|
Post by piccadillypilot on Aug 9, 2005 12:40:08 GMT
Pardon my obvious ignorance, but there must be some link between the Aldwych branch and the main, how else were stock transfers made? The branch is a trailing connection from the eastbound road, just east of the station. Dmitiri's diagram shows it better than a description.
|
|
|
Post by Dmitri on Aug 9, 2005 12:58:19 GMT
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Aug 9, 2005 13:44:32 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2005 14:30:56 GMT
(Cue Tom to tell us how expensive this would be and how it's not justified etc etc. ;D ) I'd like to come back and reply that it's not permitted by LU's own engineering standards, but I can't find anything! However, my gut feel is that on a line controlled from a central control room there would be reluctance to install a new interlocking working in a ground frame style, and the requirement from the user would be that all the routes on a particular site are controllable from the central control room. I don't suppose Coburg Street and Totteridge (NT) are enough of a precedent then to encourage a similar setup, especially since NT appears to have been recommisioned.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,095
|
Post by Tom on Aug 9, 2005 14:47:16 GMT
Totteridge is an existing installation that is a hang over from the days before centralised control. The point I'm trying to make is it would not be installed new like that today.
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Aug 9, 2005 14:56:37 GMT
'Fraid not. The appropriate engineering standard states: "Unpowered points Spring toggle, spring and loose points (consisting only of switches and stretcher bars) shall not be used." ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you Tom. But surely those points at the west end of Barking flyover and Minories junction come within that category?
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,095
|
Post by Tom on Aug 9, 2005 15:02:23 GMT
They do, but have grandfather rights as they pre-date the the original instruction in Signalling Design Office Notice 1/1975 (and later supplemented by the engineering standard).
How Minories junction fares I'm not too sure as the area was resignalled in the late 1980s and appears to have slipped through the net.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2005 16:06:09 GMT
IIRC the District line alone has 8 sets of spring and toggle points, but they are only ever traversed in the same direction and are all at converging junctions. To run over them the wrong way, they must be scotched and clipped.
|
|
|
Post by piccadillypilot on Aug 9, 2005 17:21:51 GMT
How Minories junction fares I'm not too sure as the area was resignalled in the late 1980s and appears to have slipped through the net. Maybe there was an outbreak of common sense in that powering the points and locking them etc would cost money. Plus it provides something else to go wrong.
|
|
solidbond
Staff Emeritus
'Give me 118 reasons for an Audible Warning on a C Stock'
Posts: 1,215
|
Post by solidbond on Aug 9, 2005 18:41:28 GMT
IIRC the District line alone has 8 sets of spring and toggle points, but they are only ever traversed in the same direction and are all at converging junctions. To run over them the wrong way, they must be scotched and clipped. Nearly right - there are actually 9, although at 8 locations ;D These are - 2 sets at Upminster; Barking; Aldgate East E/B, Minories Jct W/B; High St Ken W/B District; Acton Town E/B (on the approach to Acton); Hanger Lane Jct E/B; Ealing Broadway E/B
|
|
|
Post by Harsig on Aug 9, 2005 19:47:17 GMT
They do, but have grandfather rights as they pre-date the the original instruction in Signalling Design Office Notice 1/1975 (and later supplemented by the engineering standard). How Minories junction fares I'm not too sure as the area was resignalled in the late 1980s and appears to have slipped through the net. It's not just the Aldgate area that seems to have slipped through this net. There are two sets of spring toggle points at Rayners Lane, at least one of which was installed new in 1985.
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Aug 9, 2005 20:54:16 GMT
You all seem to have missed my point lads. The old tramway points were actually permanently held in the reverse positon by the springs.They were only in the normal position whilst actually being traversed by tramcar wheels. So a car that needed to be reversed only had to have the driver change ends and go back without the bother of point changing.
|
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,418
|
Post by DWS on Aug 9, 2005 21:45:35 GMT
You all seem to have missed my point lads. The old tramway points were actually permanently held in the reverse positon by the springs.They were only in the normal position whilst actually being traversed by tramcar wheels. So a car that needed to be reversed only had to have the driver change ends and go back without the bother of point changing. Its not only old tramways that had these type of points, the Croydon Tramlink has this type of points as well as powered ones. Also the Drivers can move points with a bar which is carried in the cabs of the Trams.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,310
|
Post by Colin on Aug 9, 2005 21:57:30 GMT
IIRC the Isle of Wight railway has something similar at one end of the single line where the driver drives over them forcing them into the reverse position. By the time they return the points have normalised for the return journey.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,095
|
Post by Tom on Aug 9, 2005 23:30:19 GMT
How Minories junction fares I'm not too sure as the area was resignalled in the late 1980s and appears to have slipped through the net. Maybe there was an outbreak of common sense in that powering the points and locking them etc would cost money. Plus it provides something else to go wrong. Possibly true, however they aren't provided with a facing point lock, they are merely track locked which is considerably cheaper than for a full facing passenger move. I suspect the reason for having them is something related to a 'what if?' scenario with a train having to be wrong roaded over them, as they offer more protection than a set of loose points with no locking or detection whatsoever. As it happens looking through the D.O. notices the original instruction not to employ loose poinjts for new works goes back as far as 1961. You all seem to have missed my point lads. The old tramway points were actually permanently held in the reverse positon by the springs.They were only in the normal position whilst actually being traversed by tramcar wheels. So a car that needed to be reversed only had to have the driver change ends and go back without the bother of point changing. True, but the point as I see it (no pun intended) is that they are still a set of loose points with no drive or detection, which would not be permitted for new installations on the tube these days, despite the fact they are acceptable elsewhere. IIRC the Isle of Wight railway has something similar at one end of the single line where the driver drives over them forcing them into the reverse position. By the time they return the points have normalised for the return journey. IIRC they're Hydo-pneumatic or something like it (I've got the IRSE textbook upstairs). They're quite common on the West Highland Line and other single track routes in the north of Scotland.
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Aug 10, 2005 2:02:20 GMT
Also the Drivers can move points with a bar which is carried in the cabs of the Trams. *********************************************
True and a prize of your choice as to who can tell me what that bar was called??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2005 7:43:58 GMT
Plus it provides something else to go wrong. At all the locations where you have spring toggle points, there is not a need of having electrical / pnuematic (??) points as trains can just push through them. Obvious you will not find spring toggles where you are diverging!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2005 8:12:02 GMT
Did the Picc ever have spring toggle points?
|
|
|
Post by piccadillypilot on Aug 10, 2005 9:24:19 GMT
Did the Picc ever have spring toggle points? Hanger Lane Junction. (I'm told that a select few have negotiated them from both directions.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2005 10:13:19 GMT
Did the Picc ever have spring toggle points? Hanger Lane Junction EB, they are still there. (I'm told that a select few have negotiated them from both directions.) Yes, i believe most Picc drivers do every day?
|
|
|
Post by silverbaz on Aug 10, 2005 10:39:38 GMT
Did the Picc ever have spring toggle points? Hanger Lane Junction EB, they are still there. (I'm told that a select few have negotiated them from both directions.) Yes, i believe most Picc drivers do every day? And the occasional District driver... I'll get me coat.....
|
|
|
Post by piccadillypilot on Aug 10, 2005 11:53:15 GMT
(I'm told that a select few have negotiated them from both directions.) Yes, i believe most Picc drivers do every day? A Picc train goes to the Broadway every day??? Wow, that's even worse than the District visiting South Harrow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2005 12:31:04 GMT
Did the Picc ever have spring toggle points? Hanger Lane Junction. (I'm told that a select few have negotiated them from both directions.) I deserved that... What about the rest of the line?
|
|
|
Post by piccadillypilot on Aug 10, 2005 13:47:58 GMT
What about the rest of the line? None that I can recall unless you want to include the catch points that used to be on the westbound west of Eastcote.
|
|
|
Post by Harsig on Aug 10, 2005 21:56:18 GMT
What about the rest of the line? None that I can recall unless you want to include the catch points that used to be on the westbound west of Eastcote. Either your memory is failing you, or you really haven't been around as long as some of us seem to think In my vast collection of ephemera I happen to have a copy of the second supplement to Traffic Circular (Railways) No.5 (1956) which rejoices in the glorious title 'District & Piccadilly Lines. Permanent Speed Restrictions. Loose, Catch, Spring And Spring Toggle Points. Times of Opening And Closing of Signal Boxes'In it are recorded the following on the Piccadilly Line: Spring Points West of Turnham Green: Junction between Up Coal Road and EB Fast. Northfields Depot: No. 5 road ( inlet road from No 1 platform road at Northfields Station) Loose PointsHanger Lane Junction: EB road. West of Sudbury Hill: EB Road, Trailing end of emergency crossover Catch PointsEast of Rayners Lane: EB road, 531 feet west of signal A503. Eastcote-Ruislip Manor: WB road, 990 feet east of signal A732 A. West of Ruislip Manor: EB Road, 75 feet east of signal A735. Ickenham- Ruislip: EB Road, 1,615 feet west of signal MT1. East of Uxbridge: WB Road, 900 feet east of signal MW15. Not mentioned in the traffic circular supplement, but of interest nevertheless as yet another variation is the Sprung Trailing/Power Facing point in Uxbridge Sidings.
|
|
|
Post by piccadillypilot on Aug 10, 2005 23:39:13 GMT
Either your memory is failing you, or you really haven't been around as long as some of us seem to think Given that list, not nearly as long as some of you seem to think!!!! I joined in 1976 as a Direct Recruit Guard and left in early 1984, I'm only a lad really.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2005 22:09:49 GMT
Either your memory is failing you, or you really haven't been around as long as some of us seem to think Given that list, not nearly as long as some of you seem to think!!!! I joined in 1976 as a Direct Recruit Guard and left in early 1984, I'm only a lad really. Hmmm.... well if you're 'only a lad' PP, then I must be just in my early teens!! ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Sept 8, 2005 2:28:02 GMT
and I must be in my dotage. (I'll say it before PP does :
|
|
|
Post by trainopd78 on Sept 8, 2005 8:20:19 GMT
There is another set of spring toggles under WL99 at Acton town going east.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 31, 2005 11:24:54 GMT
Bumped by Phil coz it has become a 'live' issue again
|
|