|
Post by edwin on Jan 7, 2008 20:41:55 GMT
Well the Moscow Metro has 8 car full-sized broad guage trains which are 160m in legnth, compare that to the longest in LU which is the tube sized Central line 1992 stock which measures up to 130m (?) and then let's not forget the 90 sec headways, compare that to a train every 2.5 minutes on most lines here (it'll get better...) and then compare the gigantic Stalinist stations compared to a cramped Victorian station like Covent Garden which has four lifts and narrow passageways designed for small people. Oh yes, let's not forget Moscow has 10million inhabitants compared to London's 7million, and much denser suburbs.
And i'm also wondering whether Moscow's bus network carries 6 million daily, as many take it because it's cheaper, or maybe they're claustrophobic... What's Moscow's suburban rail network like?
And there you have it!
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Nov 11, 2007 17:02:15 GMT
Bobbing Bobcat!
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Dec 6, 2007 17:09:31 GMT
1.3m? That's not so bad I guess, perhaps they just look smaller because the trains are so large compared to what i'm used to!
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Dec 2, 2007 23:31:10 GMT
What are the current trains going to be replaced with in the future? The "Rusich" or "Yauza" trains or something different?
And why are the doors so narrow? Me thinks they could improve dwell times with slightly larger doors...
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Nov 10, 2007 21:27:11 GMT
Why are these lines busier than the others? More people want to use them . I think two main reasons are: 1) a phenomenon we call 'bedroom community' - huge clusters of blocks of flats ( like this) where only very limited number of jobs exist, so most of their population has to go elsewhere; 2) loss of jobs in the suburbs mean that more people commute to Moscow to get a job. Both items quite nicely coincide in the southeastern terminus of the 'purple' line ('Vykhino') which holds an infamous record of patronage - 170 000+ passengers daily (on working days). Something similar happens on the opposite end of the line ('Tushinskaya' station), however on a smaller scale - only 110 000+ passengers daily. 170,000?! Isn't that higher than Victoria, King's Cross and Waterloo, which are all in central London!?
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Nov 9, 2007 23:14:04 GMT
For a system which operates over 30tph in the peaks I find it hard to believe that some lines don't need extra capacity, but i'll take your word for it. Some lines do need some extra capacity (e.g. 'green' and 'purple'), but they already run at maximum. And overloaded entrances and interchanges pose another big problem. Why are these lines busier than the others? And thanks for the replies.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Nov 9, 2007 14:17:56 GMT
But there is certain reason for it. On the Circle line, for example, there are only deep-level stations and only two of them with full-length central halls. Others have small central halls (about 2,5-3-car length) and passengers are too lazy to make few steps to the first or to the last car. Today we have 6-car trains on the Circle line, and only the 3rd ant the 4th cars are quite full of passengers, the rest ones are rather free. In spite of the fact it's impossible to teach 9 mln people to board not only the 2 middle cars of the train, but all the 6, there's no need for extra cars. Trains of 7 cars are in use at the red, deep-blue and light-green lines just because they don't need the 8th car very much, but I think in two-three years the trains will be lengthened. On the Fili line, trains of 6 cars in use because of too short platforms on some overground stations (maybe it wasn't planned the line would have many passengers. Nevertheless, the December 2007 will bring us the solution of this line's problem. The deep-blue line will take over last three stations of the Fili (light-blue) line, and its 7-car or maybe 8-car trains will run there) For a system which operates over 30tph in the peaks I find it hard to believe that some lines don't need extra capacity, but i'll take your word for it. I don't mean to sound facetious, but were any of the original stations constructed via slave labour? They were built during Stalin's reign after all. Thanks a lot for your replies.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Nov 5, 2007 20:39:02 GMT
And if all the platforms are 160m how come some lines have longer trains than others? A train may be shorter than a platform . I thought that, but it seems a bit silly to have long platforms and short trains when it's such a busy system!
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Nov 5, 2007 17:27:43 GMT
How come the trains in Moscow are so loud despite being younger than London's oldest (A Stock and 1967 stock)
And if all the platforms are 160m how come some lines have longer trains than others?
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Feb 22, 2008 0:25:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Jan 17, 2008 1:40:27 GMT
Who's idea was it to have ALL these announcements? It's the one thing I actually loathe about the Tube.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Jan 11, 2008 23:12:47 GMT
Sorry about that!
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Jan 11, 2008 15:50:44 GMT
It's a bog standard installation when Metronet do a station refurb - it's no wonder therefore that they collapsed under financial difficulties when they spend money on stuff that isn't needed! This is Metronet we're talking about, why would they do anymore than the barest minimums possible? It's obviously TfLs idea, as Gloucester Road Piccadilly line (which I assume is a TubeLines station) has the same announcement and is straight as a ruler. Also, Waterloo on the Bakerloo line has the old fashioned Mind The Gap announcement, Westminster westbound on the Circle and District does as well.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Jan 10, 2008 22:37:50 GMT
There is one at Gloucester Road too, the platforms on both lines are straight, and Regent's Park.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Jan 10, 2008 16:42:21 GMT
Please stop whining, the stations were never ment to be free standing, they were designed so buildings could be placed on top from day one, they were also designed so that any extra space could be used for commercial purposes. Space that isn't needed should be used up!
Also, the newsagents at Oxford Circus may be ditched when (if?) the station gets step-free access, it seems the best place to put a lift down to the ticket hall.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Jan 8, 2008 19:38:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Jan 8, 2008 19:31:36 GMT
Is Oxford Circus not a Yerkes era building, Oxblood red etc... There are two exits, one is a Yerkes station and the other a CLR one, both on the opposite corners of Argyll Road. I'm certain. There is a CLR station at Tottenham Court Road too, although somewhat spoiled by an ugly shelter.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Jan 8, 2008 0:39:59 GMT
...and Oxford Circus, Queensway remain and I think Chancery Lane, though it is not used as a tube station.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Jan 7, 2008 20:33:19 GMT
It's a shame, but the current building looks too small to cope with the expected passenger increases, am I right?
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Dec 3, 2007 17:57:34 GMT
The station also has a reversing siding to the west. When the Central line was updated, it was designed to "aid rapid service recovery" in times of disruption. This involved making all of the sidings / crossovers that were previously operated from local boxes come under the control of one location (Wood Lane). Before the modernisation, places such as Bristish Museum Siding, Bethnal Green crossover etc could only be used when somebody opened up the signal box at that locaiton. The modernisation also included the construction of a 3rd platform at North Acton, trailing crossover wast of Northolt, facing crossover at Queensway, new through loop line at Leytonstone. new through loop line at Woodford and the conversion of the sidings at Debden and Newbury Park into loops to enable easier reversing in both directions. The Central line has so many options for terminating trains short to fill gaps in the opposite service, something the Picc would kill for I'm sure. On the 24th Nov, they just allowed a huge queue of trains to build up, rather than sending some back the other way. I know that there are crew relief issues, but not all of those trains had crew reliefs at White City, that's for sure. The controllers (well some of them) simply don't act quickly enouggh, and with a 24tph service, that is fatal in terms of massive blocking back. During one of the long gaps, there were loads of trains going west while the crowds were building on the eastbound. Solution - turn one at Marble Arch, one at Queensway. Not rocket science is it! Logic and LU don't work very well together
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Dec 2, 2007 22:33:41 GMT
With regards to railtechnician's point about far too much H&S, I am sure that if the tipping out rules at terminal stations were relaxed so that the TO could simply close the doors normally rather than having to walk down the train and use the porter buttons, the Jub (for example) wouldn't block back so badly every evening northbound and more trains could be fitted down the pipe. (The Stanmore 3rd platform should help for that particular example, of course). This is one area where other metro systems (including the DLR) have a much easier time than LU. How about a verbal warning before and after leaving the station where the train terminated? And how about restricting the amount of time spent inside the siding without tipping out as 15 minutes? The Jubilee and Northern lines won't have much of a problem though, at least I think they won't! the Northern has a reversing platform at East Finchley and Golders Green, and Morden station, as Stephenk never fails to remind us, is the best terminus on LU for high frequencies. The Jubilee is getting a third platform at Stanmore also, which suggests that the full frequency will be running all the way to Stanmore instead of reversing at Willesden Green and Wembley Park these days. And I agree about the problems with management during a delay of some sort. I once had to wait 15 minutes for a Central line train at White City WB, yet I watched in awe as trains WB came in every minute! Let's not forget that station has a perfectly useable reversing platform that wasn't even occupied.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Dec 2, 2007 0:33:09 GMT
I've noticed dwell times of 20 seconds at Oxford Circus in the peaks, that's good enough surely? The problems arise at stations like Bank, which probably has the largest gap on the entire network, people tend to be more cautious there, and tight curves = speed restrictions = bunching up. But Paris has even more curves than London so that screws my argument up completely.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Nov 30, 2007 14:57:28 GMT
Okay everyone, I apologise for spouting rubbish. But i'm still confused over why London can't achieve frequencies as high as Paris or Moscow, even on the Central line
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Nov 29, 2007 21:48:18 GMT
How come other metro systems manage fine without having "severe delays" every bloody fortnight on what is supposed to be a "modern" line. It seems that LU are utterly incompetent when it comes down to signalling, systems like Moscow and Paris manage up to 36tph on "old" lines yet LU seems unable to get 30tph on a supposedly "modernised" line!
Rant over. I understand that now with all this PPP rubbish that it's probably not entirely LU's fault...
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Nov 29, 2007 0:33:44 GMT
I thought re-signalling the Central line was supposed to get rid of "signal failures"?
|
|
|
Seats
Feb 28, 2008 1:46:36 GMT
Post by edwin on Feb 28, 2008 1:46:36 GMT
If the 09/S stock trains have seats like the 95ts seats, it would be good as they are relatively comfortable. The 09ts seems to be an evolution of the 9xts designs and I hope they have learnt from the mistakes in the 92ts. Bombardier built the 92ts though I'm guessing that the 09TS seats will be padded, the D stock refurbs are padded, the seats before them were springed, so padded seems to the direction LU are headed...
|
|
|
Seats
Feb 27, 2008 21:43:58 GMT
Post by edwin on Feb 27, 2008 21:43:58 GMT
The cushions on the 1996TS (Jubilee Line ;D) are in a good state! As for the 1992TS on the Central, I haven't really noticed any improvements. These seats needed to be replaced 5 years ago. I have definately noticed improvements, twice now... It's not on many trains though, but when I sat down I couldn't feel the hard metal bits underneath at all. And I think the 96/95TS have sprung seats, not padded, therefore they never really lose their 'spring'. It's like comparing a futon to a mattress, a futon will flatten out after time, a mattress won't.
|
|
|
Seats
Feb 26, 2008 21:55:05 GMT
Post by edwin on Feb 26, 2008 21:55:05 GMT
I noticed today that the seats appeared more padded, does anyone know if they're replacing the cushions on the 92TS?
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Jan 24, 2008 18:21:34 GMT
Sorry to go off topic, but what was Tower Hill's original tiling? Was it cream like at Aldgate East?
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Dec 30, 2007 3:07:50 GMT
Will three escalators really be enough from platform level to the ticket halls, Crossrail stations need four IMO.
|
|