|
Post by domh245 on Mar 30, 2018 18:29:07 GMT
Re the 387s, the 12 HEx units should be coming from slack in the fleet. They were ordered at a time when Oxford and some branches were to be electrified and so once crossrail takes over a lot of the suburban services there will be a enough slack in the fleet for this to happen. In the intermediate period however (pre crossrail and to allow for the units to be spruced up) some services will have 387s replaced by turbos or 769s
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 28, 2018 18:07:12 GMT
For starters, Scotrail don't have any 321s to send down - they have 320s which are near identical other than that they are 3 car instead of 4, but they've recently converted a bunch of 321s into 320s for additional capacity. They are however, releasing a bunch of 158s and 170s to Nothern (both classes of which are making their way into Nottingham for me to see, 158s in service, 170s on training runs, but that's by the by), and giving themselves a bit of a headache, as their new class 385 trains are suffering massive delays for their entry into service, leaving Scotrail short of units! In the distant past (2011) Scotrail did transfer some 322s down to Northern, but nothing recent.
It is also worth noting that Northern's new EMUs are due to directly replace their 321s and 322s in the West Yorkshire area, but that shouldn't preclude them from trying to take on these HEx units, perhaps enabling them to send the 8 new units to operate services on the newly electrified lines on the better side of the Pennines *flees*
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 28, 2018 14:38:33 GMT
You even managed to get the Bakerloo extension in!
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 26, 2018 14:20:39 GMT
Interesting, it does make me wonder what the chains and hooks are for then? Redundancy?
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 26, 2018 13:26:21 GMT
Off Topic, but how did they couple the cars together? Is that thing in the middle some sort of coupler, or were the chains and hooks used (or both!)
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 20, 2018 20:32:25 GMT
Pretty sure there’s also a single 378 going around with different looking unit numbers aligned under the roundel rather than carriage ends. Yes, I believe that is unit 378135. They've also removed the unit number from the front of the train and put it on the side of the train along the floor level of the cab, as on the 710s. That said, the vehicle number on the 710s is positioned as on the 378s going by the pictures and video of 710258 on the way to France, so it does seem a little odd.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 20, 2018 13:35:18 GMT
The website advertisement also details the remaining accountabilities and the skills, knowledge and experience needed. I'll* be bitterly disappointed if there isn't a minimum 'number of threads started in FRIPAS' requirement! *seeing as the website seems to have crashed and I can't check it myself!
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 19, 2018 22:37:19 GMT
Very true. The customisable option of moquette is the design itself. Presumably it's cheaper to bulk order the same moquette, and limit line-specific customisations to things which are bespoke to each line anyway, like trim, grab poles, crests, car numbers.... Perhaps they found out its just as cheap to order smaller batches of different design, though that sounds doubtful? I'll admit to having little to no idea about textile weaving and moquette production, but I would expect that the pattern is the expensive bit, and the yarns used to make the thing have to be purchased every time you want to make some, so it'll cost little or no extra to use brown yarn instead of blue (or whatever) on the same pattern. Similarly, I very much doubt that the covers used on 73TS can also be used on 92TS or 95TS (and so on) so there isn't that much bulk ordering that can be done if each cover is individually made instead of being cut from sheet.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 19, 2018 7:33:29 GMT
B is just north of Wimbledon Park
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 14, 2018 18:42:54 GMT
Just on the note of 72TS, I think that they are going to be one of the latter fleets to be replaced by DTUP. I think that the 73TS will be first (and thus the first stock for SWR to get 'dibs' on) - based on the lack of upgrades being done to them, and also this tweet which says that TfL aim to order the "new Piccadilly Line fleet" in 2018/19
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 13, 2018 17:28:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 10, 2018 21:21:47 GMT
Why can't a 315 work in deep tunnels? It's got an emergency end door. Just like the 317s and 321s. Clearance issues. On 313’s, the part where the pantograph sits is lower. 315’s don’t have it. That depends on if you are trying to run your train down a small sized tunnel, or a considerably larger tunnel, the 315s should easily fit into the crossrail tunnels. Also, FWIW the 315 has exactly the same dimensions as the 313 in the pantograph area, 3582mm to the highest point on the roof, and 3977mm over the pantograph (which is the same type on both) when locked down.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 7, 2018 13:52:05 GMT
I would hazard a guess at West Ruislip Makes sense! I was trying to find somewhere at the east end of the line! As I understand it, the rule when it comes to Central Line station abbreviations is the first 3 letters if the station name is a single word (eg HAI = Hainult), and then if 2 words long, the first 2 letters are the first 2 of the first word, and the last letter is the first letter of the second word (eg SHB = Shepards Bush). I think that for the 3 word stations, they just use the first letter of each word (eg TCR = Tottenham Court Road)
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 5, 2018 15:25:37 GMT
Did they have power? I mean other than battery? AIUI, they had power up until the point that the first person decided to egress, at which point the third rail supply was switched off.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 3, 2018 22:22:52 GMT
I think that deicing units and sleet brushes are common to all fleets.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 2, 2018 20:35:05 GMT
Agreed, renaming it Grenfell doesn't seem right somehow. It'd make sense to rename it more as a tribute to those who died, something based around the number 72 (number of fatalities) might work. And the rest. There's still an awful lot of scepticism and anger from an awful lot of corners about that number. Best to avoid any reference to it at all, it'd do more harm than good. We mustn't forget what happened, and using the name is a more than fitting memorial (in my opinion, of course). Fair point, I hadn't quite appreciated the level of scepticism and anger about that number. I had felt that using it would be a slightly more tasteful way of commemorating it (Seventy Two Park, or something along those lines), but I can see that putting a specific number on it (and to some extent, going with just the official number of fatalities when it'll have also severely affected far more) probably isn't the best way. I still feel that simply going with Grenfell isn't the best way to go forward with it either, in some respects it feels a bit too simple (or at least, not particularly elegant), but perhaps that is exactly the sort of stark reminder that is needed.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Mar 2, 2018 13:50:09 GMT
However, I’m not sure that naming somewhere after a disaster is necessarily a good thing. Agreed, renaming it Grenfell doesn't seem right somehow. It'd make sense to rename it more as a tribute to those who died, something based around the number 72 (number of fatalities) might work.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 24, 2018 23:39:16 GMT
I'd think it unlikely, given that the TfL museum only managed to preserve a single car of each of the A60/62 C69/77 and D78 stocks, but I suppose that we should never say never.
Ps - welcome to the forum.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 24, 2018 0:23:41 GMT
It is possible for an S Stock driver to access the CCTV in each car but it takes a while as the software is unbelievably slow. I would think that S Stock ARE fitted with a capacity sensor, as are most modern Tube Stock '09 '96 '95 but this is not for passenger or driver viewing. This information would available via TrackerNet and used by Line Controllers etc. once the ATC is commissioned. Presumably then the line controller could ask the driver to play a message. Whether that is a good use of controller time though is a different question. I suppose that it's not impossible for the train to do it itself, and play the message in any cars that are significantly more heavily loaded than others. Although I think "more space is available towards the front/back/middle of the train" would be clearer than "please move down inside the train" as someone in the middle isn't necessarily going to know which way is "down" in this context. Will it not be the case that the Line Controllers can remotely trigger announcements on the S stock? I thought that they were able to do that for service status updates, so it wouldn't be impossible for them to get the train to play "please move down" messages.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 20, 2018 18:31:34 GMT
The c2c Aventras are going to be far more like the Greater Anglia Aventras than the 345s - 24m long coaches with 2 doors per coach and a top speed of 100mph.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 18, 2018 15:14:42 GMT
Still not appearing for me. I think it may be a permissions issue in Google photos. Thanks for pointing this out! I've now changed the photo URLs - hopefully these ones don't have permissions issues. Working fine now
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 18, 2018 13:14:16 GMT
Still not appearing for me. I think it may be a permissions issue in Google photos.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 16, 2018 22:03:12 GMT
Must be all the hard work done by the staff at Northfields Joking aside, whilst the 72TS are 73TS are nominally a year apart, the designs are considerably further apart. AIUI the 72TS is really little more than a manually operated 67TS, whereas the 73TS was a new design and utilised new technology (which in some ways makes the result even more surprising) There is no new technology in a 73 still old school equipment in them. New for the time then! Things like the Fault Annunciation, a Round-train-wire, and Solid State Electronics, although I suppose that those would have little to do with vastly improved reliability over the 72TS. Must be the staff working on them then!
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 16, 2018 18:20:24 GMT
I would also be interested to see how conversion affects ATO. Will miss have to be made? I hope we don't end up with a horrible jerky ride like the Jubilee. As I understand it, the Jerky ride of the Jubilee and Northern lines is as a result of the train-based part of the ATO system only having "brake" and "accelerate" as options, and isn't related to the traction package. I wouldn't expect the retractioning to start messing around with the ATO system - it should just be replacing the traction system alone, everything upstream of that (ie the onboard computers, controls, etc) should all be remaining the same
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 16, 2018 17:30:51 GMT
Do love this 4.8 The Bakerloo line fleet comprises 36 seven car trains of 1972 Tube Stock (72TS). It is the ‘next worst’ performing fleet on the network (after the Central line), and is substantially out-performed by the Piccadilly line 73TS which is of a similar age and design. the 72 t/stock are in Acton works Being Heavy Overhauled now. Must be all the hard work done by the staff at Northfields Joking aside, whilst the 72TS are 73TS are nominally a year apart, the designs are considerably further apart. AIUI the 72TS is really little more than a manually operated 67TS, whereas the 73TS was a new design and utilised new technology (which in some ways makes the result even more surprising)
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 16, 2018 15:36:32 GMT
As noted, you should be easily able to run a DC motored train and an AC motored train together, the supply is remaining the same, and any/all of the enabling works to allow the operation of the AC motored trains (such as track circuit alteration) will not prevent DC motored trains from running. However, it is worth pointing out that even with all reasonable steps taken, the performance of a DC train and an AC train will not necessarily match - there were plenty of reports from SWT drivers about trains formed of an AC unit and a DC unit either pulling or pushing together whilst motoring and braking because they weren't quite identically performing - so it may well be the case that LU try to avoid running mixed trainsets for that reason.
Tangentially related, but how often do the Central line 2-car units get swapped around? It may well be the case that there aren't many opportunities for mixed trainsets to be formed. With my thinking cap on as well, I can imagine that LU would try to keep trainsets together to prevent situations where you've got a DC motored unit in the middle of a train that needs to be released for conversion - easy enough to rectify but better if avoided.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 6, 2018 18:11:27 GMT
I assume this is done to give drivers a required break. Yes? Stepping back is done for the benefit of the service, as it allows you to run more trains. If you didn't employ stepping back, the minimum turn-around time at the terminus would be the length of time it takes for the driver to walk from one end of the train to the other, whereas with stepping back, you can run trains as frequently as the infrastructure allows, as the driver merely has to get off the train before it can depart again with a new driver, so long as they can get from one end of the platform to the other in the time it takes for the next train to be ready to leave. As for the multiple trains/day, that's more as a consequence of the required break period than a reason for it. The driver is entitled to a meal break at some point of the day and so usually ends up with a different train to the one they had before.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 5, 2018 10:41:25 GMT
I would think that the CEF* near Valenciennes would be a more likely destination for testing. The Crespin site appears to only have a short electrified spur, similar to Derby, which I don't think would be what they are looking for. It isn't too far away from Crespin (and Lille) either *Centre d’Essais Ferroviaire
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 5, 2018 9:13:52 GMT
In the comments on that Instagram link, someone is saying that it was sent for high speed testing and software testing, as there is no where available in the UK at the moment (Presumably old dalby is full of class 345s) - although the display purposes suggestion is a good possibility.
As for the numbering, as I understand it 710101-710131 are the Liverpool Street units, and there is a block reserved for future options (710132-710155) before picking up the DC/GOBLIN units at 710256 onwards
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 5, 2018 0:01:59 GMT
As far as I can tell, the forum software will automatically embed content from certain websites (instagram, twitter, youtube, etc) and so just posting the link in plain text will result in situations as per the above. The URL can be 'preserved' by linking it from within text like this, so that clicking on the underlined text will send you to the URL, rather than leaving it for the software to interpret. Not sure about the failing to load at all on your device though.
|
|