|
Post by scheduler on Jul 19, 2021 23:52:04 GMT
Post (and johnlinford's subsequent post) temporarily moved pending discussion on compliance with ProBoards' policy on Covid discussion.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jul 14, 2021 19:08:21 GMT
If management perceive the issue with detrainment is to avoid the driver having contact with T/Op, then as the W&C steps-back in the depot, that's not going to be problem. The main issue really is carrying passengers over non-passenger legal points and track.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jul 14, 2021 18:48:58 GMT
With trial operations now underway, various details have now made their way into the public domain with the conformation of a 6 tph peak and 5 tph off-peak service on the NLE when it first opens rising to a 12 tph peak and 10 tph off-peak service after in 2022 (presumably after the Bank Branch blockade). Mill Hill East is also confirmed as getting the remainder of it's direct service restored. TFL Press Release hereDoes this mean that Battersea trains will go to Mill Hill East? Sort of a self-contained service? That is not outside the realms of possibility, the problem would be the speedy reversal required at Mill Hill East on 6tph. Since Finch C to MHE is 2.5 mins run time - that's 5 mins gone on a return trip. Train operator needs minimum 5 mins to change ends, so that makes 10 mins for a through train to be off the branch and the next one to run in. That is 6tph, but as you see there's no slack -so it's risky. 5tph would have some margin in it, and so very possible that Battersea - MHE is a self-contained service.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jul 14, 2021 18:24:29 GMT
I think something will surely be cascaded to the Bakerloo line. Not sure whether it'll be Northern or Jub stock. Jub stock is 7 car, as is Bakerloo, so more likely to be that in my opinion, plus easy transfer available at Baker Street. But I don't think anyone knows for sure.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jul 8, 2021 22:45:55 GMT
I’m trying to remember the last time I was aware of a train using p2 or p3 from the east! Two booked into platform 3 from Baker Street (one empty), also commonly used to put IR Circles in the correct platform if they've started back at Moorgate. Two are also booked into platform 2 ex Paddington and on to Baker Street in service. Nothing booked platform 3 west to east reversal (or, indeed, straight east ex Paddington). Edit: And it turns out there’s several short tripping to Edgware Road and then reversing west to east in 3 today! I wrote those in, hope it didn't cause too much confusion.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jul 1, 2021 22:57:16 GMT
Why won't they be able to? I thought it was all digital displays at Richmond Not in Network Rail's computer system.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jul 1, 2021 22:54:25 GMT
London Underground timetables and operations have spent many years proving that simple repetitive routings make line control in times of disruption simpler, and ease recovery after disruption. Having multiple interlocking routes is a recipe for disaster, and would put reliability and recoverability of service in doubt. So have the passengers do a cross platform change, not the trains works out better. There is no spare platform capacity at Edgware Road to reverse another or higher level of service, remember 1 bay platform reverses the Circle Line, the other bay platform reverses the District, with each on a 10 minute service pattern, and needing at least 5 minutes (preferably more) to reverse the train, there's no room for anything else. On the odd occasion at the service start-up (and on frequency changes during the day) there might be an odd train from Ealing run to Edgware Road, but there's a total block on anything to/from Richmond running to Edgware Road.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jun 28, 2021 0:38:38 GMT
How about because the platform indicators at Richmond cannot display a destination of Edgware Road.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on May 25, 2021 17:26:32 GMT
It's early days yet, but it's pretty safe to say the new timetable has solved most of the issues the line has faced in recent years, the turn around times make a massive difference. There have been some unexpected benefits, there is a train that stables at London Road Depot during the off-peak. The Train Managers at Elephant are now able to assess Elephant drivers as part of the competence management system. Before this involved both driver and manager having to travel up to Stonebridge Park Depot. There are a number of early turns at Elephant that also stable off-peak at Stonebridge Park now. The above are both very useful for a training and licencing requirements and allow trainees to do their road test at their home depot, with many more duties suitable for the 'office hours' that the Training and Development department works. Last but not least, sometimes less is more, so we should be able to run a more reliable service for passengers, which at the end of the day is what really matters! Sounds like there's a lot of positives there. My colleagues done a good job on the timetable itself. Nice to get some good feedback.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on May 17, 2021 20:00:29 GMT
I just ordered it, used to live at Carpenders Park.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on May 17, 2021 19:11:37 GMT
For those unfamiliar here's the timetable saga of the last few years on the Bakerloo Line.
Once upon a time there was LO EUS-WFJ every 20 mins, which melded perfectly well with LU's 6tph Harrow and 3tph to STP. Then someone decided the LO was going to increase the EUS-WFJ to 4tph, but that the LU service levels were to remain unchanged. You don't need to be a maths genius to figure out that doesn't work very well. And indeed it doesn't. The resulting timetable was a total compromise, the LO services were 13/17 instead of clockface 15's. The LU's to Harrow were every 10, but alternate trains were reversed on minimum allowed layover. As were about 40% of QUP trains. The STP trains all had massive layovers. All Elephant step-back's were 2 trains. And the result of this timetable was 1. Line controllers complained that after disruption major or minor they couldn't get back on time. 2. Drivers via unions were complaining at never finishing their duty on time, and threatening strike action over the timetable. A stop-gap measure to prioritise LU over LO trains north of QUP and one train stripped from the off-peak eased the situation a little. But in reality a new timetable was needed, and this is it. The line asked for and got the beautifully melded 4tph LO, 4tph Harrow 4tph STP. And the consequent reduction in off-peak south of QUP by approx. 1 train per hour. Step-back is increased to 3 trains at Elephant. All of this makes the whole timetable as robust as the version back the days of 3tph LO. Unfortunately when the duty rostas were done this reduced the required number of drivers by 1 or 2. Why the unions complain and threatened strike action when the timetable was unreliable, then we give them what they asked for, they complain and threaten strike action again I don't know, can't fathom and don't comprehend. Anyway the slight reduction is nothing to do with COVID and there are no plans to re-increase it again, until someone finds the funds for the Bakerloo Extension, the line is re-signalled and more trains and services are needed.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jan 31, 2021 19:29:40 GMT
Part of total track replacement at Queen's Park, including North Shed. What you haven't seen, but has been happening is the 3 weeks or so of prep work done for this every night, which has caused 1 of the Queen's Park stablers to be at Stonebridge Park, and the rest of Queen's Park stabling to be reshuffled to keep North Shed empty.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jan 5, 2021 23:30:32 GMT
I suspect that they will detrain at Waterloo and run empty to Lambeth North, reversing in the platforms there, as if they were Elephant & Castle. Because there is a scissors crossover north of Lambeth North, they should be able to run to pretty much the same service level as currently. If for some reason they can't access Lambeth North station platforms then they would have to reverse in London Road depot. Since the depot is single access road, with very low speed limit it probably makes very little difference whether they reverse in the depot or on the access road. They would have to double-end the train on departure from Waterloo in order to reverse on the access road. Frankly with detrainment time, platform re-occupation time and the reversal time, even if double ended, and the depot access road re-occupation time, I can't see them going better than a 4 minute headway, which is substantially below normal peak service level. 15 trains per hour versus a normal 22 in the morning peak. Could be a pretty painful period of construction.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Oct 17, 2020 16:14:55 GMT
I was thinking it was a disguise to get some cascaded stock for the Bakerloo Line. New trains for Jub, then cascade old Jub to Northern, which needs extra trains for the extension to Battersea. Then spare old Jub or Northern could goto Bakerloo. I was figuring something like that. But all just guess-work.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Oct 17, 2020 16:06:24 GMT
Today's signalling would not support those level of service on either Bakerloo or Northern.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Oct 15, 2020 23:19:15 GMT
Will more than 30tph be required on any line post covid? I hope so .... I hope everything gets back to normal after covid. A grade separated junction is all very well, but it is timetabling the service integrations at Camden Town that are the actual restrictions super-high tph running. That is why the split is proposed, a necessary evil to satisfy the higher density service required Kennington - Morden and Bank branches. I agree it can't (or shouldn't) go ahead until Camden is rebuilt.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Oct 15, 2020 22:49:29 GMT
The Bakerloo project as an active project will be stopped at the safeguard the route phase. I'm not surprised, it might come back after Covid has bitten the dust, it might not. My crystal ball is no better than anyone else's. I really hope it does come back, and a pity they now loose the open the extension along with ordering new trains, as they could have chucked re-signalling in at the same time and got a super upgraded service out of it. Poor Bakerloo - throughout its history it has always had its southern extension kicked into the long grass and got hand me down rolling stock.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jul 6, 2020 22:59:10 GMT
There's some newly installed point work that hasn't been used before to commission as part of SMA3 - namely the east end of middle platform road at Tower Hill, now has connection to both OR and IR, so trains will potentially be able to reverse west to east at Tower Hill. Obviously these points and paths over them become available as part of SMA3. They've now been in situ and unused for quite some time, so I'm sure that will add complication to bringing in SMA3, over and above updating train op's on driving in SMA areas and the added complication of social distancing making in-cab training difficult (a mild understatement).
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Feb 29, 2020 1:15:50 GMT
Once the service is delayed, or a signalling problem causes no service between Parsons Green and Wimbledon the following things become issues for line controllers:- 1. Keeping drivers on path, so that you don't end up with drivers out of hours and thus a train stood down in a platform. 2. Parsons Green cannot reverse the full Wimbledon service, probably about half of it. To deal with issue 2 the usual preferred option is to let the Wimbledon - City (Tower Hill or further east) keep running and use the sidings at Parsons Green to keep these trains on booked times. This means the Edgware Road service needs to reverse elsewhere, either you send it to Olympia or you reverse it at Earl's Court, both these options are disruptive. And you can't run every 10 minutes to Olympia (single line branch and time to reverse makes it not work). Also shortened service needs less trains, this means stick a couple of trains in the sidings north of Parsons Green out the way, and stick 2 in the HSK terminating platforms. IF you still have too many trains a diversion to either Richmond or Ealing, will still get the train back to Earls Court on time. Result: probably running every 20 mins to Edgware Road, and Wimbledon - City trains reversing at PAG. Now you choose, trains out of service and starve east end of the line of its normal service, or send extras to Richmond and Ealing. That's the gerneral fix, but you still have to keep drivers at the right place for their meal relief and end of duty, so reversing at ERC is thus inevitable.
Whatever the line controller does it is guranteed someone will think they could have done better. That includes drivers, travelling public, and just about everybody else who hasn't seen line controllers in action in the control room when an incident occurs. One thing is for sure everybody complains, often because they think of themselves, rather than seeing the holistic picture of the whole line. The fact is there is no perfect solution to any problem, because someone is always affected and they always say "why me?" So if a line controller has decided that a train should reverse at ERC, there will be a reason, could be a very complicated one which made not be obvious, but it is hardly a decision taken lightly.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Feb 16, 2020 13:05:46 GMT
Will this allay the union concerns about fatigue and associated issues? That's certainly the general idea, whether it will or not - who knows? The main problem with the Bakerloo at the moment is that 6tph to Harrow and 3 tph to Stonebridge Park does not mix very well with the Overground's new 4tph Euston - Watford Jcn, which used to be 3tph. A few ideas to tackle this have been floated, but in my opinion what is really needed is a NR re-signalling at least as far as Harrow to allow 2 minute headways instead of 4 / 4.5 minutes north of Stonebridge Park, and 3 minutes Queen's Park to Stonebridge Park. If they could add-in bay platforms at Harrow and Stonebridge whilst they are at it that would solve nearly all the problems.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jan 16, 2020 1:16:46 GMT
No updates of revised plans have reached us.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jan 16, 2020 0:46:42 GMT
Someone earlier in the thread asked if C&H T/Ops are trained for Aldgate terminating p'fms. And the answer is yes. There are scheduled middle platform reversers at Aldgate in the C&H timetable, and engineering works that require outstabling often put a C&H train to stable overnight in Aldgate platform 2 and / or 3.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Jan 3, 2020 20:33:17 GMT
The new Working Timetable says one of the two 4 car units is a De-Icer
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Nov 22, 2019 20:10:43 GMT
A siding reverser requires tipping out time - depending on intended number of platform staff this could be anything from 1 (2 platform staff assisting, e.g. Queen's Park) to 4 minutes (driver only minimum), then the time to shunt to the reversing road (usually 1 minute), then the minimum reversal time (5 minutes) then 1 minute to shunt to departure platform. All this is the reason why middle road reversing platforms or bays or similar are a good idea. Bakerloo at Stonebridge Park and Harrow & Wealdstone really suffers for the lack of them. North Greenwich, Tower Hill, Barking have great examples of their usefulness.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Nov 13, 2019 1:06:11 GMT
There won't be any Platform Edge Doors, they are a nuisance on the Jub. The Bakerloo is definitely ahead of Central for new rolling stock - no both lines at the same time. No old trains down the new tracks. It has to be new fleet, then open the extension, then re-signal rest of line, then run whole line as automated at least as far as north as Queens Park. Number of trains - currently 31 required for peak service. Proposed 27tph suggests an extra 9 required for existing route, extension probably 9 more on top of that - suggests a required new fleet size of about 50 trains. Potentially the last batch for the extension, or for the frequency boost, whichever comes second, could be done later, as I think the plan is for the Picc, Bakerloo and Central to all get the same type of trains. So barring - minor tweeks between lines in terms of number of cars in the full unit, I expect they will stick with that plan - cheaper that way!
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Oct 11, 2019 18:51:28 GMT
The information paper I linked says 33% more trains on the Charing X branch which would be 32 tph compared to the 24 tph current peak service, suggesting the Moorgate service would be 16 tph in the peak. Given the spare drivers during the closure and the the ATO signalling on the Northern Line, would it be possible to put a driver in the rear cab at say, Camden, and have the train run in to Moorgate then able to be turned very quickly? Driver changes most likely at Old Street for a very fast Moorgate reversal. The current verbiage I am hearing is that "they" would like 16tph to Moorgate and 32tph via CHX, but it is not considered achievable by some quarters and a 15tph to Moorgate and 30tph via CHX is the preferred, more reliable, more robust option, which whilst challenging is at least more likely to work. The thing is ironically 16tph might just be possible with light passengers loads, but is probably too difficult in peak.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Oct 3, 2019 23:41:34 GMT
Surely it can't be too difficult to get Line Information Specialist's updates through to a non-LU station such as Richmond. The problem is, it won't fix Network Rail's signalling part, so it is not going to correct the departure monitors at the station. The platforming at Wimbledon and Richmond is entirely done by Network Rail, the platforms at these stations do not even appear in the District WTT. I entirely agree that a better solution to these problems needs to be found. Richmond branch is problematic, but the Wimbledon branch is virtually entirely LU, with the occasional empty stock movement over the bottom end of the route, surely it would be better if LU signalled and controlled this section.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Oct 3, 2019 23:09:13 GMT
Apparently Moorgate has a further difficulty for stepping back, which is that both driver cabs are in tunnel when the train is berthed in the platform, meaning the drivers have to enter/exit through the passenger doors. It is possible they might have to have the drivers board and alight at Old Street, in which case a very fast reversal maybe possible, so they might be able to hit 15tph, I think 16tph is really pushing it. Also the number of trains to/from Moorgate has to divide exactly into the number of trains running via CHX, otherwise the service won't mesh at Camden Town. So if it has to be 15tph Moorgate, it will have to be 30tph via CHX.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Sept 28, 2019 23:53:13 GMT
For those who haven't seen, London Reconnections did an article on the Northern line closure (and the impact of Crossrail delays). The article included their best-guess prediction for the timetable during the closure in both directions (which I was interested to see - I've been very curious about this question too, and asked about it on this forum last year). In the comments section of the London Reconnections article PoP (around 19 February) there's discussion of how the timetable could look during the southbound-only closure: in particular, whether there could be spare trains which make one extra northbound journey in the peaks (potentially terminating at Golders Green or Finchley Road East Finchley Finchley Central) before running back south when the timetable is less crowded. Well this will never work in practice, since drivers from a depot at a branch at the north end, have to return to the same depot. So unless you are going to waste driver resources by having the drivers step-back 2 trains at Moorgate, or have the trains themselves switch branches - which would go against keeping the service robust. I strongly suspect that the Moorgate service will have to be supplied from one branch exclusively.
|
|
|
Post by scheduler on Sept 17, 2019 23:40:38 GMT
Picc and District signalling will operate in some sort of combined manner, with one over the top of the other - no idea of the technical details, but I believe the intention is that when the shared track sections come on, both Picc and Districts or Mets will be able to operate on the same tracks under different signalling systems! I do know that the Picc's new control system - PICU will allow timings to a quarter minute precision, which is of course the case with 4LM new signalling.
|
|