|
|
Post by suncloud on Oct 18, 2009 9:46:25 GMT
From reading 'what are these' and 'northwood sidings', I was wondering how far off being ready for S-stock testing at least parts of the Met are to having them running under full test in terms of infrastructure etc. (Not neccesarily with pax though).
A lot of the visible improvements (ally rail, OPO cctv equipment and now buffer stops) seem to appear earliest on the route to Watford . Is this coincidence, or is Neasden to Watford the intended initial testing route?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2009 9:56:14 GMT
The last aprt of your post hit the nail bang on the head, originally we should've had the s stock out now doing it's test runs but with it being our company you know things always fall behind schedule! There have been preparation works the immunise track circuitry betwwen Neasden and the north end of the Met as that is where is the nitial runs will be done but i believe the Watford branch will be the first strect covered, finally the delivery of the fleet is inevitanle
|
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on Oct 18, 2009 18:36:41 GMT
Somerhimpson - The train should not be out testing on the railway now actually, and we are not behind schedule at all.  suncloud - We will be testing (ahead of schedule) on the north of the Met initially so you will see work associated with OPO CCTV, SDO, CSDE, immunisation, train arrestors, and signal sighting to name a few off the top of my head. This is all in preparation for for testing and integration work before the introduction to passenger service in summer 2010 which is, again, ahead of the programmed schedule. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2009 19:01:43 GMT
Somerhimpson - The train should not be out testing on the railway now actually, and we are not behind schedule at all. Has the schedule changed then? ISTR that S stock should have started passenger running from 2009 on the Met with the entire Met S stocked from 2011, followed by the C stock replacement then the District from 2014. |
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Oct 18, 2009 20:31:45 GMT
Jim and PRJB are both right to an extent. Jim's outline dates are roughly the ones from the start of the programme in about 2003/4. PRJB's are the current ones that have been so for well over a year.
A fairly thorough list of enabling works, no doubt the eagle eyed will be posting more pictures and questions in the next few weeks and months.
|
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on Oct 18, 2009 21:21:30 GMT
Somerhimpson - The train should not be out testing on the railway now actually, and we are not behind schedule at all. Has the schedule changed then? ISTR that S stock should have started passenger running from 2009 on the Met with the entire Met S stocked from 2011, followed by the C stock replacement then the District from 2014. Jim, we 're-baselined' some time ago now and have planned for passenger operation in summer 2010 for ages. Train 2 isn't due to be out on the railway testing for a while yet (LU staff, such as yourself, can PM me if they wish). All our internal literature has been stating this for a long time too. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Oct 26, 2009 23:48:28 GMT
"Re-baselined" - what a word . . . why not just say "put back the schedule"?
Look forward to seeing these trains in service next summer, hope you all manage to get the necessary work done to make it happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by deadmans on Oct 27, 2009 8:39:19 GMT
From reading 'what are these' and 'northwood sidings', I was wondering how far off being ready for S-stock testing at least parts of the Met are to having them running under full test in terms of infrastructure etc. (Not neccesarily with pax though). A lot of the visible improvements (ally rail, OPO cctv equipment and now buffer stops) seem to appear earliest on the route to Watford . Is this coincidence, or is Neasden to Watford the intended initial testing route? It would be nice if they had the depot ready for the trains. ;D Nearly two years behind schedule. ;D |
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on Oct 27, 2009 22:42:11 GMT
"Re-baselined" - what a word . . . why not just say "put back the schedule"? Look forward to seeing these trains in service next summer, hope you all manage to get the necessary work done to make it happen. Because it is not so much looking at putting schedules back, rather we look to see which programs are on time and which programs are behind and then look at the entire program to produce a realistic baseline to work from. This isn't just a one project program. Whilst the depot is behind schedule and whilst the depot is probably the project that has slipped the most we are working to see how we can bring this workstream back into line and also looking at more efficient ways of working. Perhaps my use of the term 're-baselined' shows I have been working in projects for too long? |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Oct 28, 2009 13:35:08 GMT
"Re-baselined" - what a word . . . why not just say "put back the schedule"? Look forward to seeing these trains in service next summer, hope you all manage to get the necessary work done to make it happen. Because it is not so much looking at putting schedules back, rather we look to see which programs are on time and which programs are behind and then look at the entire program to produce a realistic baseline to work from. This isn't just a one project program. Whilst the depot is behind schedule and whilst the depot is probably the project that has slipped the most we are working to see how we can bring this workstream back into line and also looking at more efficient ways of working. Perhaps my use of the term 're-baselined' shows I have been working in projects for too long? Thanks for the info, I appreciate that projects of these levels of complexity are not easy to keep on track. I hope you took my comment about "re-baselined" in the manner it was intended! |
|
