|
Post by crusty54 on Oct 17, 2016 9:19:12 GMT
One thing will need to happen, the trains will be delivered with cabs.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Oct 17, 2016 15:32:51 GMT
Given the plans for an extension of the line well into southern territories, it may create yet a Hybrid option to swap out the Bakerloo rolling stock.
On the assumption the extended line will need extra trains, this poses the question of how is LUL likely to meet this need? I doubt they would choose placing a top up order for additional trains to match the current rolling stock to run the whole line. So it seems likely we are talking about placing an order for sufficient stock to equip the entire line with NTFL (or whatever it is called by then).
If deliveries were only made to the south end of the "extended line" that section and all the new rolling stock need only be equipped with whatever proves to be the signalling system then in vogue. The hybrid bit comes because the northern section would need to be passively equipped with the new system but it would not be activated until a big bang change-over day. The old rolling stock would simply carry on as now without modification.
Meantime the southern section could be set up temporarily as a stand alone place to both test and then store the entire new fleet for the line. Once all the new trains are ready for use, all the old stock would need to be removed via the NR connections at the northern end of the line, and the old signalling system turned off, and the new one turned on allowing stock from the south end of the line to take their place and start service the next morning.
I guess that approach might be considered a bit too brave and courageous a solution for LUL management. Hence risk could be mitigated by arranging a series of silent hours whole line trials using the new stock. Essentially arranging one or more night-time whole line possessions when the old signalling would be temporarily shut off and the new one energised allowing a single new unit to transit the line end to end, with some battery thunderbirds kept on hand - just in case.
|
|
|
Post by up1989 on Oct 17, 2016 16:11:04 GMT
One thing will need to happen, the trains will be delivered with cabs. apparently the new stock are being designed in a way that the cabs can be removable eventually
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 17, 2016 17:28:52 GMT
Wasn't the Jubilee run in two sections for a few months in 1999?
Possibly the DLR too, around the time the Becktpn branch opened.
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Oct 17, 2016 17:35:04 GMT
Wasn't the Jubilee run in two sections for a few months in 1999? Possibly the DLR too, around the time the Becktpn branch opened. Sections of the Jubilee Line Extension were progressively opened from the east end but they did have the advantage of a very large depot at Stratford where the trains could be delivered. Another difficult point is that most Piccadilly Line platforms are getting platform edge doors. These can't be installed until all 1973 stock has gone.
|
|
|
Post by up1989 on Oct 17, 2016 19:23:47 GMT
I wonder if there will be plans for PEDs on parts of the Bakerloo?
|
|
|
Post by nig on Oct 18, 2016 11:58:18 GMT
I wonder if there will be plans for PEDs on parts of the Bakerloo? i do rember reading somewhere that the bakerloo is now going to be the first driveless line and if it goes driverless it will have peds
|
|
|
Post by nig on Oct 18, 2016 12:05:30 GMT
Given the plans for an extension of the line well into southern territories, it may create yet a Hybrid option to swap out the Bakerloo rolling stock. On the assumption the extended line will need extra trains, this poses the question of how is LUL likely to meet this need? I doubt they would choose placing a top up order for additional trains to match the current rolling stock to run the whole line. So it seems likely we are talking about placing an order for sufficient stock to equip the entire line with NTFL (or whatever it is called by then). If deliveries were only made to the south end of the "extended line" that section and all the new rolling stock need only be equipped with whatever proves to be the signalling system then in vogue. The hybrid bit comes because the northern section would need to be passively equipped with the new system but it would not be activated until a big bang change-over day. The old rolling stock would simply carry on as now without modification. Meantime the southern section could be set up temporarily as a stand alone place to both test and then store the entire new fleet for the line. Once all the new trains are ready for use, all the old stock would need to be removed via the NR connections at the northern end of the line, and the old signalling system turned off, and the new one turned on allowing stock from the south end of the line to take their place and start service the next morning. I guess that approach might be considered a bit too brave and courageous a solution for LUL management. Hence risk could be mitigated by arranging a series of silent hours whole line trials using the new stock. Essentially arranging one or more night-time whole line possessions when the old signalling would be temporarily shut off and the new one energised allowing a single new unit to transit the line end to end, with some battery thunderbirds kept on hand - just in case. the extension probably wont be finished before the new stock is delivered so assume they would order the additional trains within the ntfl order cant see the problem with running 2 stocks on a line as all the new stock will need is a tripcock which can easily be removed when go auto got to be a lot cheaper than closing the line down for months
|
|
|
Post by toby on Oct 20, 2016 20:36:45 GMT
Wasn't the Jubilee run in two sections for a few months in 1999? Possibly the DLR too, around the time the Becktpn branch opened. Sections of the Jubilee Line Extension were progressively opened from the east end but they did have the advantage of a very large depot at Stratford where the trains could be delivered. Another difficult point is that most Piccadilly Line platforms are getting platform edge doors. These can't be installed until all 1973 stock has gone. Were the trains delivered by road to Stratford?
|
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,487
|
Post by DWS on Oct 21, 2016 7:44:13 GMT
Sections of the Jubilee Line Extension were progressively opened from the east end but they did have the advantage of a very large depot at Stratford where the trains could be delivered. Another difficult point is that most Piccadilly Line platforms are getting platform edge doors. These can't be installed until all 1973 stock has gone. Were the trains delivered by road to Stratford? No, the trains were delivered by rail via the new junction at Green Park.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Oct 23, 2016 14:58:23 GMT
Let's keep this on topic, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 27, 2016 8:44:00 GMT
If thats the case then its unlikely it will happen before i retire and I'm 27 If I was to hazard a guess, I'd say you most certainly would retire before. Whispers are that it would all need to be privately funded, existing tunnels widened for side walkway (a requirement for a GOA1 railway) among a myriad of other enhancements before they can even bring in a single train with passengers on. Now, considering TfL couldn't even fund a £10 mill project they'd started at Newbury Park, and had to revert back to way it was, and with public funds ebbing away, private finance seems (and is regarded as) only possible way. The big question is 'how much is it all going to cost?' Followed by 'What return will private investors get?' ....... Well, it seems like the answers in respect are 'A lot' and 'Not very much'. So, it seems, although the will is high (from TfL), there is a reluctance to inject much cash. I think they will eventually have nopo running on several lines, which will be between certain parts of the lines, because those parts are able to meet the requirements without too much upgrades i.e. Jubilee line between Stratford-Green pk, All SSR lines, maybe several others??? I believe there are only 2 other mass transit lines in the world that have reached a GOA1 status, line 1 and Singapore (though the metro I travelled on last year had a driver). It is a huge undertaking with many, many hoops to jump through, some even on fire! LUL liked to think the DLR was a fully automated system, like the 2 mentioned above, before they were slapped down a few years back and had to regrade it as a GOA2 system. I believe the Central, Vic, Jubbly and northern don't even make it onto the GOA3 list and are graded as GOA4 systems. Now, to do what TfL are leading everyone to believe they are are, the whole system will be operating at GOA1, as GOA2 will need to retain a driver/captain(?), estimated costs from the shadows that is the old CPO is upwards of £25 bill investment, now I'm not a businessmen but if I was going to invest that sort of money - with no guarantee it would cover the finished article - I would want ownership of the WHOLE London Underground network, not just a tidy little return of a small % which I wouldn't see back in my lifetime. When the papers, and the graduates we have a steady flow of, report this, they always seem to forget just how old our system is and the miracles of our wonderful underground network, often performed by its many varied staff. That rivers were diverted underground, run in adjacent tunnels. Someone pointed out in mess room just this week that it is older than a fair number of heritage railways. It is a creaking system, but we take the strain of it, mostly with smiles on our faces, and yes that includes most control room staff too (well, the ones I've been in). I've no doubt change will occur on this front at some stage, but back to your statement, I think it'll be after you retire 😉
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 27, 2016 8:45:55 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. Still gotta widen those tunnel walls 😉
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 27, 2016 8:55:40 GMT
Wasn't the Jubilee run in two sections for a few months in 1999? Possibly the DLR too, around the time the Becktpn branch opened. Signal wise, the Jubbly was. My memories as a test track operator were that the main cause of all the signal woes at the time was that the two signal systems couldn't communicate with one another most of the time, so instead of compromise, they both threw their toys out their parks and had hissy fits resulting in daily signal problems. Track wise, we moved trains from SMD to Neasden every night, the process of moving beyond the 'gate' at green park was a pain in the neck as it required muchos form filling and security, but the railway was linked up from one end to the other. The schoma units powered us through to green pk platform, 2 of us drove stock up to Neasden, drove another train back and coupled up, actually, I could be wrong, I think we were only there as pilots, have to recheck!
|
|
|
Post by nig on Oct 30, 2016 1:15:20 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. Still gotta widen those tunnel walls 😉 cant see how they can widen tunnel walls they are a big ring off metal with thousands of bolts on if you undo too may of those it will cause a tunnel collapse
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Oct 30, 2016 3:02:21 GMT
Still gotta widen those tunnel walls 😉 cant see how they can widen tunnel walls they are a big ring off metal with thousands of bolts on if you undo too may of those it will cause a tunnel collapse They had to replace some rings on the Northern line near Old Street. They excavated behind the failed rings and inserted a run of new rings. The old rings were then removed. It can be done.
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286
|
Post by rincew1nd on Oct 30, 2016 7:38:36 GMT
Wasn't part of the old C&SLR tunnel enlarged to become the current Northern Line?
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Oct 30, 2016 8:06:43 GMT
Wasn't part of the old C&SLR tunnel enlarged to become the current Northern Line? Yes, and the Central Line to take standard size Tube stock
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 30, 2016 9:00:26 GMT
cant see how they can widen tunnel walls they are a big ring off metal with thousands of bolts on if you undo too may of those it will cause a tunnel collapse They had to replace some rings on the Northern line near Old Street. They excavated behind the failed rings and inserted a run of new rings. The old rings were then removed. It can be done. It can, and may be worth it for a short run. But the line has to be closed whilst it's done, which would take a long time for a complete line. With modern TBM technology, it's cheaper and quicker to build a new tunnel
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Oct 30, 2016 9:53:55 GMT
They had to replace some rings on the Northern line near Old Street. They excavated behind the failed rings and inserted a run of new rings. The old rings were then removed. It can be done. It can, and may be worth it for a short run. But the line has to be closed whilst it's done, which would take a long time for a complete line. With modern TBM technology, it's cheaper and quicker to build a new tunnel It was only closed at weekends to remove the redundant sections. The awkward points on the Bakerloo might be suitable for this type of work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2016 9:55:50 GMT
The only way to widen it, like they did at Old Street around 1990, is to build a larger tunnel one ring at a time, around the old tunnel, and then dismantle to old tunnel rings one by one, once the new tunnel surrounds it on the outside. The Old Street case was where acid soil had corroded the old tunnel rings, so the tracks were lifted first, then a set of stainless steel rings were erected around the old tunnel one ring at a tine, before the old tunnel was dismantled and removed from within the new tunnel. Finally The track was relaid through the new tunnel rings, tested, before train services resumed later.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,786
|
Post by Chris M on Oct 30, 2016 11:20:31 GMT
Wasn't something similar done on the Jubilee Line around Bond Street a year or two back?
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286
|
Post by rincew1nd on Oct 30, 2016 14:08:42 GMT
At Farnworth 'oop north' Network Rail completely filled in the tunnel with foam concrete then bored a fresh tunnel through the concrete. All time the other bore was in operation with single line working implemented.
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 30, 2016 21:44:47 GMT
Still gotta widen those tunnel walls 😉 cant see how they can widen tunnel walls they are a big ring off metal with thousands of bolts on if you undo too may of those it will cause a tunnel collapse My point exactly, have to be able to access the entire length of the train from the side, no tunnel widening no nopo 😉
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 30, 2016 21:52:49 GMT
My apologies, goa1 is manual operation, goa4 is fully automated. ATO is goa2
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 31, 2016 0:24:38 GMT
Farnworth Tunnel was lined with brick (or may even have been bare rock). Either way, a TBM had much less difficulty with chewing through it than it would have had with cast iron. As I said, a completely new tunnel dug through virgin clay is not only easier for a TBM, but can be done without closing the original tunnel first.
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Oct 31, 2016 3:16:58 GMT
Farnworth Tunnel was lined with brick (or may even have been bare rock). Either way, a TBM had much less difficulty with chewing through it than it would have had with cast iron. As I said, a completely new tunnel dug through virgin clay is not only easier for a TBM, but can be done without closing the original tunnel first. but new tunnels don't give the station access. Crossrail 2 was originally intended to link Victoria and Piccadilly Circus but there is insufficient space at the latter to accomplish this.
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Oct 31, 2016 9:25:53 GMT
I don't think there is much room under London for many more tunnels anyway.
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Nov 1, 2016 17:54:44 GMT
Farnworth Tunnel was lined with brick (or may even have been bare rock). Either way, a TBM had much less difficulty with chewing through it than it would have had with cast iron. As I said, a completely new tunnel dug through virgin clay is not only easier for a TBM, but can be done without closing the original tunnel first. but new tunnels don't give the station access. Crossrail 2 was originally intended to link Victoria and Piccadilly Circus but there is insufficient space at the latter to accomplish this. If you stand up by drivers end on platform 7 bank W&C you can hear (and feel) all the cross rail tunnelling going on within a couple of metres from the tunnel wall. Sensors line a lot of tunnel walls on both Central and W&C line, one recently placed at WB tunnel mouth WHC
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Nov 1, 2016 19:35:14 GMT
but new tunnels don't give the station access. Crossrail 2 was originally intended to link Victoria and Piccadilly Circus but there is insufficient space at the latter to accomplish this. If you stand up by drivers end on platform 7 bank W&C you can hear (and feel) all the cross rail tunnelling going on within a couple of metres from the tunnel wall. Sensors line a lot of tunnel walls on both Central and W&C line, one recently placed at WB tunnel mouth WHC tunnelling is not the problem. There is no room within Piccadilly Circus station for additional escalators and lifts.
|
|