|
Post by District Dave on Mar 13, 2007 19:49:25 GMT
One of the reasons such diversions always get a good airing here is in an attempt to remind me that I did a similar thing a few years ago and admitted it! If you want to read the details (before someone else posts it) the link is www.trainweb.org/districtdave/html/confession_time_.html
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Mar 13, 2007 19:43:44 GMT
Do you lot all have short range tanks or something?
I consider that my fluid intake is perfectly average and in seven years on the trains I've never needed to stop for a pee - I take a 'relief' before I pick up and on my meal break!
Of course we all know there are a good number of drivers that will use the need for a PNR as a means of getting out of work, but that's a slightly different issue.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Mar 9, 2007 9:26:09 GMT
However they leave Aldgate East, there really is no need to rush towards the next signal. Honestly ;D And don't we know it........ But I endorse both ADW and trainopd78's comments.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Mar 2, 2007 21:57:30 GMT
In reply to TOK....
Yes, the depot staff used the leads to get the train back on current, then it was off into Ealing Common - presumably with the T.Op being VERY careful where he stopped!!
And Tubeprune, it's exactly as I describe - remember we aren't even permitted to remove shed leads these days!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Mar 2, 2007 20:31:24 GMT
I don't know what happened to my posting but here goes #2! 1. The service is up the swanee and the Controller or whatever he is called today decides to turn a Richmond short at Gunnersbury as happened today. How is this achieved in concert with the NR signalman that controls Gunnersbury (by the way where is the signal cabin now...Wimbledon?)? Does he pick up the dog and bone and contact the NR signaller? 2. What happens if, goodness forbid, a train becomes gapped? When the Met locos became gapped the driver/motorman used to get out a stored cable and then affixed the same to a conductor rail to get on to the juice. I suppose these days in the absence of cables that can be attached, you need a train to rescue and pull back? In answer to your points: 1) Yes he picks up the phone and tells the signaller (NR) that is what is to occur, and he fits it into what he has occuring. The signaller occupies the cosy little signal box just adjacent to the lines outside Richmond. 2) Gap jumper leads were used in this instance; these are still liberally spread across the combine, but the problem these days who is licensed to use them. The assisting train procedure is an option, but takes longer (that is if there is a suitably licensed person available.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Mar 2, 2007 20:08:01 GMT
How on earth could THAT happen!?! Surely the driver would have seen a telltale on the TMS when doing his prepwork - I would expect the cab circuit batteries to have a diagnostic of some kind available! Was the driver able to change ends and return to the depot? 3) A little later (and by which time the day was already destroyed) there was a track circuit failure jest east of Barking (I think). Surely you jest! ;D ;D No - no diagnostic as such for the batteries. There are some clues that may or may not reveal themselves, but not part of our formal prep procedure - essentially you need to know the clues. We don't change ends and return over the route; if the depot staff want it back in, they move it. Bottom line is that by getting the train out onto the main Metronet have fulfilled there part of the contract that they have presented a train and it entered service; if they'd taken it back, they'd be penalised. Ha, ha - a typo - how amusing!! Wasn't it, A Good Cuppa - wish I had the time to proof read all your posts
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Mar 2, 2007 18:12:18 GMT
A variety of things managed to conspire so far as I could work out! 1) A late surrender of an emergency engineering possession at Barons Court (no idea what that was about) 2) A train leaving Ealing Common depot at the start of traffic got the front car 'gapped' (i.e. off traction current) and the batteries that are supposed to provide current to the cab circuits were flat... This meant that no trains could exit the depot from the west end. 3) A little later (and by which time the day was already destroyed) there was a track circuit failure jest east of Barking (I think). Personally, I got stuck early morning between Plaistow and Barking (train was booked to reverse at Barking) - it took something like 25 minutes to do this trip), arrived back at Earls Court on the west ten minutes before I should have been arriving back on the east from Ealing for my mealbreak; train was used for a reform so got off a little early Second half was a farce (remember too that there was supposed to be an engineering possession of Tower Hill bay road, so that was not in use as an engineering timetable was in place). My second train arrived on the west when it should have been on the east (I should have gone Mansion House -> Ealing Broadway -> Mansion House -> Earls Court west to finish). I did Ealing Broadway -> Mansion House -> Ealing Broadway, where I arrived at 13:27 - I was due to finish on the west at ECT at 13:45! Phoned Controller; 'Oh brown stuff' he responded when I pointed this out to him. Put the train up as Earls Court and reverse it there for your relief (albeit this would still mean I was late finisihing). All duly done. Arrived ECTW and - guess what? NO RELIEF!!!!!!!!!!! Eventually a driver turned up, reformed a train that was now more or less back on time to one which made it an hour late (?) - suppose the booked driver wasn't around, and they needed someone to take it! - and finally got back to acton just in time to fill out an overtime docket for fifteen minutes!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 27, 2007 21:54:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 19, 2007 11:04:33 GMT
Am I the only person to have reversed a 38TS in No 2 at HSK? I took the train from Northfields to HSK, then to S Ken (reverse) and back to Northfields. I was turning the train round after it had been transferred from the Northern Line wrong way round. I had the "Depot Furniture" from Acton as pilot. The driver had spent so long off the main that he failed to point out the wrong signal was lowered at HSK. They wanted to put me into Plat 3. The guard, who was covering the job, argued that it was the wrong road. While they were argueing, I went slowly past the two repeaters and rolled to a stop at the signal. It went back as I stopped. I got on the phone. "Sorry, mate" says the regulator, "I'll get a release and set it up for No 2. Go as soon as it clears." Much sniggering from young guard and much spluttering and embarassment from old DR driver. Still, it was a very easy bucksheee Sunday. Do they still have depot furniture turns? The Depot Furniture is a thing loooong in the past now; I can't remember when the guys who formed this "elite" came back to the "mainstream" of the depot, but I have a feeling it was in the early '90's - possibly after the introduction of Company Plan - not sure! I expect others here can expand on this. We have one T/Op at our depot who decided that he would stay at Ealing Common, only to see his job there disappear in about 2000 - he was still able to return to 'us' though -(presumably part of the deal). BUT he lost his Depot Seniority with 'us' and, despite being at the time a 25 year man, went to the bottom of the order in this respect. He is still complaining about it - daily - ad infinitum; I suspect colleagues will recognise who I mean! Buckshee Sundays - another thing long gone! Sundays now just form part of the rostered week and the duties are almost all rough!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 16, 2007 21:43:30 GMT
At the risk of appearing a smug smart rear, I actually mentioned the T Cup concept in an item on my web site well in excess of three years ago! Have a look at www.trainweb.org/districtdave/html/upgrade_plans.htmlWhilst I confirm that this was (and as I allude to in the article) a vision of what was in the semi public domain at the time I am a little surprised that the discussion here seems to think of this as something revolutionary. You will see too that Tubeprune also discusses the issue in his article at www.trainweb.org/tubeprune/SSL%20PPP%20Upgrade.htmSo - if you want to keep in the know read this site ()sorry - couldn't resist!!)
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 16, 2007 15:15:23 GMT
Are you talking about the one that is half and half chris? No - he is referring to ADW's comment that it is rare to see any D Stock train in P.2 at HSK. Another reason (apparently) they don't like using this move is that, because it is rarely used, the signalling and points equipment doesn't always set the route up. If this occurs the route has to be manually secured and the train given the appropriate authority to pass the signal at danger. This, of course, delays services even further. In context I've only ever done the move once IIRC.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 15, 2007 20:37:52 GMT
I think this is a matter that you and I must agree to disagree about! Whilst I fully understand the gist of your position, I stick with my view that there are too many possible variations that can really make it practical. I accept that there around the world various ideas for the best way to get passengers in the direction they want to go, none are perfect (though interesting to see that the Stadtbahnnetz diagram you link to shows remarkable similarities to the iconic London Underground map ) I'm afraid I don't think that the current arrangement justifies the proposition you make. IMHO it ain't broke, so don't fix it; that isn't meant to sound complacent nor 'resistent to change', it's my firmly held belief. Anyone else got any views perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 15, 2007 18:01:43 GMT
Station supervisor then, I don't know the exact title. His name is Joe Brown, you might know the London Railway Atlas that he wrote. And yes, that's what I'm saying. It's a question of changing the colour of the line on the map and changing some signs. The internal workings would be exactly the same, but it would be much more clear to the public what trains to take if signs just called it a different line, just as they do with the H&C and Circle. Do the Wimbleware trains already arrive at the same platforms in Earl's Court, in theory? Because that'd make it even easier. Is it just me or are you very touchy when it comes to this? Joe's grade is Duty Manager (Trains) - better known as 'DMT' and I know him extremely well, and have done for several years. It's not a question of whether or not I'm 'touchy' as you put it, it's simply a question of how these changes would improve the service to passengers. The essential points are that the destinations on the front of the trains and platform describers would not alter. Let's be practical here - on westbound trips once at Earls Court all passengers want to know is where the train is heading - is it an Ealing Broadway, a Richmond, a Wimbledon or an Olympia (or possibly it's either being 'short tripped' or is timetabled to terminate at some intermediate point which - in reality- really means either Putney Bridge or Parsons Green). In any of these scenarios where a train started its trip from is of no interest to the passenger at all; neither do they care what stock it is - all they want to do is get to their destination as soon as possible! Quick journeys and short waits = happy passengers My point is that though you can rename part of the service - but it makes no difference to the passenger's "experience" to their journey. At present trains from Edgware Road always arrive at Platform 4 at Earls Court and trains from Wimbledon always arrive at Platform 2 - they have to - there are no crossovers to allow the use of the other two platforms. BUT remember that trains ex-Edgware Road only make up half the service to Wimbledon, and these can be routed to either westbound platform! And this is why my standpoint is that to westbound passengers on the Wimbledon branch the proposition of renaming part of the service makes no difference! I am not proposing that the eastbound service is a little different, and it is of course far from unknown for passengers to board a train going in the wrong direction - i.e. they want a city bound train and get on a HSK/Edgware Road servce and vice-versa. This is more to do with just boarding 'a train' without checking its destination at all (or asking staff - of which there is invariably plenty) which train they need to board. Hence my position that a renaming of part of the service would do nothing to improve or enhance a passengers journey. I hope that helps to clarify my position!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 15, 2007 15:05:42 GMT
And I actually do know a District Line ex-driver and now station operator (at Earl's Court) who is all in favour of doing this, so I don't think my knowledge is the problem here. Edit: exactly as Chris M says above, too. So - this being EXACTLY my point - what has that achieved? The 'Wimbleware' trains will still arrive at Earls Court P.2, will still say 'Edgware Road' on the front, they'll still be the same trains, the customer's *might* possibly see some different signage of some sort (whoope-de-doo), the drivers will still be working in exactly the same way as they do now, the service frequency will be the same, the trains will still be supplied by Hammersmith depot, the trains will still be diverted in certain circumstances as they are now, there will still be 'blocking back' into Edgware Rd! There are not a dedicated number of C Stock trains that only operate the Wimbleware service; the C77's are nominally owned by the District, but all the C's work on a pooled basis; the obligation is to supply the required number each day by Hammersmith depot. BTW - Interested to know - what's a 'Station Operator' - never heard that grade before!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 15, 2007 8:19:42 GMT
It's just a re-branding, and it would make things a lot clearer to the many people, especially at Earl's Court. How? And by creating a new line it wouldn't just be 'rebranding'. By your own proposition you're creating a new line; this would mean new depots (as in traincrew depots), training specific to the routes that the 'new' line would be operating; they would no longer be District drivers, so therefore not qualified over the whole of the current diagram. The Olympia shuttle and Wimbleware line don't share most of their track with the rest of the District. All the rest uses the same central section, which I think is why they should be branches. What are you talking about? The only part of the line that the Olympia and Edgware Road services do not share are the short branch to Olympia (which remember is also used to divert other rains for service recovery) and between Hight Street Kensington and Edgware Road. HSK is also used both for a wide variety of 'booked' moves at the beginning and close of traffic and - again - service diversions and recovery at other times of the day. I would put money on it that virtually every day trains are diverted to HSK; by your proposal this would be lost. But the Wimbleware uses a very different line in the centre. What? Tell me where; I've been driving those routes for seven years now and there is commonality with all routes, as mentioned above. Diversions are obviously possible and that flexibility would still be there after the rebranding. No - by your proposition they would not be; they would now be a seperate line. Remember, there is 'route qualification' here. As an example I (as a District driver) cannot take a train from HSK on the inner rail to Gloucester Rd; similarly a Circle/H&C driver cannot go further towards Earls Court than Triangle sidings. Don't they also run Piccadilies using the District line between Hammersmith and Acton in case there's a problem with the Picc. tracks now? And also the District operating over the fast; these are specifically trained and refreshedmoves - not just an ad hoc thing And there are circle lines that become Barking-bound District services as well I thought. Or H&Cs. Things like that will still be possible. No they don't become District trains - they are specific moves to the Circle/H&C - which ARE all part of the same line. And all the cut and cover lines are going to be using the same type of S-stock trains in the end. Irrelevant. Similarity and knowledge in rolling stock is something entirely different to knowledge of routes and moves. In closing I have to say you seem to lack a fundemental understanding of how train operation works - I suggest you try to get a better grasp on how the railway is organised before making such sweeping propositions.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 14, 2007 21:53:09 GMT
The District Line Edgware Road - Wimbledon is already seperate to the rest of the District Line. It wont cost any extra all they need to do is change the name. You may be getting confused with the Kengsington Olympia - High Street Kengsington I would respectfully remind you that both ADW and myself are Instructor Operators on the District line - I think we know what we're talking about! Please re-read reply #6 above.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 14, 2007 21:14:29 GMT
Thanks Colin!
Plenty of reading material there!!!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 14, 2007 20:32:14 GMT
To Ture Dave But what i have geared recently is that they are looking at what bridges would need the track lowering under them etc for d stock to fit etc. You should know that route quite well dave ? Have u not ended up their a few times I've been up there once I'll have you know - well except other than as a passenger on a 73TS! Yes, there is a clearance issue, albeit that a D Stock does go under - there is a cautionery limit for sub-surface stocks, but it is really just a precaution - and A60's frequently come down the branch on their way to Ealing Common Depot when they're going to be run on the Test Track. I too have heard that it's back on the cards, but one of the biggest problems is a shortgae of rolling stock; I did once work out how many additional trains would be needed to fulfil the same slots as the Picc does - I can't remember the answer, but I think it was about 12 - and we don't have that number of trains sitting around; indeed at the moment with the refurb programme there are days when trains have to be cancelled because of stock shortages! Perhaps when the new S Stock starts arriving there could be possibilities, but this is still some way off, as you know.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Feb 14, 2007 20:10:02 GMT
Robster has quite succinctly summed up why the line is as it is and some of the complications in creating a whole new line to itself. Remember too that when there are problems - particularly between High Street Ken and Edgware Road - trains are diverted, often to Mansion Hse e/b and to either Ealing Broadway or Richmond if the problem is towards Wimbledon. If the line were seperated the drivers would not be part of the normal District service and not trained for these routes. Of course if there are service disruptions again C Stocks are used to cover gaps - your proposal would dramatically reduce flexibility. On Robsters point about the Rayners Lane/Uxbridge service, this is an old chestnut that does resurface from time to time. There is no doubt that the Picc would like to get rid of it but it's not as simple as that! I'm pretty sure that this topic has been discussed on this forum before - maybe if Colin spots this he may be able to direct you towards the thread(s)! There is too of course the point that as that branch was built by the District we would only be reclaiming what is rightfully ours !
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 31, 2007 20:56:37 GMT
On the engineering notice for Monday night Olympia was taken out of the possession,the new area was Earl's Ct-High St-South Ken. I know that the test trains did run on Sunday night as we were told when booking on that certain trains might not be available until they'd been returned to the depot. More digging required I think
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 31, 2007 16:00:35 GMT
I haven't heard back yet from my colleague BUT I heard today that the depot have been looking for available drivers (i.e. 'Spares') who are available to crew refurbs on test runs up to Upminster. I *think* they have a backlog of returned units waiting to be available for service - certainly there's been cancellations recently because of 'No OK stock', though I heard another reason for this, so maybe it's a combination of factors. The suggestion I've heard is that the Test Train team who would normally do this aren't available (?) but of course we are both route and stock qualified! I did volunteer to run one tomorrow but unfortunately the DMT hadn't got a 'spare' available to cover my turn
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 27, 2007 16:18:36 GMT
I believe that one of the crew will be a former colleague of mine who has recently departed to the Test Train Team.
I'll see if I can find out what's planned.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 20, 2007 8:34:57 GMT
Sounds like one of those classic things - and I bet as soon as you turn your back it drops again lol!! Now - perhaps I'm being simple here - but why does it need all these people to turn up - other than it makes it look like they're 'doing something' and gives them an opportunity to wear their orange coats maybe It's the actual techs (such as Pat) who actually know what they're doing, so let them get on with it perhaps? £425,000 sounds like a lot - but I wonder if it covers even the Customer Charter refunds and overtime bills!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 19, 2007 20:23:10 GMT
As stated this all kicked off yesterday and it was not resolved overnight. From a 'trainside' point of view, it was presenting itself as an intermittent failure - some trains were getting through the area without problems whilst others were having to go through 'under rule'. In a further attempt to sort it out the ERU this afternoon replaced a blockjoint (presumably tyhe same one?) and this resulted in a suspension between Mansion House and Whitechapel both roads. Sadly it didn't resolve the issue. At one time services from the west were going as far as Whitechapel and there was a shuttle service between Whitechapel and Upminster using 4xx numbers. Passing Ealing Common Depot several times during my shift revealed a much higher than normal number of trains 'resting'! Also of interest was the High Street <-> Wimbo service of D Stocks bearing 07x numbers! Sadly I didn't have my camera As to the original question so far as I could observe the improved performance of Connect was a great help - the Controllers seemed pretty much in touch, albeit they were rather in the same position as Canute holding back the incoming tide!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 16, 2007 20:53:04 GMT
Thanks Aspect - got to the Set Working Book before I did!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 10, 2007 21:42:27 GMT
Is there any SCHEDULED runs to Olympia apart from trains starting at HSK or ECT? Train 152 starts from Upminster Mon - Fri, goes to EBDY, then HSK and then becomes a standard Olympia service. At the end of traffic 152 returns to Upminster ex Olympia at about 23:40 IIRC to stable. 151 starts ex Ealing Common Depot, as does 127 which does the Olympias until 152 arrives as detailed above. There are no other timetabled services now which use Olympia.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 10, 2007 21:43:59 GMT
Oops - meant DC8's!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 5, 2007 22:16:22 GMT
Was the erstwhile Staines-West Drayton line ever considered? With the construction of T5, the Colnbrook-West Drayton track is STILL intact,and less than a mile from the boundaryquote] Is the Colnbrook - West Drayton line the branch from just west of West Drayton that I think was used for fuel tanker trains certainly during the mid 1990's? I remember in my previous working life I used to have a sandwich at lunchtime in that area and recall the tanker trains disappearing off on the loop from the main and crossing a hand work level crossing.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 5, 2007 22:10:44 GMT
You have forgotten BOAC... Thats as far as my memory goes! I can never forget BOAC - and of course their European counterpart BEA. Several friends from school went to those as apprentices and a few are still there. Had good Sports and Social facilities too
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 5, 2007 22:08:56 GMT
Doubtless you'll be in the Vanguard? ;D Was the erstwhile Staines-West Drayton line ever considered? With the construction of T5, the Colnbrook-West Drayton track is STILL intact,and less than a mile from the boundary Anyway, what about the Deux Ponts (on cargo flights), Langedoc, Scandia, Convair 240/340/440 Metropolitains. Kept many a 1950's European airline in business! Oh dear, oh dear - I can hear the youngsters yawning already! And of course the entry into service of the first all jet airliners - I still remember the sight and sound of the Coronados! I grew up in Greenford under what was then the approach to the 'wet and windy' runway and remember so well the screaming of the early 707's, DC7's, Comets etc and the contrast of the last generation of prop driven airliners. Oh - Dakotas, Yorks, Hastings (I think - or am I now at Northolt). Who else remembers the infamous near miss of the Indian Air Force Connie (ex Northolt I think) and the TWA 707 (I think). I saw it - having been alerted by 'conflicting' engine sounds.
|
|