|
Post by pridley on Jul 17, 2015 20:09:56 GMT
www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/13438903.Solutions_discussed_over_quality_of_London_Overground_services_in_Watford/From a discussion between Mr Harrington MP and London Overground Director, Mike Stubbs: - Plans to increase services from 3 to 4tph.
- By December, 5-car trains will replace the 4-car trains
- £1.2 million investment into Bushey station. They hope to include better cycle provision, new waiting areas and cosmetic improvements
- At Watford High Street, a new waiting room with CCTV will be built and better customer information provided. Similar works are planned at Carpenders Park, along with a toilet for disabled customers.
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Jul 17, 2015 21:08:24 GMT
www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/13438903.Solutions_discussed_over_quality_of_London_Overground_services_in_Watford/From a discussion between Mr Harrington MP and London Overground Director, Mike Stubbs: - Plans to increase services from 3 to 4tph.
- By December, 5-car trains will replace the 4-car trains
- £1.2 million investment into Bushey station. They hope to include better cycle provision, new waiting areas and cosmetic improvements
- At Watford High Street, a new waiting room with CCTV will be built and better customer information provided. Similar works are planned at Carpenders Park, along with a toilet for disabled customers.
To complete the scenario of bullet point two, "by December, 5-car services will replace the 4-car trains"........ a temporary arrangement until the new Overground stock are available in a couple of years, at which time the six 5-car trains on the DC (the length of which aren't needed there capacity-wise) will be cascaded to supplement parts of the original Overground (NLL, WLL, ELL, SLL) where demand is worthy of the train length. DC trains will then revert to 4-car services with the new stock.
|
|
|
Post by pridley on Jul 17, 2015 21:23:01 GMT
Are you sure about that?!
If they are full in 2018, London is changing all the time, I think TFL will take up the options they have for 5 cars for this line. Given that TFL have that written into their contract, I think it presumptuous to assume reversion to 4 cars. Certainly, politically, they would struggle to revert back if the trains are full.
Not sure why you think there is no demand via Watford. Whenever I have got off at rush hour at Euston, off a train from Tring, the Overground trains are rammed. Croxley link, and various other things plus affordable house prices are causing more people to move there. That whole area, running up almost to Aylesbury, is absolutely booming, with many places costing as much as London, and yet it is completely constrained by Greenbelt.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,394
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 17, 2015 21:27:11 GMT
Reversion to 4-car services is written into all the plans I've seen. 5-car capacity is not needed on the Watford-DC as you have London Midland express services at the north end, the Bakerloo Line in the middle, and tube stations in walking distance at the south end.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 17, 2015 21:31:00 GMT
Reversion back to 4 car trains is what is widely expected in the industry. Also, what is this contract that TfL have got that forces them to have 5 car trains? As for the comment about going from 3 to 4 TPH, that also seems a bit odd, as there are only 6 trains from the new order that will go towards the DC lines, and as it is, Euston is incredibly congested and will become even more so when HS2 works begin, so there will quite simply be no capacity to run a 4th train, unless it is run from Watford Junction to Harrow where it connects with the Bakerloo? The lack of a date for the targets (apart from lengthening) makes me think that the frequency upgrade is (very?) long-term
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,394
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 17, 2015 21:38:50 GMT
The timetabling on the Watford DC and what it interfaces with are based on 3tph as I understand it. If you can get the turnarounds sorted then maybe you could go to 6tph, but 4pth is incompatible. I think there is a signalling limitation of 3tph too.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 17, 2015 21:57:45 GMT
I think TFL will take up the options they have for 5 cars for this line. Given that TFL have that written into their contract, I think it presumptuous to assume reversion to 4 cars. Some confusion here - the 378s are all to be extended to 5 cars, indeed. But the new order for FOUR car sets for West Anglia/Goblin includes half a dozen for the WatEus line, allowing the 378s to be cascaded to the NLL/ELL group. I'm not sure what contract you are referring to - TfL decide what services to operate. They have contracts with Bombardier for the 378 extensions and the new trains.
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Jul 17, 2015 22:33:18 GMT
Are you sure about that?! Yes.
|
|
|
Post by pridley on Jul 18, 2015 2:12:44 GMT
OK, all I am saying is, that contract for four car trains has options for extension to 5. Yes, I can see them reducing back if demand did not happen, but frankly, I do not see that happening. I guess we will have to wait and see, but I would place a wager on demand meeting the 5 car supply, and TFL not being able to reduce to four cars.
|
|
|
Post by pridley on Jul 18, 2015 2:42:59 GMT
Aha, maybe the reversion back to 4 car trains co-coincides with increased service frequencies. I guess then once these are full, there is the option to have 5 car trains again later on.
|
|
Dom K
Global Moderator
The future is bright
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by Dom K on Jul 18, 2015 5:57:41 GMT
OK, all I am saying is, that contract for four car trains has options for extension to 5. Yes, I can see them reducing back if demand did not happen, but frankly, I do not see that happening. I guess we will have to wait and see, but I would place a wager on demand meeting the 5 car supply, and TFL not being able to reduce to four cars. No
|
|
Dom K
Global Moderator
The future is bright
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by Dom K on Jul 18, 2015 5:57:58 GMT
Aha, maybe the reversion back to 4 car trains co-coincides with increased service frequencies. I guess then once these are full, there is the option to have 5 car trains again later on. No
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 18, 2015 8:27:34 GMT
OK, all I am saying is, that contract for four car trains has options for extension to 5. . Where does it say that? www.europeanrailwayreview.com/24182/rail-industry-news/bombardier-to-supply-and-maintain-180-aventra-vehicles-london-overground/Can I spell it out? The Overground will be operating two different types of train. The existing class 378s, which are currently being extended from four cars to five, will operate the NLL group and the ELL group. Some of them currently work the Wat-Eus line but they are to be transferred to the NLL group to increase frequencies. The new Aventras (no class number yet) are completely different. They will be four car units, and will operate Goblin, Emerson, the WatEus Line, and (usually in pairs as eight car trains) West Anglia. The design of the 378 made it possible to extend from three to five cars relatively easily (although I understand five to be the limit) . Even if it is possible to lengthen the Aventras in the same way there are is no mention in any press release of any contract options to do so. Both the Crossrail (class 345 - a nine-car variant) and LO Aventra contracts do include options for more complete units, but as far as I am aware not to lengthen the original ones.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 18, 2015 9:09:59 GMT
Are you sure about that?! If they are full in 2018, London is changing all the time, I think TFL will take up the options they have for 5 cars for this line. Given that TFL have that written into their contract, I think it presumptuous to assume reversion to 4 cars. Certainly, politically, they would struggle to revert back if the trains are full. Not sure why you think there is no demand via Watford. Whenever I have got off at rush hour at Euston, off a train from Tring, the Overground trains are rammed. Croxley link, and various other things plus affordable house prices are causing more people to move there. That whole area, running up almost to Aylesbury, is absolutely booming, with many places costing as much as London, and yet it is completely constrained by Greenbelt. Yes we are ALL SURE ABOUT REVERSION TO 4 CAR TRAINS. It has been stated by TfL and LOROL that new *4 car* EMUs go on the Watford Line to release 5 car class 378s. I am repeating the statement that others have made just so it's completely clear that we are NOT being presumptious, merely reflecting what has been stated in public. Why do you choose to throw doubt on every statement that people make and work on the basis that only you right and everyone else hasn't got a clue? And, oh look, house prices mentioned again. Are you an estate agent or property developer?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 18, 2015 9:19:08 GMT
OK, all I am saying is, that contract for four car trains has options for extension to 5. . Where does it say that? www.europeanrailwayreview.com/24182/rail-industry-news/bombardier-to-supply-and-maintain-180-aventra-vehicles-london-overground/Can I spell it out? The Overground will be operating two different types of train. The existing class 378s, which are currently being extended from four cars to five, will operate the NLL group and the ELL group. Some of them currently work the Wat-Eus line but they are to be transferred to the NLL group to increase frequencies. The new Aventras (no class number yet) are completely different. They will be four car units, and will operate Goblin, Emerson, the WatEus Line, and (usually in pairs as eight car trains) West Anglia. The design of the 378 made it possible to extend from three to five cars relatively easily (although I understand five to be the limit) . Even if it is possible to lengthen the Aventras in the same way there are is no mention in any press release of any contract options to do so. Both the Crossrail (class 345 - a nine-car variant) and LO Aventra contracts do include options for more complete units, but as far as I am aware not to lengthen the original ones. Sorry to disagree but it is quite clear that there are contract options. TfL said so in the Approval Paper The same paper also explicitly explains the cascade of 5 cars from the Watford Line to elsewhere - see para 3.6. Mr Ridley also needs to read this just in case he still disbelieves everybody on this forum. TfL said so in the first press release they issued following the funding approval. Bombardier also refer to 24 extra trains being an option in their press releaseAll this has been said before but we have so many threads flying around and shunted around because they've drifted and entered the realms of the ridiculous it's no wonder people are losing track.
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on Jul 18, 2015 9:33:52 GMT
At the risk of sounding schoolmasterly, pridley needs to reflect on the fact that if he is - as is always the case - proved wrong on the facts he cites and the judgements he makes, whether it might not be better not to venture an opinion at all, to avoid the risk of ridicule and avoid the acustaion of wasting time. On the other hand, C Nortcote Parkinson - he of "work expands to fill the time available - remarks that every organisation should have someone who is so consistently wrong that you consult them to find out what not to do.
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Jul 18, 2015 9:35:23 GMT
Are you sure about that?! If they are full in 2018, London is changing all the time, I think TFL will take up the options they have for 5 cars for this line. Given that TFL have that written into their contract, I think it presumptuous to assume reversion to 4 cars. Certainly, politically, they would struggle to revert back if the trains are full. Not sure why you think there is no demand via Watford. Whenever I have got off at rush hour at Euston, off a train from Tring, the Overground trains are rammed. Croxley link, and various other things plus affordable house prices are causing more people to move there. That whole area, running up almost to Aylesbury, is absolutely booming, with many places costing as much as London, and yet it is completely constrained by Greenbelt. Yes we are ALL SURE ABOUT REVERSION TO 4 CAR TRAINS. It has been stated by TfL and LOROL that new *4 car* EMUs go on the Watford Line to release 5 car class 378s. I am repeating the statement that others have made just so it's completely clear that we are NOT being presumptious, merely reflecting what has been stated in public. Why do you choose to throw doubt on every statement that people make and work on the basis that only you right and everyone else hasn't got a clue? And, oh look, house prices mentioned again. Are you an estate agent or property developer? Would you like a nice cup of calming tea snoggle?
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Jul 18, 2015 9:59:50 GMT
At the risk of sounding schoolmasterly, pridley needs to reflect on the fact that if he is - as is always the case - proved wrong on the facts he cites and the judgements he makes, whether it might not be better not to venture an opinion at all, to avoid the risk of ridicule and avoid the acustaion of wasting time. On the other hand, C Nortcote Parkinson - he of "work expands to fill the time available - remarks that every organisation should have someone who is so consistently wrong that you consult them to find out what not to do. Now there's a career opportunity-Wrongway economics consultant to TfL. A shoe-in! Alternatively, he could try the Telegraph. When I was young, there was an ex-army major(?)who was consistently championing turning the entire rail network into motorways, indulged in this heresy by the always anti-railway Telegraph. A small tweak & turning most of the Tube network into underground cab & bus routes & the overground into hovercraft routes should go down a bomb with them. Still room for Pridley Int. Airport @ Edmonton, too.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,394
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 18, 2015 10:21:02 GMT
Alternatively, he could try the Telegraph. When I was young, there was an ex-army major(?)who was consistently championing turning the entire rail network into motorways, indulged in this heresy by the always anti-railway Telegraph. A small tweak & turning most of the Tube network into underground cab & bus routes & the overground into hovercraft routes should go down a bomb with them. You're probably thinking of Brigadier Thomas Ifan Lloyd - www.londonreconnections.com/2014/near-terminal-case-saving-marylebone-rail-road-conversion/
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Jul 18, 2015 10:45:53 GMT
Alternatively, he could try the Telegraph. When I was young, there was an ex-army major(?)who was consistently championing turning the entire rail network into motorways, indulged in this heresy by the always anti-railway Telegraph. A small tweak & turning most of the Tube network into underground cab & bus routes & the overground into hovercraft routes should go down a bomb with them. You're probably thinking of Brigadier Thomas Ifan Lloyd - www.londonreconnections.com/2014/near-terminal-case-saving-marylebone-rail-road-conversion/That's him! Apologies to his spirit I downgraded him-purely accidently. That's a resurrectionista of a different kind today! snoggleThanks for the video-very helpful. The reason the International Airport wasn't mentioned is that it's still being worked on. I have, however, managed to obtain some very confidential footage of what it will be based on: Incidentally, on the thread matter, I'd have thought Watford is still providing enough local employment opportunities to negate any great improvements on Watford-Euston, because there isn't the usage there once was? Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 18, 2015 11:24:49 GMT
Sorry to disagree but it is quite clear that there are contract options. Bombardier also refer to 24 extra trains being an option in their press releaseOptions for extra trains, yes. I said as much. No mention of extra carraiges for the first tranche of trains though Is that a shoo-in with an extra kick?
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Jul 18, 2015 12:44:00 GMT
The reason the International Airport wasn't mentioned is that it's still being worked on. I have, however, managed to obtain some very confidential footage of what it will be based on: The problem with the above is obvious and to be honest theblackferret, I'm surprised you've been so easily led into believing it....... Thunderbird 2 doesn't come close to meeting the criteria laid down by the Mayor (cross my heart and hope to die) for TfL services. Aside from anything else, it's transverse seating only and with its pods full of gubbins leaves no room for commuters from the WA catchment. Furthermore, whilst the area outside the collapsing palm trees has been safeguarded for expansion of the runway, this would lead to a terrible bottleneck at the swimming pool and most likely a massive fight between Virgil and Scott where they'd get all their strings tangled up and fall over. There's also the issue of Thunderbird 4 on it's single track out of the pod. I understand that somebody on an internet forum somewhere has suggested a passing loop and an extension to Parker's potting shed with a bay platform in the FAB1 car park so four Thunderbird 4's per hour can run. Sadly, upon reading this a Mr Snoggle of London finally blew a gasket and was sectioned for his own safety.
|
|
|
Post by peterc on Jul 18, 2015 13:10:21 GMT
Try driving into Watford at 9am, it is definitely a commuter destination in its own right. I have never tried to travel from Watford in the morning peak by rail but the up trains at High Street are well loaded in the evening peak.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 18, 2015 13:40:26 GMT
Sorry to disagree but it is quite clear that there are contract options. Bombardier also refer to 24 extra trains being an option in their press releaseOptions for extra trains, yes. I said as much. No mention of extra carraiges for the first tranche of trains though One small issue that there is with the various announcements is that there is not 100% clarity. The TfL paper talks about extra cars and extra trains. The Bombardier PR only refers to complete trains but that may simply be for the sake of simplicity. Perfectly possible to round up "car" options to be equivalent to 1 train. If we assume TfL's paper is correct *and* we assume they mean a total order size of 249 cars not 249 *extra* cars then we have a base order of 180 cars (I think we all agree on that!) plus options for 69 extra. That doesn't equal 24 extra trains - 96 cars - as mentioned by Bombardier. Something's amiss somewhere but I am minded to accept TfL's mix of both trains and cars being options because it's perfectly clear that in some cases you need more trains (extra tph / extensions) while in others you might want to lengthen trains. Either way round 69 is not divisible by 4 nor is 249! I am also minded to accept TfL's version if only because it is what the Committee was asked to approve. We can't see the tender scores nor all the commercial pricing and options as that's withheld but it would seem a little clumsy to get your financial and subsequent procurement authority approval wrong.
|
|
|
Post by pridley on Jul 18, 2015 15:44:25 GMT
Reverting to four car trains with a move from 3 x 5 car trains = 15 carriages per hour.
Whereas 4 x 4 cars trains per hour = 16 carriages per hour.
So the downgrade is a slight upgrade, and there can be future upgrade to 5 car at a later date.
Bear in mind, the new trains will be Metropolitan Line standard, with a mix of seating styles, so the new trains will have more seats per carriage.
Now I can see what they are attempting to achieve. Clearly, it has been deemed that wholly longitudinal seating on lines like this is unpopular. Too many people standing, whereas it is necessary on NLL and ELL because limited train length means lots of standing for short periods between Zone 1 interchanges.
|
|
|
Post by pridley on Jul 18, 2015 15:52:56 GMT
At the risk of sounding schoolmasterly, pridley needs to reflect on the fact that if he is - as is always the case - proved wrong on the facts he cites and the judgements he makes, whether it might not be better not to venture an opinion at all, to avoid the risk of ridicule and avoid the acustaion of wasting time. On the other hand, C Nortcote Parkinson - he of "work expands to fill the time available - remarks that every organisation should have someone who is so consistently wrong that you consult them to find out what not to do. This forum really is full of a bunch of arsey pricks. I simply asked whether folk were sure this was the case and asked a few bleeding questions about how reversion from five to four cars could stick politically. As you can see from my post just prior, I have found an explanation on my own, which explains that the downgrade is in fact an upgrade, and follows the new policy of Metropolitan Line type stock into Metro terminus's with longitudinal only probably limited to NLL and ELL. And the Bombardier contract does allow later increase to five car trains to Watford if / once the 4tph service is cheek to jowl. No thanks to you lot. And since none of you were able to find that explanation your selves, maybe you don't know quite as much as your over inflated egos would be led to believe?! Either that, or you would rather put people down than throw them a fricking bone. It seems that I came on here looking for answers, whereas old timers here come to seek validity to their "superior" knowledge, BULLYING and putting down anybody who has a new idea they did not have, or a question they are incapable of answering, because it destroys their fragile egos.
|
|
|
Post by pridley on Jul 18, 2015 16:05:39 GMT
The new Aventras (no class number yet) are completely different. They will be four car units, and will operate Goblin, Emerson, the WatEus Line, and (usually in pairs as eight car trains) West Anglia. The design of the 378 made it possible to extend from three to five cars relatively easily (although I understand five to be the limit) . Even if it is possible to lengthen the Aventras in the same way there are is no mention in any press release of any contract options to do so. Both the Crossrail (class 345 - a nine-car variant) and LO Aventra contracts do include options for more complete units, but as far as I am aware not to lengthen the original ones I have read that the Aventras on West Anglia, etc. can be extend to five car eventually. I expect this prior to any major infrastructure improvements if the line gets to capacity on 8tph with 8 car trains. It is cheaper to provide extra carriages than to disentangle the two West Anglia lines. But that may have to be done eventually. Regarding whether it is in the contract, the contract states that there are options for new carriages for later lengthening purposes. There has been talk elsewhere of Crossrail being capable eventually of 12 car trains with the same stated about Crossrail 2. Also, upgrade later from 24 to 30tph, with that also being possible later on with Thameslink. I cannot remember where I read this, but clearly, Crossrail was designed with future upgrades in mind. Not sure why anybody thinks this is completely outlandish.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 18, 2015 16:17:03 GMT
I thought that the 345s had been ordered to take account of the full length of platforms in the core, or is there still supposed to be some room for expansion, I can't remember.
As for the capacity upgrade, I can see where the reasoning is coming from, but I still feel that 4 tph will be a push, given that currently the 3tph service requires 6 trains to run it, and that there really doesn't seem to be the capacity around Euston to allow an extra LO train in. I still suspect that it will be 4tph from watford (which the MP represents and will want to hear) but that the 4th train won't be going all the way to Euston
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 18, 2015 16:26:43 GMT
At the risk of sounding schoolmasterly, pridley needs to reflect on the fact that if he is - as is always the case - proved wrong on the facts he cites and the judgements he makes, whether it might not be better not to venture an opinion at all, to avoid the risk of ridicule and avoid the acustaion of wasting time. On the other hand, C Nortcote Parkinson - he of "work expands to fill the time available - remarks that every organisation should have someone who is so consistently wrong that you consult them to find out what not to do. This forum really is full of a bunch of arsey pricks. I simply asked whether folk were sure this was the case and asked a few bleeding questions about how reversion from five to four cars could stick politically. As you can see from my post just prior, I have found an explanation on my own, which explains that the downgrade is in fact an upgrade, and follows the new policy of Metropolitan Line type stock into Metro terminus's with longitudinal only probably limited to NLL and ELL. And the Bombardier contract does allow later increase to five car trains to Watford if / once the 4tph service is cheek to jowl. No thanks to you lot. And since none of you were able to find that explanation your selves, maybe you don't know quite as much as your over inflated egos would be led to believe?! Either that, or you would rather put people down than throw them a fricking bone. It seems that I came on here looking for answers, whereas old timers here come to seek validity to their "superior" knowledge, BULLYING and putting down anybody who has a new idea they did not have, or a question they are incapable of answering, because it destroys their fragile egos. Goodness. Not sure that language is really appropriate. Not sure other people are the ones with "fragile egos" given the ferocity of your response. You get a lot of corrections and comment because so much of what you say is speculative and contrary to published information. Forever speculating on what should really be factual or open question type threads doesn't help the debate. If you want to speculate then post in the RIPAS sections of the forum. A result of your wild speculation and subsequent comment is the binning and locking of 11 pages of useful debate about Overground services. Now we're in the ridiculous position of having to repeat it all. That's not criticising the mods more of a reflection of what happens when debates go astray. There is not an issue on the Watford line because it is not as overloaded as other routes. Simple as that. Politics aren't an issue really except for that nutcase of a MP in Watford itself. The chap who single handedly resolved (not!) the issues on the Croxley rail link. The bigger issue on the Watford DC line is power supplies and some of that will be resolved by the Croxley Rail link enabling works. *If* something is to be done on the Watford line then I'd personally go for TfL pitching the service to 4 tph if a balance can be found with the Bakerloo Line timetable and paths into Euston. Needless to say HS2 works could throw a massive spanner in the works. 4 tph is likely to have a greater impact than stretching the trains to 5 cars - again IMO. And finally don't you dare sit there and say people haven't answered. I have made several postings today and in the past that have covered all of your questions even though you keep changing the nature of the debate so, from your viewpoint, there is always *another* question that hasn't been answered to your personal satisfaction. You seem to imagine that we won't notice what's going on. I still can't make my mind up whether you are serious or just someone who is "trolling" this forum and killing yourself laughing at the stream of responses you get.
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on Jul 18, 2015 16:32:13 GMT
pridley, ah pridley - actually, I recommend a mirror - you don't ask questions, you tell us things, things which turn out to be wrong. And if you are told things that don't accord with your view of the facts, you dismiss them as unimaginative and the sayings of "arsey pricks" ; technical difficulties and the laws of physics are waved away with a "surely" or "easily". When you say things like "I cannot remember where I read this, but clearly, Crossrail was designed with future upgrades in mind", can you not see that this is no help at all; it's exactly the same, factually, as saying "I met this bloke down the pub,who read it on the internet, that Princess Diana was killed by aliens". Merely insulting people vulgarly doesn't make you right. It is a fact, even if you don't like it, that 24 tph is the max for which both CR and TLK have been designed. Professional railway operators believe that even that frequency is pushing it;now why do you think they are wrong? It's matter of public record and was made abundantly clear to all the TLK (and most probably the CR) bidders; why do you know better? Whence you superior knowledge?
|
|