Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,358
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 17, 2015 16:17:50 GMT
When a London Underground line is suspended, it seems that the minimum practical suspension is used. E.g. Just Ealing Broadway to Acton Town or Victoria to Brixton. However, when there is a problem on London Overground a problem causes most of all the line to be suspended. As I write this there is a fire alert "in the Surrey Quays area" and the entire East London Line is suspended, including as far away as West Croydon and Clapham Junction. Is reversing something at New Cross Gate not possible? On the North London Line the other day there was something on the track at Brondesbury and everything west of iirc Camden Road was suspended - could a service not be run west of Willesden Junction?
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 17, 2015 21:36:54 GMT
The problem is that LO is a National Rail service (in the most congested parts of the network) trying to masquerade as a tube line. With the Surrey Quays example, trying to reverse things at NXG would involve crossing 3 of the lines into London Bridge, which are heavily used and ill-advisable to block. Combine with the fact that the signallers are busy enough trying to run existing services without these very short term plans, and the fact that there are already other services running through the area, and it is simply easiest to just bin the LO service until it is fixed before than rebuilding it later.
|
|
|
Post by longhedge on Jul 18, 2015 7:18:39 GMT
domh245The line into New Cross Gate is reversible, and I have experienced trains reversing back to Surrey Quays during Sunday engineering works. OK - you would probably not be able to reverse 8 trains an hour, but perhaps a couple of extra trains could be reversed at New Cross. During the `rush`, this scenario would probably dump too many passengers onto Southern Services.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2015 9:27:11 GMT
As domh245 wrote, trying to operate a shuttle service between West Croydon and New Cross Gate during disruption is a non starter really for all the reasons outlined. It has happened as a planned service when Overground Services carry out a shunt in the Sussex Loop. Aside from occupying the loop the requirement to cross over the up slow and fast lines to London Bridge as well as the down fast and then having to use the down slow platform 2 means it is not a suitable arrangement when there is ordinary weekday working up to London Bridge.
If the problems are south of New Cross Gate then during a planned closure services will use the reversible and enter passenger service directly from platform 1. During disruption however the issue is mainly one of having drivers in the right place. Most services heading south will have a driver swap at NXG. The driver being relieved will clearly need their break but if it were arranged for the driver who would have been taking it south to instead reverse it to the north then they will be out of sequence and when problems are later resolved service recovery would be a nightmare with drivers allmout of position. Although it prevents passengers joining a northbound service at NXG it is much better to turn the service empty back in to the depot (normally by the relieving driver). They will then bring the unit back into services at Surrey Quays at the time that would have been their diagrammed return working. This keeps drivers on the correct services and allows for much better service recovery should the line reopen.
I think one of the more significant problems is the lack of additional turnback facilities in the Whitechapel/Shoreditch area. There is too much congestion at Dalston Junction to reverse enough trains if they are running particularly late. Although trains can be shunted at Shadwell and Canada Water the process simply blocks the lines for too long while the driver shunts, changes ends and sets up again.
|
|
|
Post by longhedge on Jul 18, 2015 15:26:03 GMT
domh245Please disregard my above post, which whilst accurate, does not relate to your post. I should have read it properly before responding!! Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 18, 2015 16:10:33 GMT
|
|