Docklands Night Railway?

[AndrewPSSP]

Is it possible to have some sort of Night DLR (or DNR )? Seeing as it is practically automatic, would it be possible to employ night CSAs and signallers (after the trade unions of course)?

[aslefshrugged]

Back in February 2015 it was announced that a weekend night service would start on the DLR and the Sub Surface Lines in 2021 and London Overground in 2017.

DLR is Grade of Automation 3, rather than fully automatic it can't function without a member of staff on board, they're called Passenger Service Agents these days not "train captains" (salary approx. £42k) and the only stations that need to be staffed are the Section 12s; Cutty Sark, Island Gardens and Woolwich Arsenal.

RMT represents all operational grades and as far as I'm aware is the only union recognised by DLR

[crusty54]

I think it is written into the current operating contract to be implemented at a future date.

[toby]

They started a new contract term shortly before the Night Tube planning started, TfL are waiting for that contract term to end rather than end it early.

[aslefshrugged]

Keolis/Amey were awarded the DLR franchise in July 2014 (expiry 1 April 2021 with the option of a two year extension), nine months after Night Tube was announced but before Boris announced overnight running would be expanded to the DLR, etc. Here's the franchise agreement, I couldn't find any mention of the option to run a 24 hour service but then maybe I missed it

content.tfl.gov.uk/dlr-franchise-agreement-redacted-version.pdf

[snoggle]

Night service on the DLR has to wait for the next concession. This is because the current one is timed to coincide with the end of the CGL concession for the supply of the Mudchute - Lewisham infrastructure. At that point the infrastructure reverts to TfL ownership. TfL will then be free to do as it wishes with the infrastructure and train service.

TfL took a strategic decision not to activate any sort of night service on the DLR as it would require renegotiation of the CGL contract and could inhibit CGL's ability to provide assets in as required condition for transfer. There is also little prospect of getting a good deal with CGL as their contract term is heading to expiry so what incentive do they have? Also increasing use of assets and reducing the time for maintenance and corrective action to secure asset condition prior to contract end date is a pretty foolhardy thing to do. All you will get is a big bill from CGL and claims that asset condition "would have been perfect if only you (TfL) hadn't decided to run trains during the night".

I can see that TfL will also face a lot of noise issues from people living close to the line. So much of the network is elevated and close to housing that a regular night service is bound to bring on the agonies from some people living close to the route. TfL will want time to take preparatory steps to reduce noise or else deal with concerns - plenty of precedent from the Night Tube service.

[rincew1nd]

What's the CGL concession?

[Chris M]

CGL is City Greenwich Lewisham Rail Link plc.
From their website: "In 1996 CGL Rail Link plc won the concession to design, build, finance and maintain an extension to the system, from the southern end of the Isle of Dogs under the Thames to Lewisham." Given that the website is a page on the John Laing plc they its going to be related to them in some way, but I've not investigated further.

[melikepie]

What is a Section 12?

[trt]

Jul 17, 2017 13:12:39 GMT melikepie said:

What is a Section 12?

This will help.

Also:
The Fire Precautions (Sub-surface Railway Stations) Regulations 1989 (S.I. 1989/1401; “the 1989 Regulations”) were made under sections 12, 37 and 40 of the Fire Precautions Act 1971, which was repealed by the Order, but the 1989 Regulations (with some exceptions) remained in force by virtue of the saving in section 17(2)(b) of the Interpretation Act 1978. This instrument is made under the power in article 24 of the Order, and repeals and replaces the 1989 Regulations.

[revupminster]

Section 12 was a catch-all regulation not covered by the other regulations and included football grounds. I can remember it being quoted in the West Ham stewards handbook. When a fire alarm sound on the underground you would hear "Inspector Sands is needed" and at West Ham it was "Mr Moon is in the stadium" which always got a cheer and allowed time to check why the alarm had gone off. As I remember if 2 alarms went off the station/stadium had to be evacuated immediately. Probably all different now.

[MoreToJack]

Jul 17, 2017 14:40:02 GMT revupminster said:

Section 12 was a catch-all regulation not covered by the other regulations and included football grounds. I can remember it being quoted in the West Ham stewards handbook. When a fire alarm sound on the underground you would hear "Inspector Sands is needed" and at West Ham it was "Mr Moon is in the stadium" which always got a cheer and allowed time to check why the alarm had gone off. As I remember if 2 alarms went off the station/stadium had to be evacuated immediately. Probably all different now.

Can't speak for football grounds but the same regulations still apply to LU stations.

"Section 12" as mentioned covers all sub-surface stations on the Underground, and includes the provision for a minimum staffing level related to the need to evacuate a station.

If a single fire call point or detector head is activated the Fire Control Panel will go into 'Inspector Sands' mode, allowing ~2 minutes for the incident to be investigated. In some stations this can be manually extended via the Fire Control Panel for a further few minutes - this is useful where a station is very large, or the activation is in a room that isn't publicly accessible.

If a second fire call point or detector head is activated at any time the station will immediately go into auto-evacuation mode, regardless of if the time period has been extended. An evacuation can also be manually triggered from the Fire Control Panel (or, in some cases, station PA system).

Evacs are a faff.

[phil]

Jul 17, 2017 18:19:35 GMT MoreToJack said:

Jul 17, 2017 14:40:02 GMT revupminster said:

Section 12 was a catch-all regulation not covered by the other regulations and included football grounds. I can remember it being quoted in the West Ham stewards handbook. When a fire alarm sound on the underground you would hear "Inspector Sands is needed" and at West Ham it was "Mr Moon is in the stadium" which always got a cheer and allowed time to check why the alarm had gone off. As I remember if 2 alarms went off the station/stadium had to be evacuated immediately. Probably all different now.

Can't speak for football grounds but the same regulations still apply to LU stations.

"Section 12" as mentioned covers all sub-surface stations on the Underground, and includes the provision for a minimum staffing level related to the need to evacuate a station.

Correction - it includes ALL enclosed stations regardless of operator or location in the UK.

Thus Birmingham New Street (NR), Liverpool Central (MerseyRail) , St James (Tyne & Wear Metro), Ibrox (Glasgow Underground), Charing Cross (Glasgow NR) and City Thameslink (NR) to name just a few (and I believe the likes of London Charing Cross, Cannon Street, Victoria, Liverpool Street also count due to the office blocks built above the platforms) are all 'section 12' stations

[MoreToJack]

Our two statements are not mutually exclusive ergo it's hardly a correction, more additional information. 🙄

[rincew1nd]

As a further addendum all the MerseyRail stations in central Liverpool and Birkenhead are included, not just Central. So James St, Moorfields, Lime St (low level), Central plus Hamilton Square. There may well be more, the point being that these regulations apply to a number of 'underground' stations across the country.

[brigham]

The problem with night running is mainly concerned with maintenance work. It's difficult to 'walk a length' with traffic running; in third-rail electric systems, obtaining 'possession' of the electrical installation becomes a minefield.
In the US, in cable days, operators would keep a number of horse cars to operate the 'owl service'. (This is the US term for the overnight timetable; it isn't a magical set of dinner plates in Wales). The engineering team were then free to run the cable slowly for inspection, run in splices, &c..
Difficult to see how such a service could be worked on the DLR, for instance. Horse cars would require extensive work in the four-foot, which effectively rules them out on cost. Perhaps some form of battery locomotive, or a petrol generator set hauled by a normal train would suffice?

[Chris M]

Why would the DLR third rail be any different to the LU third and fourth rails or the third rail on the East London line that have/will shortly have a night service 2 nights a week?

[brigham]

Jul 21, 2017 10:03:35 GMT Chris M said:

Why would the DLR third rail be any different to the LU third and fourth rails or the third rail on the East London line that have/will shortly have a night service 2 nights a week?

No difference whatsoever.
Hence "...for instance".
The existing overnight running on the London urban lines is against the better judgement of the engineering staff, (a fact pointed out on this very forum).
Anyone can operate a service INSTEAD of safety-critical maintenance. The difficulty lies in doing both.

[rsdworker]

yes i remember copehagen metro started as 5 to 12 am with no night service - this latter expanded to 24/7 with single tracking in nights - fully automated
so DLR can run 24 hours no matter if they have issues

[Chris M]

As it is almost entirely bidirectionally signalled, then single tracking shouldn't be too difficult from an operational point of view, but there would need to be some way of alerting passengers to which platform is in use at stations without islands.

Wheel squeal and track noise in general is a significant issue on parts of the DLR - the curves between South Quay and Heron Quays for example were easily audible when I lived a little over 200m away as the crow flies. This is likely to be one of the most significant issues for a night service.
Is it likely that the new stock will be quieter in this regard?

[crusty54]

The DLR has walkways beside the track.

[brigham]

Jul 27, 2017 10:01:03 GMT crusty54 said:

The DLR has walkways beside the track.

That solves the problem nicely.
Charge a special reduced fare overnight, and allow them to walk alongside the alignment.

[North End]

Jul 27, 2017 2:02:50 GMT Chris M said:

As it is almost entirely bidirectionally signalled, then single tracking shouldn't be too difficult from an operational point of view, but there would need to be some way of alerting passengers to which platform is in use at stations without islands.

Wheel squeal and track noise in general is a significant issue on parts of the DLR - the curves between South Quay and Heron Quays for example were easily audible when I lived a little over 200m away as the crow flies. This is likely to be one of the most significant issues for a night service.
Is it likely that the new stock will be quieter in this regard?

Whilst the bi-directional capability may help a bit, this isn't the be all and end all when it comes to maintenance - as there's only so much work that can be carried out without a full block. Plus there is also the issue of getting staff, and equipment, to the site where they're needed - this may involve sections of line where trains are running, or perhaps stations where passengers have free access.

[Chris M]

True regarding maintenance, but I can't think of any stations where the public have free access. Some tape may be required across an entrance or two or along one side of an island, but that's been used (apparently without issue) when one but not both of the Central or District/H&C tracks at Mile End are closed so I don't imagine the DLR would be different.

[crusty54]

They're only talking about 2 nights per week. 5 nights are left for maintenance.

[North End]

Jul 27, 2017 18:25:52 GMT crusty54 said:

They're only talking about 2 nights per week. 5 nights are left for maintenance.

Time will tell whether reducing the amount of maintenance time by 30%, including the long Saturday night, will have a detrimental effect on performance. The one thing that can be said with certainty is that it certainly won't have a positive impact. Meanwhile there has been a marked deterioration in LU performance recently, although I wouldn't like to say if Night Tube has contributed to this. But quite a few asset failures are happening at the moment.