|
|
Post by dw54 on Jun 29, 2020 11:21:40 GMT
I tried using search to find posts. Failed! My question: is there a list of platforms that were physically lengthened to accommodate S stock, and the new lengths after modification.
EDIT: I'd like to work out what the maximun distance between leading edge of leading passenger door to trailing edge of trailing passenger door with all doors on platform, on the S7 routes and on the S8 routes. Assuming all barriers other than those required for safety, are removed.
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jun 29, 2020 11:42:23 GMT
A list could be made, but would depend on whether you want to count;
- Platforms that were physically lengthened. Not a huge list actually.
- Platforms that only had end barrier or other obstructions moved or removed. Yes, lots of these...
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286 
|
Post by rincew1nd on Jun 29, 2020 22:38:17 GMT
Our Advisor prjb may know such things. |
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Jun 30, 2020 0:31:18 GMT
and one or two where end door cut out was introduced.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Jun 30, 2020 4:20:22 GMT
and one or two where end door cut out was introduced. Baker Street eastbound Circle/H&C has the whole of the rear car is locked out. |
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jun 30, 2020 6:23:13 GMT
If the OP clarifies their question I'd be willing to work up a list from the actual data. However, the stations with real physical platform extensions were:
Hammersmith (H&C) - lengthened track at the terminal ends and new usable platform edge created at that end. All 3 platforms.
Shepherds Bush Market - both extended at the east end.
Latimer Road - both extended at west end together with substantial structure repair/renewal throughout.
Ladbroke Grove - both extended at west end.
Westbourne Park - both extended at west end.
These arose out of a PPP requirement to extend platforms at all stations on that branch to accommodate all doors on S7 trains. The others on the branch were achieved by end barrier movements and any necessary platform repairs, usually platform edges and associated tactile strips.
Possibly Royal Oak involved a physical extension to the east, I'd need to look it up...
Later, Goldhawk Road EB reverted to one front doorway cut out due to proximity to the stairs and perceived excess open edge in front of the berthed position of a C stock train. By then the PPP contract was over so no compulsion or funding to extend the platform to the west.
Later still, the work outstanding to allow the extreme east end door to open in Hammersmith platform 3 was de-scoped as providing minimal benefit.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,350
|
Post by Colin on Jun 30, 2020 14:02:56 GMT
From a District line perspective...…
There were a number of minor end barrier movements otherwise end door cut out's are used if there isn't enough usable platform.
The only platform that was physically extended was the former bay platform at Putney Bridge which became the main westbound through platform.
Platforms taken out of use were Mansion House bay and Putney Bridge westbound (swapped as per above).
The biggest change on the railway to accommodate S stock was actually all of the depots and sidings. Every single one of them had to be modified to fit them in! I've often wondered why anyone thought it was a good idea to buy a train that didn't fit the railway but I've worked on LU long enough to know that logic definitely played no part in the decision making process!
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,747
|
Post by class411 on Jun 30, 2020 15:55:25 GMT
Shepherds Bush Market - both extended at the east end. Can you say by how much they were extended? I never noticed any work going on, nor have I noticed any obvious change at that end. (I wasn't looking, though.) I'd like to see if I can 'see the join' now that I know it's there, but it would be useful to know roughly where it is. This is somewhat bemusing, as from the moment it was used by S-Stock, those doors were in use - I know, because they are the ones that I always use myself. (I'm not actually sue what de-scoped means.) |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,199
|
Post by Tom on Jun 30, 2020 16:54:11 GMT
(I'm not actually sue what de-scoped means.) To de-scope is to remove something from the sphere or area over which an activity operates or is effective. The biggest change on the railway to accommodate S stock was actually all of the depots and sidings. Every single one of them had to be modified to fit them in! I'm not quite so sure that every one was modified. Taking a case in point, at Parsons Green there was no work to No. 28 siding and very limited alterations to Nos. 21, 22 and 23, all of which could take an S7 beforehand. Possibly Royal Oak involved a physical extension to the east, I'd need to look it up... Royal Oak was indeed extended at the east end, and the starting signal A127 was relocated in consequence. <<posts merged: superteacher>>
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 17:36:49 GMT
The biggest change on the railway to accommodate S stock was actually all of the depots and sidings. Every single one of them had to be modified to fit them in! I'm not quite so sure that every one was modified. Taking a case in point, at Parsons Green there was no work to No. 28 siding and very limited alterations to Nos. 21, 22 and 23, all of which could take an S7 beforehand. Don't think anything at PG was changed except they can no longer use 29 road behind the WB platform as it too short for a S stock, but the signalling remains commissioned. Barking wasn't changed apart from shunt signals raised slightly higher on the outlets at the west end of the sidings |
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jun 30, 2020 17:41:33 GMT
Shepherds Bush Market - both extended at the east end. Can you say by how much they were extended? I never noticed any work going on, nor have I noticed any obvious change at that end. (I wasn't looking, though.) I'd like to see if I can 'see the join' now that I know it's there, but it would be useful to know roughly where it is. This is somewhat bemusing, as from the moment it was used by S-Stock, those doors were in use - I know, because they are the ones that I always use myself. (I'm not actually sue what de-scoped means.) At Shepherds Bush Market the platforms were extended by about a car's length I seem to recall. The new sections must start near to the east end i.e. the Wood Lane end, within the public area but close to the end barriers. I was always puzzled as to why the extended platform goes so far beyond the public area end barriers and is longer than strictly necessary. Could look up the dimensions if you really need them.
By extreme east end at Hammersmith platform 3, I mean the end of the train most remote from the train arrestors and the public circulating area. I am certain that on platform 3 the passenger doorway closest to the departure end cab remains closed and this is the case both now and before ATC.
By de-scoped I meant removed from the 4LM Project scope. Sorry, didn't mean to confuse. |
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jun 30, 2020 18:00:29 GMT
From a District line perspective...… There were a number of minor end barrier movements otherwise end door cut out's are used if there isn't enough usable platform. The only platform that was physically extended was the former bay platform at Putney Bridge which became the main westbound through platform. Platforms taken out of use were Mansion House bay and Putney Bridge westbound (swapped as per above). The biggest change on the railway to accommodate S stock was actually all of the depots and sidings. Every single one of them had to be modified to fit them in! I've often wondered why anyone thought it was a good idea to buy a train that didn't fit the railway but I've worked on LU long enough to know that logic definitely played no part in the decision making process! Sorry, I forgot to mention Putney Bridge in my list, thanks for remembering it.
Generally though, LUL chose the 7 car layout for the C&H and District so as to increase capacity and the trains have done that fairly successfully I think compared to C and D stocks. I agree there was a huge amount of infrastructure work to fit them in though. More than might be expected at first thought considering the District main line ran 8 car trains at one time, OK a long time ago! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 18:09:08 GMT
Don't forget the other costs to modify the existing infrastructure like signalling mods, installing co acting signals to get better sighting, depot upgrades, substation upgrades to get full functionality of the trains.
In my mind and only my mind they have spent millions upon millions to get the most out of these trains which in itself was a massive investment, at least LU/TfL own the trains outright they do not belong to a leasing company
Personally I feel some of the money to be wasted especially on the signalling mods just to get the trains running to begin with but never mind its done now.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jun 30, 2020 19:22:37 GMT
I guess S stock was designed to maximise capacity as demand continued to grow, and modifications would serve for its 40 year life, rather than limiting future capacity by historic equipment.
|
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Jul 1, 2020 2:03:35 GMT
Hammersmith (Met) platform 3 does indeed have one set of doors cut out at the east end; they are platformed but beyond the barriers. The stairs from the footbridge are nearer to the second set of doors which does indeed make any benefit minimal. This was the case both pre- and post-CBTC, and on more than a few occasions did I have to call up drivers and ask them to nudge a bit further west. It is an exceptionallY tight berth for S stock due to the extension at the west into the station buildings and the various point work to access the sidings and the main at the east.
|
|
|
|
Post by dw54 on Jul 1, 2020 2:24:04 GMT
A list could be made, but would depend on whether you want to count; - Platforms that were physically lengthened. Not a huge list actually. - Platforms that only had end barrier or other obstructions moved or removed. Yes, lots of these... Physically lengthened. Cheers to all who have responded. I wasn't previously aware of a lot of the detail (and the devil hides in the detail!!). |
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jul 1, 2020 7:30:05 GMT
Hammersmith (Met) platform 3 does indeed have one set of doors cut out at the east end; they are platformed but beyond the barriers. The stairs from the footbridge are nearer to the second set of doors which does indeed make any benefit minimal. This was the case both pre- and post-CBTC, and on more than a few occasions did I have to call up drivers and ask them to nudge a bit further west. It is an exceptionallY tight berth for S stock due to the extension at the west into the station buildings and the various point work to access the sidings and the main at the east. That's interesting on operating the tight berth. I was involved in adjusting the old CSDE 'window' to encourage T/Ops to draw a few cm. further in and get the last wheelset across the blockjoint by ensuring they wouldn't get CSDE unless they were far enough 'in'. I just checked and we did that in September 2015. It would be interesting to know whether things were better after that. And indeed whether a similar problem persists in ATC. |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,747
|
Post by class411 on Jul 1, 2020 8:00:01 GMT
By extreme east end at Hammersmith platform 3, I mean the end of the train most remote from the train arrestors and the public circulating area. I am certain that on platform 3 the passenger doorway closest to the departure end cab remains closed and this is the case both now and before ATC. I must apologise. I was completely wrong when I said I used the doors at the far east end. I've confused myself before about this. It's because the line there is really north/south, so when you change from HC&C to District or vice versa, you get out at the 'western' end of a platform, change stations, bearing very slightly left, and get on the 'western' end of the other platform. Not a very good excuse, though, as I've been doing that change regularly for over thirty years.  Thanks for the information about the HC&C platform extensions. I'll have a look and see if I can see where they were extended. The only thing I have noticed is that the various bits of equipment at the east end of the eastbound platform do look a little 'messy' - possibly an artefact from the extension. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,350
|
Post by Colin on Jul 1, 2020 9:34:33 GMT
Some of you have questioned my post citing Barking & Parsons Green as examples where no modifications were done. I would normally add the relevant quotes or tag the relevant people but I’m on my phone at work so trying to do either is too much of a faff....
I guess it depends on your view of what the word ‘modification’ actually means but as a driver I needed S7 stopping diamonds to be installed as the D stock stopping diamonds were of no use.
As already mentioned, some shunt signals at Barking had to be resited to improve views and aside from 21 & 22 roads at Parsons Green (and 29 rd obviously) all sidings had new buffers installed - same at Barking on the dead end sidings. Some walkways at both locations also had to be tweaked.
Granted Barking & Parsons Green didn’t have major berth or layout alterations but I stand by my original comment that all sidings saw modifications in some form or other.
|
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Jul 1, 2020 15:53:27 GMT
Hammersmith (Met) platform 3 does indeed have one set of doors cut out at the east end; they are platformed but beyond the barriers. The stairs from the footbridge are nearer to the second set of doors which does indeed make any benefit minimal. This was the case both pre- and post-CBTC, and on more than a few occasions did I have to call up drivers and ask them to nudge a bit further west. It is an exceptionallY tight berth for S stock due to the extension at the west into the station buildings and the various point work to access the sidings and the main at the east. That's interesting on operating the tight berth. I was involved in adjusting the old CSDE 'window' to encourage T/Ops to draw a few cm. further in and get the last wheelset across the blockjoint by ensuring they wouldn't get CSDE unless they were far enough 'in'. I just checked and we did that in September 2015. It would be interesting to know whether things were better after that. And indeed whether a similar problem persists in ATC. All of my experience was from February 2017 onwards... so, erm, probably not much better! |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,199
|
Post by Tom on Jul 1, 2020 16:44:59 GMT
Don't think anything at PG was changed except they can no longer use 29 road behind the WB platform as it too short for a S stock, but the signalling remains commissioned. I was the Tester in Charge for Parsons Green. S7 Enabling works included: - Provision of FRLs on 21 and 22 sidings
- Removal of Train Ready To Start plungers on 21-24, 25 and 27 roads.
- WF26 and WF33 repositioned
- Stopping position adjustments on 27 road
- Provision and then subsequent removal of Limit of Shunt beyond WF38.
|
|
|
|
Post by randomnumber on Jul 1, 2020 16:52:16 GMT
Don't forget the monumental amount of work that went into extending Baker St platforms 1 & 4.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2020 20:22:18 GMT
Don't think anything at PG was changed except they can no longer use 29 road behind the WB platform as it too short for a S stock, but the signalling remains commissioned. I was the Tester in Charge for Parsons Green. S7 Enabling works included: - Provision of FRLs on 21 and 22 sidings
- Removal of Train Ready To Start plungers on 21-24, 25 and 27 roads.
- WF26 and WF33 repositioned
- Stopping position adjustments on 27 road
- Provision and then subsequent removal of Limit of Shunt beyond WF38.
Nothing really changed then |
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jul 3, 2020 9:46:25 GMT
That's interesting on operating the tight berth. I was involved in adjusting the old CSDE 'window' to encourage T/Ops to draw a few cm. further in and get the last wheelset across the blockjoint by ensuring they wouldn't get CSDE unless they were far enough 'in'. I just checked and we did that in September 2015. It would be interesting to know whether things were better after that. And indeed whether a similar problem persists in ATC. All of my experience was from February 2017 onwards... so, erm, probably not much better! Ah, perhaps you at least kept the delays to a minimum! The CSDE adjustment was after a huge delay incident. I think the T/Op had shut down and left the cab, leaving the approach track occupied, locking everything up. |
|
