|
Post by jukes on Feb 2, 2024 19:48:14 GMT
That sounds like the old link line between Angel Road and Lower Edmonton (now Edmonton Green). The platform (known as Lower Edmonton (Low Level) was on what's now the traffic island outside Edmonton Green station, which was known as Lower Edmonton (High Level). The single line then rose to join the (main) line just north of Lower Edmonton (High Level).
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Mar 8, 2023 12:10:24 GMT
If these peak trains are going to be re-routed via Tottenham Hale then Seven Sisters will also loose 4 trains to LST in the morning and 4 to Hertford East in the evening.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Dec 6, 2022 16:36:23 GMT
In two separate FOIs TfL have now confirmed the following services from Shenfield in the May 2023 timetable:
a) Trains from Shenfield will NOT run to Reading. b) Trains from Shenfield WILL run to Heathrow.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Oct 31, 2022 21:42:40 GMT
Only two validators at Farringdon. I didn't notice any very visible signage. There is also an interchange lift. I have not yet had a chance to see if a validator has been placed for it's users.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Oct 20, 2022 14:08:46 GMT
Point to note - only Class 378's can be used on the East London Line. And Class 378/1's are DC only. The 710/3s are rumoured too be going on hire to Southern to operate the Watford Junction - East Croydon service. However, that may now be in doubt as numbers of pax using that service is slowly growing back towards pre-pandemic levels so 6-units would not be enough to operate a viable service.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Sept 2, 2022 20:31:00 GMT
TfL are supposed to be placing validators within Farringdon so pax going to and from the NR platforms to and from the EL platforms needn't have to exit and re-enter - as to when TfL will get round to placing the validators is unknown. Pax exiting the Integrated Ticket Hall and re-enetring the Underground Ticket hall or the Barbican EL ticket hall are covered by a 10-minute OSI.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Jul 31, 2022 14:27:42 GMT
I'm not aware of any official announcements more precise than "autumn 2022" for all these. Unofficially however in the last few days I've heard 6 November being spoken of for through running (Shenfield-Paddington, Abbey Wood-Heathrow/Reading). While Bond Street was not mentioned, the last plan I was aware of was for Bond Street and through running to start on the same day, and I've not heard anything to say that is not happening. In an unrelated forum the bring into use date for Bond Street of 2nd October is quoted. As with everything to do with Crossrail nothing is confirmed until the paperwork is done. Was at and 'in' Bond Street early last week. Everything looking very very good! 2nd of October is certainly being mentioned but the hope is that if possible it might be 2-3 weeks earlier than that. As regards through running again 6th of November has been mentioned a lot but so has a 'window of opportunity' between mid-September and mid-November. In essence there is nothing certain yet but hopes are that everything can be achieved as soon as possible to allow plenty of time to iron out any remaining kinks before total integration in May 2023.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Jul 12, 2022 16:14:42 GMT
TfL already have 'Ghost Zones for fares purposes' so just as an example Broxbourne is in Gohost Zone 11 as are all Stations to Hertford East. Shenfield is in Ghost Zone 12. TfL have the capacity to go up to Ghost Zone 15. I suspect Reading is in 15. Gatwick is already in Ghost Zone 14.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on May 5, 2022 21:28:27 GMT
The TfL statement was approved by DfT before it was issued. Later the same day Grant Shapps issued a tweet in his role as SofS Transport with an Elizabeth line graphic containing a Conservative party tagline and claiming 'tory glory' for funding and bringing the Elizabeth line to all.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Aug 28, 2020 21:30:55 GMT
If you look carefully at the ORR letter it states that the 5-car 710/2s can only run as 2x4 car in multiple with a car removed per unit.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Aug 24, 2020 10:23:58 GMT
The six 710/2s for the NLL/WLL are 5-car units and in multiple would be 10-car which is far too long for the platforms on the NLL and probably WLL. It appears that they will be reducing the 5-car units to 4-car and software configured to be able to operate in multiple as 8-car trains. Even as 8-car they would be far too long for the majority of NLL platforms and indeed GOB platforms too. The only lines where they could operate in more or less unrestricted 8-car formations is: West Anglia, DC (with SDO) and WLL.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Apr 29, 2020 21:47:51 GMT
I get that the trains are walk-through and that this is generally useful. I'm wondering what the capacity of the trains is. There might well be more cars per hour, but if they're shorter car the benefit is mitigated. If Wikipedia is to be believed, cars of both classes of unit are about 20m long (there are slight variations between driving and non-driving cars because of cabs and couplers) Platform 5's publication gives the dimensions of the 710 cars as about 22.5m, but I think this is an error - they may have copied the data across from the Class 345s, which are similar in most other respects but not in length. Class 710 Data sheet at: www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/545906/response/1301326/attach/3/Class%20710%20Stock%20Information%20Sheet.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Mar 2, 2020 16:58:13 GMT
Do you know which stations will require SDO? Stoke Newington (northbound) so far SDO spotted so far: Stoke Newington Northbound and new for 710s Southbound too. Hackney Downs Platform 4 Northbound.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Feb 11, 2020 23:01:37 GMT
Did he give a hint as to February of which year!!!? And, I saw 710119&120 on test this morning at Stoke Newington on their way to Enfileld Town. Nothing fell off or went clunk or crunch so looked good!
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Feb 4, 2020 15:34:10 GMT
Figured I'd drop an update on Ilford as things have finally started to happen. Roundels have started going in (although weirdly the boards appear to be designed slightly differently to the others on the line, not sure why) as well as the non-crossrail platforms getting their plain blue signage. The temporary entrance on Iford Hill looks pretty much done and the new platform barriers on platform 1 are all in and signage to the temporary entrance is up so I wouldn't be surprised to see the temporary entrance open on Monday and if not then the following Monday. Quick update on Marland, Forest Gate and Manor Park: These all appear to be complete. Update: I should have waited until I'd left for work before posting this . On the way into the station this morning they were handing out leaflets (and chocolate for some reason) about exactly this along with voice announcements, the temporary entrance will open after this weekends line closure with a reopening estimate of "Autumn 2020". Any pictures of these new 'slightly different' signs?
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Jan 26, 2020 22:08:31 GMT
Actually it will be DB Regio (registered and capitalised in UK) who will compensate NR and LO. Although LO is ARL and owned by DB via its Arriva UK subsidiary, which is also a UK registered and capitalised company, the money I suspect will go to TfL as LO is a concession not a franchise. Simples. (cue chorus of meerkats)
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Aug 14, 2019 12:45:46 GMT
Oh no! The 350s are leaving LNWR? Sad news; I liked them. According to Wikipedia, LNWR will be keeping the /1 and /3 subclasses, and acquiring the 350/4s from Transpennine. Yes that will give LNWR a uniform fleet of 110mph 350s. The /2s are only 100mph capable without modification.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Jul 29, 2019 21:43:12 GMT
I have just looked at NESA MD166 Seq 001. The section of line from just before NP Junc (in the direction heading towards Shepherd's Bush) is DC 3rd Rail and AC OHLE, to accommodate the voltage change for both SR and LO, (the AC extends to perhaps 450m? just before the LU viaduct) so if the train was in approx the NP Junc/St Quentin area then it was energised at both DC and AC. Do we know the exact spot the train was at?
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Jul 29, 2019 16:08:11 GMT
Given that one of the prime dangers often stated in these incidents is that the track was live*, I don't think that would be a complete answer. * Obviously, even if it isn't at one moment, it could be the next, so apparent lack of power to the train should never be considered a justification for unauthorised de-training. The reference to the line being "live" may be to the fact that other trains might be passing, rather than electrically live. But the report's title does say the line was "electrically live". I'm not sure exactly where the stranding took place, but North Pole Junction is a little way north of the changeover point from DC to AC, so any electrically live components would be several metres above the evacuees' heads. Unusually, the changeover is done "on the fly" (there is, presumably, a reason the wires were not carried as far as Shepherds Bush?) and if a pantograph fails to rise the train's momentum may be enough to carry it beyond the end of the 3rd rail, leaving it stranded even if both the AC and DC power supplies are live. . The reason the OHLE does not extend to Shepherd's Bush is that it would have to pass under the Hammersmith & City Line viaduct and would interfere with the legacy LU signalling. It was decided a long time ago to await the changeover to the new 4LM signalling system on the H&C before extending the OHLE into Shepherd's Bush station platforms and do the voltage change there. That may no longer be the case as the 378/2s (and in future 710/2s as well) make the change on the move and, the hourly Southern 377s still halt to change voltage but costs being what they are it might be felt that spending out on a shortish OHLE extension is no longer needed/justified.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Jun 7, 2019 16:34:21 GMT
My memory is hazy on this so I could be misremembering, however something tells me the TFL/NR boundary is actually at Kingsland Road, just north of Dalston Junction. If so then the Highbury connexion is entirely within NR infrastructure. Something else tells me that a full AC/DC interface was planned but wasn’t fully completed. Modern requirements dictate special arrangements to separate the AC and DC sections, specifically the different earthing arrangements, normally achieved by means of isolation transformers, and unless something has changed fairly recently I don’t believe this was ever provided. I don’t claim to know much about this so I could be wide of the mark, but it does tie in with the mention upthread of bagged-up assets. The LAND boundary between TfL owned land and NR owned land is indeed just to the north of Dalston Junction. Between that point and just to the West of Highbury, TfL effectively rent the land from NR to provide the ELL infrastructure - all of which remains the property of TfL. NR retain ownership of the trackbed on this section and certain other things like Bridge structures. The railway systems however (signalling, rails, electrification, etc) are separately controlled depending on the owner. This is no different to the DLR who ‘rent’ part of the viaduct between Limehouseand Cannon Street Road Junction from NR. Now in theory TfL could maintain all their property in the Dalston - Highbury section ‘in house’ house if they wished - but given the equipment is all of the type used on the National Rail Network, it makes perfect sense to contract out maintenance to NR. The section west of Dalston Junction is indeed NR property. The signalling is controlled from NXG which is TfL BUT the signalling staff are provided by NR who also provide the electrical power, and own all the structures as well as the stations at H&I and Canonbury. P2 at Highbury is still designated as the ELL/NLL connection line; however, it was never brought into use and at present there are no plans to do so, unless the DC line is diverted away from Euston then, as the legend has it, 2 of its trains might be routed to NX (via this connecting line) and 2 to Stratford. Of course, to run such a service the DC line would need more than its intended 7 Class 710/2s.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on May 19, 2019 16:15:05 GMT
Interesting that no walking connection is shown between Dalston Kingsland and Dalston Junction as, even on a bad day(!!) they are only 8-9 minutes walk.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Mar 10, 2019 16:43:04 GMT
That has been noted and is being followed up with TfL. It might of course just be an interim arrangement until Oyster PAYG is extended to Luton as previously announced. The same TRU also said Oyster is going live at Potters Bar and Brookmans Park which must be interim pending go-live to WGC.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Jan 2, 2019 13:45:53 GMT
Obviously Siemens have broken the back of the issues with the 700s as you would hope and the 707s and 717s seem to have had a smoother early life. The 717s were supposed to have been in service by September last year, so not that smooth. And the irony is that the type with the smoothest entry into service (class 707) may well be out of service by the end of the year. (Unless the 701s that are to replace them suffer the same problems as their class 710 cousins). The 717s were never slated to be service in September 2018. It was always advertised as gradual introduction from LATE Autumn 2018 (always meaning December 9 timetable change) up to early Spring 2019 (meaning mid-March). At least 20 of the 25 units had been delivered before Christmas and are undergoing rigorous testing and driver route and traction training. The remaining 5 units will have been delivered by February. A limited public introductory service has been running on some Friday afternoons since November with a service from Moorgate to Gordon Hill. The only thing that has changed is GTR decided to concentrate all its efforts on timetable stabilisation and enhancement work on the Class 700s and very sensibly decided to delay the additional introduction effort associated with the 717 rollout from December 9 into January or perhaps the start of February. By which time in probability the entire GN Metro service can be '717'nd' in one go! Having ridden a 717 under test and in public service I can promise they are good!
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Dec 14, 2018 18:59:08 GMT
Is the line diagram at Moorgate still missing Welham Green and spelling the preceding station as "Brookman's[sic] Park"? Line diagram Maps etc at Moorgate, Old Street and Highbury in the TfL parts of the stations is, well, TfLs responsibility to update!
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Dec 3, 2018 18:49:46 GMT
Still no Shepperton thpough Luton and Stevenage have Inter City services, which starts to raise more revenue-sharing issues. WGC and Hertford North are the usual limits of the Moorgate (Northern City) line services (a handful continue from Hertford to Watton-at-Stone and Stevenage). A news report on the local Epsom press said that there was not the funding for Epsom to be in Zone 6. There will be a further extension of Oyster if and when GN Metro is transferred to London Overground. In that case Oyster will at least be extended to Watton-at-Stone but probably to Stevenage too with the usual 'LO only trains' albeit with an additional via Hertford North only tagged onto the proviso. This proviso is also used to/from Watford Junction (LO trains only) and to/from Shenfield, in that case TfL Rail trains only! If LO does take over GN Metro, then Freedom Passes will also be extended to WGC and Stevenage via HNorth with the LO trains only etc proviso. As regards Epsom the MP for that town has long been a patron (albeit inactive) of the campaign to extend Oyster - such a coincidence he is the current Secretsry of State forTransport - who can now claim to have kept his promise even though pax using the station will not benefit from actually being in Zone 6 which is only 980m north of the station!!!!
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Nov 17, 2018 17:38:36 GMT
Electrification got held up due to some botched jobs on the wiring, I believe. I think that's the politest comment about the electrification works I've read in a long time. To the best of my knowledge the following went wrong. - they designed the electrification incorrectly - they put the wrong steelwork in the wrong places - they fractured several pipes and sewers - they failed to anticipate the need to raise the bridge at Crouch Hill station having assumed a waiver would be granted - the supply contract for the steelwork was placed too late - the supply of steelwork was late and incorrect - productivity on the project was woefully behind expectations in the first phase - project management during the first blockade seemed to be extremely poor as was TfL's understanding of what was actually going on. The only bits that seemed to go OK were - track lowering works - the long planned bridge replacement near T Hale / Ferry Lane - the platform extension works (separately contracted) Clearly NR eventually got their act together for the second blockade as at least all the posts / masts and wires were installed. Even then there were multiple further weekend closures and it look a long time to get places like South Tottenham's wires finished. Everything that went wrong was being project managed by NR. The platform extensions were being managed by TfL and everything went swimmingly! TfL were frustrated because every time they asked NR for a progress report nothing was supplied even though TfL could see problems they couldn't interfere because they are not the infrastructure owner.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Nov 17, 2018 17:34:28 GMT
I'm not sure if its a question of "an "end game" with the reliability with the 172s" or rather its a similar situation to when the Central Line introduced Working Timetable 67 in 2013. On the Central Line increased frequency in the off peak and at weekends meant that the 1992s weren't spending as much time in depots and sidings which meant that the train maintainers didn't have enough time to work on them which in turn meant trains were developing faults while in service. The difference with the current situation is that rather than an increased frequency there are two fewer trains on the Goblin but no one could have predicted how the 172s would hold up until they actually tried it. luacton - I heard the problem with the 710s was that the pantograph was dropping under certain conditions due to a software glitch. Not sure if there were any other problems. Pantographs were dropping and nobody is sure why the software is doing that. The AWS in the rear cab was remaining active so causing the brakes to apply unless isolated - again nobody quite understands why. Plus there were a host of minor problems with the TCS software. Problem is if you modify software to resolve one problem sometimes it causes another. That means you might need a complete rewrite in extremis. Testing resumed on the GOB a couple of nights ago but since that single round trip there hasn't been another although one is scheduled for Monday night - assuming it runs.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Nov 16, 2018 16:24:59 GMT
Just to put this into context. The decision to surrender the lease on the 172s was taken earlier this year by TfL on the not unreasonable assumption that the 710s would be in service well before now. One unit went to WMT a few weeks ago and another followed a few days ago. That leave 6 units for 6 diagrams. If you flog your trains to death to try and cover everything then failures will occur more frequently. As this is a concession not a franchise all higher decisions are made by TfL. ARL are trying to do their best to cope with a situation NOT of their making. There will be no penalty charges since the body that would penalise ARL is the very body (TfL) that has caused the problem in the first place!!! The issue now is getting the 710s in service before 31 Dec when the the remaining 172s vanish to WMT. Yes well except that AIUI the first 172 released is sat in Ilford Depot going precisely nowhere. It's not even clear if any work is being done to it. Ditto the second unit. There are other pertinent questions here such as - whose decision was it to delay much needed overhaul works? - why were overhauls delayed? Was it just to save money? - whose decision was it to not negotiate a phased overhaul with mechanical attention first and internal refurb / toilet fitment later? Did anyone talk to West Midlands Trains and the leasing company about this? - what happens when, AIUI, the current lease for the 172s runs out on 31 December 2018? Nothing that has been said by TfL or the LOTrain project people covers this risk. In fact the statements are so vague about the 710s that it is very unlikely, taken at face value, that more than 1 or 2 710s will be operating for more than 1 - 3 trips on weekdays only by the end of December. Do we have no service whatsoever come 1 January 2019? Not expecting you to have these answers but someone in authority does NEED to answer them along with plenty others. There needs to be a proper investigation into this whole debacle and who took what decisions and when. I think it is extremely convenient that Arriva Rail London are feeling no heat over any of this. I assume Bombardier aren't suffering any payment deductions either as a result of the decrepit mechanical state of the 172s. It's in situations like this that contracts and performance regimes fall to pieces with no incentive on anyone to do anything properly. And I say that as someone who *ran* a very complex performance regime for a long time. In some sort of order - ARL (with very deep forebodings) after consulting TfL in order to try and run all diagrams. (in essence TfL make all decisions of this nature as such is reserved to them in the current concession agreement) - See above and No savings in fact potentially more expensive. Out of necessity to keep all diagrams covered - TfL held the 172 lease so all decisions sit exclusively with them - Roller skates, cycles and whatever replacement buses that can be cobbled together will be available, along with TfL PR staff to tell everyone it could be worse.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Nov 15, 2018 18:12:21 GMT
...The real question to ask is why the reliability of the 172s has seemingly fallen off a cliff since Arriva took over? In effect someone is gaming the performance regime in that they've decided to save on operating costs and dump the problem on passengers who have delayed and overcrowded journeys and Arriva who take the financial hit for cancellations (assuming they've not been granted a waiver on this!).... They'll probably introduce it on Christmas Day..... "Peace on earth, and mercy mild, God and sinners reconciled." We hope. 🤞🤞 Just to put this into context. The decision to surrender the lease on the 172s was taken earlier this year by TfL on the not unreasonable assumption that the 710s would be in service well before now. One unit went to WMT a few weeks ago and another followed a few days ago. That leave 6 units for 6 diagrams. If you flog your trains to death to try and cover everything then failures will occur more frequently. As this is a concession not a franchise all higher decisions are made by TfL. ARL are trying to do their best to cope with a situation NOT of their making. There will be no penalty charges since the body that would penalise ARL is the very body (TfL) that has caused the problem in the first place!!! The issue now is getting the 710s in service before 31 Dec when the the remaining 172s vanish to WMT.
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Nov 10, 2018 16:40:32 GMT
According to the latest Ticketing & Revenue Update, Oyster PAYG should be extended to Hertford North and Epsom next January. (Welwyn Garden City is not mentioned). Stations between Iver and Reading will be placed in the non published zone 15 (F). Oyster at present can only cope with zones up to 15, so any further zones will require modifications. Strange to assign all stations between Iver and Reading to 'ghost' zone 15, rather than graduate them. For example Iver 10, Langley 11, Slough 12, Burnham 13, Taplow 14 and Maidenhead to Reading 15. Currently the PAYG ghost zones contain the following: Chafford Hundred, Purfleet, Ockenden, Grays and Watford Junction - Zone 10, Broxbourne, Hertford East, Rye House, St Margarets (Herts) and Ware - Zone 11, Shenfield - Zone 12, Earlswood (Surrey), Horley, Merstham, Redhill and Salfords - Zone 13, Gatwick Airport - Zone 14. It will be interesting to see how Epsom, Cuffley, Bayford and Hertford North are ghost zoned. I would imagine Hertford North will be in 11 in common with Hertford East. As for Epsom perhaps 6 in common with Epsom Downs or possibly 7. As for stations to WGC they are supposed to be 'Oystered' as well as stations up to Luton as per the original Thameslink programme.
|
|