New Signalling

If there is benefit in running as near to normal as possible over running a completely different one (I have no idea either way) then I don't think the guesswork is pointless.

Without knowing anything about what changes are forthcoming in either December or May, is it not possible that the will still be "in effect three services competing for two bays for an hour or so", even if not at the exact same times?

In the first instance, we will have new stabling arrangements in that area (ie, no Triangle sidings from December), so that already means there will be different start up arrangements over what we have today - in particular with no Triangle there'll already be less pressure on High Street straight away.

Some of the first trains can be reversed in different locations - indeed it has happened in the past with temporary WTT's (ie, South Kensington).

"The Yard" at Earls Court (which is basically platform 2, out to the east of the station, then back to platform 3) is another option. The yard option can easily be used for the Olympia's during the peak shoulders with South Ken bound trains from platform 2 'running round' via EC7's (departs platform 2 like a High Street bound train but runs to South Ken like a train from platform 1) - they would obviously need to have more stand time at Olympia. That would only need to happen 3 times an hour but would free up space at High Street.

Some of the reversing at High Street in the peak shoulders could also be reduced by smarter timetabling - instead of having a train go to Wimbledon then High Street then Ealing & Stable [at Ealing Common depot], why not just run it straight to Ealing? With C stocks not going past High Street, you have the spare capacity to cover a few D stock paths to Wimbledon - this would have the double benefit of less occupancy time at High Street thus keeping things moving. Again the bulk of stand time can be had at Wimbledon with 4 platforms available.

If the Circles are going to run, and reverse at High Street, would their current paths fit? Keep in mind also that some redundancy may need to be built in with the Circles cos there will be a heavy reliance on the points which are hardly ever used at high Street. If they fail what you gonna do with the Circles?

This is my point though, there are many options available to be exploited, and also many what if scenario's that need to be taken into consideration that I have no doubt at all that there will be a temporary WTT to cover the period. Off peak frequencies can be maintained relatively easily but I think it would be suicidal to try and run things as they normally would at peak times....

Well I now have WTT139 in my possession and.......it's basically 138 with a few changes for Lillie Bridge. So much for the management promises about reducing all the pointless extra slack that came in with 138 and that stepping back wasn't working on the Olympia's

Anyway, back to the point in hand; I think we have misunderstood each other with regard to what sort of service will likely be offered and how much of a timetable change will be required.

Reading back through this thread, what are the three services that require the two bay roads? Olympia shuttle and Wimblewares check, but the Circles will use platform 2 as they cannot physically reach the bays.....

Stuff coming from or going to Ealing Common Dt?

Hence shedcompnodosh using 'in effect' - that's my impression anyway.

Regretfully, the 'slack time' will not be addressed until Dec 2011.

The Olympia stepping back has settled down but is still quite unnecessary IMHO.

The May 2011 timetable will only reinstate Triangle sidings stabling, neither the wasteful slack time or stepping back will go.

Tough call - I'd sketch out both options but I'd have a gut feeling that it could be done in a mixed stylee:

Start of Traffic
Mansion House reversing
AM Peak
Thin OLYs
Lunch Slack
Thin OLYs
PM Peak
Mansion House reversing
Close of Traffic.

ie. don't send stuff to Mansion House during the build up to PM peak [1] - all to do with the black art of doing the shoulders and not eating into standards during transitions. ;D

[1] thin OLYs during service transitions as they are 'self contained' - don't propagate delays down the line to MH and give the District controllers more hassle than strictly necessary. (Met controllers on the other hand...... )

I think the Mansion House option (and it may only need 1 train to run there in each peak) should work as this move won't be needed in the peak itself, but in the build up to the morning peak, and after the evening peak

An example would be train 30 - 19.32 ex WDN

pull 40 half a minute earlier, push 30 thro' to Mans H, run 10 1 later, 27 half later, then you're back on book

something similar on the WB return and jobs a goodun!

consecutive 2 minute headways not desireable I realise, but if it were for just 1 train in the am pre peak shoulder and pm post peak shoulder, I think that would be do-able?

I still don't think the temporary WTT will have a service so similar to a normal one that there'll be any issues at High Street, but we'll find out when it's issued.

Anyway, I've quoted your bit above as you have unwittingly picked an Upminster turn that I was doing just 2 days ago!! More to the point, by doing as you suggest you would create more problems than you'd solve. I wonder if it's an angle you may or may not have considered?

Now train 30 forms the first half of duty 550, which looks like this (30min unpaid meal relief before anyone asks!!):

Book On: 1637 UPM
Book Off: 0014 UPMDT
Duty Length: 7hrs 7min

T30

BKG E.....1721
UPM.......1741...1751
WDN......1922...1932
HST.......1955...2008
EBY........2032...2042
ECMDT...2048

Meal Relief @ Acton Town

T101

ACTW....2200
EBY.......2206...2218
UPM......2351...2355
UPMDT...0001

If you run train 30 to Mansion House, you are realistically looking at it going away at Ealing Common depot 20 minutes later. Now that first half is already 4hrs 11min from book on to stable - whilst the rules are 4hrs 15min driving time (thus in theory plenty to play with), I think it would be unlikely that an increase on that first half would be considered acceptable by those involved in compiling and approving drivers duty sheets.

That first half is also quite long enough thank you very much!!

The other issue is the meal relief, which if you factor in walking times, would mean a Mansion House & back as you propose would be impossible.

Fiddling with the timetable is one thing, but once you change that one thing, pound to a penny it'll then affect something else!!

well thats sods law I'd pick a train involving a turn you'd driven this week

I hadn't overlooked this angle as I realise that every timetable has a duty sheet with it's own complications/parameters

I thought there would be 2 avenues open (and the 2nd would certainly work presuming only 1 or 2 trains need to run to Mans H!)

1) pick a train where an extension to Mans H and back doesn't break the 4hr 15 (yes Mr obvious I realise!)

if that fails ... my trump card !

2.) as HSK-ERD is suspended I imagine that would equate to 6 x C stock in service all day instead of 8

therefore Earls Court (is it just ECT or do they share C stock duties with ACT?) will have a few additional spare duties, as a result of the revised timetable and slightly reduced train work

use one of these duties to relieve the T/OP whose turn was going to break and get them to put the train away at ECMDT!

Don't forget 4h15 is the driving time limit but 5h15 is the maximum "on-duty" time without an unpaid break.
So you could run T30 to Mansion House and stable Ealing Common. Then to have enough meal relief time pick up the next train at Act E instead of the West with the previous driver doing the Broadway and back. Don't know what the latter's duty is. Just thought I'd suggest it for a laugh. On the Pic there are a few very long halves (4h53 second half on 489 for eg).
Anyway running to HST is fine, people need to get there as well!

I don't think that a more intensive HSK - WDN 'C' stock service would get past the planners. I believe they measure journey patterns and plans in terms of customer benefit/disbenefit, so reducing through services from the city to the busiest west end branch of the District would not fit with this line of thinking

If only that same policy applied to all planned engineering works....

As flagged up by littlebrute:



Link

I wonder how long before we see this type of blockade test out on the deeper lines, it'd be interesting.