|
Post by ruislip on Feb 29, 2008 18:48:54 GMT
If the T-Cup is implemented, will that affect the Wimblewares working on the District? I have a feeling that Edgware Rd will be stretched with both T-Cups and Wimblewares trying to use the two middle platforms--especially in the Peaks. Could they not send the Wimblewares to Mansion House or Tower Hill?
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Mar 1, 2008 7:23:12 GMT
My understanding is that the Wimbleware will be unchanged, though I accept your reservations! Just to remind you, I wrote a piece on the proposed changes back in 2003 which can be read at www.trainweb.org/districtdave/html/upgrade_plans.html - unfortunately some of the links no longer work and of course there are changes to the plan which have been discussed elsewhere on this forum.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Mar 1, 2008 12:23:28 GMT
Surely it could be used as an excuse to re-extend them back round the northern circle to moorgate/aldgate?
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 1, 2008 12:40:41 GMT
If ATO is to be delayed as rumured the T cup will not work! As stated Edgware Road will not work. If T cup is implemented, running the Wimbledon trains to Moorgate will add extra pressure to the Northern Circle. Aldgate is not an option because Met trains will need it to reverse 10 tph to Uxbridge.
By projecting Wimbledon trains to Moorgate, (apart from crossing the westbound road) they will have to compete with Circle Line trains to and from Hammersmith, Hammersmith & City trains to and from Hammersmith and at Baker St, the aformentioned Uxbridge-Aldgate trains, plus all the other Met city trains in the rush hour!
Anyone for an old skool Wimbledon-High Street service?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 17:05:17 GMT
I daresay this has been discussed before... I wonder how operationally necessary the accommodation sidings at Edgware Road are.
Has a fifth platform on their site been considered? This would allow for three reversing platforms. (Yes, I know it would cost money...)
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Mar 1, 2008 17:36:49 GMT
I daresay this has been discussed before... I wonder how operationally necessary the accommodation sidings at Edgware Road are. Has a fifth platform on their site been considered? This would allow for three reversing platforms. (Yes, I know it would cost money...) At present there are 3 C Stocks out-stabled at Edgware Road. They were banding round ideas at connecting the east end of the sidings up with the running line. Personally, if they get round to flogging off the airspace above the station in time then a complete remodel, with straight, thus faster platforms and as you say, one more platform would be nice. *Retrieves pie from sky*
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,763
|
Post by Chris M on Mar 1, 2008 17:46:52 GMT
Will the S stock fit in these sidings?
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 1, 2008 18:11:20 GMT
Nope, the C stocks only just fit into them now! I like the idea of a 3rd platform-that would certainly make things better.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on Mar 1, 2008 19:20:58 GMT
Why not use the original Metropolitan Railway tunnel between South Kensington and Gloucester Road as sidings?
EDIT: there is only space for one long siding in the trackbed!
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 1, 2008 19:28:15 GMT
That is a possibility. I personally think that the Moorgate-Barbican section will become sidings when the track is closed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 23:39:16 GMT
Why not use the original Metropolitan Railway tunnel between South Kensington and Gloucester Road as sidings? EDIT: there is only space for one long siding in the trackbed! I'm sure I've read elsewhere that there may be sidings at South Ken. There should be space for at least one train in the tunnel between South Kensington and Gloucester Road, plus one at the disused platform at South Ken (which could be connected both ends). There's also space on the other side (south) of the station, or will be when the portakabins go.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 23:45:15 GMT
There's also space on the other side (south) of the station, or will be when the portakabins go. Are those portakabins going? They've been there for at least the last 20 years, I assumed they were permanent.
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Mar 2, 2008 4:53:48 GMT
Well for a start Neasden will be able to take a lot more trains, there was a figure around. I'll try and find it!
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Mar 2, 2008 6:17:18 GMT
There's also space on the other side (south) of the station, or will be when the portakabins go. Are those portakabins going? They've been there for at least the last 20 years, I assumed they were permanent. The portakabins were part of the 'temporary' signal and communications installation depot which opened in 1980. The P-Way had a small section there. I worked from it for all bar four years from the time it was opened to the time it closed following devolution. The depot was for the most part vacated in the run up to devolution as engineering was outsourced and staff were downsiized from 1989 through 1991. The remaining S&E staff having survived the hatchet were transferred to signal house at Acton Works in early 1992 ISTR. I believe the portakabins are in use by the P-Way to this day. The last time I was near or by about four years ago most of the depot as I knew it was gone having been derelict for several years.
|
|
|
Post by stanmorek on Mar 2, 2008 17:02:37 GMT
The last time I visited the portakabins back in 2005 the Metronet possession planners were occupying it and I believe they are still there. This was where the centre of operations was during Engineering possessions from the infracos end. The Possession Master and the POSUMs (Protection Support Manager) were based here with the Engineer in Charge (EIC) travelling around visiting each of the worksites.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2008 17:19:42 GMT
They are full full of what I assume P Way, when I go past late in the evenings.
|
|
|
Post by stanmorek on Mar 2, 2008 17:25:24 GMT
They had night briefings for staff working in possessions too. I remember they'd lock the room after the meeting started and the whole thing was recorded on tape.
|
|
|
Post by plampin on Mar 28, 2008 22:41:39 GMT
Like the chesham service the future of wimbledon to edgeware road trains is uncertain. Although the T-cup service is not planned to affect this i expect it will leaving us with a service that terminates at high street kensington or moorgate, however both of those seem unlikely. Also the introduction of the t-cup service is unlikely its self because of the work on infastructure needed. Signals need updating, track needs relaying and other things. If this all gets done by 2011 (the date it should be done) i will be very suprised
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2008 8:41:30 GMT
I know I've asked this before, but I have never seen any official documentation on the Teacup line, and all the internet documentation on it seems to be outdated. I am therefore not really expecting it to actually happen.
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Apr 8, 2008 8:54:03 GMT
I know I've asked this before, but I have never seen any official documentation on the Teacup line, and all the internet documentation on it seems to be outdated. I am therefore not really expecting it to actually happen. It's on the LU Intranet!
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,763
|
Post by Chris M on Apr 8, 2008 10:08:37 GMT
That doesn't help those of us who aren't LU staff!
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Apr 8, 2008 10:19:00 GMT
That doesn't help those of us who aren't LU staff! Well it proves that it is 99% likely to happen, as it says they can't sustain the increased service without it. Maybe someone in the upgrades (PRJB) could get it okayed to have it posted here?
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Apr 8, 2008 12:00:48 GMT
Well now that the ATO has been delayed I doubt the T cup will happen any time soon! In my view the T cup will be unworkable without automatic opertation and it may well be unworkable with ATO!
|
|
|
Post by cetacean on Apr 8, 2008 12:23:11 GMT
The Wood Lane station page does promise a future 15 tph service on the Hammersmith branch, and I can't see how that can happen without a major reworking of services. So I'd count it as a public acknowledgement that something's up.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Apr 8, 2008 12:33:24 GMT
It must have been written I while ago! I can see the T cup being delayed by a few years!
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Apr 8, 2008 17:49:50 GMT
This is what it says on the Intranet - for my part, I think that turning trains at Edgware Road will be worse than having a Circle....:
As part of the upgrade, new service patterns are being developed for the Circle line. A number of options were considered, but the final option selected provides the most customer benefits. Under this proposal, Circle line trains will run from Hammersmith then on around the existing Circle line route, before reversing at Edgware Road. This will disbenefit a small number of customers who currently travel east from stations such as Notting Hill Gate, but overall it will bring more benefits.
The suggestion of running the Metropolitan line as far as Barking was rejected as the longer route would reduce the reliability of the service while not providing significant benefits. Terminating the Metropolitan line service at Baker Street was also consider, but this would inconvenience a significant number of customers who travel onwards to the city.
Outline of the proposed service
Benefits The service between Hammersmith and Paddington will be increased, supporting growing demand in this area. The reliability of the Circle line will be improved, and in the event of degraded service, reversing Circle line trains at Edgware Road will make recovery easier.
Planning The new service will still be described as 'Circle line', and train descriptions will be carefully worded to ensure that customers understand which train they need to catch
This service pattern will require an increased number of trains to operate, and so cannot be introduced until delivery of the new sub surface rolling stock is well underway.
Hammersmith & City line trains will continue to run to Barking and Aldgate will remain the terminus for the Metropolitan line. Specific details on train frequencies are still being developed and will be posted on these pages once available.
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Apr 8, 2008 22:05:21 GMT
I wonder whether there will be any more changes before the plan is implemented.
For example could the Hammersmith Liverpool St - Aldgate East section be stopped (along with conflicts at the flat junction at Aldgate) when Crossrail services begin? This could improve reliability of the rest of the SSL.
Remember too if things go to plan Wimbleware and the rest of the Wimbledon service will be part of another line entirely (as it should be) in the not too distant future
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Apr 8, 2008 22:59:59 GMT
I also reckon that the line between Acton Town and Rayners Lane will become SSR.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Apr 9, 2008 2:55:54 GMT
Right, I have another Barbican based idea, this time for getting the Met to Barking! Retrack Barbican as having two main roads with two passing loops, using the soon to be abandoned FCC platforms. Have the met arrive in alternate platforms in a staggered pattern, so each met that's passing through waits one cycle before proceding on its journey. If that wouldnt work on its own, then do the same at Aldgate to provide capacity for the circle (the ability to 'sideline' a train so as to reduce any delay to the one behind it) (not to sure if ALD possible, also probably too expensive), and what about that plan at Baker Street to turn one of the terminal roads into a through road? If these schemes could be done cheaply, would it provide enough redundancy? C5, wrt the Rayners line, anything that can take more train should! It would deffinately simplify piccadilly line opperations just doing Cockfosters - Heathrow, and would put an end to surface stock and tube stock sharing platforms, with the DDA stuff gained as a bonus. It would also mean that in th future, surface stock floors can be designed the same height as NR train ones, so more level PTI's.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2008 7:39:39 GMT
I wonder whether there will be any more changes before the plan is implemented. For example could the Hammersmith Liverpool St - Aldgate East section be stopped (along with conflicts at the flat junction at Aldgate) when Crossrail services begin? This could improve reliability of the rest of the SSL. Remember too if things go to plan Wimbleware and the rest of the Wimbledon service will be part of another line entirely (as it should be) in the not too distant future God I hope not! Crossrail shares only four stations with the Hammersmith and City line. Hardly enough to get rid of that service and make everyone change onto Crossrail. What I'd like to see, ideally, is the four-tracking of Aldgate East - Whitechapel, and the running of an improved and much more reliable H&C that doesn't interfere with the District Line there.
|
|