Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2011 13:42:35 GMT
Any realignment to the Central Line platforms at Bank would mean shutting down Liverpool Street to Holborn, one of the busiest sections of the Tube, for a very, very long time. Somehow I don't think local businesses aka The City would think the changes were worth the disruption. Not necessarily a very, very long time. Shouldn't it be possible to do most of the boring while leaving the existing tunnel alone? Besides, the situation may become easier once Crossrail arrives. An alternative is not to change the tunnel, but move the platforms off the tightest part of the curve. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2011 18:46:22 GMT
Not necessarily a very, very long time. Shouldn't it be possible to do most of the boring while leaving the existing tunnel alone? Besides, the situation may become easier once Crossrail arrives. An alternative is not to change the tunnel, but move the platforms off the tightest part of the curve. Crossrail will make very little difference, commuters that travel to the stations that feed the City; Bank, St. Paul’s and Chancery Lane, will still pack onto the Central Line making any work on it highly disruptive. I don’t see how it would be possible to do any work on the platforms without shutting down the line, the platforms would still have to align with the escalators and the passage ways connecting the Central with the other lines and the ticket hall. Ditto with moving the platforms to a less curved section, not that I can think of one within a reasoable distance, you have bends both east and west of the platforms. |
|
|
|
Post by chrisvandenkieboom on Sept 3, 2011 9:21:14 GMT
Any realignment to the Central Line platforms at Bank would mean shutting down Liverpool Street to Holborn, one of the busiest sections of the Tube, for a very, very long time. Somehow I don't think local businesses aka The City would think the changes were worth the disruption. Plus, it would probably require the platforms to also be wheelchair accessible due to a law (which also prohibits curved platforms to be built) |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Sept 3, 2011 10:57:22 GMT
No-ones ever quoted this law or refferenced it, yet we've all assumed its there and thats what it says. I wonder what the actual rule stipulates, and how different it is from LULs interpretation of Whitehalls interpretation of what Brussels hoped for.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2011 8:20:53 GMT
No-ones ever quoted this law or refferenced it, yet we've all assumed its there and thats what it says. I wonder what the actual rule stipulates, and how different it is from LULs interpretation of Whitehalls interpretation of what Brussels hoped for. I believe that the current legislation covering disabled access to railways is the Equality Act 2010, I’m sure if you wanted to spend a few hours trawling through it you could find the relevant section. LUL’s interpretation would be exactly the same as Whitehall’s as for anything this big they would need funding from the Treasury, |
|
|
|
Post by andypurk on Sept 4, 2011 13:59:20 GMT
No-ones ever quoted this law or refferenced it, yet we've all assumed its there and thats what it says. I wonder what the actual rule stipulates, and how different it is from LULs interpretation of Whitehalls interpretation of what Brussels hoped for. I believe that the current legislation covering disabled access to railways is the Equality Act 2010, I’m sure if you wanted to spend a few hours trawling through it you could find the relevant section. LUL’s interpretation would be exactly the same as Whitehall’s as for anything this big they would need funding from the Treasury, The law (when I checked recently), provides for the relevant minister to allow for exemptions to the provisions. Of course, it is upto LU (or whoever) to apply for an exemption from the DfT. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2011 19:33:37 GMT
|
|
SE13
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2013
Glorious Gooner
Posts: 9,737
|
Post by SE13 on Oct 2, 2011 7:12:05 GMT
The above link is to a secure site, and as such, the link won't be clickable. Copy and paste into a new tab/window/whatever Mac has and the page will work fine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2011 8:51:49 GMT
There is an exhibition this week: "The public are invited to the first project exhibition at 10 King William Street, London EC4N 7TW, from Tuesday to Friday, 8 – 11 November, between 8:00 am – 6:00 pm. Members of the project team will be available to answer any questions and your comments on the proposal are welcome." consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tube/bank |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2011 10:58:09 GMT
I went this morning.
The work they are doing is encouraging. If you want to know the detail, you'll probably have to go to the exhibition as they have a full model there, and people to explain the model too.
In short, they are going to tunnel a new southbound Northern Line platform, which will be to the west of the existing one (confusingly, the platforms at Bank are the "wrong" way round, breaking the driving-on-the-left convention). In between the existing northbound platform and the new platform will be a new interchange and circulation tunnel. The existing southbound platform will be a circulation area for the current northbound platform (so, in effect, the circulation area for the Northern line will be tripled).
In addition, there will be 4 new express lifts to the DLR and the surface, where there will be a new entrance. It is unclear whether there will also be new escalators between the Northern and the DLR, but it did look like this was intended. Finally, there will be a a new connection to the Central line from the interchange tunnel.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,767
|
Post by Chris M on Nov 10, 2011 0:08:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Nov 10, 2011 2:55:53 GMT
It looks like there will be two tunnels in between the running tunnels? The current southbound tunnel and a new passageway... So not really that similar to London Bridge which has one tunnel between the running tunnels.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2011 8:25:34 GMT
Yes, I think the two Northern line tunnels at Bank will be further apart than they are at London Bridge.
The current adjacent platform tunnels will effectively be joined to make one platform tunnel, and then there will be an additional passageway tunnel to the west
|
|
|
|
Post by ianvisits on Nov 10, 2011 9:11:47 GMT
It looks like there will be two tunnels in between the running tunnels? The current southbound tunnel and a new passageway... So not really that similar to London Bridge which has one tunnel between the running tunnels. It'll also be a different colour scheme, so it's really different. The point is that the "principle" is the same - dig a new tunnel, and convert old running tunnel into some form of passenger space. |
|
|
|
Post by fleetline on Nov 18, 2011 0:21:10 GMT
Were any plans drawn up for this when Thameslink was at the design stage? In terms of 'straightening' the Central, would this bring any significant operational benefits?  No, the link at City was for the Jubilee Line as there was still a possibility when City was built that the Jubilee would be extended through the station footprint. There even areas of the station know as LUL corridor today tho it's now filled with equipment as part of the Thameslink upgrade. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2011 20:52:46 GMT
In the model, the new tunnel looks to be a larger gauge than the existing ones. Are they future proofing for something? Or will there be emergency walkways?
Really, if you're going to the trouble of boring a new tunnel, you might as well.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,767
|
Post by Chris M on Nov 20, 2011 3:23:47 GMT
Neither I nor any of the people who were there at the same time as me noticed the running tunnel as being larger gauge than the existing running tunnels and so didn't ask anything about it. It could be an optical illusion of course. The platform tunnel is larger bore than the existing one - it needs to be for the wider platform.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2011 8:44:03 GMT
would a new running tunnel have to have emergency walkways in now?
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Nov 20, 2011 9:30:25 GMT
would a new running tunnel have to have emergency walkways in now? Possibly not. The new sections of Northern Line tunnel at London Bridge were not built to a larger diameter (apart from the junction tunnels), despite being constructed as part of the JLE project. |
|
|
|
Post by v52gc on Nov 20, 2011 11:26:48 GMT
The PiccEx tunnels at Heathrow to T5 were built to a larger diameter with walkways.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2011 12:22:43 GMT
That's an interesting thought, but the problem is getting to the KWS tunnels. The original station shafts are under Regis House, which was rebuilt about 10 years ago and so unlikely to be in a condition for redevelopment (which might have allowed coordination of works). The running tunnels southwards are on steep gradients (the old SB in particular), with sharp curves, and are only 10'2" in diameter. They've also been severed at London Bridge by JLE work, so I suspect that the opportunity for using them would be very limited. How about a return of the 'umbrella', this time over the road junction at Bank or Monument? Sorry to reply a bit late on this one, but when the DLR was constructed to Bank, a small access tunnel was dug from the working site into the base of a sewer shaft on the corner of Eastcheap & Gracehurch Streets. The sewer access point was about 15 feet in diameter rising upwards and was suitably planked over to create a working base. After the line had been constructed the access tunnel was back filled using something called foam cement. In the mid 90’s it was cleared and reopened. This was to enable the removal of spoil as a result of the construction of the additional passenger walkways between the DLR and the Northern Lines. I had the opportunity one night to walk through the tunnel to the base of the sewer. The tunnel had a narrow gauge railway so that spoil could be removed in small hopper wagons. Typical of those seen in mines and tube construction sites. Note sure how they moved the wagons, might have been through muscle power. I assume the tunnel was backfilled once the construction had ceased. I was told the reason why this was required. But its best left to your imagination! However it would be unlikely this would cope with the considerable amount of spoil which would need to be removed. In the past (I think with the Jubilee), the River Thames proved an ideal working site for the removal of spoil. With the reduction in Lorry movements being a priority, shifting the spoil out by Barge would I assume tick all the right boxes. Failing that there’s nothing to stop LUL creating a new working tunnel to somewhere like Finsbury Circus and removing spoil from there. Dean |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2011 22:59:43 GMT
Thanks for the extra info Dean
I was unaware that the DLR station had two phases to it, ie. that the extra tunnels to the Northern line (I presume you mean the ones halfway down the Northern platforms) were built later.
Is there anywhere to find a complete history of the DLR station at Bank? I would be interested to know a bit more about some of the design decisions made etc.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,767
|
Post by Chris M on Nov 21, 2011 11:52:35 GMT
The removal of spoil was discussed at the exhibition, and the river was being looked at. However for various reasons, including getting the spoil. to the river and finding a suitable bit of river frontage in a very congested and protected area, barges aren't likely to be used this time. While no final decisions have been made, the most likely option will be to reuse a site near London Bridge that was used for the JLE and remove it by lorry from there. Ianvists' blog post (linked earlier in this thread) goes into more detail.
|
|
|
|
Post by trt on Nov 21, 2011 12:09:31 GMT
So long as they do something about the heat in the lower level PCAs... it's like a dry version of a sauna down there. How about shaping the roof of the tunnels so they are tear-drop shaped and tapping off the rising hot air to provide heating for the office buildings above? Build passive ventilation in from the start.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2011 18:01:17 GMT
well, they should do whatever they managed to do with the DLR - because that's ventilated fine
|
|
|
|
Post by ianvisits on Nov 22, 2011 12:51:04 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ianvisits on May 25, 2012 19:06:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisvandenkieboom on May 25, 2012 19:10:36 GMT
Will anyone be there to take photographs? I'm curious. |
|
|
|
Post by alfie on May 25, 2012 19:34:55 GMT
I'll go; be an excuse to alight at St. Paul's! (Though Bank would be easier for me)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2012 21:19:58 GMT
I'm definitely going! And will make some photos if allowed.
|
|
