|
|
Post by jakehn54 on Aug 13, 2009 20:46:29 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2009 20:54:29 GMT
Well, it surely is better to close one platform, and thus provide service to the station(Even if that means travelling past the station, change to other direction, and then get there), than to close the whole thing down?
|
|
|
|
Post by jswallow on Aug 13, 2009 21:07:56 GMT
Loughton has four platforms (according to CULG as I don't know the area). 1 and 2 are an island, 3 and 4 are an island - a single track serves both platforms 2 and 3. The work will affect the Loughton terminators if it's going to impact anything, as platform 1 (wb) and 4 (eb) are unaffected by this work. But no, I don't know what they're doing either.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2009 21:10:02 GMT
Well, it surely is better to close one platform, and thus provide service to the station(Even if that means travelling past the station, change to other direction, and then get there), than to close the whole thing down? You won't even need to do that Platforms 2&3 is the middle road normally used for reversing trains, drivers using that platform would simply open the doors on the working platform side. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2009 21:20:58 GMT
I just guessed it was a normal thru-station like...umm..Kew Gardens on the District line. How would I know there was more than two platforms?  |
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Aug 13, 2009 21:25:02 GMT
Yes, it's an easy solution. Loughton will simply become one single island platform at a time whilst the other island is refurbed. So while platform 1&2 are refurbed platform 3&4 will provide the up and down service and then vice-versa.
|
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on Aug 13, 2009 23:09:49 GMT
Will this mean that trains regularly scheduled to reverse @ Loughton will instead reverse @ Debden or somewhere else?
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Aug 14, 2009 0:38:02 GMT
I guess possibly not; looking how the similar works at Uxbridge were managed.
There may well be some 'thinning' of the reversing to allow through running; or through trains could non-stop Loughton.
(take all this with a pinch of salt, because this is only based on what has gone on in the past elsewhere on the system, rather than what is actually planned - and I can't remember OTTOMH how many Loughton reversers there are these days, I shall read the WTT to send me off to sleep....... )
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Aug 14, 2009 9:57:58 GMT
Loughton reversers were being extended to Debden in the off peak the other day - there is enough reversing time allowed at Loughton to enable the extension to Debden without losing running time.
Not sure what will happen in the peak though, as Debden has its own scheduled reversers then. Possibly Woodford / Woodford sidings.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Aug 14, 2009 10:20:27 GMT
Interesting; looking at my notes and past WTTs the situation is reversed - Loughton reversers are in/out quick and Debden reversers are there for ages.
However looking at past engineering TTNs for the Central (I've not got a huge amount, so there isn't a lot of information I can find in the library) there was a TTN published on 2006 (TTN 20/06) which was for station refurbishment at Epping at the weekends - west of Loughton the normal WTT service was run, but east of Loughton the times were re-jigged to allow only one train (and therefore only one platform at Epping occupied at once).
Appreciably the situation is slightly different at Loughton - Loughton reversers that are in passenger service both ways could be turned short at Woodford and pick up their WB working in the previously booked slot - that would leave Buckhurst Hill with a rather sparse service though.
Perhaps the easiest solution would be to extend all the passenger EB/WB reversers to Debden, and the passenger train ex-Debden would pick up an ex-Epping path to the Central area; there is plenty of scope for tweaking the stand time at Epping.
Would I be right in thinking that the Northolt - Loughton shuttles are still running giving 4 trains/20 mins as far east as Loughton? In which case there is ability to absorb more stand time at Northolt. I wonder if there will be a Northolt - Debden service, rather than a Northolt - Loughton service. Possiblilities..... Possiblilties..........
EDIT: I've just looked at TTN 42/07 (Temporary WTT for commissioning White City Sidings) which does have every fourth EB train as a Loughton reverser. Booked reversing time is 13¾ min - extending that to Debden (2½ min running time each way) would lead to an 8¾ min reversing time at Debden to allow a former Loughton reverser to return as booked. Doable I think. ;D ;D
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Aug 14, 2009 23:59:08 GMT
Very Doable! I think many trains will reverse in Woodford bay - well they might as well!
|
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Aug 15, 2009 19:42:18 GMT
I'm not 100% sure ... I might be confusing these platform closures ... but it *might* be to do with third platform works at Stratford. I recall hearing Loughton was to be used for testing alternative configurations for Stratford ... track and train cctv set-ups, sighting, doors open / door close sequencing, correct side door enable, etc etc. If you read the weekend closures PDF in detail, it is only one of 2/3 thatis closed, never the other platforms. Thats means it is the double sided track ... this does fit with Stratford scenario testing. Stratford will need a lot of fine tuning to get the ''board one side alight other side'' set up right without impacting dwell time, but clearly they don't want to block Stratford itself for this, so what can be done in advance elsewhere will be tested. As I say, I may be thinking of some other works, I will try and find out.
--
Nick
|
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Aug 16, 2009 11:33:43 GMT
I'm not 100% sure ... I might be confusing these platform closures ... but it *might* be to do with third platform works at Stratford. I recall hearing Loughton was to be used for testing alternative configurations for Stratford ... track and train cctv set-ups, sighting, doors open / door close sequencing, correct side door enable, etc etc. If you read the weekend closures PDF in detail, it is only one of 2/3 thatis closed, never the other platforms. Thats means it is the double sided track ... this does fit with Stratford scenario testing. Stratford will need a lot of fine tuning to get the ''board one side alight other side'' set up right without impacting dwell time, but clearly they don't want to block Stratford itself for this, so what can be done in advance elsewhere will be tested. As I say, I may be thinking of some other works, I will try and find out. -- Nick Can't see any segregation working. Anyone wanting DLR or Jubilee is going to alight at Stratford on the south side; anyone for LO or NXEA will use the north face of the platform. Tower Gateway's "horsehoe" design is also flawed in that passengers using the Royal Mint Street entrance have to board/alight from the same (south) side of the train, when all boarding is supposed to be from the north face. |
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Aug 16, 2009 12:24:05 GMT
During Loughton's refurb a few years' back the platform tarmac was renewed, but started to bubble/break up shortly afterwards as it was (allegedly) not laid properly. A decision was then taken to replace this with paving slabs. After 80% of the surface was completed the Heritage lobby stepped in and pointed out that this finish was incomptable with the station's listed status and that tarmac would have to be reinstated. This work was due to begin from today but, because of some contractor issues, is now cancelled until further notice...
|
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Aug 16, 2009 13:09:09 GMT
I'm not 100% sure ... I might be confusing these platform closures ... but it *might* be to do with third platform works at Stratford. I recall hearing Loughton was to be used for testing alternative configurations for Stratford ... track and train cctv set-ups, sighting, doors open / door close sequencing, correct side door enable, etc etc. If you read the weekend closures PDF in detail, it is only one of 2/3 thatis closed, never the other platforms. Thats means it is the double sided track ... this does fit with Stratford scenario testing. Stratford will need a lot of fine tuning to get the ''board one side alight other side'' set up right without impacting dwell time, but clearly they don't want to block Stratford itself for this, so what can be done in advance elsewhere will be tested. As I say, I may be thinking of some other works, I will try and find out. -- Nick Can't see any segregation working. Anyone wanting DLR or Jubilee is going to alight at Stratford on the south side; anyone for LO or NXEA will use the north face of the platform. Tower Gateway's "horsehoe" design is also flawed in that passengers using the Royal Mint Street entrance have to board/alight from the same (south) side of the train, when all boarding is supposed to be from the north face. I did say I was not 100% sure. Perhaps it is my assumption they are doing one side out one side in, I don't know. Whatever, they were to supposed to be testing or have tested a Stratford set up at Loughton some time. -- Nick |
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Aug 16, 2009 14:26:37 GMT
Why would Stratford WB gaining two platform faces become a special problem for 92TS or the Central Line in general? Trains already serve such set ups at White City and, indeed, Loughton.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2009 13:11:13 GMT
The problem is that if both sides of the train are opened on the westbound at Stratford, dwell times will suffer because people will use the train itself as a shortcut, to avoid going through the subways. That's why you need to test the scenario of opening one side of the train first, then the other, to see if it works.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Aug 17, 2009 15:20:13 GMT
Ah. The 'Morden Problem'...... Shall I place a bet that the dwell time is extended by 25 seconds? Or there is 15 seconds stand time scheduled at this platform?
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Aug 17, 2009 22:13:45 GMT
There is a similar setup at Barking on the eastbound District - this has worked OK for years. However, the service is less frequent meaning dwell times are not so crucial, and it is nowhere near as busy as Stratford is in the morning peak!
In terms of people using the train to cut across platforms, that would be a challenge in the am peak when sometimes it's hard enough getting on, let alone managing to get through a train!
|
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Aug 21, 2009 16:41:12 GMT
|
|
