|
Post by aslefshrugged on Nov 7, 2020 11:17:12 GMT
I believe I read somewhere (it might even have the business case) that if the DLR began operations today the ORR would have made PEDS a requirement and its allowed to continue (and expand) due to "grandfather rights". Indeed
Thing is the original DLR system had straight platforms and level gradients at stations which make for the easy installation of PEDs.
Unfortunately the expansion of the system over the years has rather ruined that with several stations now on curves, gradients or both.
If the DLR ever gets a further extension though I can see them being insisted on - just as the Jubilee line extension to Stratford has them even though the earlier bits don't
PEDs were only installed on the "tunnel section" stations on the Jubilee Line Extension, not on the three "open section" stations - Canning Town, West Ham and Stratford. When I was training to work on the JLE (Feb/Mar 1999) we were told that the primary reason for installing PEDS was to improve ventilation by reducing the "tunnel wind" effect (obviously not a problem in open section) and to reduce the amount of combustible materials on the track. Reducing passenger "intrusions" on the track was a secondary benefit.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Nov 6, 2020 18:11:20 GMT
I believe I read somewhere (it might even have the business case) that if the DLR began operations today the ORR would have made PEDS a requirement and its allowed to continue (and expand) due to "grandfather rights".
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Nov 1, 2020 10:08:58 GMT
TfL given £1.8bn for another five months, £905m grant and £95m loan. Negotiations will continue over future funding.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 31, 2020 11:36:08 GMT
A bulletin dated 30 October 2020 has gone up at West Ruislip. Seems this wasn't supposed to be displayed until Monday but an over-enthusiastic manager put it out two days early.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 31, 2020 4:15:17 GMT
Do all Leytonstone crew work the W&C, or only a select few, or link? All Leytonstone TOps are licenced to work the W&C apart from Night Tube part timers and the "700" duties are part of the roster. Some TOps prefer to work the W&C rather than the "Main" while others (like me) try to avoid the Drain as much as possible but we all have to go down there at least once every six months to keep our licences up to date.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 30, 2020 10:45:50 GMT
Until a few years ago the managers on the W&C came from the Bakerloo, when I asked why I was told that initially E&C had provided the drivers but that was before I joined the company in 1997.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 30, 2020 10:20:30 GMT
Please feel free to correct me if I am mistaken but I seem to recall that the City of London Corporation makes a financial contribution to the operating costs of the Waterloo & City and permanent closure is unlikely while that continues.
Current plans are for the trains and signalling to be replaced as part of the "New Train for London" project along with the Central, Bakerloo and Piccadilly Lines. With all four lines sharing the same rolling stock drivers for the W&C would come from Elephant & Castle Train Crew Depot (as was done before the Class 482s/1992TS were introduced) instead of Leytonstone, reducing the amount of travelling time at the beginning and end of each shift.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 29, 2020 12:36:19 GMT
ASLEF saying that Night Tube will definitely return, talks on a reintroduction date are continuing and we should get an exact date over the next few weeks.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 27, 2020 18:57:42 GMT
That never was the case as far as I'm aware, DLR trains are GoA3 and cannot operate without a member of staff on board.
(as ever if anyone has more information then I am ready to stand corrected).
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 27, 2020 8:55:36 GMT
And GOA3 doesn’t allow the abolition of duty schedules, which is one of the potential prizes which can be won from trying to increase automation. It may allow some simplifying, but ultimately you still have to have a name in a numbered box, and a body on every train - just like today. But see benefits on page 24 include: Faster schedule recovery, independent of the recovery of train operators to rosters or ‘duty sheets’. This suggests that Train Attendants are envisaged to not have a duty allocated to particular trains, but supervisor still needs to allocate staff to individual trains, and monitor their meal break requirement and end of duty relief. There will still be training, leave cover, etc to manage. The real advantage of full automation is operation like station lifts, rather than the staffed operation they once had. Perhaps that is not possible on LU trains. We had that when running the "Covid" service in the weeks after lockdown, booking on at our rostered time without knowing beforehand which train we'd be picking up but that was with a greatly reduced service, trying to run a full service on that basis would be an unholy nightmare for the manager on the desk and probably require far more TAs than the current number of TOps which would negate any savings on staff costs. N.B. last year DLR PSAs were on around £45k, only £10k less than TOps.
Page 14 it says the Piccadilly Line would "retain a pool of Train Operators for continued GOA2 operation between Uxbridge and South Harrow". Page 16 says that on the SSR "Mode changes will also be necessary on branches where interoperation with National Rail and Overground services occurs and where the Thales automatic signalling system is not yet installed" and on the Bakerloo "GoA2 operation would continue North of Queen’s Park where Network Rail track and platforms are shared with TfL London Overground trains". So there would still be drivers on driverless trains
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 26, 2020 12:38:27 GMT
GoA 0 On-sight; Similar to a tram running in street traffic
GoA 1 Manual; A train driver controls starting and stopping, operation of doors and handling of emergencies or sudden diversions.
GoA 2 Semi-automatic (STO); Starting and stopping are automated, but a driver operates the doors, drives the train if needed and handles emergencies. As used on Victoria, Central, Northern, Jubilee and parts of Sub Surface Lines
GoA 3 Driverless (DTO); Starting and stopping are automated, but a train attendant operates the doors and drives the train in case of emergencies. As used on DLR
GoA 4 Unattended train operation (UTO); Starting and stopping, operation of doors and handling of emergencies are all fully automated without any on-train staff
I've got the full 26-page document available on a PDF through the ASLEF Central East WhatsApp, I'll have a read at some point.
Page 14, TfL have decided that GoA4 wouldn't work so it would have GoA3 with Train Attendants like the DLR. So like the DLR those TAs would be able to join a union (probably RMT) and go on strike if they chose to.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 26, 2020 10:23:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 23, 2020 8:16:59 GMT
Confirmation that there will be an all-night service on New Year's Eve although if the pubs and bars are closing at 10pm I can't see why we're bothering
I won't be volunteering for that or for Boxing Day working.
When I started working for the Tube one of the things we were told during training was that around a third of passengers were commuters and the majority used the Tube on a less regular basis. While the current focus has been mostly on the fall in commuter numbers the effect of the loss of tourism has been overlooked.
Using figures from VisitBritain TfL have calculated that tourist spending in London will be down £10.9bn this year, £7.4bn from overseas and £3.5bn from domestic tourism. By comparison the estimated losses from commuter spending are just £1.9bn, £1.4bn from commuters living in London and £0.5bn from outside.
We might grumble about tourists but they are big part of London's economy.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 20, 2020 22:32:41 GMT
Also there will be no peak short-workings, so all trains will be Ruislip-Epping or Ealing-Hainault in future. All trains won't be Ruislip-Epping or Ealing-Hainault, if there were then West Ruislip and Loughton drivers would never work Hainault or Ealing Broadway branches while Hainault drivers would never work Epping or West Ruislip branches. In the event of a service suspension on a branch loads of drivers would be able to refuse to work as they weren't licenced for the route which is why the timetables have Hainault-West Ruislip and Epping-Ealing Broadway trains to mix things up so that everyone gets to cover all the routes.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 16, 2020 11:02:58 GMT
Are these scarcely-credible train frequencies somehow sacred? Perhaps a few fewer trains per hour, with relaxed timings end-to-end, would place less strain on the stock, and allow the existing signalling to continue in use? Some folk learn to make economies when money is tight. Not so TfL, seemingly. Perhaps making off-peak waiting times one minute longer will help? It won't hurt to add an extra minute for things to balance better and to preserve stock equipment? Overseas this has been done before, and off-peak speeds are also set slower between each stop so maybe that helps? We don't need to do it for long sections but for like stations between Shepherd's Bush and Liverpool Street slower speeds may be able to help preserve stock better during off-peak times since ppl aren't in a rush. They just have to adjust a little more time instead I'm not sure the Central Line's ancient ATP could handle different speeds for the peak and off peak.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 16, 2020 10:58:28 GMT
If the new Central line trains (NTfL) are shorter due to it being 7 carriages maybe there is a little more room? I've not heard how many cars the Central Line version of the NTfL are going to have but the length of the train is irrelevant, in order to run more trains they would have to shorten the gaps between block marker boards/signals which would require an awful lot of engineering work, so probably too expensive.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 16, 2020 7:13:05 GMT
At a time of financial tightening, can a case really be made for replacing the Central line trains within nine years, when they have still to be fitted with new motors and many other upgrades? The programme will take three or four years to complete. Surely these must be allowed to settle in to see if they achieve the improvement that is promised, before it is decided as wasted money and new trains are ordered. There is no plan for new signalling, which will be thirty years old by then! Could perhaps two dozen new trains be ordered to interwork and improve current frequencies? Apart from the thought of ordering new trains to a 30 year old design frequency is restricted by the "fixed block" signalling system which is only just coping with the current 34 tph. Also I doubt if there would be room for another two dozen trains at Hainault and Ruislip A good point about the Central Line overhaul program, I think this might be another reason why the Bakerloo stands a better chance of getting new trains under the CSR
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 15, 2020 23:12:30 GMT
TfL's CSR submission does include new stock for the Bakerloo, but a case still has to be made that the investment is the best use of that money. When the case for all four lines was drafted out, the Bakerloo didn't come up to scratch! The solution was to blend it with the Lewisham extension plans, since they must include a new fleet of trains to provide enough to interwork with the existing line. Now Lewisham fades into the distance, and the replacement fleet for current Bakerloo again stands alone. Last time the continual patching of the current fleet made more sense than a new fleet for such a short, relatively quiet line. Would there be enough of the 63 old Jubilee trains for the Bakerloo to get 36+? The Northern NLU2 wanted 17 more trains for 30tph on current service pattern, but CSR submission talks of line split for 30+tph. 36tph business case required 44 trains, and the lowest split option was 30 extra trains, so not enough for the Bakerloo. But assuming money for Camden station improved interchange is not available, the best no split service required 26 trains which leaves 37 for the Bakerloo. So it still remains a possibility in hard times! New trains for the Jubilee Line (1.9bn) + Northern Line splitting/Camden Town rebuild (£0.6-1.3bn) = (£2.5-3.2bn) New trains for the Bakerloo and Central (£1-2bn) Given the age of the 1972 stock, the lower overall cost and the current financial situation I think Bakerloo stands a much better chance of getting new trains than the Jubilee.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 15, 2020 12:20:38 GMT
Delivery of new trains for the Jubilee Line is scheduled for 2024-29 (page 21) while splitting the Northern Line and transfer of 1996s is scheduled for 2024-28 (page 33). New trains for the Bakerloo Line are scheduled for delivery "late 2020s" (page 19). Sending 1996s to the Northern Line is pretty simple as they're similar to the 1995s so the drivers won't require much stock training (if any). Sending 1996s to the Bakerloo would mean every driver retraining on the stock and by the time they'd finished that it would be time to start retraining for the new "Piccadilly/Bakerloo/Central/W&C" trains. Plus all the additional kit that would have to be installed on stations for in-cab CCTV, refitting trip cocks, etc. that's a lot of expenditure for trains that would only be there for a limited time In the current financial mess, I fear TFL are not going to be allowed to commit to spending on new stuff unless/until Bakerloo stock is clapped out and has reached pretty much a similar standard of delapidation as the 38 stock down on the Island Line. I am sure creative financing options will be explored and they might bring that date earlier, but inevitably such deals just add to the financial burden down the line (Pardon the pun).
So making best use of what you already have does indeed seem unavoidable and may indeed trigger rolling stock cascades of still serviceable stock. But I have my doubts about using former Jubillee Line stock on the Bakerloo Line - as they may not fit! The official dimensions in the publicly available TFL Rolling Stock Information Sheets (v4) show the "length over car ends" for Jubillee and Northern stock is a fair bit longer than the current Bakerloo 1972 stock. The longest cars 1995/1996 stock cars on Northern/Jubillee (they are the same) come in at 1.69 Metres longer than the longest 1972 cars (5 feet 6 1/2 inches old money). Sadly this is a bit more significant than the few inches mentioned above, and raises the question of whether they will fit the same kinetic envelope? Also sections of the Bakerloo include some fairly severe reverse curves (usually accompanied by squealing wheels) hence these locations may require some tunnel surgery to allow any longer stock regardless of whether it was taken from Jubillee or Northern fleets. The big attraction of the new walk-through trains ordered for the Piccadilly is they comprise relatively short segments which should help with the platform/train gap issue and also means they should fit the Bakerloo tunnels without any costly modification.
Only when Bakerloo stock becomes political embarrasing (anyone remember the "Misery Line") - which current politicians will conclude will be someone else's problem - then those in charge at the time will just have to find funds to place a run on order of the new Piccadily rolling stock trains but suitably shortened to fit Bakerloo platforms lengths. TfL's CSR submission included new stock for the Bakerloo and Central Lines (page 19) plus the new stock (aka "New Train for London) is designed for the Piccadilly, Central/W&C and Bakerloo lines so they won't need to be shortened.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 15, 2020 9:54:35 GMT
Delivery of new trains for the Jubilee Line is scheduled for 2024-29 (page 21) while splitting the Northern Line and transfer of 1996s is scheduled for 2024-28 (page 33). New trains for the Bakerloo Line are scheduled for delivery "late 2020s" (page 19).
Sending 1996s to the Northern Line is pretty simple as they're similar to the 1995s so the drivers won't require much stock training (if any). Sending 1996s to the Bakerloo would mean every driver retraining on the stock and by the time they'd finished that it would be time to start retraining for the new "Piccadilly/Bakerloo/Central/W&C" trains.
Plus all the additional kit that would have to be installed on stations for in-cab CCTV, refitting trip cocks, etc. that's a lot of expenditure for trains that would only be there for a limited time
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 12, 2020 8:13:57 GMT
Last Thursday ASLEF District 8 told reps that TfL have confirmed that the Bakerloo extension has been shelved due to the financial impact of the Coronavirus outbreak.
Unless Sadiq finds £2-3bn down the back of the sofa this is an ex-project
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 9, 2020 11:52:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 8, 2020 12:56:55 GMT
The argument seems to go that the Jubilee line is an important line, but its trains are becoming unreliable lately, so it is time to replace them. But never mind because we can use them on the Northern line, the most used of all lines! As if unreliability doesn't matter over there! Focusing on the proposed 96ts transfer to the Northern that would mean a total fleet size of 169 trains (106 95ts + 63 96ts). Would the Northern require all these trains in peak service or would this create a larger pool of spare trains that aren't required in peak service? Would this provide an opportunity to weed out and remove a number of particularly unreliable units on both the 95 and 96 stocks increasing reliability? The 7th added car would be removed and would the 96ts be based at one depot and the 95 at the others. I assume due to the high degree of similarity that both fleets would interwork but return to a specific depot out of service? Thanks for any knowledge as always Where are they going to fit them all? They've got Morden, Golders Green (depots), Edgware, Highgate and High Barnet (sidings) plus I seem to recall there are going to be two sidings at Battersea. How many trains do they actually have room for?
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 7, 2020 20:22:31 GMT
If the politicians stayed out of business a lot more people would have been on the dole instead of on furlough It's due a lot to the politicians that we are in this mess to start with Our politicians are elected so the voters are responsible ..()Not sure what any of this has to do with ASLEF's strike ballot but some people on this this forum love to digress...
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 7, 2020 10:21:00 GMT
I wonder though, would some 1996 stock be used on the Piccadilly as emergency replacement stock since I doubt the 73 would last any looooonger reliably...or at least the 1995s can be transported via the King’s Cross loop onto the picc If you transferred 1996 or 1995 stock to the Piccadilly you'd first have to train the Piccadilly IOps on that stock then they'd have to train the other TOps. By the time they've done that it wouldn't be long before the new stock arrived (2023) and the whole training process would have to start again. During that time the IOps and TOps would have to spend time away from their normal duties and I suspect the Piccadilly is just as short of drivers as the Central Line. The 1995/96s would also need to be refitted with tripcocks which I believe were removed (please correct me if I'm wrong)
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 7, 2020 5:56:59 GMT
A higher capacity Jubilee line fleet to follow upon the new Picc trains must mean new platform edge door layout, and overnight change from old to new trains at the extension tunnel stations. I believe the change from 6-car to 7-car trains was done over the Christmas/New Year break. I imagine that the door layout of the new trains will be identical to that of the 1996 stock as changing the PEDs would be ridiculously expensive, would take weeks/months with massive disruption to services.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 3, 2020 18:01:00 GMT
I'd be interested to know TfL's reasoning for prioritising DLR to Thamesmead over Bakerloo line to Hayes. Seems Bakerloo line is more "shovel ready" than the DLR extension. I'm struggling to find the details of what the planned benefits are for the upgrades of North Action and Canning Town are. Does anyone know please? The estimated cost of the DLR extension is "Around £800m" with delivery scheduled for "2026-2030" The Bakerloo extension would cost an estimated £2-3bn but is dependent on new trains as there isn't enough 1972 stock to run an extended service. Also if the extension is built I somehow doubt they'll be installing coloured lights and tripcocks so the rest of the Bakerloo would need a signal upgrade. From page 32 of the proposal
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 2, 2020 17:44:18 GMT
Looking through the finance committees submission, it's clear that the timeframes have been very carefully chosen to only talk about projects deliverable within this decade to appeal to the kind of short term planning the Central Government machine is living by at the present time.
And which unlock opportunities for development. The DLR to Thamesmead has been cited as an example of this and stands as the odd man out amongst the plans given everything else is about maximising the use of the current network.
Unfortunately because the already the Bakerloo extension passes through is already heavily built up, opportunities for big housing developments are limited meaning that the overall BCR is relatively poor compared to other initiatives which although not seemingly that impressive require far less in the way of infrastructure costs.
According to the proposal there's lots of scope for development:- Piccadilly Line signals "Enables more than 20,000 homes to be delivered." New trains on the Jubilee Line "This supports delivery of 15,000 new homes and frees up the current Jubilee line fleet to be used on the Northern line. DLR extension "Supporting up to 20,000 new homes across the Thamesmead and Abbey Wood and Royal Docks and Beckton Riverside Opportunity Areas." North Acton Station Upgrade "This development, supporting 6,000 homes" Canning Town Station Upgrade "This scheme, which will support up to 10,000 homes planned within walking distance of the station" West London Orbital "This new orbital connection, supporting 14,000 housing units".
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 2, 2020 13:34:23 GMT
Looking through the finance committees submission, it's clear that the timeframes have been very carefully chosen to only talk about projects deliverable within this decade to appeal to the kind of short term planning the Central Government machine is living by at the present time. I suppose it would be intivatble in the current climate for this to be a survival mode pitch aimed at preserving the fabric of the network which is probably why the Bakerloo line extension was omitted as even its most optimistic time frames would have put it past 2030. What this whittled down proposal shows is that you really can't shirk upgrade works on a system like LU for too long before the network is compromised. Given Andy Byford's track record in New York, I hope he can pull it out the hat in London too. This really does feel like last chance saloon for TfL. I don't see why this is the "last chance saloon", if responsibility for transport in London is taken away from TfL then it becomes the responsibility of the DfT, the Secretary of State for Transport and ultimately the Prime Minister. Much easier for the government to hand over the money and let the Mayor take the blame when things go wrong!
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 2, 2020 12:43:42 GMT
Trains were held outside Woodford in both directions last night due to a passenger stripping naked on the platform.
I don't know if it that had anything to do with the shuttles or the traction problems but I don't remember ever hearing that one in the last 22 years.
|
|