Planned Stabling at Lillie Bridge

Vast could go some way to describe Ruislip but certainly does not describe Lille Bridge.

Two of the roads that will be used are the long roads to which you refer - 1 and 10 - and each of these will stable three trains each.

As for the rest (certainly between 2 and 9) IIRC they all come to a dead end against the concrete of EC2! I'm fairly certain of this - I've been over there so many times lately I''m sufferning from Lillie Bridge fatigue!

Bear in mind though that EC2 and the surrounding area is all due for redevelopment - I think the plans are for a Westfield style shopping mall across the whole area - LU is to sell the air space above Lillie Bridge and I suppose it'll all be rafted over. Ashfield House will go too I understand.

With the greatest respect I think if you're basing your comments on Quail diagrams that are old and out of date; I suspect going back to before Earls Court 2 was constructed (or if later assumed there were no alterations to the layout when EC2 was built).

At this time I can't post a schematic plan of the location but I will attempt to describe the layout as best I can; forgive me if this post becomes rather protracted!

1) 1 Road extends all the way under EC2 and comes to an end at the roadway which is off Empress Place. To give you an idea of its length, this is one of the roads on which we will stable three S Stock trains - each of which are over 117 metres long! There is currently a spur off 1 Road (1A Road) which extends up to the EC2 building - this is to be decommissioned

2) 10 Road is similar to 1 Road, excepting that there is no spur road - see later.

3) 2 Road Runs up as far as the EC2 building; at the top of this are pits which were built when the alterations associated to EC2 were done but apparently these were never used! There is also a spur from this road - 2A Road - as with 1A Road this is to be decommissioned.

4) 3 Road no longer exists - it was removed when the EC2 alterations were done.

5) 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 Roads are the shed roads; all these run up to the EC2 building and trains can be shunted between roads from these and all give access to 10 Road.

6) 11 and 12 Roads are both accessed from 10 Road - there are connections at both the West Kensington and EC2 ends.

7) The Stores Road (unnumbered) is adjacent to 12 Road and is also accessed via 10 Road, also at the EC2 end; this road roughly goes about as far as the mid point of the sheds.

I hope all that makes some sense and helps you visualise how it's all set up. Though I have been getting many photos whilst I've been working over there, these are more associated with the stuff I've been doing, rather than general views of the site; I'll see if it's possible to get some that may give an idea of what I'm describing!

I have to say I'm having to do this from memory as to be honest beyond the sheds I'm not interested - we will not operate service trains beyond the shed on 7, 8 and 9 Roads - they are the only shed roads we will be using. If the depot require trains shunted to the south of the shed (i.e. towards EC2) this will be done by depot staff.

Thinking about it I think I am incorrect in saying those roads go as far as the EC2 wall and your interpretation is more correct; certainly they all converge towards and eventually join 10 Road.

However if we go back to your previous thought 'As it stands at the moment, most of the space underneath EC2 isn't really used. The layout is fine for engineering trains, but not so good for stabling passenger stock.' I am sure that the shed roads couldn't be extended sufficiently that they would offer enough space to stable trains without fouling the points towards 10 Road because of the physical structure of EC2; again I'd have to have a look to confirm this for certain!

When a train is stabled at that position on 1 Road - which will be known as '1 Bottom' (and the same applies for a train in a similar position on 10 Road) - they are pretty much tight up to the walls of EC2. There is just room for a walkway to the wall side of the train, but it is very restricted; they will not form part of our walking route.

I'm almost certain that you are correct concerning the loss of the connection to 10 Road, but I will try to remember to have a look next time I'm over there.

I will go through the photos I've accumulated over the last few weeks and if any help this discussion I'll post them up

The required engineering works to the infrastructure to accommodate the S Stock seemed vast. I presume this was all costed out at the time the quote for the supply of the new Stock was being examined. Which begs the question is it worth it, rather than have the Stock designed to fit the existing infrastructure without all these extra works being necessary!!

Yes I'm sure the costs probably were taken into account as regards the extra stabling requirements for the S Stock, which from Tubeprune's reply, above are quite extensive. It's just a strange situation where Stock is being purchased which, as a consequence require extensive extra works to be carried out. Perhaps because of this, the Stock should have been designed to fit the infrastructure rather than the other way around, which all seems like the ' tail is wagging the dog ' in this case.

But this has always been the LT/LU way! One thing that can be said about it is that there has never really been a single standard in any division or department of the organisation at any level in any discipline. Standardisation would bring cost benefits in so many ways but short termism over many decades has ensured that such could never be achieved because of the way that finance and budgets were/are arranged.

So while your point would be common sense it is forced to be impossible but at the risk of going wildly off topic momentarily the same can be said for the national road network and transport infrastructure in general.

So on the downside short term forward planning is the real issue which can never really be resolved because technology advances exponentially, finance comes in fits and starts and 'the combine' began as many separate standards. The upside to short termism has always been that the company has been at the forefront in terms of usage of new technology to a greater or lesser degree.

S stock is an attempt at standardisation for sub surface stock and should have a knock on effect in other disciplines as well which is a good thing but which may at some time in the future hold back the usage of even newer technology.

In my view it is swings and roundabouts so whether the dog wags the tail or vice versa is of little consequence.

I really think this must be seen as a bold and sensible decision which has some foresight and regard for the future. If the stock was purchased to fit the smallest available platform lengths (Bayswater being the main restrictor) you miss a golden opportunity to substantially (in the case of the Circle and H&C) increase the carrying capacity of those lines at what is a relatively modest (in construction terms) expense. If the decision had not been taken to do this you almost certainly condem the system to serious risk of overcrowding for the next 40 or so years, a decision that would no doubt be condemed in the future as a "lack of investment and foresight by our forefathers"! There are enough examples of that about!

Whilst there are works being undertaken to accomodate S stock, they aren't exactly what one would describe as major engineering challenges, given that plans to rebuild such as Bayswater and Paddington are not proceeding.

All seems like a good compromise of cost v benefit to me.

Sorry to go off topic there. Going back to lillie bridge. If road 1 will stable 3 trains in a row on the same track wont that be alot of hassle if the train closest to olympia station end is defective? That will leave 2 trains stuck behind until the first train has been moved or the same if the middle train is defective.

No - the works will allow for three trains as described.

Where 37 and 38 Roads are now, this will reduce to one road and the other two (on the east side of thesidings) will be relaid to accomodate two S7's.

There is already an accomodation block at Triangle sidings. I know of no plans that this will be altered.

Your question about it's future if stabling ceases herefore becomes academic.

Looks like I've finally been beaten - there is a recent thread on the forum that answers your question though I'm blowed if I can find it. Perhaps it's cos I've not long got in from work ;D ;D

Anyway, the answer is yes, D stocks can access Lillie Bridge from West Kensington eastbound. The proof is that one went that way into Lillie Bridge on 7th July 2005 as a result of the events that day.

EDIT: just noticed something no one else seems to have noticed....4 pages in and the thread title still suggests we're in France!!

Living 5mins away from the Depot, I never heard anything about the Shopping mall. All I know is that they want to build houses on the site