|
Post by t697 on May 3, 2019 18:28:14 GMT
Latimer Road. The far platform is the Eastbound and the ICSS beacon of 4 yellow 'tags' is visible.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 28, 2019 22:32:27 GMT
Sounds like the traction motors will have a hard time plus the door closing needs slowing down at the end it was a bit quick If they are still using the pneumatic door operators, I think it looks like the hydraulic motion damper at the door filmed closing has partly failed or been removed.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 28, 2019 22:21:27 GMT
There are a number of reasons why a "trial" could be difficult, which I'm sure are obvious to Operators, Engineers and those paying for temporary ATC settings... ATC will have been commissioned here by the time the new platform is ready.
I don't know what the permanent platform edge barrier would look like. I'd have thought the ones at the north end of Baker St 2 and 3 wouldn't be thought in keeping with the Heritage nature of South Ken but then the neat one at Putney Bridge 3 might be thought too puny to discourage foolhardy actions. Somewhere in between perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 28, 2019 18:36:24 GMT
Current scope at South Ken for SSR provides a new platform (numbered 5, at least for now) the other side of the existing EB track. There will be a physical platform both sides of that track but the existing platform 2 will be barriered off at the platform edge and the train doors will only open on to the new platform. The island platform will then only serve the WB track, as platform 1. The new lift to that platform will meet the platform in the vicinity of the last car of an EB train, so unless Selective Door Opening (SDO) was invoked, it wouldn't be practicable to retain door opening both sides of EB trains. And because of the way S stock SDO is configured, you'd have to have the same SDO doors not opening both sides of the train which would be a waste of part of the new platform and a bad constraint on trains and passengers at South Ken EB, thus negating some or all of the project benefit.
I know there are those with other views, so I'll just take cover now!
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 17, 2019 20:46:06 GMT
D the same style of foot bridge is used Dagenham East to Elm Park Picture seems to be taken before the invasion of the new cable route galvanised supports for ATC.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 17, 2019 15:57:52 GMT
A - Bayswater? D - Between Rayners lane and Eastcote? Or least on the Uxbridge branch. Photo appears to be from an S stock.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 10, 2019 4:59:11 GMT
C - Pinner?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 1, 2019 19:20:42 GMT
As stated, 7100 was fully repaired. In fact despite a few other minor damage incidents and repairs over the years, the full 75 train D stock fleet was intact at the start of the D stock withdrawals.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 29, 2019 6:17:12 GMT
Ruislip the only truly double ended one.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 28, 2019 7:29:39 GMT
If Upminster is not the odd one out,then how about Beckton as it maintains two different passenger fleet types and is not on LUL. Or Ruislip, the only one of the four in West London. Or SMD, built for and still maintaining its first fleet of trains.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 27, 2019 16:20:07 GMT
Can't remember the specs of what was fitted, but I do know 890V is a myth haha. I have heard rumours of the regen braking peaking at 1000V+ (from a very reliable source) but unsure for how long that voltage was sustained.. Could you explain the "890V is a myth" and "peaking at 1000V+" please? If you don't think it appropriate to do so in public, PM me. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 27, 2019 16:03:16 GMT
B - Ruislip Depot? Which may mean the coloured obscuration bars are a clue.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 25, 2019 23:01:27 GMT
Train rolled onto Richmond this morning claiming to be for Chalfont & Latimer fast. Not sure an S7 has ever been to C&L! Once the driver had changed ends, it proclaimed, more prosaically, but rather more plausibly, that it would only go to Tower Hill. Most S7s did a 'rattle run' from Neasden to Amersham and back when originally delivered a few years ago. But they were empty stock then. C&L Fast is code 008 or 009 on the selection screen while Tower Hill from Richmond is 891 and the trip to Richmond 744. Something odd there with fingers or software... Possibly only the first digit of the Next Trip got entered so it got taken as 008.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 25, 2019 17:22:00 GMT
The S Stock is Bombardier, this is Siemens. I know, but they were essentially both required to solve the same problem - installing an evacuation system whilst still allowing the driver to see signals in confined stations. As a matter of interest, would there be the same sighting problems at those stations if the trains were S stock? (According to Wikipedia, an S7 is about 4 metres shorter than a 717). There was a huge amount of work on sighting signals and other 'sighted assets' from S stock for their introduction. This meant lots of analysis, some asset relocation, some co-acting signals, lots of sighting runs and lots of platform integration testing. Bit of a surprise if the Class 717 project has not fully planned for the same thing. And you might be amazed how much had to be spent even for the S8 routes just for a train 2m longer and with the driver sitting further back with slightly narrowed sightlines.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 24, 2019 16:26:42 GMT
It should be able to take 1000v DC quite easily I believe it has 750V mods when it was overhauled at Acton Works, but might be wrong. I understand that it did have mods for operation on 750V supply / 890V Regenerative braking from S stock, but the spec for the works to the 1938 heritage train didn't include 1000V. Would need another assessment.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 23, 2019 5:35:22 GMT
Interesting stuff from goldenarrow and latecomer. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 22, 2019 19:53:54 GMT
I've noticed that driving style on London Overground (LO) Class 378 Electrostar trains seems to be extremely cautious or defensive, with very low accelerating and braking rates used. That's as well as the rather non-metro dwell times! The defensive driving seems much more so than with other Operators' Electrostars. Is there some reason to this?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 20, 2019 19:14:43 GMT
Vehicle On Board Controller. It's the bit of kit that drives the train. There's two per train, one in each driving cab. Just to avoid concern; The CSDE function is provided by the ATC in the ATC commissioned areas. What about when in RM (Restricted Mode) - say for example the VOBC's stop communicating and we're forced to drive in RM mode, do we then rely on the current tags to provide the CSDE (correct side door enable) function? Sorry to all for my VOBC gaffe. I'd thought it had been given in full not too far further back in the thread. On the CSDE in RM question; Yes the current beacon tags will give CSDE if the train is in RM. Longer term they are due to be removed though. I think the training/briefing material may mention that but emphasise the Emergency Open process.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 20, 2019 5:47:58 GMT
Hackney Downs on LO, the rest on LU?
Or, Tooting Bec the only one with the tracks in tunnel.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 20, 2019 5:42:23 GMT
Currently there is normally a change from the front VOBC to the rear one at Wood Lane WB. More generically it's at the first station after the boundary. No plan to change this. Count it as a feature! What is the intention behind this switch? Typically wheelsets towards the rear of a train experience slightly better wheel/rail adhesion, due to the passage of wheelsets in front. Therefore the tachometer axles associated with the rear VOBC are slightly less likely to experience slip, thus improving reliability of operation. Apparently it was too much of a tear up of existing proven software to do this as default on start up or entry to the ATC area so it's done at the next station. Once in the ATC area it does swap ends again at the reversing terminus. So the quirk will go away when there are no migration boundaries left.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 19, 2019 20:44:26 GMT
Yeah you're right, I only clearly saw the front carriage. My mistake thinking that they were all the way down the train. Anyway, doesn't seem like too big a deal, I'm sure they'll sort that one out in time. I doubt they will tbh it has been like that from the start. However the s stock does not use CSDE system for the doors in ATO running the doors are controlled by the Signalling system so that may fix that problem Just to avoid concern; The CSDE function is provided by the ATC in the ATC commissioned areas. The Door Not in Use indicators come on relatively briefly if the ATC controller (VOBC) that is the Active one is changing to the other one, or at the entry station, when the VOBC becomes Active as the mode is switched from tripcock to an ATC mode. Currently there is normally a change from the front VOBC to the rear one at Wood Lane WB. More generically it's at the first station after the boundary. No plan to change this. Count it as a feature!
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 17, 2019 17:32:57 GMT
Yes, I think you've nailed it. It's the intentional hysteresis built into the system to stop it hunting (i.e. reaching speed, coasting, dropping speed by 0.00001 m/s, motoring for a fraction of a second, etc.). It would seem to imply that the granularity of the available power increments is not small enough for the system to select a power that would enable the train to maintain a constant speed under the given conditions. I bumped into Dstock7080 at Earls Court earlier and as he rightly pointed out, S stock tend to maintain their maximum speed when driven manually much better that D stocks used to (on D stock the motors would noticeably drop out and then cut back after losing 3 or 4mph). So actually, S stock may well not hunt around. As we’re now into public service, perhaps someone can go and check it out for us! JL and NL are less jerky than when TBTC was first commissioned, but it is still noticeable at times and in some locations. There are several reasons why the Hammersmith - Latimer Road area as now commissioned is not jerky in speed control, but this may not follow through forever and everywhere, given the likely need for further system tuning to achieve the final run time and train frequency requirements.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 17, 2019 17:26:37 GMT
- no red or green signals at the ends of platforms.- white lights illuminate on every car when the train is about to depart. - more accurate information on station DMis, real time information able to be broadcast from Hammersmith Control centre. Thanks. How annoying that is going to be at Hammersmith. Now everyone will have to run for the train and everyone is going to pile in through the first set of doors and walk inside the train to wherever they want to sit. Unless they have had the foresight to provide a 'this train is about to depart' indicator to give passengers some seconds warning - although that would probably be counter-productive as it would end up with more people hurling themselves at closing doors. Actually, while catching an ATC train at Hammersmith (H&C) this very afternoon, I realised the Ready to Depart indicators on the cars can be better than trying to see a starter signal that may be part obscured to a passenger. Also an alert T/Op would press Close as soon as the starter went green if no-one was actually stepping aboard. With the RTD lights coming on when there is nominally 10 seconds to go there is time for a passenger to press the nearest door open button on an autoclosed door and board. It will be interesting to see if that reduces the number boarding at the back and walking through. Also the platform DMI's at Hammersmith did seem to be correctly stating which was the next train out.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 14, 2019 4:32:46 GMT
The Epping-Ongar section didn't close until 1994 so when the DVA was scoped it was likely not certain the service would be withdrawn. Spot on. There was still a possibility it would stay open. And to my knowledge 92TS did go to Ongar twice, but only as test trains testing low voltage operation. I wonder whether the new upgrade will remove North Weald and Ongar from the destinations library.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 13, 2019 7:06:08 GMT
The now very tatty Hillingdon station?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 12, 2019 18:12:30 GMT
Still on the thread but a different aspect; In the 1910 film it's clear the track layout at Baker St is different to today. I understand the main changes were made about 1914. Anyone got before and after plans or diagrams?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 9, 2019 10:23:24 GMT
t697 , Fair enough, it must have had to come a long way from the planned introduction date many moons ago. Ben , 36tph seems to be the go to limit for the CTBC products provided by Thales to London Underground at the moment. In the digital world SelTrac can reach over 40 tph but that's negating the very real complexities of the SSR. Yes, a long way indeed when you recall this is the third ATC that has had substantial integration design done for S stock! Present contract is for 32 trains per hour capability including some recovery margins on the most intensive sections, top and bottom of the Circle and out to Barking. Obviously less on the branches. Obviously performance with the busy junctions is the biggest restriction to capability apart from the usual limits from accelerating and braking rates and station dwell times.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 8, 2019 19:57:56 GMT
There's no real way to avoid this but T/OP's are going have a bit of a faff once Migration Areas 2 and 3 are live with Edgware Road terminators needing to be in ATO for the last stretch over Praed Street Junction similar with Metropolitan line services finishing at Baker Street as will any District line services rounding off at Tower Hill. Surely it's the number of Migration Boundaries per trip that makes the 'faff' factor rather than how close it is to the last station? In any case, the Boundary switch over is very simple and now working well, at least in the recent test and Ops proving weekends.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 5, 2019 18:56:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 4, 2019 23:37:07 GMT
I thought RVAR only requires an audible for door closing on trains like 1972TS and that opening alerts were only required when a door 'beomes openable by a passenger'. Since the doors always open and close under Train Operator control on 1972TS, only a close alert is needed. Also the 1972TS already has a close audible doesn't it? The old Sonalert type. Certainly some may have failed and be due replacement.
|
|