the public Tube Map. I understood too that Operators don't like driving a train that is claiming to provide a service for another line? Perhaps that sort of barrier is not actually real? Regarding now redundant 'trips' such as the now unusable Hornchurch reversers etc. etc., they will be removed at a suitable update. There are a number of anomalies when it comes to S Stock destination codes including a code that takes you from Edgware Road to Barking via Victoria, train describes itself as a District line train, and the opposite a train from Barking to Edgware Road via Victoria is described as a Circle Line train. On weekend Engineering works, when the Hammmersmith and City line is part suspended from Liverpool St to Barking, and for them to terminate at Aldgate, the only code for an Aldgate terminator is a Circle line one. Others that would need to be added would be for Circle and H&C trains to be able to terminate at Paddington (Suburban) and remove Park Royal, all ready for the new signalling system.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Apr 22, 2017 1:29:25 GMT
I remember this being filmed, I saw a glimpse of me at one of the platforms, won't say where though!
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Mar 26, 2017 10:17:07 GMT
The Met carry track circuit clips with strict instructions that they must not be used on fourth rail systems, drivers have to practice using them on dead track annually. We have them on the Central Line too We have them on the District line too.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Mar 26, 2017 9:50:59 GMT
It will be nice if this was the case, it has been a long running tradition whereby the District and Piccadilly trains can safely share each other's tracks between Barons Court and Acton Town in both directions (Notwithstanding the Missing Platform at Chiswick Park, and the difference in rolling stock sizings!) Also no platform at Stamford Brook Station on the Eastbound Piccadilly, but curiously one on the Westbound! did the train travel at full/normal line speed or was it going considerably slower? Maybe if a district stopper was in the way? It was certainly going slower than it would have on the fast lane, but not by too much. All the slow platforms in both directions have a 25mph speed restriction at the exit of the platform, so Piccadilly line trains would slow for that. Also Turnham Green junction on approach signals are normally red and only clear as you near them. Locals have a 40mph speed limit, fast has a 45mph limit.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Mar 21, 2017 13:09:24 GMT
What about the 95's and 96's? I believe they are somewhere in the 90% region of part compatible, certainly the cars are the same length width etc.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Feb 24, 2017 0:23:56 GMT
They are probably for the reversing manoeuvre which can be done via the "Euston Loop". The one with E is probably for Engineering trains.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Feb 14, 2017 13:24:15 GMT
I have two options.
A. Bring the Piccadilly line into SSR (Sub-Surface Railway) signalling programme so that the whole of the Piccadilly is signalled the same. This would solve the problem both at Rayners Lane / Uxbridge and Acton Town / Ealing Common where SSR and Piccadilly share the same track.
B. At Rayners Lane, build a new bay platform on the side of the existing Northbound platform, where the sidings used to exist, for the Piccadilly. A new tunnel into this bay so the Piccadilly doesn't have to touch the Uxbridge branch. Improvements to Uxbridge branch under new signalling should increase the trains per hour on the Met to cover the shortfall from the Piccadilly no longer running there.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Feb 8, 2017 16:52:41 GMT
Only 4 light Injuries treated by LAS, thankfully it was in a platform at the time. LAS, London Ambulance Service? Yes correct, London Ambulance Service. Apologies for using the acronym, wrote this after coming off a dead early shift, and before a power nap. I was a little tired. Being right by the junction there is a lot of space not immediately adjacent to a track so I can easily understand why it might seem an attractive place to move to to escape a crowded platform. Particularly if you don't know how serious the problem on/with the train is. Adding to the problems is that station building is small and cramped and way under the capacity required to relieve the pressure of an overcrowded platform with any speed. There were building works when I was last there (a little before Christmas) that wont help matters if they're still ongoing. Just took a look at Google maps at the station ( Dalston Kingsland) it looks like they could do with installing some Emergency Exits leading out to Boleyn Road.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Feb 8, 2017 12:29:38 GMT
Only 4 light Injuries treated by LAS, thankfully it was in a platform at the time.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Jan 26, 2017 15:19:12 GMT
Liverpool St Eastbound Hammersmith and City to Whitechapel (island platform), Hammersmith & City back to King's Cross St Pancras.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Jan 10, 2017 15:27:08 GMT
Just checked the Central Line Twitter, Leyton reopened at 18:29 although why it was shut is beyond me as its not a Section 12. Could have been a Fire alarm or OPO monitor fault.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Nov 30, 2016 14:24:02 GMT
Can't help but think that the 83 stock that sat in the sidings at South Harrow for years, should have been converted into a RAT for Piccadilly Line long time ago.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Nov 27, 2016 18:04:47 GMT
The 73 stock on the Piccadilly line uses the Westcode 7 step EP braking system made by Westinghouse, although only 4 steps are used by the train. This is backed up by automatically applied Rheostatic braking on the motor cars, cars 1,3,4 and 6. Upon approach to a station, the Train Operator will select one of the Service Brake settings on the CTBC (marked as Service 1, 2, 3, 4 respectively), the train will then apply the relevant EP brake to all cars and after a few seconds (2-3?) the EP brakes in the motor cars are automatically released and the Rheostatic braking is applied. At about 10 mph the Rheostatic braking is automatically released and EP brake is reapplied to the motor cars.
So how does this relate to the problem of wheels locking up? When the Rheostatic braking appies, it tends to be more effective than the EP brake, and combined with poor rail adhesion (leaf fall and or wet / icy rails) then train wheels will be prone to locking up, and if this happens for too long can create a flatspot. The technique I was taught to avoid this was to apply the service brake and release and reapply in a cycle to avoid the Rheostatic brakes applying. This technique normally stops the wheels from locking up but factors like how poor the rail adhesion is, passenger load, speed, and braking distance are all important to the non skidding equation.
One final thought, although it has been several years since I have driven on the Piccadilly line, I can recall the 73 stock was prone to having a fierce Rheostatic brake develop in one or more motor cars or for a Rheostatic brake to stick on and release long after other cars released their brakes. This could also effect wheels locking up and flats.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Nov 10, 2016 14:05:15 GMT
Only the class 55 (and the extinct class 23) had the delta-form engine that gives them the name. The class 37 hasa conventional twin bank 12-cyl engine Correct about the extinction of the class 23, however the sole-remaining Napier Deltic type T9-29 engine and generator set from a class 23 loco, is to be installed into a replica Class 23, See The Baby Deltic Project for more details.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Nov 10, 2016 13:50:09 GMT
All the doors failed to close. It was suspected that one of the saloon door open buttons being pushed in was the issue. Porter buttons, the ones at each end of the cars that close the doors on that car didn't close them either. Train was about to move off very slowly with all doors open to Leytonstone when the doors then all closed. 27 minute delay. Assuming the 92 stock has a door control mcb, would that have not bypassed the problem and allowed the doors to be closed by either porter button, doors close buttons at the other end of the train, or manually shut?
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Nov 8, 2016 22:20:07 GMT
So they finally got rid of the last payphones at Piccadilly Circus, but a fitting use for the space [doffs virtual cap towards Frank Pick].
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Oct 16, 2016 12:46:43 GMT
You missed out one major con of option two, the need to store all the new trains somewhere once built, and somewhere for the old trains to go before they get chopped up. Would only work with the W&C. The new trains would be stored at the existing depots / sidings as they are built, old trains would removed to scrappers, and space at scrappers would be determined by how many used, and where. In the case of the Bakerloo line, its direct connection to the National rail network would make it logical to move old and new stock by rail. That could also open up the possibility of storing old trains in unused but functional sidings on National Rail. I appreciate that the signalling upgrade would more than likely be completed before all the new trains are built and delivered, and I would suggest that this time period be used for a thorough testing and bedding in of the new signalling system and trains. At some point there would be enough trains to run a limit passenger service. Isn't option 4 essentially what was done with the Victoria Line (minus the driverless bit) That's correct. In my opinion going from one ATO system to another would be relatively easier than going from a traditional fixed block, tripcock / trainstop, coloured signal, manually driven system if only for the simple reasons that, in the example of the Victoria line, it had a relatively precise train identification system, overlaid with a completely electronic signalling system. The traditional system has a number of mechanical systems that would need to have a reliable method of obtaining signalling information to pass to the computerised signalling system. I would like to say that although I used the term "relatively easier" above to describe the Victoria Line upgrade, I appreciate and give immense respect to the teams that successfully developed, built and installed that system. With regards to the driverless bit, from noddymac's original post he mentioned driverless as going to ATO, I assumed he meant ATO as implemented on existing Underground lines i.e. Central, Jubilee, Northern, Victoria lines with a Train Operator / Instructor Operator at the front able to override the system and bring the train to a safe stop in the event of an Emergency, open and close doors, etc. As opposed to a system like UTO (Unattended Train Operation) where there is no member of staff on board and the train does everything.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Oct 16, 2016 9:46:50 GMT
I can't see new trains being introduced and run with old signalling? It almost defeats the purpose of new trains. If the trains are going to be driverless, it's say to say it could most likely go ATO. I know Network Rail were once discussing the idea of trialling trains between Kings Cross and Kings Lynn or Cambridge where trains just run on axel counters with no signals whatsoever, so if that happens and it's successful, signals could definitely become a thing of the past! (Not in our lifetime I hope) Traditionally, the underground has always introduced new trains on old signalling, but of course there are 4 ways new trains could be introduced on new signalling. 1) Upgrade old trains to run on new signalling, install new signalling, introduce new trains. Pros New trains would not have to have any legacy signalling system installed, so cheaper to manufacture. Cons Expense of designing and fitting old trains with new signalling equipment including issue of lack of space for said equipment on the 72 stock. 2) Shut down the entire line, upgrade signalling system, remove old trains and introduce new ones. Pros Cheapest option in terms of actual costs of new signalling and trains as no need to upgrade old trains, install legacy equipment in new trains, run dual signalling systems, quickest way to have new system completed as can be worked on 24/7. Cons Loss of service for passengers during upgrade, loss of revenue from passengers using other services to complete journeys, impact of increase passenger load on other Underground lines, compensation to passengers effected? 3) Introduce new trains onto old signalling system. Remove old trains, Upgrade signalling system. Pros quickest way to get new trains in service, less impact on passenger service as upgrade can be spread over longer period of time, i.e. worked on at nights when service closed. Cons New trains would have to be fitted with legacy signalling equipment so cost. 4) Install new signalling system to run parallel with old, introduce new driverless trains, remove old trains, removed old legacy signalling system. Pros new trains cheaper as no legacy equipment needs to be installed. Cons cost of designing and installing a new signally system that can run parallel with old in a fail safe manner. IMHO the current method of introducing new trains able to run on old signalling system is probably the cheapest and has less impact on customers.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Jun 4, 2016 23:51:00 GMT
Far easier to reverse trains at Hammersmith than Barons Court, so it is rarely used.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on May 19, 2016 14:48:15 GMT
The line with the gap in it is the present H&C line, not the Middle Circle, which ran from Mansion House to Aldgate via Addison Road and the now-closed link to the H&C. The Outer Circle ran from Broad Street to Victoria via Willesden Junction and Clapham Junction, later diverted at Addison Road to run to Mansion House via South Kensington. It was for this service that the MDR built its electric locomotives. The current NLL uses part of its route - the Olympia Shuttle is another surviving vestige. There was also a short-lived "Super Outer Circle" from St Pancras to Earls Court via the Dudding Hill line and the now-closed side of the Gunnersbury triangle. Most of these longer orbital routes withered away when trams and motorbuses started to compete with them on the shorter journeys, and deep level tubes provided more direct ways of getting from one side of London to the other. The Outer and Inner Circles fought off the competition by electrification, as did the ELL and SLL: although in the ELL's case the physical barrier of the Thames limited the amount of road competition anyway. Here is a map showing the various circle lines.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Apr 30, 2016 1:29:50 GMT
Yes it is No it isn't. Or at least that is my understanding. Watford Met will become a stabling depot. Will the Island Platform be removed in the process? The space has the potential to become an extra two stabling roads. The station building at Watford is Grade 2 listed, but I am not sure of the platforms, but that could have some bearing on the matter.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Mar 26, 2016 13:30:33 GMT
There is a set of points at Barking on the Eastbound just before the beginning of Platform 1a, not sure if it is in use though.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Feb 28, 2016 18:26:00 GMT
1973 have the brackets pre-fitted as it is easy to turn them around, via the heathrow terminal 4 loop to make a middle cab an end cab. I seem to recall seeing a post somewhere about the reasons for 1992 having middle cabs was because they had more cabs than NDM's (non-driving motors)? Can't find it at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Feb 11, 2016 22:46:09 GMT
The trains will be driven manually on the Richmond and Wimbledon branches and driven to lineside signals there is no plan to introduce in cab indications for the signalling. I can't speak for the Met line but my understanding is the slow lines north of Harrow on the Hill will have the lineside signals removed and full ATO, the fast lines will keep the lineside signals for the Chilterns but the S stock will run in full ATO. The Uxbridge branch will be again full ATO for the S stocks but with lineside signals for the 73 stock, but running to fixed block signalling. My understanding was that the 73 stock was due to have a replacement speedo with a TOD style display, relevant signalling hardware and would run in PM while on Uxbridge branch, has this changed?
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Jan 27, 2016 16:38:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Dec 6, 2015 16:57:50 GMT
Bearing in mind the incident happened at ticket hall level, why was the train service suspended? Probably because given how near the platforms and tracks are to the ticket hall, the incident could have very quickly spread to the platforms and more importantly the tracks.
|
|
|
Post by piccboy on Nov 19, 2015 8:51:06 GMT
How does the roll back protection on all stock work then? Runback protection operates at 0.5m movement. On D Stock to the rear only. On S Stock in Tripcock mode, to the rear. In INTER in either direction. Also in reverse, to the front on S Stock.
|
|