|
|
Post by superteacher on Nov 21, 2017 9:34:39 GMT
It seems like there are almost daily delays due to signal failures and track issues. And of course the Picc is infamous for taking ages to return to a normal service after disruptions. It has aging rolling stock and infrastructure and I can honestly see things getting a lot worse before the upgrade in however many years. The Picc is the first line that many tourists encounter when they arrive in London, so the impression it gives about the system is not a good one.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 21, 2017 10:34:57 GMT
It seems like there are almost daily delays due to signal failures and track issues. And of course the Picc is infamous for taking ages to return to a normal service after disruptions. It has aging rolling stock and infrastructure and I can honestly see things getting a lot worse before the upgrade in however many years. The Picc is the first line that many tourists encounter when they arrive in London, so the impression it gives about the system is not a good one. Yep and the upgrade will not be easy to achieve given all the sensitivity over access to Heathrow and various marginal West London constituencies. In Roger Ford's latest Informed Sources preview he notes rather ominously that LU are 9 months late in releasing procurement info for the resignalling works and the preferred bidder announcement for rolling stock has now gone back into 2018 so probably another year's delay there on top of the decade's worth of delay for a whole range of factors. At this rate we'll be lucky to see any substantive improvement before 2025 which is not tenable economically or politically for such an important line. Something will happen long before then which really brings the pain on for whoever is TfL Commissioner and the Mayor. If the original plans had been kept to the line would have been largely upgraded by now and approaching completion. |
|
|
|
Post by DistrictSOM on Nov 21, 2017 11:02:17 GMT
Today was no track fault despite which was being said over the media and from TfL
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 21, 2017 11:04:38 GMT
The Picc is the first line that many tourists encounter when they arrive in London, so the impression it gives about the system is not a good one. I would expect that Crossrail may soon take over many of the airport passengers that haven't already been lured away by the publicity at the airport for HEx. This may give the Picc some wriggle room, both in terms of capacity and exposure, to struggle on for a few more years. Funny - I rarely use it now, so I still think of the Piccadilly as it was when I first came to London and it was my local line - then, the 1973 stock was super-whizzy and bang up-to-date, and a marked contrast to the ancient CO/CP stock trundling along on the adjacent tracks. |
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Nov 21, 2017 11:13:52 GMT
How do the performance figures compare, between 1973 Piccadilly stock, and the larger CO/CP types on the District? Was the '73 stock notably quicker than the previous types on the same route?
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Nov 21, 2017 11:18:16 GMT
I’d be interested to know the current failure rate of the 1973 stock.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 21, 2017 13:45:42 GMT
How do the performance figures compare, between 1973 Piccadilly stock, and the larger CO/CP types on the District? Was the '73 stock notably quicker than the previous types on the same route? Comparing performance is difficult, as the District hardly manages to get to full speed between stops whilst the Picc has a non-stop run, but my recollection is that if you had two trains starting together from Hammersmith, they would be pretty much neck and neck up the bank until the District train started to coast for the Ravenscourt Park stop. Does 1973 stock have a weak field setting, and would it be used between Hammersmith and Acton? The 1959 stock was on the way out when I first used the line but I don't recall a big difference in speed - the timetable was, of course, designed around the slowest stock on the line. |
|
|
|
Post by sudburytown on Nov 21, 2017 14:32:19 GMT
Today was no track fault despite which was being said over the media and from TfL Are you able to tell us what it was? Yesterday was also reported as a track fault (at South Kensington) and today has been reported as a track fault at Acton Town. I believe there was a signal failure at Acton as well yesterday which affected the District line. |
|
|
|
Post by PiccNT on Nov 21, 2017 16:19:48 GMT
Today was no track fault despite which was being said over the media and from TfL Are you able to tell us what it was? Yesterday was also reported as a track fault (at South Kensington) and today has been reported as a track fault at Acton Town. I believe there was a signal failure at Acton as well yesterday which affected the District line. Yesterday was indeed a track fault. It was a broken running rail immediately east of South Kensington EB. Once a temporary repair was put in place, we had a 5 Mph speed restriction over it. Not in work today so not aware of what today's issues are. |
|
|
|
Post by DistrictSOM on Nov 21, 2017 16:34:01 GMT
Today was no track fault despite which was being said over the media and from TfL Are you able to tell us what it was? Yesterday was also reported as a track fault (at South Kensington) and today has been reported as a track fault at Acton Town. I believe there was a signal failure at Acton as well yesterday which affected the District line. This mornings issue was a Point issue at Acton Town which affected both District and Piccadilly. Trouble is with all the different current sections and various routes trains can take it’s difficult in some circumstances to allow a service to run whilst staff are still working on the equipment |
|
londoner
thinking on '73 stock
Posts: 332 
|
Post by londoner on Nov 21, 2017 19:32:10 GMT
I avoid the line as much as possible, despite it being my local line and the line providing a direct route to work. Instead, I take the Met line and sacrifice 5-10 minutes extra (though not always depending on waiting times for the uxbridge branch).
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 6,897
|
Post by metman on Nov 21, 2017 21:05:00 GMT
I believe the 73ts is quite reliable according to a recent report. More reliable than the 72’s and 92’s.
|
|
|
|
Post by ethano92345 on Nov 21, 2017 21:32:10 GMT
I believe the 73ts is quite reliable according to a recent report. More reliable than the 72’s and 92’s. They probably are, to be honest. I'm not sure if the 72's have an excuse but I tend to forgive the 92's as the curves they have to make are unnatural for a train, however, I do remember reading, somewhere, that the 92's were specifically made to cater for tight curves but I guess they are getting tired a lot faster than the 73's. Nevertheless, I do love the 92's. Before I get a warning, sorry about that, back to the topic: I think TfL are mostly relaxed about the picc because they know Crossrail will take a lot of strain for passengers going to Heathrow. Here's a question that might help answer the initial idea: In the same way the 96's were built as a cheap replica of the 95's, were 72's were built for longer use and the 73's built to quickly and cheaply replace the old fleet? If they were then TfL can't have seen this dire need of an upgrade as a surprise. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Nov 21, 2017 21:48:07 GMT
I believe the 73ts is quite reliable according to a recent report. More reliable than the 72’s and 92’s. They probably are, to be honest. I'm not sure if the 72's have an excuse but I tend to forgive the 92's as the curves they have to make are unnatural for a train, however, I do remember reading, somewhere, that the 92's were specifically made to cater for tight curves but I guess they are getting tired a lot faster than the 73's. Nevertheless, I do love the 92's. Before I get a warning, sorry about that, back to the topic: I think TfL are mostly relaxed about the picc because they know Crossrail will take a lot of strain for passengers going to Heathrow. Here's a question that might help answer the initial idea: In the same way the 96's were built as a cheap replica of the 95's, were 72's were built for longer use and the 73's built to quickly and cheaply replace the old fleet? If they were then TfL can't have seen this dire need of an upgrade as a surprise. The 96 stock was actually produced before the 95 stock, and although they look outwardly similar, they are quite different trains. |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,219
|
Post by Ben on Nov 21, 2017 21:49:12 GMT
I believe the 73ts is quite reliable according to a recent report. More reliable than the 72’s and 92’s. Wouldnt have thought it's difficult to beat the 92ts in that respect! Theyre probably not doing much better than class 483... The Picc does seem to have drawn the short straw for the foreseeable future. Further, any unconventional solution seems difficult/expensive enough to render it almost a non starter. Beyond thinning services past Arnos Grove, and Acton - Rayners becoming a shuttle, there seems nothing more that could possibly give. Not to mention the size of its fleet being too limited. One wonders how much it would cost to immunise Rayners - Acton and improve vertical clearances. |
|
