Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2005 16:30:22 GMT
Anyway, back on topic! All this stuff about where to terminate trains from Uxbridge was a waste of a thread!! The Ealing - Tower Hill service, under a line swap, would become Uxbridge - Tower Hill. Sorry to be cocky, but I would have thought that was obvious !! ;D ;D Cockines comes before a fall! Pete UXB earlier in the thread said: "During the peaks the Piccadilly operates a 5 min service (12 tph) to Rayners Lane, with the District serving Ealing Bdwy every 8.5 mins (7 tph)." Which seems to me a very valid point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2005 23:14:32 GMT
All this stuff about where to terminate trains from Uxbridge was a waste of a thread!! The Ealing - Tower Hill service, under a line swap, would become Uxbridge - Tower Hill. Sorry to be cocky, but I would have thought that was obvious !! ;D ;D Cockines comes before a fall! Pete UXB earlier in the thread said: "During the peaks the Piccadilly operates a 5 min service (12 tph) to Rayners Lane, with the District serving Ealing Bdwy every 8.5 mins (7 tph)." Which seems to me a very valid point. Thanks adw. At least someone reads my posts!! ;D
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,310
|
Post by Colin on Sept 8, 2005 23:29:35 GMT
Have a look at the current district timetable* - yes there's the odd 7 or 8 minute gap, but most trains are actually 9 or 10 minutes apart to Ealing. All that would be needed to fill the gaps is run trains (for example), Rayners - Acton or Rayners - Acton, then fast to Hammersmith and reverse in the siding. Running the 'extras' as far as Earls Court in the peak would crucify the service.
*apologies to those that cannot have access to a timetable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2005 23:00:53 GMT
Have a look at the current district timetable* - yes there's the odd 7 or 8 minute gap, but most trains are actually 9 or 10 minutes apart to Ealing. All that would be needed to fill the gaps is run trains (for example), Rayners - Acton or Rayners - Acton, then fast to Hammersmith and reverse in the siding. Running the 'extras' as far as Earls Court in the peak would crucify the service. *apologies to those that cannot have access to a timetable. Well, with respect, I think that Acton or Hammersmith reversers as you've described would crucify the Piccadilly service in the peaks!! My understanding of the peak service to/from Ealing is of 7 tph (average 8.5 min interval)... obviously at variable intervals to fit in with the current Piccadilly 12 tph service to Rayners... but not strong enough to take-over the Rayners/Ruislip/Uxbridge service. There is no easy way to suppliment this, so perhaps it's best if things are left as they are for now methinks. But still open for discussion.
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Sept 10, 2005 1:07:59 GMT
It'll not be done until new rolling stock comes along I shouldn't think.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,310
|
Post by Colin on Sept 10, 2005 2:27:38 GMT
I take your point's Pete UXB (BTW I like TT's too!)
*goes away to ponder*
|
|
|
Post by ikar on Sept 23, 2005 12:39:27 GMT
I made a little research for about how many trains would District need for the service
Current: District D stock 67/75 Picc 73' stock 76/86
Now when T5 opens and if the route swap is made then it would be the same number of trains for the Picc
But if the District gets the line to Rayners lane which is served by 12tph and if half of them continues to Uxbridge, then a new double track terminal should be build (Gloucester Road is a good one but the Earl's Court station has only 4 platforms and has already a big and frequent service and that would largely make a mess into the District line timetable plus the trains from Richmond would have to wait a few minutes at Turham Green, but that would also make a mess into the timetable (with a gap into the services), so my suggestion is to make a siding with 2 tracks somewhere near Turnham Green without messing the Picc sidings with a fly over or dive under to the WB line For that the Richmond freq would also needed to be 12tph or that all Picc trains stop at Turnham Green.
Back to the original stock thing I suppose that District would need 15-25 more trains but that as you see is not possible at the moment.
Route swap - well see when the new SSL stock comes
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2005 14:00:10 GMT
My brilliant idea is to take a New Labour approach towards this issue and privatise Rayners-Acton!
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Sept 23, 2005 14:35:22 GMT
we still do not seem to have solved the problem that nobody is going to use a commuter service where they have to change (say at EC or GR) when they didn't before.
Unless the new DR Rayners service actually runs into the city (Tower Hill, Monument it doesn't matter) public outcry will stop it before it starts.
|
|
|
Post by ikar on Sept 23, 2005 15:20:07 GMT
we still do not seem to have solved the problem that nobody is going to use a commuter service where they have to change (say at EC or GR) when they didn't before. Unless the new DR Rayners service actually runs into the city (Tower Hill, Monument it doesn't matter) public outcry will stop it before it starts. Yes Phil that is the truth. The services would need to run to the city but it would have to bring large reconstructions to the area, I think that the best thing to do is to reconstruct the Tower Hill (adding 1 more siding so the capacity would then be better), 2 more platforms at Earls Court so the Earl's Court station would not be overcrowded, maybe introducing fast services between Turnham Green and Hammersmith (the Richmond trains would always stop at intermediate stations), and maybe adding 2 fast tracks between T/Ham Gr. and Hms
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2005 15:26:45 GMT
You've all got me thinking about this now! I'll have a think and post my suggestions later when I'm in from work. However, I don't think mass-reconstruction in the city is either feasible or neccesary. Maybe Mansion House bay platform would be used a bit more, or High Street Ken bay platforms.
I'm sure those in the Ivory Tower have their own ideas which will bear no resemblance to our suggestions, but it keeps my mind active thinking of solutions!
|
|
|
Post by ikar on Sept 23, 2005 15:31:59 GMT
You've all got me thinking about this now! I'll have a think and post my suggestions later when I'm in from work. However, I don't think mass-reconstruction in the city is either feasible or neccesary. Maybe Mansion House bay platform would be used a bit more, or High Street Ken bay platforms. I'm sure those in the Ivory Tower have their own ideas which will bear no resemblance to our suggestions, but it keeps my mind active thinking of solutions! Mansion House is good too (How many booked reversers are there daily IIRC there is 1) But if half of the trains reverse at Mansion House and Half reversing at Tower Hill that would be a little mess too unless they are the independent services Uxbridge-Mansion House Rayners Lane-Tower Hill P.S. are there any Ruislip booked reversers daily
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2005 0:07:21 GMT
By coincidence I've also been thinking about this over the past week, Alan... *puts 'I LIKE TIMETABLES' hat back on again* IMHO this route swap will have to take place sooner or later, because the Piccadilly will need more than the present 12 tph peak service on the Heathrow branch when T5 is open. Bearing in mind how busy the whole branch is during the peaks, even now, I think we're looking at a minimum of 18 tph to keep it moving. With the present 24 tph in the central area this only leaves 6 tph for 'elsewhere', which can probably only be "Ealing Broadway"! So the District will probably have to take back the Rayners/Uxbridge services at some time, but we have another 'track capacity' problem now. From my experience, the practical capacity of SSR lines in the central area is around 28 tph in todays working conditions -- though I'm sure that Q8 and others will remind me of 32 tph and possibly even 40 tph services in the past! There are certain demands on the current peak service pattern, like 7 tph for the Circle, 7 tph for Richmond, and a minimum 14 tph for the Wimbledon branch (but this is helped by the 7 tph from Edgware Rd). OK, the existing Ealing Bdwy service (7 tph) would be diverted to Rayners Lane (and beyond!) but would need to be supplimented by at least 3.5 tph (a train every 17 mins) from somewhere on the District apart from South Ken to Tower Hill. A question for all you District drivers now... How busy are the Olympia's during the peak? PS. I liked that idea for a reversing point at Gloucester Road.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,397
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 24, 2005 0:40:05 GMT
Would a 4tph Edgware Road - Wimbledon and 3tph Edgware Road - Olympia with (most) off-peak Uxbridge/Rayners Lane services terminating at HSK work?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2005 0:58:11 GMT
Would a 4tph Edgware Road - Wimbledon and 3tph Edgware Road - Olympia with (most) off-peak Uxbridge/Rayners Lane services terminating at HSK work? Sounds good to me at first glance Chris... But as other DR blokes keep telling me how busy the "Wimbo" branch is, I'll reserve judgement on that for now!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2005 1:52:26 GMT
Would a 4tph Edgware Road - Wimbledon and 3tph Edgware Road - Olympia with (most) off-peak Uxbridge/Rayners Lane services terminating at HSK work? I suspect that the people who use the Wimbledon service would protest most strongly at the idea of reducing their Edgware Road service! Indeed one of the Tory MPs had a pledge to INCREASE the service (although she never said how she'd do this with the line already at capacity in the peaks!) I can't think of a way around this at the moment, unless all Ealing and some Wimbledon (D stock) services were diverted to operate towards Rayners/Uxbridge. I hope they re-open South Harrow as a District depot though, that would be handy for me! ;D (Not as daft as it sounds seeing as they're re-opening both Hammersmith and Loughton depots!)
|
|
|
Post by ikar on Sept 24, 2005 8:28:09 GMT
Would a 4tph Edgware Road - Wimbledon and 3tph Edgware Road - Olympia with (most) off-peak Uxbridge/Rayners Lane services terminating at HSK work? But still it isn't a service to the core of the city
|
|
|
Post by ikar on Sept 24, 2005 8:30:01 GMT
I hope they re-open South Harrow as a District depot though, that would be handy for me! ;D (Not as daft as it sounds seeing as they're re-opening both Hammersmith and Loughton depots!) IIRC that South Harrow stables 1 train
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Sept 24, 2005 11:26:35 GMT
A question for all you District drivers now... How busy are the Olympia's during the peak? PS. I liked that idea for a reversing point at Gloucester Road. Yet again though the Rayners Lane branch punters are still going to squeal if they end up at GR, HSK or OLY, or have to change trains before that. South Harrow is not quite Metroland but some fairly important souls live there (quite apart from occasional short-term visitors from the DR ;D ) and I cannot see anything short of a full service from the branch to the city being acceptable (at least not in the peaks).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2005 13:13:00 GMT
I hope they re-open South Harrow as a District depot though, that would be handy for me! ;D (Not as daft as it sounds seeing as they're re-opening both Hammersmith and Loughton depots!) IIRC that South Harrow stables 1 train Yes but no train crew are currently based there!
|
|
|
Post by piccadillypilot on Sept 24, 2005 13:26:39 GMT
Yes but no train crew are currently based there! Which is a shame, the messroom was very convenient for reversing drivers to make a brew.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,310
|
Post by Colin on Sept 24, 2005 15:37:21 GMT
A question for all you District drivers now... How busy are the Olympia's during the peak? Too busy to withdraw them, if that's what you were thinking - especially if there's a 9-5 exhibition.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,310
|
Post by Colin on Sept 24, 2005 15:39:42 GMT
but we have another 'track capacity' problem now. From my experience, the practical capacity of SSR lines in the central area is around 28 tph in todays working conditions -- though I'm sure that Q8 and others will remind me of 32 tph and possibly even 40 tph services in the past! There are certain demands on the current peak service pattern, like 7 tph for the Circle, 7 tph for Richmond, and a minimum 14 tph for the Wimbledon branch (but this is helped by the 7 tph from Edgware Rd). OK, the existing Ealing Bdwy service (7 tph) would be diverted to Rayners Lane (and beyond!) but would need to be supplimented by at least 3.5 tph (a train every 17 mins) from somewhere on the District apart from South Ken to Tower Hill. Seems to me that the Circles have got to go !! ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,397
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 24, 2005 16:11:37 GMT
What about replacing the Circle and H&C lines with Hammersmith - Baker Street - Tower Hill and Gloucester Road - Notting Hill Gate - Baker Street - Barking services, freeing up capacity for an Uxbridge/Rayners Lane - Earls Court - Tower Hill - Whitechappel service?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2005 17:50:46 GMT
What about replacing the Circle and H&C lines with Hammersmith - Baker Street - Tower Hill and Gloucester Road - Notting Hill Gate - Baker Street - Barking services, freeing up capacity for an Uxbridge/Rayners Lane - Earls Court - Tower Hill - Whitechappel service? They tried such a route before on Notting Hill Carnival weekends, I'm sure I read somewhere, and it didn't go down well. The round trip took ages for drivers and it confused passengers in the central sections as well. The most likely idea atm is to create a 'Hammersmith & Circle' service from Hammersmith to Edgware Road via Tower Hill, with some services stopping at Aldgate and the Met diverted to Barking. With some trains stopping at Aldgate, you could theoretically free up some space on the south section perhaps, but I'm no LU employee so I don't know for sure. Edit: I've just realised that it would effectively mean the end of Edgware Road as a District terminus, so the gains by introducing the H&Circle might be minimal. We really need a timetabler on the inside to answer this one.
|
|
|
Post by ikar on Sept 24, 2005 21:10:17 GMT
When I have a little time I will make a fictional District TT with the Rayners Lane route involved
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Sept 24, 2005 21:41:42 GMT
When I have a little time I will make a fictional District TT with the Rayners Lane route involved Don't make it too genuine or LU will want to steal it (AND won't pay you for it) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by ikar on Sept 25, 2005 10:42:30 GMT
This is how the Tower Hill station would look if I would reconstruct it.
4 /------------------------------- =to Minores -/-*----*-------------------------+ \ / 3 / \ 2 -\---*---*------------------------+ \------------------------------- =from Minores 1
P.S. can you make a copy of it to the District line board too
Plus at Earl's court 1 new platform so there would be an reorganiation
Pfm 5 Trains to Rayners Lane/Uxbridge Pfm 4 Trains to Richmond/Olympia Pfm 3 Trains to Wimbeldon
Pfm 2 Trains to Tower Hill/Whitechapel/Barking/Dagenham/Upminster Pfm 1 Trains to HSK/Edgware Road
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2005 11:15:50 GMT
Someone at LUL should make these forums the Official Underground Think Tank ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2005 15:15:36 GMT
This is how the Tower Hill station would look if I would reconstruct it. 4 /------------------------------- =to Minores -/-*----*-------------------------+ \ / 3 / \ 2 -\---*---*------------------------+ \------------------------------- =from Minores 1 P.S. can you make a copy of it to the District line board too Better diagram of the above.
|
|