|
Post by alpinejohn on Mar 1, 2022 13:08:39 GMT
Wow - thanks for that link I was completely unaware that this idea existed let alone it being so far advanced that they envisage opening in just 2 years time. I guess the article is still somewhat speculative given the use of the weasel word MAY in this bit..
" The owner-operator of Heathrow is to contribute most or all of the cost, and the Development Consent Order may be granted in late 2022. "
Looking at that map it looks like the route will mostly run beside the huge reservoirs to the west of Heathrow and unlikely to require any houses to be flattened so perhaps this is why I completely missed this development especially as the locals have been so vociferous about nearby HS2 link developments.
Looking ahead I wonder if the proposed funding approach is really sensible given the costly "Heathrow" premium demanded to use the current mainline rail link into Heathrow. As they say there is no such thing as a free lunch, so whilst the Treasury/Network Rail may not be funding it immediately, the reality is that far more money will eventually be recovered with interest in years to come from the resulting higher rail fares to get to Heathrow over that new link, which may make travel by road more attractive for some.
Do we know if the plan is for this route to be primarily serviced by Elizabeth Line services - or mostly entail diverting some existing GWR services from the west heading for Paddington?
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Mar 1, 2022 8:41:05 GMT
OK this change may be a bit premature, but in the grand scheme of Elizabeth Line developments it seems sensible as recently the simplyflying website carried a story confirming that work had begun preparing T4 for reopening before the summer season.
I am however unsure whether the western side Elizabeth Line service pattern ever envisaged operating direct Reading to T4 services - does this not imply a reverse somewhere?
As for T4 there are loads of contracting staff already getting the terminal complex ready, after it was pretty much abandoned during Covid. I suspect a very large workforfce will be required to first clean through and prepare the terminal in that short time period, closely followed by extensive system testing and airline staff re-familiarisation before a single passenger plane can possibly use the complex. In short they are going to have to pick up the pace dramatically especially with BA struggling to sort out the current IT and baggage problems over at T5.
If trains to T4 are about to resume services that may be a welcome relief to the current airside shuttle operation and endless vans.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Feb 19, 2022 16:36:01 GMT
Thanks DStock 7080 for the link to that recent GWR announcement confirming that a Class 230 battery train will be given a trial on the Greenford-West Ealing shuttle.
It seems that the fast charging facility will be provided at West Ealing using the VivaRail patented system which has already been approved by Network Rail.
I guess we will not have to wait too long to see where they decide to install the related support kit(battery/power generator bank). I hope they do not install it on the shuttle platform, as there does seem to be plenty of unused "railway land" adjacent to the shuttle platform track bed. Ideally the charging equipment can simply draw electricity at a very low rate from existing power supplies on site rather than use a diesel generator, with a battery bank being used to meet the occasional high current draw whenever charging is actually taking place.
I assume the class 230 will continue to occasionally share the shuttle bay platform with the once a week Parliamentary service run by Chiltern. However given the stated 60 mile+ battery range for the class 230 unit, it should easily allow the unit to do several 6 mile round trips without needing to be berthed to recharge at West Ealing on every visit, so hopefully the charging rails and stopping board can therefore be located as close to the station entrance as current trains stop.
Whilst the announcement simply states the trial is due to launch this year - they will have to get their skates on to get this new kit installed and all the staff trained on the Class 230 units to allow them to enter pasenger service operations from the typical 14 May 2022 timetable change. Hopefully there is ample time to allow GWR to get the Class 230 into passenger service before the December timetable change.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Feb 16, 2022 15:30:15 GMT
I came across a worrying web article suggesting that the planned new combined entrance to Northern and Bakerloo at Elephant and Castle has hit a snag.
Whilst work to create a new combined station entrance is underway by a developer - it seems that TFL will not have the money to relocate the current ticketing facilities and passenger entry/exit barriers, so that even when the new facility is ready for use, they will remain unused and LU will have to continue to staff two separate stations, with presumably twice the staffing costs.
Can this be true or is it simply media click bait?
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Feb 6, 2022 9:14:04 GMT
I rather had the impression that at least as far as TFL services were concerned the Mayor had chosen to insist passengers wear masks - so what exactly is holding back these "more people" from currently using public transport in London?
Meanwhile the underlying message from Government advisers is that we have pretty much attained herd immunity in the UK - so just how long does it make sense to "insist" on masks as opposed to recommending them? Should we still be having this discussion next year? Next decade? Next Century? (Why am I am suddenly reminded of scary calculations last century about the potential depth of horse dung being deposited on London Roads - masks thrown away per journey = xxx? millions of tonnes of extra rubbish to sweep up or collect and dispose of in contaminated land fill)
We are told that lots of people (vaccinated & unvaccinated) could right now have some variant of the Covid virus but have no symptoms and be spreading it around and around wherever they go. So Covid becomes more and more like colds and flu and we are never going to get rid of this virus completely.
Whilst there was no effective vaccine and very limited understanding of Covid risks, Government imposed lockdowns and mask mandates made sense to limit exposure. However now pretty much anyone who really WANTS to be vaccinated has been able to get vaccinated. Hence people should now be allowed to revert to normal. Indeed that may finally see some growth in overseas visitor numbers and public transport use.
As for surveys - no matter how well intentioned - they are very prone to question bias. They will often only give a broad indication based on what the surveyor has been instructed to ask. Sadly survey contacts are not always willing to share their true thoughts and can give answers which they think the survey authors want to hear. "Yes of course I would use Public Transport more but..."
Rather than relying on educated guesswork, I hope TFL can find the funds to carry out an in-depth trawl through historical Oyster data (suitably anonymised) which should provide a far better picture of where there is real demand and where it has been lost.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Feb 5, 2022 9:03:04 GMT
Eventually TFL and the Treasury will need a major re-think on funding.
I somehow feel it is dangerous for TFL (and the unions) to overlook the big picture or assume things will "return to normal".
Regardless of Covid - commuting levels in and around London have probably returned to their new peak as more and more office based businesses have developed effective Work from Home arrangements. Yes there may still be a need for occasional gatherings/team meetings but these are likely to require only occasional "all hands on deck" and can be accommodated in a rented conference facility or meeting hall rather than a expensive corporate HQ.
Already many office based companies have realised that once you write off the initial costs then going forward working from home saves them money - lots of money - as they can reduce their office heating bills, can reduce or sell off office space, can minimise travel expense claims and can still pay staff the same amount.
The weird bit is many people working from home actually seem keen to work harder - if only to demonstrate to colleagues still based in the office that they are not sitting around doing nothing. Yes there was a once off cost adapting business processes to support people working from home but that bill has been paid, and working from Home will be the norm for many new businesses.
As they say the genie is out the bottle and forecast commuting numbers need a serious re-think - which may mean it is time to seriously adjust staffing and service levels across the tube to reflect real travel patterns.
Going on strike now simply demonstrates that many people can actually do without their service - yes it causes inconvenience for many but "life goes on" - I feel it is only a matter of time before Night Tube is abandoned and funds will be found by the Treasury to transfer the Waterloo and City back to Network Rail which will only be re-opened after it is modified for fully automated operation.
I am worried that the louder Mayor Khan insists the system is safe whilst insisting on people wearing masks to fight a disease which we are now being told is endemic within the UK population is only underscoring the message that public transport is more dangerous - so hardly a good image to attract potential visitors and indeed why many people will continue to prefer to drive around in their own enclosed air conditioned box regardless of the environmental or economic cost.
Wake up Mayor - your messaging is counter-productive - by all means encourage - but do not mandate masks. That ship has sailed...
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Jan 27, 2022 8:36:51 GMT
Doubtless regulars will not be at all phased when a train gets held by signals, however there is a finite time beyond which some people do start getting agitated. This AIB link www.gov.uk/government/publications/safety-digest-092019-north-pole-junction/passengers-self-evacuating-at-north-pole-junction-15-july-2019mentions several instances where passenger agitation can eventually result in some making potentially dangerous decisions - even going so far as forcing doors open and self evacuating onto tracks where the power rail may potentially be still live. The ability to issue a timely automated message can greatly reassure passengers that the driver is alert to the delay, and allow the driver to focus on communicating with signallers and getting any problem resolved swiftly. Indeed as the new tube rolling stock is being designed with at least passive provision for eventual automated operation - I suspect that reassurance messages will be of even greater value if we ever reach the point of these trains operating without a driver onboard. However by the time any Tube trains actually switch to automated operation, doubtless someone will have done some research to determine what notices are really needed(work), especially given several fully automated transit systems will by then have been operating elsewhere for many years and well placed to advise.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Jan 16, 2022 19:25:31 GMT
Does published information confirm that refurbished trains now entering service with LED lighting will also feature new AC motors - or is that a separate project/timetable?
I am also in two minds over whether adding humps to platforms is the right approach. Yes it offers a cheaper and potentially quicker fix but looking to the distant future I guess all deep tube lines will progressively move over to operating some variant(length) of the proposed new Piccadilly tube stock.
Presumably the new stock will arrive with full walk through access, and potentially allow as close as possible level boarding along the entire length of the platform, rather than a short hump section.
I really hope whoever is engaged to install them has made provision for their easy removal so that accessible boarding to new trains can happen along the whole train length. Sadly it looks like the shared BR section of the Bakerloo will inevitably mean some sort of mixed compromise platform height.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Jan 5, 2022 11:08:15 GMT
Is that thread title somewhat misleading?
I am not sure why TFL would really want to create housing on this site. I rather suspect that it is actually the tussle between the Mayor, Whitehall and of course influential construction consortia who are really behind this?
The Acton Museum site is substantially more than storage - currently it provides public access - albeit on limited occasions, but it still is a real museum if you want to use the expression. This announcement suggests that function is being abandoned over night, meaning the contents can in future simply be crated up and sent for storage wherever is super cheap - which probably means somewhere miles outside London where there is no real prospect of easy public access for Londoners.
Brilliant - why stop there? Knock down the Royal Albert Hall - dump the rubble in a quarry in Buckinghamshire and let people visit it there... That should free up plenty of space for more multi million pound apartments and of course the two "affordable flats" needed for planning permission and of course ensure loads of profit and nighthoods for the developers.
This idea stinks.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Dec 10, 2021 12:59:45 GMT
This makes me wonder if, when it comes to serious accidents, human factors now far exceed technical failures? Have we crossed that threshold yet?
In which case rather than discussing further "patches" to the current system - which may or may not work we should seriously be considering plan B.
As it stands. this finding seems to add yet another reason for RAIB and Londoners to demand PEDs (with gap fillers where needed) on all platforms and on all lines - with the admittedly huge cost being offset by a rapid switch-over to fully driverless operation which doubtless the Treasury and Mr Johnson would be happy to fund in full, and at a stroke solve their budget problems.
In due course London ends up with a safer system with the "drivers" role being completely replaced by an "attendant" role similar to the Docklands routes. Obviously any ticket checking role would be impossible given the length of tube trains - so attendants would just sit in the leading cab and enjoy the view, whilst leaving it to the system to drive the train with the cab simply equipped with a big red emergency stop button and a radio coms system.
Attendants would not need extensive training or route knowledge as in future the computer would in future do everything(just like the lifts in my office), which pretty much eliminates human factor accidents especially those where people get tired and occasionally make mistakes(SPADS/Sandilands).
Importantly the attendant role would not be trained to operate a passenger carrying train - even in emergency. Their future role would be just to provide passenger reassurance and oversee any necessary evacuation if a unit fails - leaving it then to the back-office & maintenance people to recover any defective train if/when it all goes wrong.
This greatly changed role would reduce the level of expertise required and of course the cost to employ an "attendant" to sit in the cab. Probably the role could be taken on by pretty much anyone capable of holding a driving licence and able to demonstrate basic common sense.
This may not be what some on this forum wish to hear, but it does seem the inevitable direction of travel for at least the tube network, with it really just being a question of how long will it take? If the new Piccadilly units are now being specified with autonymous operation capability then I suspect we could see the whole system follow within 50 years.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Nov 24, 2021 7:50:50 GMT
"It would look very strange seeing different length carriages on the trains. So accustomed to either all the same length or just end cars with cab ends being different lengths." Strange yes - but problematic I am not sure. The new Stadler Class 755 trains in East Anglia seem well liked despite being a complete mix match of coach lengths including a dinky size power pack to confuse the public - where are the doors? The regulars did not take long to work out where to stand. I am not sure single doors at the extremeties of a train are really a major cause of delays in day to day operation - it is mostly people unwilling to move on down inside the car who cause delay.
However I like the new NTFL design as it looks like people will be able to pass through the train even if some people insist on effectively blocking a doorway, also we may eventually be rid of any mid train cabs or even double mid cabs still occasionally found on the Bakerloo. These can be seen to routinely panic visitors who have neatly lined up along the platform length only to find that when the train pulls up they have no way to board the train along a long length of platform.
The sad thing remains that the never ending TFL funding mess means the roll out of NTFL across other lines is now likely to take several decades - and only then once passengers have had to endure progressively unreliable trains for years. The "Misery Line" looks set for a come back.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Nov 2, 2021 18:03:21 GMT
I agree it is good to see the class 484 variants are finally carrying fare paying passengers even if there appear to be a few gremlins now affecting punctuality - if RTT can be believed.
The sad bit is that someone (presumably ORR) has forced them to modify the original D78 door closing mechanism so that it now takes an eternity to open and close. On the District I never noticed any lengthy delays to something as simple as opening the doors. Indeed in some instances they seemed to begin opening marginally before the train was fully stationary.
I realise the delay is probably mostly because SWR insist in having the guards open the doors rather than simply close them. I recall basically the same grumble when the Class 230s were introduced on the Marston Vale, and I suspect they just ignored the issue then in the hope it would go away. Well it has not. Come on VivaRail figure out how to reduce the insane impact on dwell time.
Whilst most of the overly long line closure can be laid squarely at the feet of VivaRail it is ironic that first day services were also impacted by a signalling failure and then a line side fire. Lucky they are not.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Oct 30, 2021 11:33:58 GMT
If the image posted above by Dstock7080 is fairly recent it is rather worrying. Black plastic bin liners do not last forever and presumably were installed at some stage during the switchover from Conventional light signalling. As a short term (potentially reversible) fix this makes sense but this late in the day I rather doubt the covered up signals will ever be considered for reinstatement.
Hopefully the signal lights have all been powered down by now or there is a risk that once those plastic bags degrade after many years in sunlight then it must only be a matter of time before drivers may encounter an unexpected signal aspect light despite being told by the onboard kit that he is cleared to proceed.
Is there a programe to remove these potentially distracting legacy signalling?
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Oct 29, 2021 13:20:24 GMT
Whilst I agree only a temporary power supply would be sufficient for the proposed 1 year trial, it rather ruins its "Green" credentials if a fossil fuel generator is actually used to keep the batteries charged.
It must surely be appropriate for TFL/GWR to provide a way to tap into whatever power supply is already in situ and simply rectify/transform that power supply as necessary to match the charging system requirement.
However I have no idea what voltage/current AC or DC is required to supply the charging system which this unit has been designed to work with.
As the Vivarail charging system is currently(sorry) the only system approved for use by Network Rail - I suspect it a very remote prospect that Vivarail would go with any of the admittedly interesting alternative charging systems currently being developed around the planet.
As the Vivarail charging system is already subject to a patent, presumably the actual supply voltage requirements are no state secret and already out their somewhere. So if the system needs AC then West Ealing must be the most likely choice whilst if it needs DC then Greenford might be better - always assuming their is adequate reserve power capacity in the existing infrastructure to allow the occasional demand from the fast charging station - which could well entail providing a fairly minimal trickle charge supply into a ISO container loaded up with a heap of end of life Tesla batteries and some fancy automated charging monitoring kit to maintain balance between demand and supply..
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Oct 28, 2021 17:47:27 GMT
Its a while since I looked at the vivarail website and can see that clearly it has a recent makeover with a few interesting pieces of news buried in other articles.
So there is confirmation that another two car unit is being completed this year for the US Pop-up-Metro demonstrations.
It also looks like the unit currently being used in Scotland for COP 26 event will see further use for a year trial operation on the Greenford shuttle from early 2022.
I wonder how long it will be before we should expect to see charging facilities appear? My guess is sometime in the next month or two, to allow the kit to be tested and staff training completed before the class 230 actually starts carrying fare paying passengers.
What is not clear is whether charging facilities will be provided at both West Ealing and Greenford. Their website states that their patent fast charge system can now get to full charge in 10 minutes, so given how short the route is, charging at either end should work fine. However Greenford may be the better choice as it is exclusively used by the shuttle, whilst the West Ealing platform is occasionally shared by a Parliamentary service interloper meaning passengers would face a longer walk to board the train at West Ealing if the charging facility was located far enough along the platform to leave space for the occasional Parliamentary service.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Oct 26, 2021 10:03:15 GMT
A D-Train has made it to Scotland: So that will be the second time a Class 230 visits Scotland ... It will be interesting to see if the GWR trial next year of battery Class 230 units on the Greenford shuttle works out well, and finally provides confidence for their potential use by other TOCs including operators in Scotland. The Greenford trial mirrors the approach adopted for Class 230 operations by VivaRail in the USA, where they are pushing the idea of going direct to demonstration operation of real units, rather than spending vast sums on consultants reports to tell you it will all be very difficult and costly.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Oct 14, 2021 8:23:09 GMT
Are people overstating the 4 car gapping problem - and in effect slowing down the CLIP upgrade project?
I assume it is not impossible for a few of the more experienced drivers on this route to quickly produce a map showing the locations where a short 4 car train may end up gapped - ie places to avoid stopping. OK they may have to do a few test runs to identify all the risks, but surely it must be possible to spot a long chunk of track with no power rails...
Then I suspect it would also be able to identify any problematic signals likely to result in a train stopping in those gaps.
Armed with that information a quick fix would be to erect some sort of warning boards ahead of those locations - IE min speed past this point of x mph to ensure a train has enough momentum to clear the gap.
Given this extra information (sort of additional route knowledge) most competent drivers should have no problem operating a 4 car set on route - save the need for any incident requiring an emergency brake application(child playing on track).
Yes there is the extra hassle for depot staff to first split the chosen train and check the 4 driving positions are serviceable. Eventually depot staff can presumably reform the train into 8 car format very quickly, once all the trains have been through the CLIP upgrade - assuming someone can actually make a credible case for doing so.
However I rather doubt there is any time of day where a 4 car train cannot comfortably handle typical passenger numbers on the Hainault-Woodford shuttle. Operating a 4 car train should reduce power consumption and reduce wear and tear on rolling stock.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Oct 9, 2021 13:32:31 GMT
Anything is possible but I doubt it.
They obtained and quickly got rid of a 38 stock unit after a very short period on the Island because the steel chassis was being eaten by the salty air in Alderney. The 73TS units also have a steel chassis so I suspect they won't want to repeat the same mistake - even if the main bodyshell is aluminium.
My money is on razor blades.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 29, 2021 8:35:16 GMT
The research has already been done. The 'effort' involves finding it in the library. You must be able to get a couple of days 'shelf-bashing' for £130,000! Given the project is to produce "a report somehow demonstrating the idea could be viable" I am not sure this will go well. 50/50 their findings get marked secret and never see the light of day - although by then, the report may be cheaper than loo paper. Most of that money will be taken up trying to selectively exclude or discount all the earlier evidence which demonstrated the idea was bonkers and then with whatever is left somehow try and construct a remotely credible case that an automated tube line will be cheaper - ever.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 28, 2021 13:24:33 GMT
So when you have already got a report which says your brilliant idea is actually totally stupid - DAFT decide to just get another report... THIS is public money - Stop wasting it! Listen to transport experts and rather than wasting more on the latest politicians vanity project - only spend money on stuff we really need - like replacing clapped out rolling stock and signals and delivering a frequent and credible public transport offer which is the only way to finally get people out of their fossil fuel burning cars..
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 28, 2021 12:56:10 GMT
Well despite rumours that the 484's were far too heavy for the Ryde pier - it did not collapse with the first 4 car run on the pier earlier today.
Today the Ryde Esplanade web-cam shows the first 4 car trip departing from the pier at 13:30 and it seemed to be making very swift progress.
The 4 car unit was formed at the pierhead from 2 car units arriving from Esplanade at 11:15 and 11:45. Does anyone know how long it used to take to couple up a pair of D Stock units? I suspect they did not take the best part of two hours, which suggests that they arranged some supervised staff training on coupling and uncoupling these units at the pierhead station rather than a long lunch..
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 25, 2021 16:59:50 GMT
It might have helped that London Underground awarded the project to a single contractor; a consortium between Ferrovial and Laing O'Rourke. Crossrail was dozens of contracts to loads of contractors It is perhaps worth remembering that Crossrail was badly impacted by the collapse of Carillion who had been lined up to do most of the Crossrail station upgrades to the west of Paddington - work which using other contractors, is only now more or less complete - years late and way above original estimates.. www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/07/28/carillion-collapse-cost-taxpayer-162m-crossrail-overspend/I am very impressed by how swiftly and efficiently TFL managed to test and get signed off the work needed to incorporate the new section into the Northern Line proper with all the necessary interfaces and then testing of TBTC signalling systems let alone find time to complete staff training and emergency evacuation exercises needed for Fire Brigade sign off. Meantime unlike the smooth progress with the Battersea Extension, CrossRail testing seems to be taking an eternity and not going particularly well. Indeed I was tempted to look back at recent and past video's from Mark Wild - sadly the guy now looks incredibly stressed. I really hope Mark does not become the final fatality linked to the jinxed Cross/Elizabeth/Purple Line project.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 19, 2021 16:18:28 GMT
Interesting to see that Class 230 trains on the Bedford-Bletchley line were included in the range of DMU rolling stock assessed in recent research into pollution on various mainline trains www.railjournal.com/news/british-government-to-investigate-air-quality-standards-following-diesel-train-research/The weird bit is that unlike various other diesel powered multiple units, they found that brake dust and particles from the hard floors were the main pollution causes on the Class 230 and not the underfloor diesels which use modern Euro 6 diesel power units. On full electric units like the Class 484 units presumably brake dust levels would be lower thanks to regenerative braking. What is not clear is who specified the choice of floor material? Would it be specified by DFT, ORR, VivaRail or London North Western? Whoever made the decision this research suggests they need to think again.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 11, 2021 10:24:44 GMT
As for what happens when they run out of D stock vehicles - it is clear VivaRail already have flagged up some ideas including retrofitting existing DMU stock to operate either entirely on battery or battery diesel hybrids. Check out the comments at around 5:50 minutes in this video interview with the former Vivarail MD Adrian Shooter.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 7, 2021 12:04:42 GMT
Yes end October seems to be the latest informal rumour for the Isle of Wight Class 484 units to enter passenger carry service.
At the moment the Ryde Esplanade webcam shows a gaggle of Orange clad workforce are swarming around the station with nearby signalling pannels opened up, so perhaps they have sorted out the recent flooding problem and are finally getting that end of the line for test runs with the 484s. Certainly the 484s have already been doing occasional trips from Ryde St Johns to Shanklin for both driver training and clearance checks through the new platform and dual track section at Brading.
Hopefully another month and a half will be enough to finally get this line back up and running.
The weird bit for me is how converting an EMU to an EMU could involve the need for installing hideously complicated software on units which had worked reliably for decades. This increasingly seems like the introduction of Overground class 710 units on GOBLIN where the software was also mired in faults. I wonder if someone went out of their way to specify the units were fitted with a fancy comprehensive fault reporting system only to find the fault reporting system is faulty...
Hey Ho. Doubtless they will get there eventually.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 4, 2021 15:21:17 GMT
Doubtless the bean counters are the culprits but how hard can it be to see that cutting back the CBTC roll out is a false economy.
Eventually the current signalling on all lines will need replacement so all you are doing is time shifting the expense with the big downside you need to spend twice as much maintaining two systems rather than one, but each time you restart the process you need to go through the whole quotation, recruitment and staff training processes, and in the interim you are removing operational flexibility on routes shared with other lines.
The current ever shifting goal posts for the SMA's must be incredibly wasteful.
Doubtless the dead hand of HM Treasury are truly to blame for this chaos, which is reminiscent of the stop start mess on mainline railway electrification plans. So rather than devising and implementing a comprehensive rolling programme with all the efficiencies gained by training a single dedicated team charged with completing a steady stream of projects to deliver mainline railway electrification, we have seen the whole thing deteriorate into stop start chaos - all due to those dratted bean counters - with any "savings" identified being quickly wasted as suppliers end up having to draw up new tenders for project after project.
Surely by now the new trains for the Piccadilly will have been specified and it would make no sense to buy new trains if they don't also come fitted with a TBTC system which is fully compatible with the TBTC being used on the SSR line.
So why oh why are they not busy extending the current SMA list to cover the entire Met and District line routes and also the whole Piccadilly line route with the eventual intention of ensuring that the same TBTC system is progressive rolled out across the entire Underground network so that it is ready to use as and when new rolling stock is commissioned.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 1, 2021 15:36:57 GMT
Hmm I just tried the website and immediately got results for the Journey from Russel Square to Alperton. All I can say is the website works fine from my location in the Alps and I rather doubt the website is intentionally designed to give overseas visitors a better service than people in the UK. I tried the search using Firefox, Explorer, and Edge and all 3 worked. Strange...
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Aug 26, 2021 8:24:27 GMT
Just how long will it be before someone drops a phone under/through that lash-up and decides to retrieve said precious item and ends up getting caught in the fishing net and garroted. In a crowded underground platform situation it is a recipe for disaster and lawsuits. Next...
OK you do not need to gold plate door systems - indeed there is no reason why door systems should not be made of far cheaper solid sheet material like ply or sheet steel. The big cost would however remain all those door opening mechanisms and related safety sensors. I would be astonished if bulk buying would allow you to cut up and running costs down by 10%. Presumably TFL have pretty recent bills for the stuff on the Elizabeth line so a few back of the envelope calculations should give you prices for installations at Waterloo and Bank.
Sadly virtually all stations are unique so virtually every station would need customisation to fit PEDs - so you could not get a massive discount if you immediately decided to fit PEDs to every LUL platform.
Fundamentally too many people seem to think an automated railway could easily be made as safe as an automated lift - but even lifts need maintence and reliable power supplies and they still break down often with the fire brigade turning up - sometimes hours later to release the victims. I would hate to see people emerging from a trapped train after spending several hours in the dark.
But it would be far from simple to automate the Waterloo and City and it would be massively costly - just to eliminate a handful of drivers wage packets with those savings largely offset by the need for extra train captains and extra CCTV monitoring staffing.
I fear this is another piece of total madness from someone who will never be held to account for his gross misspending of public monies.
Yes the Waterloo and City line is as simple as it can get, but even that has sidings and maintenance activity which cannot be automated. There are also a rabbit warren of supporting systems and tunnels which would all need someone to ensure are locked and monitored at least with CCTV 24/7 to stop lunatics up to mischief, and probably it would mean a lot more cleaning staff would be required to keep the place from turning into a dump.
Inherently if your real objective is to make the undergound system "unions/strike proof" that means eliminating ALL the staff from ALL activities. So no one on trains or platforms, no one doing maintenance and no one in control rooms. Just leaving it all up to a micro-chip which will probably stop working if the power ever fails.
A cardinal rule of risk assessment is to think outside the box and never underestimate the damage which can be wreaked by someone with a JCB. Hence this focus on automation regardless of costs or benefits, poses a risk which I, and I suspect many others users will prefer not to take.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Aug 25, 2021 7:58:13 GMT
"... Thanks for the link. What does TfL do?: I.6) Main activity - Urban railway, tramway, trolleybus or bus services. Is that still to come, or are they looking back a while?..." Don't write off the trolley bus. They are still alive and well liked in many countries - but OK I am not aware of any remaining TFL systems. Like most things a trolley bus has plusses and minuses - yes the wires are unsightly but require much less disruption than trams and with regular maintenance are as reliable as most trains, and are of course emission free and probably more energy efficient as you are not lugging around batteries, or an onboard power station with gallons of fuel. Certainly the ones I use occasionally over in Switzerland seem far less prone to disconnecting from the cable requiring manual intervention with a pole vault pole. www.sustainable-bus.com/trolleybus-tramway/12-double-articulated-trolleybuses-hess-lausanne-switzerland/Progress... perhaps we need trolleybuses after all - the benefits of a full electric vehicle without lugging around batteries. As for considering lower platform edge doors - I think the French are now thinking of moving back to full height PEDs as it seems idiots still conspire to drop mobile phones (and other stuff) onto the tracks and some go to absurd lengths to retrieve the damn things. Here are just a few examples (there are many more) of why - driverless trains or not - there is perhaps a case for PEDs everywhere... abc7chicago.com/walks-onto-train-video-distrcacter-walker-woman-falls/5662895/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3183969/The-shocking-moment-man-jumps-rail-platform-tracks-risking-life-retrieve-mobile-phone.htmlI wish someone did a study to work out how much disruption would be avoided if TFL actually removed all wifi and 4G 5G signal reception in their network - at least for the general public. Hopefully without the distraction of endless FacePage posts, people will finally decide to look where they are going and stop dropping phone onto the tracks.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Aug 23, 2021 7:28:29 GMT
I wonder if HM Treasury has inspired this initiative? The best way to kill off a stupid idea is to show beyond doubt just how stupidly expensive it will be. The Yes Minister reference does indeed seem pertinent especially if you are trying to dissuade a Minister hell bent on his latest pet project. Anyone remember how quickly operating the crew manned Routemaster 2 fleet became unviable - meaning TFL are stuck for years with the extra fuel maintenace and depreciation costs of operating buses lugging around extra staircases and boarding platforms - brilliant!
I really hope TFL take the brave step of doing it properly and rather than rely on in-house musings. They need to round up a selection of reputable experts from inside and outside the railway sector and including construction firms, and then armed with a full briefing of the latest HSE and accessibility rules see what they come up with.
At least from TFL's perspective the whole cost of this fruitless exercise can then be passed to HMT. As this means the cost will also be paid for by people North of Watford I wonder how long it will be before Andy Burnham and others cry foul.
|
|