7 car platforms

[Colin]

I was having my meal break at Upminster yesterday and found a copy of 'Metronet matters' - their internal magazine. There was a piece about station modernisations, and in the last sentance it said that future works included extending platforms (current C stock only) to take seven cars on the circle and Hammersmith & City lines. So that settles that argument then - the new plastic stock will be SEVEN cars on the District, Circle and Hammersmith & City lines. And the Met?..............

[citysig]

Ah, this would be the same magazine that proudly published an article on re-signalling the city area of the H&C by mid-2005.

Of course, making all the H&C and Circle platforms 7-cars would be such a feat of engineering. Let's see. Bayswater.

The rest only really require tweaking of the platform barriers - some will be left a bit "tight" for space, but should be able to cope.

Then comes Edgware Road. This really would be a problem, since a few years ago - despite protests from a large panel including me - they re-signalled the area and tied it down so that 6-cars is the limit.

I would like to see how they tackle that one, but then as I said, it could be a long time coming. Let's not forget that the referred to company is unwilling to spend money unless it absolutely has to (and is going to get a good return for it's investment).

[q8]

I don't think the extending the Notting Hill <<>> Paddington Circle platforms will be that difficult actually Citysig (not winding you up today) Blackfriars and Monument used to be similarly short and they managed it there. The two stations that train crews wanted done were Temple and Gloucester Road. At one time or other they had the roof off at the west end of both places and it would have been easy. Barbican too was wide open to the sky when the tunnel was re-alignerd in the 60's .But no, myopia crept in again.

[solidbond]

Having read the same article (which is also available online from here)
I can't see a major problem with most of the H&C stations - except for one - Hammersmith. Where are they intending to put the extension? In the booking hall? Or perhaps just extend the platforms eastwards, and not worry about that piece of track leading to the depot

[citysig]

Maybe I should have phrased my post differently. The direction I was heading from was that it would not be that difficult to make all platforms 7-car.

I was coming from the angle that Metronet will make a big thing over something small - in the hope that it looks like they're actually doing something. When in fact, what looks like a big project to "lengthen" platforms will actaully involve structural work at only a couple.

As for Hammersmith, there would be less problems there than Bayswater. At the former, there is plenty of booking-hall area space to extend the current running rails (and provide for 7-cars plus the sand drag). At the latter, extension requires a bit more work with the tunnels needing to be dug out.

[Deleted]

As I recall, the concourse was originally expanded and the current booking hall provided due to heavy passenger usage on the H&C. Now Metronet proposes to shrink it and demolish the booking hall.

Swings and roundabouts, huh?

If Hammersmith H&C were extended, would Metronet be sensible and fix the layout too?

[citysig]

They haven't proposed it, I merely suggested that would be a sensible/cheap course of action. They're bound to choose a cheap option, but whether or not sense comes into it is another matter.

The layout changes would fall under the "not cheap" catergory, and so I don't think they will be considered. In any case, the length of each train would be increased, and so less requirement to step-up the service. Therefore the layout would still be sufficient.

[Deleted]

But if the platforms were extended, would they be long enough to clear a 7-car train? These days a rather absurd amount of dead-end track appears to be taken up by buffer stops and track arrestors - if the bays were extended and this equipment provided, would there be enough space for a 7-car train, much less an actual concourse?

[q8]

Somewhere or other (TV or Internet) I have seen a track based braking thing that elimnates need for sandrags etc. It seems to work on a similar basis to a treadle and is about 60ft long. The principle seems to be that the approaching train depresses the treadle part which brings some sort of plate into contact with the inside surface of the wheels and causes drag to slow the train down. The item I saw demonstrated this and it seems to be a marvellous thing in the it slowed a train travelling at 25mph down to 5 in the distance (60ft) without derailing it.

I wonder if it will be of any benefit where space is tight.

[piccadillypilot]

q8 said:

The principle seems to be that the approaching train depresses the treadle part which brings some sort of plate into contact with the inside surface of the wheels and causes drag to slow the train down.

Such a device was used in hump marshalling yards on BR to reduce the speed of wagons being sorted.

[q8]

Such a device was used in hump marshalling yards on BR to reduce the speed of wagons being sorted.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah yes I remember those. But this application I saw of it was as a replacement for sandrags with one of those 'sliding' headstop things to finsih the job.

[Deleted]

Well, there are already trains longer than platforms on the Northern Line (I think that's the one) - and isn't the new stock going to have corridors anyway?

[citysig]

piccadillypilot said:

q8 said:

The principle seems to be that the approaching train depresses the treadle part which brings some sort of plate into contact with the inside surface of the wheels and causes drag to slow the train down.

Such a device was used in hump marshalling yards on BR to reduce the speed of wagons being sorted.

I don't know why, but the example I thought of was certain fairground rides such as rollercoasters also use them ;D

As for getting rid of the equipment, most locations would indeed gain a car or so in length of track - some locations even more so. As an example of a location I visited recently, Stanmore would have room for around another 2-3 cars!

[Deleted]

As a late entry as ive just joined ,i can tell you,as one of our ex dmts is on the 7 car project, that the new s stock is will be 7 cars on the circle/district and h+c and the met will be 8 cars.Certain stations round circle have had copmpulsory purchases on prperty above them and it is confirmed that all platforms at hammersmith will be extended into the booking hall thus of course the new depot has to be rebuilt which has costed lul lots of money to build and now has to be re done again !!!!! typical money wasting company which hasnt changed in years past !!!!!

[Deleted]

Oh wonderful - the poor denizens of the Hammersmith branch will now have their entire service suspended while the terminus throat is uprooted...

[edb]

q8 said:

Such a device was used in hump marshalling yards on BR to reduce the speed of wagons being sorted.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah yes I remember those. But this application I saw of it was as a replacement for sandrags with one of those 'sliding' headstop things to finsih the job.

I think this is a similar arrangement to what is used at Ealing Broadway on the central line.

[stanmorek]

I had a look at the feasibility studies done for the 7 car platforms whilst they were at an early stage.

I remember the Baker St scheme for platforms 5/6 in particular.

At the time the Kings Cross eastbound platform tunnel had a strip cut from the crown after excavating down from Euston Road. The road was kept open for traffic with a temporary trestle bridge overhead and the plan was to use this for Baker St except over Marylebone Road. Here a section of brick tunnel at the western headwall was to be dug out and demolished and replaced with precast arches to match the platform tunnel diameter. Then there would be sufficient space for your platform extension and passengers would see the light of day.

The feasibility studies were done as an early costing exercise and I think the cheapo option of going for end door cut out at most stations was seriously considered.

[stanmorek]

I recall that a scheme was drawn up to convert the one side platform (forgot the number) at Hammersmith H&C into an island platform by buying up the land behind it. This was a while back and was probably kicked into touch.

circledriver said:

As a late entry as ive just joined ,i can tell you,as one of our ex dmts is on the 7 car project, that the new s stock is will be 7 cars on the circle/district and h+c and the met will be 8 cars.Certain stations round circle have had copmpulsory purchases on prperty above them and it is confirmed that all platforms at hammersmith will be extended into the booking hall thus of course the new depot has to be rebuilt which has costed lul lots of money to build and now has to be re done again !!!!! typical money wasting company which hasnt changed in years past !!!!!

[q8]

Oh, the forward thinking of some in planning is wondrous to behold [seniorplanner not included]

[Deleted]

Oh, don't talk to me about Hammersmith.

Relevant project team got full financial authority before consulting with the reps.

The reps bounced the proposals because they weren't up to scratch. The project team had to come back to ask for a bigger budget which didn't go down well. It also delayed the programme.

Asking for money once is better than a drip-drip of seeking more dosh.

[nutter]

Surely selective door opening could be used at stations such as Bayswater (if the S Stock have that capability -- i presume they will) but it would not be a good idea at Hammersmith as the drivers have to walk the length of the train on the platform dont they?
Im probably wrong lol.

[Deleted]

nutter said:

Surely selective door opening could be used at stations such as Bayswater (if the S Stock have that capability -- i presume they will) but it would not be a good idea at Hammersmith as the drivers have to walk the length of the train on the platform dont they?
Im probably wrong lol.

The HMRI are allowing selective-door opening on the DLR at Cutty Sark when 3 unit trains are introduced. I can't see why this can't apply to stations such as Bayswater.

[Deleted]

nutter said:

Surely selective door opening could be used at stations such as Bayswater (if the S Stock have that capability -- i presume they will) but it would not be a good idea at Hammersmith as the drivers have to walk the length of the train on the platform dont they?
Im probably wrong lol.

Drivers changing ends at Hammersmith could use the connecting doors between cars to get to the front car, then the j door to access the cab.

[Deleted]

did I hear right that there was once a plan to put in anothe platform at Hammer [H&C]. I went down there and after looking at the proposed site, I can't see how another platform can be squashed in between the existing building/raised car park and the current tracks/platforms.

[Deleted]

yes tubeoperator92 plans wrere made to make another platform on the ncp car park as the land belongs to lul and to put a through walkway through the wall on platform 1 but of course due to it being listed they had to qush that idea as they cant put a hole in the wall ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

[citysig]

The land, including the depot, still officially belongs to the church. The lease was at one point due to expire in 1998 - but thankfully, despite the rumours, the church had no real interest in taking the land back - would certainly have made things interesting.

As well as the original extra platform plan, on the same bit of land was planned 3 sidings. This would have taken up some of the loss from losing the depot (see above ;D )

Other plans included a third track between Goldhawk Road and the platforms - this was dropped when it was found that it would only be used twice each day - and only then if the service was bang on time.

We have a strict drugs and alchohol policy on LU. That leads me to believe that most of these plans were dreamt up either after work, or by people who should have taken the day off.

[Phil]

citysig said:

We have a strict drugs and alchohol policy on LU.

Alchohol? Are you part of the solution or part of the problem? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

[q8]

As an aside to the title of this thread something is puzzling me? AFAIR all the platforms north of Baker Street on the Jubilee are capable of taking 8 cars. Why therefore were not the extension platforms made to accomodate 8 cars as well?

[citysig]

The extenstion was designed originally for the 7 cars they have now. I dare say one or two platforms could stretch to 8-car lengths.

For various reasons, the north end of the line is graced with some very generous platforms - one or two are slightly longer than 8 cars. Do we then wonder why not all platforms are 10 cars in length? It has to stop somewhere or we'll have people walking from station to station (under normal circumstances I might add before the quick ones jump in.)

[Phil]

citysig said:

It has to stop somewhere or we'll have people walking from station to station (under normal circumstances I might add before the quick ones jump in.)

As all us country bumpkins will do, once card tickets get replaced by Oysters only. Quicker to walk than queue for an oyster (and I thought they were only for posh folk..........) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D