|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 5, 2020 17:09:04 GMT
A simple link between existing main-line railways, with no goods traffic, and no through running to anywhere else on the Underground network. How could it possibly have cost so much, for so little? It's not the Canal Tunnels, nor even the Gotthard Base tunnel. If it was just a tunnel between Pudding Mill Lane and Royal Oak, with no intermediate stations, and using conventional block signalling, it would have cost a lot less (and been completely useless). What's costing the money is the stations. Digging the railway line to connect them together was the easy bit. Indeed, if you forgot about the stations and just ran trains through it non-stop you could probably open it next month.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 4, 2020 11:56:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 4, 2020 11:53:38 GMT
The decision to transfer governance of CrossRail to TFL does seem completely counter to previous D/Transport stance on mainline railways. . Wasn't that always the plan?
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 4, 2020 9:45:01 GMT
I only discovered recently that the Watkin Path up Snowdon was named after, and built by, Edward Watkin, who owned a holiday chalet in Cwm Llan. Watkin was an MP, and the path was ceremonially opened in 1892 by his friend William Gladstone. The path stood in for the Khyber Pass in "Carry On Up the Khyber"
There is no evidence that Forbes was involved in the rival route that was built up the other side of the mountain from Llanberis between 1894 and 1896!
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 2, 2020 10:09:45 GMT
...Crossrail 2 might end up being named after a King (I have Charles in mind), as it is unlikely to even start being built until our next Monarch has acceded to the throne. The George line, then. (Assuming Charles becomes Georgivs Septimvs, rather than Carolvs Tertivs). The "Georgian Line" has a certain ring to it. Indeed, I think I would have preferred the "Elizabethan Line" for Crossrail. William will probably be William V, but could be Arthur, Philip or Louis (we have arguably had one of each already, as Mary Tudor was considered to be ruling jointly with her husband, and the future Louis VIII of France was briefly recognised as King of England during the troubles at the end of King John's reign, eventually losing out to supporters of John's infant son Henry III)
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 1, 2020 22:41:57 GMT
There is no significant connection between the area served by the line and Vikings though. . Most of the line falls within the Danelaw, the area of Britain ceded to Danish rule in 886 under the Treaty of Alfred and Guthrum, which included Essex and most of Middlesex. The boundary followed approximately the line of Watling Street (the A5. At the time of its opening in 1967 the Victoria Line was the only one to lie entirely NE of Watling Street
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 1, 2020 21:51:44 GMT
The District Line was a shortened version of Metropolitan District which the District had adopted to gain some kudos and investors who believed the two companies were linked. They were, originally. The MDR was set up as an arms length company to avoid risking the finances of the "going concern" Met. The intended merger after completion of the District fell through because of the poor financial position of the MDR, laden with debt by the much higher cost of construction compared with the Met itself, and the four board members they had in common resigned from the MDR.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 30, 2020 9:35:11 GMT
Oh and REV in my name is my initials.. A work colleague of mine whose initials were R.E.V.(Surname) was a churchwarden, but his initials meant he was frequently mistaken for the incumbent in correspondence.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 30, 2020 9:31:04 GMT
We did name the Victoria Line after someone who couldn't use it either. it was named for one of the main termini that it connected, which was itself named for the area in which it stood. Of course, that area was named for QV. Specifically, Victoria Street (opened 1851) which lent its name to the station opened nine years later.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 29, 2020 9:02:48 GMT
How many transport secretaries have there been during Crossrail construction...5 or 6. . The parliamentary process stared in 2005, when Alastair Darling was Transport Secretary. Three more had come and gone by the time construction started in 2009, when Lord Adonis was in the hot seat. Since then we have had Philip Hammond, Justine Greening, Patrick McLoughlin, Chris Grayling and now Grant Shapps. The average tenure was about 18 months, so I wouldn't bet on Shapps still being in post when Crossrail finally opens
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 26, 2020 15:04:55 GMT
I've got three trips to Hainault today and a Newbury Park tomorrow, hopefully someone tells me where I'm going although I'll probably have to check the platform describers when I change ends As the person in charge of the train I would hope that you do find out where you are going in a better way than looking at platform train describers! . Even if you think you know where you're going, it's probably a good idea to check the train describers otherwise you'll get a lot of disgruntled passengers.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 23, 2020 17:17:07 GMT
It was only the Driving motor cars from 1923-28 which had the centre door pillar The trailers and control trailers never had centre door pillars . My mistake - I misunderstood the reference in Hardy's book. Of the 19 motor cars that went to the Isle of Wight (numbered 1-15, 19-25 (odd) and 2-10, 20, 22 (even), Nos 19 (3045) 20 (3308) 21 (3041) 22 (3010) 23 (3315) and 25 (3313) were pre-1928 versions that had the door pillars. On the IoW each 4-car unit was originally formed with one of these and one later one. The three car sets all had the later version.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 23, 2020 11:58:15 GMT
I thought centre door pillars were a Hurst Nelson speciality. Did other builders also use them? The "Hurst Nelson" stock was for the District Line, specifically its C stock of 1910. Standard stock was built by a variety of manufacturers, although Hurst Nelson was not among them - the Picadilly Standard stock fleet was mainly Metropolitan carriage & Wagon (later Metro Cammell after the merger with Cammell Laird) with some Birmingham and Gloucester RCW trailers and the "experimental" train of 1930 built by UCC (Feltham).
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 23, 2020 9:45:08 GMT
Information from Brian Hardy's "Underground Train File". During its twelve year production run from 1922 to 1934 the so-called "standard" stock design underwent many changes. Although cars could be swapped between lines, the Piccadilly's fleet was largely made up of two batches, the first being built in 1927/28 to replace Gate stock, the later being from 1931 to expand the fleet ready for the extensions to Cockfosters, Hounslow and Uxbridge. The two types were of course both used throughout the line.
The 1928 motor cars were the first "Standard" Stock motor cars to not have the central pillars, but the trailers stillnever had them. The 1931 fleet had no central pillars, and also were the first to have end doors in the trailers. The vehicles which went to the Isle of Wight included examples of both types.
Edited to correct a misreading of Hardy's book
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 20, 2020 18:52:43 GMT
Luckily the politicians and civil servants did not have their fingers in food supply and distribution. Tesco, Sainsbury and all the other supermarkets showed the working of the free market. I beg to differ. Although registered as clinically vulnerable, I know of someone who was unable to get any supermarket to deliver groceries until two months after lockdown started and had to rely on neighbours. Spare computer battery, soldering iron, roof bars for the car, OO gauge West Country Pacific: no problem. Groceries? Not a hope.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 18, 2020 12:24:22 GMT
I have to say one of the things that surprised me is the, for example, "Ah, the specified fire proofing is no longer up to code, so we need to replace whats already been done" - is it normal in railway projects to re-write the specification requirements before something goes in to service and do the job twice? Seems to set yourself up for a never-ending build project if so... If it's purely a contractual matter (e.g using the latest upgrade) then no. And I recall in the early days of the Crossrail project there was a definite policy of avoiding "mission creep" by not allowing any "bells and whistles" (or extra branches) to be added, to void potential delay to the project (Haha). But if a new legal requirement is introduced, that has to be installed whether you like it or not. So if there is a requirement for all new trains to have a particular feature if entering service after a given date, any non-compliant design either has to be rushed into service before that date, or retro-fitted. This happened recently with new emissions rules for diesel locomotives (and why it was worth salvaging some old engines with "grandfather rights") I recall there were some good bargains to be had on new cars without catalytic converters towards the end of 1992, as dealers tried to shift stock that would be non-compliant if registered after 1/1/93.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 9, 2020 20:57:50 GMT
The history of the 350hp shunter goes back much further than that - Indeed, the 350 does, but the poster did say 08, so I only referred to 08. I was referring to thr previous poster (Roythe bus) who queroed whether thw WR had any diesels at that date. In fact, the GWR's first diesel was in 1933, but by the time of Nationalisation fifteen years later it still only had one shunter (a different one), plus another seven on order - and a fleet of about 40 railcars.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 9, 2020 19:31:50 GMT
I doubt johnb2 would have seen a diesel going through Baker street in the early 1950s as I don't think the Western Region had any at that time. The 0-6-0 English electric (class 08) shunters were around at that time, but not in any significant numbers. Au contraire, WR and directly relavent here, Old Oak Common was an early 08 depot D3030 (as 13030) was there from 10/1953 : The history of the 350hp shunter goes back much further than that - originally an inter-war LMS design, but all of the "Big Four" had some. Most of the GWR examples seem to have been based in Cardiff, but at least one (numbered as 15103 by BR) was at Old Oak from 1953 to 1958
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 5, 2020 17:58:02 GMT
ORR have only endorsed the use in passenger service of the specific units ...........006, 007, and 008 (which has yet to be delivered to Wales and indeed has only recently begun test runs from Vivarail Long Marston). This means a separate request will be needed for units 008 and 009 which are still under construction for TFW Don't understand. Has 008 been approved or not?
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 1, 2020 23:32:47 GMT
The Category M (Trolley Vehicles) driving licence still exists, I suspect the only holders are those involved in museums where they still operate. You don't need a DVSA licence to drive a trolleybus (or any other vehicle} on private land, so I doubt many staff at Sandtoft (or the other two sites which have working trolleybus infrastructure) have them.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 1, 2020 20:51:57 GMT
our side pointed out that there was no such animal, trolleybuses resting legally on set of highly specific local Acts, some Construction and Use regulations, and a quaint definition used by the Railway Inspectorate. Fresh legislation would be needed.... Curious, as I recall when I took my driving test in 1979 trolleybuses were mentioned as one of the categories one could be tested on (with tasks such as making right and left turns without dewiring............), so the DVLA certainly knew what they were. That was only seven years after the last trolleybus ran on a public road in the UK (in Bradford) but I wonder if anyone is still qualified to drive one (and if not, how one would organise instruction and/or driving tests should such beasts ever make a comeback)
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 31, 2020 10:37:38 GMT
When this stock reaches the Central Line (about 2035 at the present rate?), won't the reduced size and extreme curvature at Bank on the old CLR section be a constraining factor? The new trains will have much shorter cars and be able to fit the Bakerloo and Central but with varying train length of course, possibly 9 and 11 respectively. Shorter carriages can fit the curves more closely, so The Gap should be smaller.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 30, 2020 8:56:22 GMT
Usually in Class 312 trains with open blinds behind the train driver so that it was possible to enjoy a forward view, but occasionally in a Class 309 where there was a choice of open saloon or side corridor compartment seating - both being features that do not apply to Class 345 Crossrail trains. Not really a fair comparison as the services once operated by 309s and 312s were not the all-stations services that that 345s are inheriting. "Dusty Bins" (321s) or 360s are standard fare today, with the prospect of 720s to come. Compartments haven't been seen on the all-stations services since the line was electrified in 1949, and even then they didn't have side corridors!
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 27, 2020 7:55:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 26, 2020 16:33:31 GMT
If Canary Wharf hadn't been redeveloped the DLR would never have been built. . It was the Jubilee Extension that was fu7nded by the developers of Canary Wharf. The DLR was planned and construction started before O&Y started on the Wharf.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 23, 2020 16:02:58 GMT
I think that is a definite as platform heights are being changed and the tube stock will not be compatible. Are you sure about changing platform heights to suit the Class 484s? I would have thought it would be far cheaper to achieve any boarding height change by lowering the trackbed formation/ballast depth - rather than messing with the platforms with all the attendant impacts on attached buildings and access ramps. That's probably what they'll do. The effective platform height will be increased, whether you raise the platform or lower the track bed.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 22, 2020 10:00:28 GMT
If the service suspension is until March 31st, and 483s won't be able to run after the work is done, that suggests that 484s will be running in service on and from April 1st (Maundy Thursday).
And you have until Sunday January 3rd to ride a 483.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 11, 2020 6:37:09 GMT
The Tube History link above suggests only one 1938TS trailer was converted to work with the 1960 stock - in fact there were four: three (4921, 4927, 4929) on the Woodford shuttle, and a fourth (TRC912) for the track recording train, although it was never used and a 73TS car was used instead.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 10, 2020 13:07:53 GMT
It doesn't need to store the whole fleet, just that part of it that cannot be accommodated at London Road and Stonebridge Park. I know London Road is tight for space, but I've got no idea about Stonebridge Park. But these 60 are in addition to known requirements, which includes 40 for the Bakerloo
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 6, 2020 12:01:58 GMT
'S' was chosen as a letter not previously used in the sub-surface stock alphabet It was, but not since 1950. Ex Metropolitan Railway experimental saloon cars 2598 and 2599 (originally 198 and 199) built in 1925 as prototypes for the stock for the Watford extension - the production series were compartment stock so these two remained unique. They latterly worked with control trailer 6557 (originally MR 106) as a 3-car train on the East London Line. I assume the "S" and "T" designations for ex-Metropolitan main line stock were coined some time after the introduction of the new R stock in 1947, but before the withdrawal of this unit three years later, although oddly the former MR Circle Line stock, the last of which ran on New Years Eve 1950, seems never to have been allocated a letter. (Source, Brian Hardy's "Underground Train file) Letters A, C, D and H have also been recycled, but curiously I and J were never used. H was originally used, in 1925, for reconditioned B stock (being the next available letter), and later for any stock still with Hand-operated doors.
|
|