|
Post by malcolmffc on Nov 24, 2014 7:05:38 GMT
Agreed, it's surprising that Edgware Rd isn't a priority for SFA given its such an important interchange
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Oct 27, 2014 13:40:58 GMT
At my local station is a poster saying the S stock will replace the old trains by the end of 2016 ( this poster is at stations East of Barking) In the mean time the D stock is being left to rot as regards the passengers can see in the tatty seating, dirt inside and out. Good - I would be horrified if TfL were spending any more than the bare minimum required to keep the trains running given they are all being scrapped in the next 2 years.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Oct 9, 2014 11:45:17 GMT
I've given up on London Reconnections - too much uninformed speculation and power-crazy moderators who like to edit or delete half the comments.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Sept 11, 2014 21:22:47 GMT
Is this weekend's closure of the Northern TBTC related?
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Sept 3, 2014 21:10:12 GMT
But there would still be no lift from the NR concourse to the.LU subway level so it would still not be accessible. If you look at the 3D map of the station, you can't get to that part of the station from where the jubilee lift goes without using stairs.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Sept 3, 2014 20:25:25 GMT
On the Station Master app, on the 3d map of Waterloo there is a 2nd lift at the W&C line end, is that the lift you are on about? I think that is the lift from the subway concourse to the W&C platforms. It does seem extraordinary that they are spending all this money to make Bank W&C step free, which is a major piece of work, but not spending the much smaller sum required to make the the other end of the line step free as well. You'd get step free access to the southbound Bakerloo "for free" as well. Even in the 2050 doc there is no plan to implement SFA at Waterloo despite it being the busiest NR station in the country!
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Sept 3, 2014 17:15:41 GMT
Thanks for the info re: Upminster. When will trains run to Richmond in pax service?
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Sept 3, 2014 17:10:25 GMT
In an earlier thread (now locked) it was mentioned that step free access to the W&C platforms at Waterloo used to be possible via a lift in the old Eurostar area. With the imminent re opening of platforms 21 and 22, will this lift be available again?
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Sept 2, 2014 7:59:09 GMT
Is there a target date for the first passenger service to Upminster?
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Aug 19, 2014 17:09:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Aug 19, 2014 12:24:44 GMT
Agreed, this idea is second only to Waterloo & City line extension in the list of silly ideas on this forum that seem to resurface every few months.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Aug 1, 2014 6:25:40 GMT
Moving very slowly to possibly peak-hour only workings to Barking around October. With driver training at the east end commencing in early September it is hoped a train (or two) will be able to run to Upminster to help with driving familiarisation, again around October. The new WTT from 14 December should see scheduled trains running to/from Upminster. They are still not yet cleared to run past Upney due to signalling mods still needing to take place I believe on the next lot of weekend shutdowns at the east end this is when the process is going to start to convert the track circuits. Why has this been left so late? Surely this is the sort of thing that could have been done over the past 4 years while the S Stock was being rolled out on other lines?
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Aug 1, 2014 6:23:29 GMT
In the long run, once the capacity upgrade that the use of S Stock on the SSR will enable, those 24 people will get their seats back through the higher frequency of trains.
Also don't forget that there are probably another 20 people who currently can't board a train at all at places like Victoria in peak times, who will be able to thanks to the S Stock :-)
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jul 26, 2014 12:06:52 GMT
Thoughtful as these ideas are, none of them answer the most important question: Why would anyone up north want to use LU's 35 year old cast offs? This is not the same situation as the Iale of Wight where tube stock were all that were suitable.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jul 17, 2014 0:43:39 GMT
The new signalling systems are making life difficult through negligent design. If compatibility with existing stock had been placed in the design specifications from the beginning, things would now be much simpler. Why on earth would LU's signalling spec mandate compatibility with 40 year old trains which will have long since been scrapped when the upgrade is complete? The point of the signalling upgrade is to add desperately needed capacity to the network. The only way to achieve this is through ATO, which precludes the use of heritage stock. It's that simple.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jul 17, 2014 0:41:17 GMT
Rolling stock on whatever railway everywhere in the world has always been incompatible, whether it be gauge, voltage, brakes, width height or whatever. Why on earth LUL had to go from a completely compatible system that worked on all lines (except the Vic) to something unique to every line is rather silly. But we digress... That's a little unfair...assuming Thales are awarded the SSR resignalling contract, the same TBTC system will be used on the Jubilee, Northern, Met, H&C, Circle & District Lines. And I wouldn't be surprised to see it being used for the Picc too given its significant overlap with the District and Met. That just leaves the Central, Victoria and possibly the Bakerloo on different systems, which isn't much worse than today. (i'm not counting the W&C!)
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jul 13, 2014 21:46:00 GMT
The cost of retrofitting modern signalling technology to 40 year old stock would rightly be lambasted as a shocking waste of public money.
An old train like the C stock can still be appreciated without it running on the network, especially given the thousands of photos and videos online of it in service. If I see an old phone from the 1900s in a museum I don't expect to be able to connect it to a phone line.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 25, 2014 16:02:53 GMT
Funnily enough, when enthusiasts are confronted with the costs of maintain and storing redundant trains, their "enthusiasm" quickly vanishes!
1 car of 'C' stock is more thane enough - it's hardly a design classic.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 25, 2014 6:07:01 GMT
The purpose of the announcements is to help visually impaired passengers know which platform they're on.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 24, 2014 13:57:10 GMT
Those type of platform announcements are done by Emma Hignett (the voice of iBus), I believe. They are played at several stations now - I'm sure the station staff are sick of them!
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 12, 2014 6:40:35 GMT
The first S7 Stock passenger workings to Ealing and Richmond should commence tomorrow with one trip to each destination. As from next week 2 trips to each will be made in the midday off-peak period M-F. These are additional trains and are not replacing D Stock and can be cancelled at a moments notice. Fantastic that these are starting already! Presumably they can't go further east than Barking for now (and hence, in practice, will most likely terminate at Tower Hill)?
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 12, 2014 6:26:22 GMT
No, it really is EU procurement law. This forces. LU to put the signalling for each line out to contract in a separate competitive tender. www.out-law.com/page-5964Note, I'm not anti-EU at all - just explaining how the law of the land has forced LU's hand here. I'm sure they would have preferred to have approached Thales directly if allowed. How would this prevent LU specifying that signalling systems from different suppliers should be compatible? It would presumably make the cost prohibitive
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 11, 2014 10:32:37 GMT
However, in general, surely you design your train - broadly - for the railway you have, rather than designing your train and rebuilding your railway to fit it. Tell that to SNCF! www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27497727
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 11, 2014 7:50:33 GMT
I must disagree there. It, like many other problems supposedly theirs, is not anything to do with Europe. The problem is squarely a British one of mismanagement and misapplication. Something we have always excelled at! No, it really is EU procurement law. This forces. LU to put the signalling for each line out to contract in a separate competitive tender. www.out-law.com/page-5964Note, I'm not anti-EU at all - just explaining how the law of the land has forced LU's hand here. I'm sure they would have preferred to have approached Thales directly if allowed.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 11, 2014 6:48:59 GMT
Ask any District line passengers trapped in a sweltering D stock yesterday if they'll be sad to see it replaced with an air-conditioned S Stock.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 11, 2014 6:45:16 GMT
It's hard to achieve a compromise between consistency and embracing the latest technology though. The pace of the tube upgrade is so slow that by the time it's done in the 2030s, the lines that were upgraded first will have been done 20-25 years previously so to be consistent across all lines you'd need to be introudcing technology that was decades old.
It's like saying all new computers should be running Windows XP to be consistent with the ones that already exist.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 10, 2014 12:33:21 GMT
The previous 3 comments, (Ben's Malcolm's & tomek's) are VERY profound. Money seems to have been poured into making things (a) overcomplicated, and (b) incompatible with other part of the system. LU's obsession with 'handed stock' has also obstructed clear thinking. We now have District Line trains that can't access all of the District Line. Where will it end?? Confused by your last point - unless you mean the D stock!?
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 10, 2014 12:32:10 GMT
Lack of standardisation and rapid turnover rates of technology and product will cost the industry a fortune - argueably more than what the cost would have been of sticking with older simpler technology and swallowing its drawbacks, inabilities and associated problems. Why TFL didn't bothered to choose one standard system of ATO for all the lines ? European Union procurement rules, I believe. Each line has to be put out for a separate tender, though (thankfully) the SSR could be combined.[/quote]
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 10, 2014 6:58:50 GMT
Its very interesting this comes up, there was an artical in Railway Engineer magazine about obsolescence with a little table as an example of various items. At the moment we're using technology to do ever increasingly complex things, perhaps we should be using it to achieve the same things but in increasingly simple ways at times too. Lack of standardisation and rapid turnover rates of technology and product will cost the industry a fortune - argueably more than what the cost would have been of sticking with older simpler technology and swallowing its drawbacks, inabilities and associated problems. Its absolutely shocking that transfers can't occur in service - total backwards step. With the resultant pollution and congestion on the North Circular. They may as well have not bothered with 60 years of standardising gauge, electrification, signalling, etc. Surely the real problem is the funding for the Bakerloo Line Upgrade being pulled? Had that remained in place, it too would be running modern trains with TBTC by the end of the decade and this would only be a short term problem. Also, the ability to occasionally move a 1970 stock by rail would be a silly reason not to provide the massive capacity upgrade to the Jubillee line that TBTC has provided.
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Jun 4, 2014 22:04:34 GMT
I always thought it was a waste to replace satisfactory D stock, whilst money could have been better spent on replacing the crumbling 1972 Bakerloo Trains instead! They aren't satisfactory at all. They're 35 year old technology with small doors.
|
|