|
Post by metrailway on Sept 12, 2011 13:38:16 GMT
Metrailway, you made an interesting point about the 2car Chilterns being crowded. Chiltern is required to keep crowding to a specified level as part of their franchise agreement. Does this apply on the Met/GC line? If so this could suggest that TfL is attempting to push any problem onto Chiltern for it to solve. Yes Ben, Chiltern are required to use 'reasonable endeavors' to prevent 'excessive overcrowding' on all the trains it runs. The franchise agreement doesn't state how DfT measures this. The problem is for Chiltern is that they are short on stock, due to Evergreen 3 demand so any extra cars on off-peak services is very hard to achieve. If Chiltern order extra 172s from Derby they can't be run on the Met as they can't be fitted with tripcocks. The franchise states that Chiltern is not permitted to change its own timetable which would cause existing Chiltern passengers to use the Met. However, as the Met is not accountable to DfT, there is no agreement to prevent the Met changing it's timetable to force existing Met passengers on Chiltern services.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 12, 2011 0:07:57 GMT
So by that merit the Piccadilly Line should call at Ravenscourt Park, Stamford Brook, Turnham Green and Chiswick Park? The District Line (for the first three at least) provides a decent service as it is. It's quite a different scenario - not least to mention there isn't really the capacity to thrust the Piccadilly Line's full service down that way as well! Cooperman, you seem to have get again jumped my point. The top end of the Met is no more special than anywhere else on the line. Whining because you have a whole seven minutes slapped on your journey time to benefit people other than you? I might be coming across a bit grouchy but the whole attitude from the people in zones 8/9 seems to be sod everyone else, I want my fast trains! The changes are off-peak, like I also said in my post. They are improving peak journey times and capacity with the S stock, not that you'll see all of that until the resignalling is complete and in full service. Like I said before, there's a lot of fresh air carried on the Met in the off-peak. If you're in a rush to get somewhere, use Chiltern. Marylebone is a short couple of minutes walk away from Baker Street. Lets play out a scenario: The next train leaving Amersham is an all stations Met. It leaves with a handful of people, as everyone going to London is advised to wait for the quicker Chiltern arriving in 10mins times. This happens along the line so that when the Met leaves Ricky it is emptier than it would've been if it was a fast service. As it calls into the local stations south of Moor Park not many will get on as there is little demand for 8tph meaning the amount of fresh air transported is even greater than before. 10 minutes after the local Met has departed, a Chiltern to Marylebone arrives at Amersham. Some might be surprised that lunchtime services are well patronised by passengers from Aylesbury and Amersham. A 2 car lunchtime service from Aylesbury is about 60-70% full by the time it reaches Amersham. Due to the halving of Met services at Amersham previously and now no more fast Met services, everyone piles on to the Chiltern so it is now 85-90% full. The train fills up so as the train leaves Ricky there are people standing. Is this acceptable for an off-peak service? Many people on the North end are worried that this is just the first step. The off-peaks are being slowed, could it be the peaks in a few years time? It doesn't help that the timetable is being introduced when the S Stock, which is well suited for inner-surburban/city services, is being rolled out on what is mainly an outer surburban commuter line. I know that many will say that there is no plans to cut fast peak services, but it is obvious to see why people are worried.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 11, 2011 18:51:48 GMT
Wasn't the replacement to enable Watford services to run faster over this section? Yep, Watford speeds increased from 20 to 30mph after the replacement Having been past today, at both Watford North and Watford South Junctions, the mainline speed is now 50mph (no longer 60). The Watford North curve is 20mph and the Fast - Local at Watford South is 25mph, as you said. So the current penalty in crossing over is probably not much different to the old layout at the here. The SB fast become 60mph after Moor Park. IIRC the NB fast becomes 50mph from 60mph just south of the bridge over the Grand Union Canal/ River Colne
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 10, 2011 23:01:41 GMT
All were former 'main line' stations?
Moor Park - GCML/Chiltern Hammersmith - GWR Chigwell - GER Dagenham East - LTS
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 10, 2011 17:53:04 GMT
S stock should bring the line speed to ~60mph again with the new signals when in place. Bear in mind they have a design speed of 62mph, compared to the current 50mph limit of A stock. That and they should be able to absolutely thrash a 165 off the mark! The speed limits are already 60mph on the fasts and north of Ricky for Chiltern! It is not much of an improvement if it stays at 60mph! 40+ years ago the locals were 60mph, and the fasts 70mph, with the section between Ricky and Chalfont rated 60mph, and Chalfont to Missenden at 70mph. In those days, the Great Central services ran faster than these speeds as the locos didn't have speedos. The S Stock top speed is 62mph but the A Stock was designed for 70mph! Sure the S stock will be faster than the A Stock has been in the past 10 years, but will be slower than services 20, 30, 40 years ago. LUL will advertise this as an improvement when it is anything but!
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 10, 2011 17:02:48 GMT
Adrian shooter was on television earlier in the week promoting the new 100mph 1 hour marylebone banbury service,its a disgrace that journey times are proposed to increase on the met line when the emphasis is on speed,amersham/chesham is to far for all station stops. It isn't fair to compare the Met to the Chiltern Main Line. The Met is an outer-surburban commuter line, whilst the Chiltern Main Line is now in my opinion an InterCity railway. Inevitably speeds will be higher on an IC line. mikeyr1234 I forgot to add to my last post that if you travel into London regularly you should get a Network Railcard, which would give you 1/3 off both Oyster and NR Off-peak fares. So a Off peak travelcard from Beaconsfield will be £12 instead of £18. Is this timetable a sort of trial for the major timetable change planned for December 2012? I know that Chiltern and LUL were in negotiations about the Dec 2012 timetable, to allow improved speeds and services to Aylesbury. Is the thinking that by diverting the Amersham/Chesham services onto the slow lines, you free up the fasts for Chiltern services? The problem is now that when Metronet replaced the Watford South junction in '07, they replaced the crossover rated at 40mph(?) for local Amershams with one I think only allows 20mph for local Amershams. I don't believe there is a 'major' timetable change planned for Dec 12. It is more likely to be similar to the Dec 11 timetable with a couple of running time revisions, but at the moment it doesn't look like these will be particularly significant That news will disappoint Chiltern and Network Rail. The West Midlands & Chilterns RUS published in May says that Chiltern Railways and LUL, have commenced consideration of what opportunities exist to exploit incremental service mix and journey time improvements following the introduction of the December 2012 timetableIf talks have broken down, it seems passengers on the 'Aylesbury Corridor' will have to settle for low speeds until at least resignalling comes in 2017(?). TfL have said that their preferred option for improving speeds etc is by timetabling changes and if that doesn't happen it would be very disappointing. Chiltern have pretty much been slagging off LUL publicly for what is coming up to 10 years now, and looks like they will continue to do so for several years to come. I can't blame them. When ATP was being rolled out on the Chiltern Lines during the BR days, LUL 'agreed' to allow it to be installed on the Met. However, LUL never arranged the possesions required, and the Chiltern management were forced to fit tripcocks on the 165s. When BR was privatised, this same BR Chiltern Lines management, won the franchise as Chiltern Railways, and has seen speeds on the Met drop to the lowest in 50 years, cancelling out the improvements they have funded north of Amersham. I remember when I opened my new Chiltern timetable to find out my commute to Aylesbury had increased by 5 minutes with the non-stop Harrow - Ricky time increasing from 7 minutes to 13 minutes! They had to retime my train so that when commuters arrived at Aylesbury, they had enough time to reach work on time. Chiltern and the passenger have been repeatedly been told that millions is being spent on the Met yet the non-stop Chiltern journey still takes 11 minutes. don't get this whole north Met attitude that they are some sort of special group deserving of bespoke services whats the mileage from Epping to Holborn as a comparison to Amersham - Baker St? bet theres not a lot in it and Epping passegners don't have fast trains in the peak, let alone the off peak! Epping to Holborn is 18 miles and 56 chains. Since most commuters in the Chiltern area go into the city, it would be fairer to compare the Amersham - Moorgate distance. This distance is 27 miles and 14 chains. Amersham - Baker St is 23 miles and 64 chains. The time it takes to travel between Epping and Holborn is about 47 minutes, the same as a Fast Amersham - Baker St. At least Epping has a 6 minute frequency to the city at morning peak, unlike Amersham or Chesham.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 10, 2011 13:24:49 GMT
mikeyr1234 I forgot to add to my last post that if you travel into London regularly you should get a Network Railcard, which would give you 1/3 off both Oyster and NR Off-peak fares. So a Off peak travelcard from Beaconsfield will be £12 instead of £18. Of course, a car gets expensive if you want to travel into the center of London during the week, rather than just Baker Street itself, as you have the £10/day for the congestion charge on top of any other road costs. True, it should cost about £15 fuel for a return journey plus congestion and parking charges is quite expensive when compared to the Met. But there is the perception that the car is cheaper than the train, and for some the ' extra comfort' of the car will be worth the cost. @metcontrol Is this timetable a sort of trial for the major timetable change planned for December 2012? I know that Chiltern and LUL were in negotiations about the Dec 2012 timetable, to allow improved speeds and services to Aylesbury. Is the thinking that by diverting the Amersham/Chesham services onto the slow lines, you free up the fasts for Chiltern services? The problem is now that when Metronet replaced the Watford South junction in '07, they replaced the crossover rated at 40mph(?) for local Amershams with one I think only allows 20mph for local Amershams.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 9, 2011 23:49:46 GMT
Since you are talking about going from High Wycombe Mikeyr1234 then you have 6 trains per hour to choose from, when compared to the 4tph from Amersham and Beaconsfield I mentioned previously.
If you plan your journey, you might be fortunate to get one of the very comfortable Class 67 loco hauled 'silver trains'!
The average speed of an 1 hour Aylesbury - London train (38 miles) is obviously 38mph. If you only take the section south of Amersham (23.5 miles in 39 mins), this average speed drops to 36mph. To contrast, if you take the Network Rail owned section between Aylesbury and Amersham, the average speed is 43mph (15 miles in 21 minutes).
The average speed of a 47 minute Fast Amersham - Baker St train (23 mile distance) is only 30mph! If 7 minutes are added to this service, then the average speed drops to 26mph. Contrast this to the car, which takes 47 minutes* to complete an Amersham - Baker St journey of 28.5 miles with an average speed of 36mph.
So the car looks like a credible alternative to many off-peak users.
*From Google - quite a conservative time.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 9, 2011 22:15:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 9, 2011 21:49:01 GMT
Have to say that, as a Chesham user, I'm pretty negative about this and do take the view that this is someone's personal baby. I understand that the Watford service is to be reduced, so I don't think the argument about having enough trains or drivers stacks up, especially as the fast service is being maintained at peak hours. There has been no consultation on this with service users which is pretty unimpressive and seems to demonstrate a somewhat unaccountable 'can't stop us' attitude. All other rail services in the area offer journey times to London of 30-35 minutes - why are Chesham and Amersham singled out for journeys of over an hour? What this will lead to is railheading with people riving to Berkhamsted and Wycombe instead - hardly consistent with objectives of reducing car use...or does that only apply in London..? Sorry, can't be pleased about this! Indeed, car use certainly won't drop because of this timetable. Network Rail says that it is quicker to drive to London from Aylesbury than take the train during off-peak, and the car is only 11 minutes slower in very congested peak traffic. It is probably the same for Amersham and Chesham. Amersham is currently the 4th top passenger flow to/from Marylebone, despite having the Met to choose from. On the other hand, Aylesbury isn't in the top 5, despite being 3x larger, as there is a rather large group of passengers from Aylesbury who drive to Tring/Haddenham to get a train into London as it is quicker. Could the same occur to Amersham? Chiltern have been expanding the car parks at their stations as they are big supporters of park & ride. Beaconsfield has 700 spaces, Gerrards Cross has about 500 spaces and High Wycombe has about 350 places. Driving from Amersham station to Beaconsfield station takes approximately 15 minutes. To compare Amersham and it closest station on the Chiltern Main Line, Beaconsfield: Amersham: - 4 trains at 'high peak' (arriving in Baker St/Marylebone at 8:00-9:00am)with fastest (Chiltern) taking 33 minutes. Others take 36, 39, and 50mins. (Journey planner says only 1 Met train (the 50min one) arriving between 8-9am. Is this right???)
- max £18.60
- 2tph off-peak Met takes 47 mins to Baker St
- 2tph off-peak Chiltern fast takes 39 mins to Marylebone.
- max £11
Beaconsfield: - 6 trains at 'high peak' (arriving in Marylebone at 8:00-9:00am) with the fastest train taking 23 minutes. Other trains take 27, 30, 31, 33, and 58mins.
- Anytime Day Return + return oyster Z1 peak journey: £19.50 + £3.80 = £23.30. However, if you don't need the Undeground, an annual will be about £300 cheaper than Z1-9 annual.
- 2tph off-peak slow takes 36-39 mins
- 2tph off-peak fast takes 28-32 mins
- Off-peak travelcard £18
Undoubtably Beaconsfield has a better service both during peak and off-peak times, and with the Met becoming worse after December when the Amershams become semis during off-peak. Both Chiltern & Met services via Amersham become slower during the leaf fall timetable as well, whilst Beaconsfield is unaffected. As Beaconsfield is a lot more expensive, there might be a reasonable migration, from the people who can afford it but I don't think it will be a huge number. However, there might be a modal shift from train to car during off-peak, as a large percentage of people who have cars there, and if the train is slower, why would they take it?
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 8, 2011 23:23:21 GMT
As I have said before, I honestly do believe that increasing journey times - whichever way you look at it is a step backwards. Surely any railway would aspire to run faster services? Indeed Tfl themselves are always very keen to publicise the planned journey time reductions on many lines once engineering works are complete - yet they are not so keen to publish the added journey times to a large amount of Met Line users. As I've stated on the Chiltern & Metropolitan Railway thread, TfL's official response to Network Rail's suggestion that journey times should be improved on the LUL section of the 'Aylesbury Corridor' is: "Whilst journey time improvements on this route are welcome, they should not come at the expense of service levels at stations in London." Doesn't inspire confidence in your average Chiltern/Met passenger in Bucks! In the same response, TfL state that it's recommended approach to improvements in journey time, capacity etc on the 'Aylesbury Corridor' are by timetable interventions instead. Maybe it was this current timetable intervention that TfL felt would lead to these improvements?
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 7, 2011 23:30:33 GMT
A Stock are 16.1m long, Pullmans were over 17m but the the cars on the 4TC are 19.7m long.
I don't know if it's right but I heard that some Met steam locos were banned south of Finchley Road as they were too large for the tunnels?
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 7, 2011 22:36:53 GMT
I'm surprised that the 4TC managed to fit through the narrow tunnels to reach Baker St. They're not that narrow - they do say that A-stock has been seen at Baker Street, and that's 5" wider than the BR Mk1 profile! True but isn't the BR Mk1 profile much longer than the A Stock profile?
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 7, 2011 21:17:09 GMT
Sarah used to be push pull enabled as this great video shows.... Of course over time these bits of equipment and reliability issues may mean these videos are unique! I'm surprised that the 4TC managed to fit through the narrow tunnels to reach Baker St.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 7, 2011 13:53:49 GMT
The coaching stock is usually the remaining set of 4TC. I would imagine that a couple of class 20s might be sourced from somewhere! If not, maybe some battery locos instead like in the days of Steam on the Met. Slightly off-topic but on Wikipedia, it states that Mark 1 coach BSK 35011 is still in use by LU. However, I've never seen it out during specials etc, so is it still used or has it been sold off/scrapped?
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 7, 2011 0:19:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 6, 2011 22:41:02 GMT
2017 I think...
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 6, 2011 22:27:44 GMT
... they never responded to that either, but did say that there would be no benefit to having a National Rail Railcard. Well, there would if there weren't so many stupid restrictions attached to them! On the subject of railcards, I don't understand why ATOC haven't introduced a national railcard scheme. It's a no-brainer, most off peak trains are just transporting fresh air, and to get people to use them, fares need to be cheaper. According to research, an extra 15% in passengers numbers during off-peak in effect at no extra cost as the trains have to run with or without passengers if a national scheme was introduced. This would reduce the subsidy from the Govt as well. You could pretty much abolish all other railcards (as the other cards have very little additional benefit over a national scheme) making Guards/RPIs jobs easier. If you want we could make the card free of charge for people who would get their own category of railcard, such as young or disabled people. NSE introduced the Network SouthEast Card but after privatistaion ATOC has slowly added more restrictions. I bet if BR was still about, a national railcard would've been introduced, just like most stated owned networks in Europe.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Aug 22, 2011 21:50:07 GMT
Went on the Met today, Liverpool Street to Chesham and back (changing at Baker Street). Was surprised to only see 1 S-stock which was at Chalfont & Latimer. Thankfully it looks like we still have quite a bit of time to ride the A-stocks before they all go to the scrapheap. I really think the exterior design of the S-stock is brilliant. Its the interior that I am really unsure of. I wonder if even more commuters up in Buckinghamshire will try to get the Chiltern service which is very comfortable, if they are faced with those S-stock seats to and from London every weekday! I'm sure they will migrate to the Turbos, especially if they extend them. The original Evergreen 3 plans adds fast services from Aylesbury via High Wycombe (taking approx 1hr) which would free up more seats on the existing via Met services, facilitating any migration.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Aug 21, 2011 20:18:40 GMT
Thanks for your help. They seem to have been withdrawn early, considering the Piccadilly line trains are 10 years older (going by the date in the doorways). It seems to be on the track within the sidings nearest the train line, so I'd agree a crane probably wouldn't be able to get to it. Similarly, the wheels must have almost rusted to the track by now. I remember the old train at Uxbridge in the sidings but I think that was taken away a few years ago. Thanks again for your answers. When the Jubilee Line Extension to Stratford was built, new stock (the current 1996 stock) was needed to operate the service at a good frequency. It was intended to refurbish the 1983 stock cars and run them concurrent with the new 96 stock. However, the cost of this refurbishment was very similar to the cost of just ordering extra new trains. Thus, new trains were ordered and the 1983 stock was retired. It would've been very bad press for the Underground if the relatively new 1983 stock was scrapped, so they were stored in sidings instead. I bet if BR wasn't privatised, they would've bought some and run them on the Isle of Wight Edit: 100 posts! ;D
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Aug 21, 2011 19:42:56 GMT
Hi! Welcome to the Forum!
I think the train you are referring to is the old 1983 stock, which ran on the Jubilee, and were stored at South Harrow, as well as other places, after retirement in 1998.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Aug 17, 2011 12:19:01 GMT
It will never happen but what I would love to see is Sarah Siddons pulling the Dreadnoughts from Moorgate all the way to Amersham, and then an engine swithcover with Met No. 1 which then pulls the train to Aylesbury.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Aug 9, 2011 15:35:02 GMT
Banbury is a good place, as mentioned above. NR recently installed new semaphores for the bay platforms.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Aug 8, 2011 22:13:11 GMT
Harrow on the Hill re-opened according to the National Rail website
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Aug 8, 2011 20:52:07 GMT
According to the National Rail website, Harrow on the Hill is closed due to the rioting, yet there is nothing on the TfL website. Does anyone know whether it is opened or closed?
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Jul 27, 2011 22:47:07 GMT
There is a hill at Southgate which forces the line to go in tunnel
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Jul 27, 2011 21:15:25 GMT
C stock has travelled to Amersham before...
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Jul 24, 2011 23:49:25 GMT
I suspect that Chesham will get whatever is cheapest to do in the short-medium term. Its all very well and good it running shorter trains to match to demand, but really the question should be how can demand be increased? Lower fares and speed up services. I don't know what the max speed on the branch is (35mph?), but I suspect with some structural work and a larger cant a slightly increased speed could be possible. But that would take money, and a longer term view. Good thing about Croxley RL is that the potential for each end of the branch to have a triangular junction is there. West Coast diversion to Marylebone, and Chiltern to Euston, for example. The branch has a max speed of 35mph. The best solution, IMHO, wouldn't be an increase in linespeed but construction of a loop somewhere to improve reliability. WCML diversions using the Croxley link probably wouldn't happen since Voyagers, which were used during the WCML blockade in 08, can't be fitted with tripcocks, due to their bogies. Chiltern Class 172s use the same bogies and thus can't operate on the Met. Back on topic, if there were three through platforms at Chalfont & Latimer, 4 car operation might come in hand, where the 8 car train from London is split, with one 4 car unit going to Amersham, whilst the other goes to Chesham. This would reduce the Met service to 2tph for stations from Rickmansworth, but would allow an extra 2tph Chilterns to Aylesbury to operate. However, in most cases the operational disadvantages outweigh the benefits.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Jul 15, 2011 16:38:16 GMT
Hmm, interesting proposal... I think there is a block on new lines with 3rd rail electrification, but I know there might be exclusions, such as to link a short non-electrified section or such like... I guess the 'new' ELL was done this was as it was more or less a like for like replacement. Am not sure as to the exact rules on this, but maybe Network Rail might have the answer via their website or contact centre! Bit far fetched, having an isolated patch of 3rd Rail territory in the Harrogate area! Network Rail won't install your standard 3rd rail in non 3rd rail land BUT there are no restrictions on installing a DLR style 3rd rail, which is what is being suggested.
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Jul 15, 2011 12:55:59 GMT
I agree that it is an idea worthy of further consideration, if not for the Harrogate line then for others. I was mildly amused to note the idea being roundly poo-poohed by the cognoscenti of the uk.railway newsgroup, who clearly know best about these things. THC The guys on railuk forums also hate the idea. According to the railnews article, the proposal costs £150m for electrification and stock (20 D78s + 10 spare). I've calculated that if you instead ordered 20 4 car 172 (4 car to get similar no of seats to D78), it would cost £140m, only £10m cheaper
|
|