|
|
Post by uzairjubilee on Jul 28, 2010 21:38:41 GMT
Hi all,
I know this is one of many threads on the future of Putney Bridge with the introduction of the S Stock, however I cannot seem to locate the others.
Recently I've been passing a lot through Putney Bridge and would say have been thoroughly observing the layout.
I've noticed it's all very tight in the area. Am I correct in saying that when the track alongside platform 2 becomes the through track, it will see the removal of that crossover in order for that track to join with the WB main?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2010 21:58:24 GMT
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Jul 28, 2010 23:11:33 GMT
There is no Southbound/Northbound on the District line - it's all Eastbound/Westbound  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2010 8:57:57 GMT
Otherwise reverting to the original layout............
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2010 9:04:19 GMT
There is no Southbound/Northbound on the District line - it's all Eastbound/Westbound Hm, I thought the wimbleware trains were described as north-/southbound. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Jul 29, 2010 11:04:49 GMT
Nope.
Some platforms on the Wimbledon branch used to have Southbound/Northbound descriptions on their signage but they've now all been updated to the correct version which is East/West.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2010 9:18:37 GMT
A question that may have been asked before, but I've had a look round and can't find it, so, with the layout of PYB as it stands, why is it in that configuration anyway?
I'm guessing it has something to do with reversing, inasmuch as it is 'probably' safer, easier that we reverse only across one main line - PYB EB - than cross BOTH the WB & EB if the bay was in the current WB through road?
I can think of other locations where this doesn't seem to be an issue - Plaistow, East Ham (Main Line shunt of course), Dag East, etc..
The only other reason that springs to mind is that it is maybe a structural issue with the way the raised platform is constructed, that having a train sitting for an extended period of time (thinking that the through road was/is a bay) may put undesirable stress on the integrity of the structure?
Where's that Meccano set....
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,766
|
Post by Chris M on Aug 4, 2010 10:33:55 GMT
I suspect it's operational convenience - a reversing siding/bay in the centre of the running lines is much less disruptive to the service. With the layout at Putney Bridge at present, reversing trains block neither road entering or leaving the bay (i.e an eastbound train can pass the terminating westbound train as it enters the bay, a westbound can pass as the reversing train leaves eastbound). When the current bay and westbound lines are swapped an eastbound train can pass as a reversing train enters the bay, but a westbound train cannot pass as it leaves eastbound.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2010 23:26:35 GMT
My understanding is that if the bay road were the through route then the platform would not be long enough for D stock. The curve on the westbound platform gives just enough extra length to make it fit. There really isn't much platform to spare when a D stock is berthed on the westbound, so it seems plausible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2010 5:19:14 GMT
With abandoment of the current westbound line, that would allow the current bay to be extended westward to gain the extra space for berthing and still allow reversal with the crossover at the east end.
|
|
|
|
Post by uzairjubilee on Aug 6, 2010 11:31:45 GMT
Ah get rid of the existing westbound. That speed limit coming in is quite slow ;D.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Aug 6, 2010 23:11:07 GMT
Chelney plans include space to the east of the current lines. Someone should look into passive provision for a 4 track station with two terminal bays in the middle perhaps?
|
|
|
|
Post by v52gc on Aug 7, 2010 2:17:45 GMT
The logistics to four track it would be huge, as it is it's tight between the bus stops and a Magnet & offices to the other side, the W/B as it is overhangs the latter. It's a pity if they lose the W/B road, other then the slow speed restriction, I liked going over what looked like a wooden bridge! I used to know someone who used to get off at Parsons Green or Fulham Bdy and continue south of the river by bus because Putney Bridge station scared them going West!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2010 21:52:55 GMT
The logistics to four track it would be huge, as it is it's tight between the bus stops and a Magnet & offices to the other side, the W/B as it is overhangs the latter. It's a pity if they lose the W/B road, other then the slow speed restriction, I liked going over what looked like a wooden bridge! I used to know someone who used to get off at Parsons Green or Fulham Bdy and continue south of the river by bus because Putney Bridge station scared them going West! I daresay there are a few folk like that. I like to imagine that the stations on the Liverpool Overhead Railway (which I never got to use) had a similar "feel" to Putney Bridge. |
|
