2009 TS in traffic hours

I would imagine it would depend very much on exactly how the traffic hours test runs are planned to work.

If they're gonna be run at set times, then I would have thought they'd be in the timetable, and therefore on the program rolls. If however they are just gonna be run ad-hoc, I wouldn't have thought it'd be wise to include anything on the program rolls.

EDIT: I dunno why I'm thinking it's the case, but I thought traffic hours testing was starting in December 2008, with introduction into service from Feburary 2009

Test train paths are still in Victoria WTTs; although their fact was last declared separately in the Rolling Stock working for WTT 19 (10/84), the trips were renumbered from 176/177 to 746/747 in WTT 27 (27/9/98) - Train 175 was also withdrawn then. Hmmmm *wanders off into WTT Library*

Will train 1 or train 2 be used for these test runs?

I thought it was the other way around - there would be a transition period of both systems in use.

Will still need all the extra signalling as noted being installed in the TC before these run in traffic hours. So expect a few big items regarding commisioning.

The write up in TC43 states a trial installation during mid Oct 08 and if ok then rolled out across whole line with final completion by mid Jan 09.

Thank-you. That's what I suspected, but it is nice to see it confirmed, knowing a fair bit about signal sighting on the surface (but not as much on sighting in tunnel) and signal sighting committees.

big delays, hmm, wait and see how BIG the delays are for the 09/10!!! stock :-p

Depends what you mean by 'advanced' - what sort of measure of comparison do you want? True and complement data comparison within the interlockings is more-or-less the same whatever manufacturer you use.

Seltrac has the disadvantage of not being able to cope with different sized wheels on the stock. Implemetation of EBALD is also necessary - reminiscent of the early days of the Vic when the stopping command spots were not quite in the right place.

Again I suppose it depends on yer definition of advantage, but I wonder if the difference is that the Victoria is fixed block whereas the Jubilee is getting moving block?

I dunno if that is the case - I might even be barking up completely the wrong tree........just thinking aloud as it were

ah i see, thanks, it seems it isn't as simple as I thought. I thought moving block systems could run trains closer together and thus have more tph (in theory)

Theoretically Moving Block should have a capacity advantage over Distance To Go (DTG), although there are many variables such as acceleration/braking rates, number of overlapping blocks for DTG, length of blocks for DTG, train positioning accuracy, train/wayside communication, braking safety factors (such as allowed no. of failed brakes), safety margin, etc etc. Some Moving Block systems are really DTG systems with very short blocks and lots of speed codes.

Whilst Moving Block could be seen as "more advanced" than DTG, the Jubilee Line will be getting a relatively old but well proven communication method - inductive loop. It could be argued that the radio communication on the Victoria Line's new signalling is more advanced.

You won't see them in traffic hours for a little while yet.

According to Peter Hendy (via London Reconnections) traffic hours testing will commence by the end of May.

londonreconnections.blogspot.com/2009/04/tfl-board-reports-0309.html