|
|
Post by ollie102030 on Jan 13, 2019 1:52:39 GMT
patrickb I suppose you could have 2 4 car 1962 units... they can be run in coded manual or what type of Train Protection they have (If only...😂) Seriously though surely the only option to get physically more trains is to re-equip redundant driving cabs? If there were 2 trains that both had 1 inactive cab surely they could be marshalled in a way that meant 1 was a full A-B B-C C-B B-A set (or whatever the normal set up is) and the other was like a 1967 or A Stock train with two cabs at the centre in a A-B B-A A-B B-A fashion, even if the inner cabs didn’t work. This could then mean both cabs could be worked on at the same time with only 1 train out of service, and then as soon as they’re re-fitted they can split off rather than requiring shortening. Another reason why I think an the 4 car units may be being brought back (purely speculation) is that if the Waterloo and City line gets its new stock first, then surely the 4 car Central line units can be split and added onto the ends of the ex-W&C trains to form an ATO capable 8 car train? I would have thought making 4 car units first would save a lot of hassle and shuffling around if that ever does happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by tjw on Jan 13, 2019 18:45:42 GMT
That was a very useful issue for me. I used it to plug the draft coming through the M door this morning. Worked a treat.  Paper airplanes! We had a manager that could not spell (before spellcheckers), so a former English teacher and myself would sit down in the mess room and correct his notices / newsletters. We would also give it a mark out of 10 with all the essential insulting comments that teachers would add in red pen. |
|
|
|
Post by luacton on Jan 13, 2019 18:50:06 GMT
patrickb I suppose you could have 2 4 car 1962 units... they can be run in coded manual or what type of Train Protection they have (If only...😂) Seriously though surely the only option to get physically more trains is to re-equip redundant driving cabs? If there were 2 trains that both had 1 inactive cab surely they could be marshalled in a way that meant 1 was a full A-B B-C C-B B-A set (or whatever the normal set up is) and the other was like a 1967 or A Stock train with two cabs at the centre in a A-B B-A A-B B-A fashion, even if the inner cabs didn’t work. This could then mean both cabs could be worked on at the same time with only 1 train out of service, and then as soon as they’re re-fitted they can split off rather than requiring shortening. Another reason why I think an the 4 car units may be being brought back (purely speculation) is that if the Waterloo and City line gets its new stock first, then surely the 4 car Central line units can be split and added onto the ends of the ex-W&C trains to form an ATO capable 8 car train? I would have thought making 4 car units first would save a lot of hassle and shuffling around if that ever does happen. There is some serious overhaul work to start on the 92TS in the foreseeable future, which is the reason for the 4 car units. This frees up a train for the work. If the W+C trains are removed and replaced, surely it makes more sense to turn them into 8 cars they require a fair bit of work anyway to convert them for use on the central line. Why pull a perfectly good 92, split it, then couple to a 4 car ex-W+C and risk potentially having 2 faulty 8 car 92ts. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesb on Jan 14, 2019 7:17:58 GMT
Will any morning [Westbound] through trains [i.e. not terminating at Woodford] still run with the new timetable? I am guessing not.
|
|
stapler
Those who have no voice are ignored; that's why I shout
Posts: 1,553 
|
Post by stapler on Jan 14, 2019 8:16:43 GMT
Will any morning [Westbound] through trains [i.e. not terminating at Woodford] still run with the new timetable? I am guessing not. Very much doubt that, because the pressure will be on to increase WB capacity on the "main line". With huge developments planned at Loughton, Debden, and Epping (not to mention poor old North Weald) before NTfL replaces the 92s in approx 2032, conditions there are likely to become much worse. How anyone at Woodford, S Woodford etc will get on a train is anyone's guess (Development at Chigwell is likely to be centred on the open spaces at Limes Farm, which feed into Hainault) |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jan 14, 2019 9:55:02 GMT
At 8pm on Saturday we had six trains cancelled due to a lack of drivers, we also had trains cancelled on Friday (not sure how many), if we don't have enough drivers to cover all the duties for WTT69 how are we going to cover a "Small increase to morning eastbound peak, evening peak and peak shoulders" and "Early morning and late evening enhancement" for WTT70?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jan 14, 2019 11:51:54 GMT
One train is due to be removed from WTT69 AM peak service from 23 April 2019, “to support CLIP (Central Line Improvement Project)”. TTN33/19 refers.
|
|
stapler
Those who have no voice are ignored; that's why I shout
Posts: 1,553
|
Post by stapler on Jan 14, 2019 14:15:33 GMT
One train is due to be removed from WTT69 AM peak service from 23 April 2019, “to support CLIP (Central Line Improvement Project)”. TTN33/19 refers. Do we know which train? |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 14, 2019 17:50:44 GMT
Will any morning [Westbound] through trains [i.e. not terminating at Woodford] still run with the new timetable? I am guessing not. Very much doubt that, because the pressure will be on to increase WB capacity on the "main line". With huge developments planned at Loughton, Debden, and Epping (not to mention poor old North Weald) before NTfL replaces the 92s in approx 2032, conditions there are likely to become much worse. How anyone at Woodford, S Woodford etc will get on a train is anyone's guess (Development at Chigwell is likely to be centred on the open spaces at Limes Farm, which feed into Hainault) There are still likely to be some in the morning as some trains have to enter service from Hainault depot via Grange Hill. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jan 14, 2019 21:20:26 GMT
One train is due to be removed from WTT69 AM peak service from 23 April 2019, “to support CLIP (Central Line Improvement Project)”. TTN33/19 refers. Do we know which train? I doubt it will be as simple as just taking (say) duty number 123 out of the previous Working Timetable. The whole timetable will have to be rewritten anyway as some trains will be returning from Hainault sooner than hitherto (because they are not going on to Woodford) |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 14, 2019 21:22:58 GMT
I doubt it will be as simple as just taking (say) duty number 123 out of the previous Working Timetable. The whole timetable will have to be rewritten anyway as some trains will be returning from Hainault sooner than hitherto (because they are not going on to Woodford) I don’t think it’s the new timetable coming in in April though, so the existing service pattern will remain until WTT70 comes in, apparently later in the year. |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,249
|
Post by Ben on Jan 14, 2019 21:30:44 GMT
With the western section of crossrail now somewhat on the tube map, and the chance that RfL may take over Paddington-Reading trains at some point late in 2019, are we likely to see a drop in ridership on the central line's branch concomitant with it? That may enable a slightly reduced frequency on the Ealing branch.
Given the amount of work that is still planned for central line stock from the various rebuilding activities, one wonders if, as speculated by other members, the addition of E-F units from the W&C might yet allow future increases in service and flexibility, given the length of time 2032 is away (and the chance that such a date may very well end up slipping). One has to wonder how much a business plan would have to change its values for this to become viable.
Like others, it does seem odd to be aiming to get more service from fewer trains, notwithstanding the 4 additional B-C/D middle units that will be released by the shuttle. Does WTT70 have any differences in running times?
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 14, 2019 21:59:21 GMT
With the western section of crossrail now somewhat on the tube map, and the chance that RfL may take over Paddington-Reading trains at some point late in 2019, are we likely to see a drop in ridership on the central line's branch concomitant with it? That may enable a slightly reduced frequency on the Ealing branch. Given the amount of work that is still planned for central line stock from the various rebuilding activities, one wonders if, as speculated by other members, the addition of E-F units from the W&C might yet allow future increases in service and flexibility, given the length of time 2032 is away (and the chance that such a date may very well end up slipping). One has to wonder how much a business plan would have to change its values for this to become viable. Like others, it does seem odd to be aiming to get more service from fewer trains, notwithstanding the 4 additional B-C/D middle units that will be released by the shuttle. Does WTT70 have any differences in running times? They were doing trials to increased the maximum speed back to 100kph. Don’t know whether anything came of it though. That would reduce running times slightly. |
|
|
|
Post by patrickb on Jan 15, 2019 0:14:30 GMT
With the western section of crossrail now somewhat on the tube map, and the chance that RfL may take over Paddington-Reading trains at some point late in 2019, are we likely to see a drop in ridership on the central line's branch concomitant with it? That may enable a slightly reduced frequency on the Ealing branch. Given the amount of work that is still planned for central line stock from the various rebuilding activities, one wonders if, as speculated by other members, the addition of E-F units from the W&C might yet allow future increases in service and flexibility, given the length of time 2032 is away (and the chance that such a date may very well end up slipping). One has to wonder how much a business plan would have to change its values for this to become viable. Like others, it does seem odd to be aiming to get more service from fewer trains, notwithstanding the 4 additional B-C/D middle units that will be released by the shuttle. Does WTT70 have any differences in running times? They were doing trials to increased the maximum speed back to 100kph. Don’t know whether anything came of it though. That would reduce running times slightly. was a sufficient bulk order of loctite made before they began those trials?  |
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jan 15, 2019 7:01:00 GMT
One train is due to be removed from WTT69 AM peak service from 23 April 2019, “to support CLIP (Central Line Improvement Project)”. TTN33/19 refers. Do we know which train? Pure guesswork on my part at this early stage but: 124 125 140 must be candidates. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jan 15, 2019 8:43:27 GMT
With the western section of crossrail now somewhat on the tube map, and the chance that RfL may take over Paddington-Reading trains at some point late in 2019, are we likely to see a drop in ridership on the central line's branch concomitant with it? That may enable a slightly reduced frequency on the Ealing branch. Given the amount of work that is still planned for central line stock from the various rebuilding activities, one wonders if, as speculated by other members, the addition of E-F units from the W&C might yet allow future increases in service and flexibility, given the length of time 2032 is away (and the chance that such a date may very well end up slipping). One has to wonder how much a business plan would have to change its values for this to become viable. Like others, it does seem odd to be aiming to get more service from fewer trains, notwithstanding the 4 additional B-C/D middle units that will be released by the shuttle. Does WTT70 have any differences in running times? As far as I'm aware TfL won't take over services to Reading until the central section opens but if they are given Paddington to Reading it would simply replace existing GWR services so there is no reason to think it would make any difference at all to the number of passengers changing at Ealing Broadway onto the Central Line. The Piccadilly and Bakerloo Line will get new rolling stock before the W&C so the Class 482s aren't going to be available for conversion to 1992s any time soon. As far as anyone knows WTT70 is still just a collection of files on a PC in an office at Palestra House and apart from "this year" we have no idea when (or if) its being introduced. |
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jan 15, 2019 10:41:01 GMT
With the western section of crossrail now somewhat on the tube map, and the chance that RfL may take over Paddington-Reading trains at some point late in 2019, are we likely to see a drop in ridership on the central line's branch concomitant with it? That may enable a slightly reduced frequency on the Ealing branch. Expected in WTT71 "April 2021": |
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Jan 16, 2019 19:04:16 GMT
We had a manager that could not spell (before spellcheckers), so a former English teacher and myself would sit down in the mess room and correct his notices / newsletters. We would also give it a mark out of 10 with all the essential insulting comments that teachers would add in red pen. Haha.....but did that manager have such an air of glibness to plaster a full bust picture of him/herself all over every communication ala Kim Yong Un stylee 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 16, 2019 20:33:13 GMT
With the western section of crossrail now somewhat on the tube map, and the chance that RfL may take over Paddington-Reading trains at some point late in 2019, are we likely to see a drop in ridership on the central line's branch concomitant with it? That may enable a slightly reduced frequency on the Ealing branch. Expected in WTT71 "April 2021": Presumably the peak frequency between White City and Leytonstone won’t be reduced. |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jan 16, 2019 22:21:14 GMT
They were doing trials to increased the maximum speed back to 100kph. Don’t know whether anything came of it though. That would reduce running times slightly. As it is the trains seem to travel faster than the traffic on the A40, especially between Hanger Lane and Greenford where the two are within eyesight of each other. Going back to 60mph will increase the speed differential even more! Depending on when this speed increase happens I might get myself a Network Railcard ODTC and travel up to West Ruislip. The 120 mph closing speed train passes should be fun - even more so if a Chiltern DMU is at the right location at the right time on the adjacent NNML (New North Main Line). My present Network Railcard expires in the summer, I won't be renewing it as I'll be eligible for even more valuable age-related railcards and freedom passes later this year. Simon |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jan 17, 2019 8:43:31 GMT
, I won't be renewing it as I'll be eligible for even more valuable age-related railcards and freedom passes later this year. Good value, isn't it? The cost of my commute has dropped by 99.7% |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jan 18, 2019 0:23:17 GMT
, I won't be renewing it as I'll be eligible for even more valuable age-related railcards and freedom passes later this year. Good value, isn't it? The cost of my commute has dropped by 99.7% My travels spending is actually likely to increase, as the Senior Citizen railcard is nationwide.
However, for London travels I await developments. I am wondering whether financial pressures at local govt. level will mean that the expected free pass is delayed until I reach retirement age (67).
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jan 18, 2019 7:59:02 GMT
However, for London travels I await developments. I am wondering whether financial pressures at local govt. level will mean that the expected free pass is delayed until I reach retirement age (67). Although the effective cost to the GLA (in lost revenue for TfL) of the over-60 pass keeps increasing as the gap between age 60 and the state pension age increases, it would be electoral suicide to abolish it. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jan 18, 2019 11:13:28 GMT
I predict a mod will ask people to stick to the subject...
|
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Jan 18, 2019 12:38:32 GMT
I predict a mod will ask people to stick to the subject... |
|
|
|
Post by ijmad on Jan 22, 2019 11:03:01 GMT
I wonder if they will show this on the tube map, with a gap at Hainault showing the need to change trains.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jan 22, 2019 12:02:23 GMT
I wonder if they will show this on the tube map, with a gap at Hainault showing the need to change trains. Like it used to be?  |
|
|
|
Post by ijmad on Jan 22, 2019 12:59:25 GMT
I wonder if they will show this on the tube map, with a gap at Hainault showing the need to change trains. Like it used to be? Ah! My memory isn't quite that clear so thanks for the reminder! As you say, various maps like the the 1985 map from the London Tube Map Archive show the Hainault gap. I guess a similar style could be adopted once again. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 23, 2019 17:51:48 GMT
I wonder if they will show this on the tube map, with a gap at Hainault showing the need to change trains. It depends on whether they still run a limited number of trains through Hainault, maybe in the peaks. Not sure what the actual timetable will be yet. |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,249
|
Post by Ben on Jan 23, 2019 21:00:49 GMT
Suppose there's arguments both ways for showing it as previously and against. One wonders whether the current style guidelines have needed to have anything to say on this issue (hopefully such a pedantic issue is recognised as being thus).
|
|
