Passenger Door Open

[silenthunter]

Why have London Underground switched away from this in general all year round? In the winter, it's resulting in cold air blowing into the train at every surface station.

[castlebar]

............and the resulting heat loss requires using far more energy to re-heat

Environmental MADNESS, and this destroys any pretence to be "green" and environmentally friendly.

Occasionally, l think "the Peter Principle" applies to decision makers, and they get over promoted

Think of the tons of carbon emissions that will now be released from every single LUL train

Next time Environmental Activists hit LU, they might think they have a reason. Why hand them one??

[Dstock7080]

Feb 23, 2020 10:34:27 GMT silenthunter said:

Why have London Underground switched to this in general all year round? In the winter, it's resulting in cold air blowing into the train at every surface station.

On the Central Line there were instances of passengers pushing the "open" buttons outside, stepping in then immediately pushing the "close" button behind them, onto following passengers.

A decision was taken to remove the passenger facility from '92 '95 '96 Stock during refurbishment.
S Stock retain the passenger open button, for use after the doors have 'auto-closed'. A 'passenger open' facility is available but is required not to be used.

'Selective close" is still available on '72 and '73 Stock at outside terminal stations.

[tarq]

Feb 23, 2020 10:34:27 GMT silenthunter said:

Why have London Underground switched to this in general all year round?

To reduce dwell time? Every second counts.

[castlebar]

Somebody should tell Greta Thunberg what these decision makers have done.

Then leave them to deal with her

The amount of heat lost via this madness must be adding to global warming

[superteacher]

It always amazes me how National Rail, DLR and other metros around the world can cope with passenger open, yet LU can't.

[North End]

Feb 23, 2020 15:29:45 GMT superteacher said:

It always amazes me how National Rail, DLR and other metros around the world can cope with passenger open, yet LU can't.

It's not so much a case that LU can't cope with it, but seemingly LU's users can't. Whenever passenger open has been used it has led to an increase in dwell times.

[superteacher]

Feb 23, 2020 16:17:02 GMT North End said:

Feb 23, 2020 15:29:45 GMT superteacher said:

It always amazes me how National Rail, DLR and other metros around the world can cope with passenger open, yet LU can't.

It's not so much a case that LU can't cope with it, but seemingly LU's users can't. Whenever passenger open has been used it has led to an increase in dwell times.

Maybe it’s to do with the piecemeal way that it was introduced. What was a mistake was using it in the central area. It could have just been used in the open air sections.

[croxleyn]

How much would it cost to record "Please press the door button to open it", played just before station arrival?

Probably a ridiculous amount of money if it's not already in the system...

But what to do for the passengers waiting outside?

[North End]

Feb 23, 2020 19:24:34 GMT croxleyn said:

How much would it cost to record "Please press the door button to open it", played just before station arrival?

Probably a ridiculous amount of money if it's not already in the system...

This could easily be done, however the difficulty would be that experience shows people don't listen to announcements. Like on Boxing Day when the Northern Line was closed south of Euston, every train was turning up with half the train ostensibly unaware the train was terminating there.

[whistlekiller2000]

Feb 23, 2020 19:43:08 GMT North End said:

Feb 23, 2020 19:24:34 GMT croxleyn said:

How much would it cost to record "Please press the door button to open it", played just before station arrival?

Probably a ridiculous amount of money if it's not already in the system...

This could easily be done, however the difficulty would be that experience shows people don't listen to announcements. Like on Boxing Day when the Northern Line was closed south of Euston, every train was turning up with half the train ostensibly unaware the train was terminating there.

I'm of the opinion that there's so many announcements on the system these days it's led to 'announcement fatigue' where hardly anybody listens to any of it anymore. You could probably announce a nuclear attack and nobody would take any notice.

[silenthunter]

Feb 23, 2020 19:49:05 GMT whistlekiller2000 said:

Feb 23, 2020 19:43:08 GMT North End said:

This could easily be done, however the difficulty would be that experience shows people don't listen to announcements. Like on Boxing Day when the Northern Line was closed south of Euston, every train was turning up with half the train ostensibly unaware the train was terminating there.

I'm of the opinion that there's so many announcements on the system these days it's led to 'announcement fatigue' where hardly anybody listens to any of it anymore. You could probably announce a nuclear attack and nobody would take any notice.

I'd half like to see someone try.

[t697]

S stock does have autoclose after 45 seconds which reduces heet/'coolth' losses at terminal stations and when there is a long dwell time, but that leads to complaints from a different portion of the psssenger population who seem to have embedded in them "LU doesn't have autoclose, never has, never should" and then get caught by autoclosing doors despite the scheme being the same as all other modern trains in the UK.
Can't please everyone...

[AndrewS]

London Overground and TfL Rail both expect passengers to press the door open button, as do (I found out once to my inconvenience) Croydon trams, so there's no consistency within TfL, sometimes even at the same platform. Seems to work okay, even on bits of LO that are just as busy as LU. Thameslink have made a conscious and I'd say quite sensible decision to have passenger operation except in the central area when they actually announce that the doors will open themselves. This to-ing and fro-ing of policy with buttons provided then taken out of use dates back at least to the 1938 stock doesn't it?

[alpinejohn]

In an ideal world everything would be consistent - but we are not in an ideal world.

Back in the real world where TFL is chronically strapped for cash - I wonder just how high this issue ranks in their priority list?

Personally I think what matters most is actually having trains running to time rather than having them withdrawn from service so someone can make something which already works adequately to make it "marginally" better.

Whilst this thread started off focusing on reducing heat loss - I rather think that for much of the year leaving the doors open actually provides a really welcome means of getting rid of excess heat.

Indeed I suspect that most of the heat actually being lost comes from the passengers themselves and if global warming carries on the way it has been recently, then getting rid of excess heat is going to be increasingly important from the passengers perspective. Certainly anyone who has the misfortune of peak hour travel on most deep tube lines knows just how unpleasant a totally rammed train can be even in mid-winter in the central area, so sorry please leave those doors open longer.

As for the future as others have noted we already have the subsurface fleet fitted with a selective closure system, and presumably as and when the deep tube lines get new rolling stock something similar (consistent) could indeed be provided on them too. But until that rolling stock is actually specified and in service, the cynic in me can see no chance whatever of money being provided for would be nice ideas to modify existing rolling stock - much of which is already on borrowed time.

[castlebar]

Here's a few ideas

If there's excess heat,

1: Have windows that can be opened

2: Don't heat the trains so much

3: Don't make modern trains use much more energy than trains did 60 years ago when people weren't so wise about saving energy

4: Question whether some of the people who make decisions are fit for purpose.

5: Question why when "TfL is chronically strapped for cash", TfL seems to spend money on things such as PEDs which would once have been laughed at and disbelieved as being unnecessary.

6: Question why TfL seems to look for ways of spending money as if it is now fiscally incontinent.

[class411]

I think that the problem LU have with passenger operated doors is this:

For a train to be delayed (i.e. have it's dwell time increased), it only needs one doorway to be operating sub-optimally.

There are two main reasons why a doorway may operate sub-optimally.

a) The passengers nearest the button don't know that they have to press it.
b) They press the button before it is enabled and then there is a wait until they realise that it needs to be pressed again.

Given the number of doorways on each train it's quite likely that at least one may cause a few second's delay at each station, and over the course of an entire journey this all adds up.

I see (b) happen quite frequently on NR.

I used D-Stock a lot when it was passenger door operated and never saw anyone fail to get on or off, but there were often delays - admittedly short - when someone was not clear what they had to do.

[Tomcakes]

Feb 24, 2020 13:34:04 GMT alpinejohn said:

In an ideal world everything would be consistent - but we are not in an ideal world.

Back in the real world where TFL is chronically strapped for cash - I wonder just how high this issue ranks in their priority list?

Quite. Probably several points below zero.

Feb 24, 2020 14:06:21 GMT castlebar said:

Here's a few ideas

If there's excess heat,

1: Have windows that can be opened

Such as the droplights at either end of the carriage on all tube stock?

2: Don't heat the trains so much

I seldom have come across trains with heating running, only in very cold snaps on open sections/early in the morning.

3: Don't make modern trains use much more energy than trains did 60 years ago when people weren't so wise about saving energy

Source? I'd have thought that a modern train, with regenerative braking etc, would use less.

4: Question whether some of the people who make decisions are fit for purpose.

If you believe that they're not, a complaint can surely be made through the relevant channels.

5: Question why when "TfL is chronically strapped for cash", TfL seems to spend money on things such as PEDs which would once have been laughed at and disbelieved as being unnecessary.

When have TfL spent money on PEDs? As I understand it, the installations on the JLE were done during the era of the London Transport Executive, and in any case were more than two decades ago (which, allowing for the relevant project management malarkey, probably means that a decision to include them was taken a good 25 years ago).

6: Question why TfL seems to look for ways of spending money as if it is now fiscally incontinent.

Given that TfL is under significant financial pressure, and given that expenditure of different scales will require commensurate levels of approval, I would think that the only way it could be described as fiscally incontinent would be if the whole system and all the people in it had a cavalier attitude and cheques were written without any discussion, cost benefit analysis etc having been done. Now, undoubtably, in an organisation of the size and complexity of TfL, there may be the odd example of waste or raised eyebrows over something, but at worst I'd describe it as "fiscally having a bit of a prostate problem and occasionally inappropriately releasing" as opposed to "fiscally incontinent"

[Chris M]

Added to the above, the reasons why TfL are strapped for cash are complex but at the simplest level its primarily due to central Government slashing their budget while simultaneously making them responsible for more things, with a side helping of declining patronage and the fares freeze

[greggygreggygreg]

Feb 23, 2020 12:16:33 GMT castlebar said:

............and the resulting heat loss requires using far more energy to re-heat

Environmental MADNESS, and this destroys any pretence to be "green" and environmentally friendly.

Occasionally, l think "the Peter Principle" applies to decision makers, and they get over promoted

Think of the tons of carbon emissions that will now be released from every single LUL train

Next time Environmental Activists hit LU, they might think they have a reason. Why hand them one??

Does it use more energy, though? Surely the electricity is still being produced regardless of whether heat is being wasted or not?
And automatic train operation would surely use a lot of energy too, maximum acceleration and maximum braking?

[norbitonflyer]

Feb 24, 2020 18:35:10 GMT Tomcakes said:

3: Don't make modern trains use much more energy than trains did 60 years ago when people weren't so wise about saving energy

Source? I'd have thought that a modern train, with regenerative braking etc, would use less.

Modern trains tend to be heavier (all that aircon, crash protection etc) and have higher performance. Look at what happened when Network Rail suddenly found a power upgrade on the South Western was urgently needed because SWT had specified their Desiros without checking with NR first.

Feb 24, 2020 20:37:28 GMT greggygreggygreg said:

Feb 23, 2020 12:16:33 GMT castlebar said:

............and the resulting heat loss requires using far more energy to re-heat

Does it use more energy, though? Surely the electricity is still being produced regardless of whether heat is being wasted or not?

Electricity is only produced by the power station if a load is applied at the consumer end. The more heat needs to be replaced, the greater the load, and the harder the power station has to work.

[philthetube]

Power supplies on the met certainly had to be upgraded when the S Stock was introduced,

[35b]

Feb 24, 2020 20:53:12 GMT norbitonflyer said:

Feb 24, 2020 18:35:10 GMT Tomcakes said:

Source? I'd have thought that a modern train, with regenerative braking etc, would use less.

Modern trains tend to be heavier (all that aircon, crash protection etc) and have higher performance. Look at what happened when Network Rail suddenly found a power upgrade on the South Western was urgently needed because SWT had specified their Desiros without checking with NR first.

Feb 24, 2020 20:37:28 GMT greggygreggygreg said:

Does it use more energy, though? Surely the electricity is still being produced regardless of whether heat is being wasted or not?

Electricity is only produced by the power station if a load is applied at the consumer end. The more heat needs to be replaced, the greater the load, and the harder the power station has to work.

AC motors also have different power characteristics from DC motors, meaning fewer troughs.

[alpinejohn]

Please do not take this as any sort of personal criticism but being a cynic and in an age of routine fake news, I rarely accept assertions without at least endeavouring to see whether the facts back them up.


Suffice to say I was genuinely astonished by the assertion that new trains tend to weigh more than older trains and the implication they must be less energy efficient, and considered this revelation justified some factual confirmation.

So after a few hours with a calculator and trawling wiki, TFL, LUL and the Suburban Electric Railway websites for facts, as far as recent v older LUL rolling stock is concerned it seems the opposite is true.

For instance an 8 coach set of modern 2009 stock on the Victoria line weighs in at 197.3 tonnes empty, is 133.3 metres long and can carry 1128 people at crush capacity.

By comparison a far shorter 7 car set of 1938 stock weighing in at 179.46 tonnes was 109.93 metres long – but each 7 car set had 4 x driving cabs which I assume must reduce available passenger floor space and potential crush load capacity. So to even things out, if you add one extra 38 stock trailer car to the equations (the lightest option) it means an 8 coach train of 38 stock would weigh more at 200.44 tonnes and its length would rise to 125.54 metres which is still significantly shorter than an 8 coach set of 2009 stock so presumably cannot possibly carry as many people.

As for needing power supply upgrades – that is of course true. But those upgrades were needed to allow the power supply to accommodate the regenerative braking systems on the 2009 stock which of course recovers some of the energy previously being wasted during braking and presumably was done to help reduce their power consumption compared with earlier trains.

Hey ho. Perhaps new stuff is better after all

[croxleyn]

For those interested in Power Generation, visit Gridwatch. Shows daily, weekly &c power usage in the UK by energy type, and what we get from/supply to European mainland.

What amazes me is how much electricity is consumed in the small hours.

If the Frequency is high, that means too much electricity is being generated, and vice-versa.

[spsmiler]

Feb 25, 2020 18:53:52 GMT croxleyn said:

For those interested in Power Generation, visit Gridwatch. Shows daily, weekly &c power usage in the UK by energy type, and what we get from/supply to European mainland.

What amazes me is how much electricity is consumed in the small hours.

If the Frequency is high, that means too much electricity is being generated, and vice-versa.

economy 7 meters encourage nightime power use, even of things like dishwashers and clothes washing machines


also, battery electric cars and buses are more likely to be charged up over night 

[countryman]

Feb 25, 2020 23:15:03 GMT spsmiler said:

Feb 25, 2020 18:53:52 GMT croxleyn said:

For those interested in Power Generation, visit Gridwatch. Shows daily, weekly &c power usage in the UK by energy type, and what we get from/supply to European mainland.

What amazes me is how much electricity is consumed in the small hours.

If the Frequency is high, that means too much electricity is being generated, and vice-versa.

economy 7 meters encourage nightime power use, even of things like dishwashers and clothes washing machines


also, battery electric cars and buses are more likely to be charged up over night 

Not sure I would want to run a washing machine overnight, especially a Whirlpool or Indesit. Besides, ours is too noisy.

[moogal]

Feb 25, 2020 23:15:03 GMT spsmiler said:

economy 7 meters encourage nightime power use, even of things like dishwashers and clothes washing machines

Plus many flats are electric-only, so you have immersion heaters for water, plus in many places storage heaters - at this time of year especially there'll be a fair load from that.

[norbitonflyer]

Feb 25, 2020 18:53:52 GMT croxleyn said:

If the Frequency is high, that means too much electricity is being generated, and vice-versa.

[/p][/quote]

Frequency being over 50Hz must be unusual except when the network is playing catch up (re-synchronising grid time with atomic time). A frequency reduction will occur when the power available to turn the turbines (steam pressure for example) is not enough to overcome the electrical load, so the turbines slow down until more generators are brought on load.

[philthetube]

Feb 25, 2020 16:49:02 GMT alpinejohn said:

Please do not take this as any sort of personal criticism but being a cynic and in an age of routine fake news, I rarely accept assertions without at least endeavouring to see whether the facts back them up.


Suffice to say I was genuinely astonished by the assertion that new trains tend to weigh more than older trains and the implication they must be less energy efficient, and considered this revelation justified some factual confirmation.

So after a few hours with a calculator and trawling wiki, TFL, LUL and the Suburban Electric Railway websites for facts, as far as recent v older LUL rolling stock is concerned it seems the opposite is true.

For instance an 8 coach set of modern 2009 stock on the Victoria line weighs in at 197.3 tonnes empty, is 133.3 metres long and can carry 1128 people at crush capacity.

By comparison a far shorter 7 car set of 1938 stock weighing in at 179.46 tonnes was 109.93 metres long – but each 7 car set had 4 x driving cabs which I assume must reduce available passenger floor space and potential crush load capacity. So to even things out, if you add one extra 38 stock trailer car to the equations (the lightest option) it means an 8 coach train of 38 stock would weigh more at 200.44 tonnes and its length would rise to 125.54 metres which is still significantly shorter than an 8 coach set of 2009 stock so presumably cannot possibly carry as many people.

As for needing power supply upgrades – that is of course true. But those upgrades were needed to allow the power supply to accommodate the regenerative braking systems on the 2009 stock which of course recovers some of the energy previously being wasted during braking and presumably was done to help reduce their power consumption compared with earlier trains.

Hey ho. Perhaps new stuff is better after all

They may not be heavier but they are power hungry, for example the S stock have air conditioning to power, computers all over the place to run, cooling fans on loads of the equipment, the only fan an an A stock was the drivers cab heater, they also have more motors which give far better acceleration.

There was concern about sending an S stock to Chesham before a power upgrade as they were not sure if it would get back.