|
Post by domh245 on Jul 25, 2014 17:36:46 GMT
I'm not sure about that, the new emission compliant engines are apparently quite large, and in order to propel the train at a decent speed, I'd imagine a largish engine would be needed! I Suspect that it would be feasible to put the engine in between the Cab Bulkhead and the first door, at least there is somewhere to put an engine without restricting the driving area to a broom closet! What will be interesting to see is whether or not the trains will run DOO or not. There is a bit of an argument on at the moment about DOO in the north, and as these trains do have provision for both rear cab operated Guard Operations and CCTV/Mirror DOO, I wonder what will be done. I certainly can't imagine Mirrors being the preferred way forward, might we end up with some bodyside CCTV with monitors in the TMS location? There are so many questions to be answered, and some of the ideas coming from the official sources are quite daft, I think we could probably do a better job ourselves - now then, where's my angle grinder?
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 25, 2014 15:54:03 GMT
If it were Ealing Broadway, it would have to have been during the 67 Stock farewell tour, as I can't think of any other time when a 67/72 style train has been there!
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 24, 2014 21:10:46 GMT
Earls Court still has these old things, but I doubt that we would want them back en masse! Granted the current ones are a bit small, but that brings the benefit of lower maintenance costs. However where the new ones win is when it comes to flexibility, the ability to display all the possible destinations with a couple of keystrokes - here, you would only have that flexibility if the describer was the size of the platform! Perhaps a "best of both worlds" would be to have a larger dot matrix TD, with the regular destinations along the side and then the number of minutes across the edge, reading left to right, next train to later, I think a simple diagram is in order: Basing it on St James Park WB as in the photo: Destination 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th +-----------------+-------------------- |Ealing Broadway | 1 |Wimbledon | 3 |Richmond | 7 |Circle Line | 0 8 +-----------------+--------------------- or something similar to that, but to be honest, the current system works fine. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! (unless you are granted a large budget and told to do so! )Also, it might be worth a mod splitting any discussion about TDs to a new one at your discretion
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 22, 2014 22:00:37 GMT
31 Road - That is much like 29 Road, in that it is behind the platform, and I think that a picture may help: That image (from the original DD site) shows the view from 23 Road, with 31 road being that set of buffers behind the EB. To quote DD: so that's that one answered As for 28 Road, I think that it can accept S7 stock, and it has certainly been fitted with the new style buffers, I doubt it would have received these if an S7 didn't fit! likewise the rest of the roads can accept S7s, but in some cases this has meant limiting the number of trains, and moving stopping positions. I highly doubt any new roads will get built, there really isn't the space, but with some clever remodeling, you might be able to stable 1 additional train. This is entirely guessstimation work, but you could move the stopping positions for 21 and 22 road back to the very end of the track, and then by remodeling the pointwork, you might end up with enough space to fit an S7 in 29 road. As for all the moves, you'll just have to wait for someone else to pop along! EDIT: Looks like I've saved Colin some work (hopefully - I don't think there are any mistakes?)
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 22, 2014 9:10:34 GMT
If the proposed link is correctly, then D might be Golders Green
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 20, 2014 22:11:47 GMT
What aspects of the design would limit the train to 60? The motors? The bogies? Would the bodyshell be suitable for running at more than 60? Maybe some aerodynamic mods on the front end, which would double as a crumple, much like the TGV units.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 20, 2014 12:22:05 GMT
I wouldn't have thought that there would be that many DMUs properly displaced. Any DMUs displaced by the 319s off of thameslink will be used to strengthen other services, and run new services. As for crossrail, the only units being displaced are the turbos, which will again be used for service strengthening, and when the reading electrification is done, will be cascaded internally to west country services. The main reason for trying to get these new DMUs is because (AIUI) the 142s, which make up a bulk part of the northern fleet, are not going to get an upgrade from their owners (Angel Trains) to make them compliant past 2020, something that I think will also be happening with 153s. So even though lots of units will be displaced and cascaded, there is an ever growing need for new units.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 19, 2014 20:01:43 GMT
I'm sure we have all heard about the rumour of the D78 stock that is being displaced going up north, the one about the leeds - harrogate line, and the 3rd rail conversion, something that was fairly quickly written off by the fact that there would have been nowhere to stable the trains. However recently, another idea has surfaced, which would again see the units heading up north. This idea involves fitting diesel engines (most likely above the solebar), loosing 2 cars from each 6 car set (and probably permanently coupling the 2 halves) and using them as a DMU. However, at the moment, I have not seen any further information about it - So as it appears, I will try to post it here.
To be honest, it does seem like a crazy idea, but it may not be completely infeasible. It would almost certainly be used as a DEMU, with new traction motors, and if they use a formation along the lines of DM - T - T - DM then you could fit an engine to either one or both DMs behind the drivers compartment, and then fit an accessible toilet to one of Trailers.
However it does seem like it would be an insanely expensive project, with lots of complications. However it does look like (some parts of) the North really want the cast off tube stock!
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 18, 2014 7:33:46 GMT
What will it be called? We already have LOROL, can we look forward to CROL, or maybe even XROL?
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 17, 2014 20:07:14 GMT
From the diagrams they gave - it was 35 cm beneath the foundations for the escalators, so that would have been sufficient clearance. Likewise 85cm above the tunnels would be sufficient clearance, as the weight of the TBM will have be spread out over a fair area, don't forget that as soon as the tunneling head has gone, the walls are sprayed with concrete to harden the mud around it, before the concrete linings are put in place.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 17, 2014 13:43:38 GMT
For the SSL at least. If it is an S40 system that gets installed (with much gnashing of teeth and other moaning from the enthusiasts and operators!) then at least the heritage stock, namely the 38TS will be able to go back on to the Northern (and Jubilee for that matter!)
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 17, 2014 12:54:18 GMT
Although you can't really run heritage tube stock on the overground without changing the wiring on them.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 16, 2014 21:03:50 GMT
Well I thought that the first episode was pretty interesting. Very impressive that they managed to pass through the eye of the needle without any calamity. Out of interest, what were the tolerances like when they were building the original tubes? With crossrail it was to within a couple of centimetres of the intended route I doubt that the old tube diggers could have been that accurate!
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 15, 2014 20:52:09 GMT
Hmmm. It might be worth you trying to send off a Freedom of Information request to TfL about it, along with some of your other unanswered questions. You could get some definitive answers! That's not to say that there isn't the information on here buried away in one of our collective heads, but you will probably get an answer quicker through an FoI.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 15, 2014 15:59:03 GMT
It would seem that the track through Fulham Broadway WB has been redone, but not on the EB. It looked like this work has extended toward the tunnel, but I couldn't be sure. It also looked like the track through Parsons Green has been done, but I think that it was done before. Am I Missing out on some of the work that was done - It's difficult to see where track has been replaced when you are looking out of a window!
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 15, 2014 14:52:10 GMT
Unfortunately a balance has to be stuck. A 10 year old spotter might want a whole range of features, but obviously they may not fit in. Equally the train designers might want to cram in as many seats as possible, but at the expense of stand back areas, and other amenities. The consultants have to try and achieve the perfect blend of everyone's ideas. A difficult task certainly, but hopefully they'll get it right.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 14, 2014 15:59:43 GMT
Here's hoping that the final train is function over form. Theres no point having a nice looking train if it don't work!
-------------------------------------
I hope that this new partnership is similar to the one from the 378s - that is to say that the consultants do the livery and internal layout, but the people with experience of building trains do the most important bits!
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 12, 2014 21:42:53 GMT
I assume that the route secure (which I'm guessing is just a synonym for interlocking) isn't used in fault situations. Even swanky new software can't prevent a point fault, so there would have to be some sort of backup system just in case. Or do seltrac have that much faith in their system?
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 12, 2014 8:59:34 GMT
Uxbridge?
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 11, 2014 14:23:45 GMT
I suppose the sensible alternative is to use a shorter via destination, perhaps waterloo? It is arguably a more major interchange than Charing cross
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 11, 2014 13:51:32 GMT
Perhaps it is an attempt to remind customers that even though they have to endure the northern line, they should remain positive...
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 11, 2014 13:47:31 GMT
To be fair, some of the residential development is quite nice. Big gardens, district line at the bottom of the big garden, conservatories etc. It is arguably an enthusiasts heaven. I've often thought that a webcam streaming footage of the railway would be quite good...
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 10, 2014 19:59:59 GMT
Would the 5th be Aldgate East. They all (bat Abbey Road) start Al, and the only other one that starts like that is Aldgate East. I don't know how abbey road fits into it though
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 10, 2014 17:05:03 GMT
During the winter storms just gone, one of the 38TS units (class 483) on the isle of white was flooded. I'm guessing that it will become another spares donor, as it'll probably be very difficult and uneconomic to repair!
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 10, 2014 16:24:24 GMT
I'm guessing that they would be reffering to the bit between Putney bridge station, and up to where it has been replaced so far (which I think is close to that new sand coloured building next to the EB road. I suppose the giveaway would be where the spare rails appear /have already appeared in the 4 foot tonight
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 9, 2014 22:24:13 GMT
Unfortunately, if siemens don't put in a bid for the moorgate contract, TSGN can't take force them to make some more desiros. Siemens pulled out of crossrail because their production lines would be full. I suspect that the new GatEx stock would end up being an option from the 387s, or possibly some 377s that are displaced by introducing some 387s elsewhere (but that's more unlikely)
As for the moorgate stock, I think it'd be quite nice to have one of the underdogs come through, be it Hitachi, CÁF or even Stadler. Whether or not we actually get that, goodness only knows
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 8, 2014 22:24:33 GMT
West brompton is rather nice, at least the DL side is. The NR platforms are now a mix of old 60s esque platforms and modern stuff as well. I'd also say that the line between just south of East Putney junction and the road bridge north of Wimbledon Park is quite nice, albeit with a fair amount of residential development either side
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 8, 2014 20:11:20 GMT
I suspect that when the weight of the paper work equals the weight of the third rail then it will be allowed. As I understand... 1. You are not allowed to turn it on for a few hours over a weekend and turn it off when you have finished. (I am told it is not a good idea to turn it off for long periods.) 2. You must have a control room manned 24/7. 3. You need to convince (and PAY) the Electricity companies to build substation(s), and transmission line, that is if they have the power to spare. 4. You will need to find an understanding insurance company. I believe the Southern Electric Group have looked into how it could be done... £1... lots of zeros here! For point 3, you could always play the green card, and install solar panels, wind turbines, and other renewable sources, to create your own local supply just for your traction. Alternatively, if these guys get some funding (or collaborate with some heritage railway somewhere) and get some decent lengths of track and Power supply laid, you might well end up with a place for all of the preserved EMU stock to run about
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 8, 2014 19:44:34 GMT
It's also worth noting that S7 21301/02 (formerly in the multicolour livery) is called "Queen Elizabeth II", the name being carried on 21301.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jul 8, 2014 19:41:18 GMT
I'd imagine that when running on the S40 signalled lines on a non S40 train, a line possession would have to be taken, and to ensure that routes are secure, you would scotch and clip. As for any PSRs, there will probably be a pilot with you when you are operating, but unless it is a stock transfer, most of the time, you probably wouldn't be going very fast.
|
|