|
|
Post by Chris W on Sept 20, 2015 9:22:42 GMT
Is the project really years behind as you state? I always thought that the D stock was due to be gone by 2015, so we would only be talking about it being one year late. I'm sure that at the S Stock mock-up met (I think as far back as 2008), one of the boards did state 2016 as being the withdrawal year for the D Stock. The above is exactly what I would have assumed, BUT it does not make much sense when considered against the original announced timescales for the introduction of S Stock. The complete introduction will be YEARS behind the originally announced date. And yet, when they made those original announcements they must have been fully aware (one supposes) of the life (before major work) expectancy of the D-Stock. Or is this yet another LU management cock-up, along the lines of announcing dates whilst not, apparently, realising that drivers would need to be trained and infrastructure changes made (or perhaps just grossly underestimating the time required for these tasks)? Many will be aware that TfL are jumpy with regards to criticism... after all they have been stitched up many times by subStandard, inaccurate and sensationalist press reports. My take is that TfL are the slave to their political masters telling them what they will do... whilst Central Government has cut funding by approx 20%. With the goal posts having been moved significantly and with politicians never wanting to be seen to lose face (promising what they can't deliver), guess who the whipping boy is ?? TfL have to play with the assets they have, so if dates slip, as long as they provide a service, should we perhaps ask the question... does a little slippage really matter ?? |
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Sept 20, 2015 11:53:36 GMT
TfL have to play with the assets they have, so if dates slip, as long as they provide a service, should we perhaps ask the question... does a little slippage really matter ?? This is what I've always said. It doesn't matter provided the service of shifting people from A to B doesn't suffer which in the end is what the punter pays for. If the new models are later into service, they'll last a bit longer as a result. I do think that TfL make a rod for their own back though, giving out even tenuous in-service dates to the public when they've no need to do so. All they need say is "the new trains will start introduction as soon as technical and administrative arrangements are complete." However, if the service did begin to suffer due to clapped out trains then every man and his dog would have good reason to complain and would have my support.  As it stands I can't see anything service-wise to complain about so to me there's no problem at all. |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,746 
|
Post by class411 on Sept 24, 2015 8:00:47 GMT
My take is that TfL are the slave to their political masters telling them what they will do... whilst Central Government has cut funding by approx 20%. With the goal posts having been moved significantly and with politicians never wanting to be seen to lose face (promising what they can't deliver), guess who the whipping boy is ?? TfL have to play with the assets they have, so if dates slip, as long as they provide a service, should we perhaps ask the question... does a little slippage really matter ?? TfL have to play with the assets they have, so if dates slip, as long as they provide a service, should we perhaps ask the question... does a little slippage really matter ?? This is what I've always said. It doesn't matter provided the service of shifting people from A to B doesn't suffer which in the end is what the punter pays for. If the new models are later into service, they'll last a bit longer as a result. I do think that TfL make a rod for their own back though, giving out even tenuous in-service dates to the public when they've no need to do so. All they need say is "the new trains will start introduction as soon as technical and administrative arrangements are complete." However, if the service did begin to suffer due to clapped out trains then every man and his dog would have good reason to complain and would have my support. As it stands I can't see anything service-wise to complain about so to me there's no problem at all. I think you have both missed my point entirely. Allow me to restate it: Going back to 2007/8 we have been given many dates for the introduction of the S-Stock. The reasons given here (tfl don't usually give reasons, they just quietly make announcements and put up posters with later dates) have all been along the lines of 'drivers haven't been trained, 'trackwork hasn't been done', 'signals need to be upgraded', as if all this came as a bit of a surprise to LU management even though the trains were originally ordered over a decade ago. However, NorbitonFlyer has suggested that the reason is not, in fact, anything to do with a lack of preparedness, but a desire to make the best use of the old stock before it is scrapped. This is a much more logical reason and one that shows LU management in a much better light than not being able to use stock because no one thought to get the drivers trained! HOWEVER, the life spans of the old stock must have been known pretty accurately for many years so the question remains, "Why were there so many spurious target dates if it was known that they would not be met because the assets were still 'sweatable'?" |
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Sept 24, 2015 10:05:28 GMT
My take is that TfL are the slave to their political masters telling them what they will do... whilst Central Government has cut funding by approx 20%. With the goal posts having been moved significantly and with politicians never wanting to be seen to lose face (promising what they can't deliver), guess who the whipping boy is ?? TfL have to play with the assets they have, so if dates slip, as long as they provide a service, should we perhaps ask the question... does a little slippage really matter ?? This is what I've always said. It doesn't matter provided the service of shifting people from A to B doesn't suffer which in the end is what the punter pays for. If the new models are later into service, they'll last a bit longer as a result. I do think that TfL make a rod for their own back though, giving out even tenuous in-service dates to the public when they've no need to do so. All they need say is "the new trains will start introduction as soon as technical and administrative arrangements are complete." However, if the service did begin to suffer due to clapped out trains then every man and his dog would have good reason to complain and would have my support. As it stands I can't see anything service-wise to complain about so to me there's no problem at all. I think you have both missed my point entirely. Allow me to restate it: Going back to 2007/8 we have been given many dates for the introduction of the S-Stock. The reasons given here (tfl don't usually give reasons, they just quietly make announcements and put up posters with later dates) have all been along the lines of 'drivers haven't been trained, 'trackwork hasn't been done', 'signals need to be upgraded', as if all this came as a bit of a surprise to LU management even though the trains were originally ordered over a decade ago. However, NorbitonFlyer has suggested that the reason is not, in fact, anything to do with a lack of preparedness, but a desire to make the best use of the old stock before it is scrapped. This is a much more logical reason and one that shows LU management in a much better light than not being able to use stock because no one thought to get the drivers trained! HOWEVER, the life spans of the old stock must have been known pretty accurately for many years so the question remains, "Why were there so many spurious target dates if it was known that they would not be met because the assets were still 'sweatable'?" I know this is an emotive subject for you and appreciate what you're saying but whilst I can't speak for Chris, my post was simply agreeing with him that in the end, it doesn't matter about slippage, whatever the reason, unless services to the paying punters are compromised, which they haven't been in any meaningful way. |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,746
|
Post by class411 on Sept 24, 2015 10:14:20 GMT
I know this is an emotive subject for you and appreciate what you're saying but whilst I can't speak for Chris, my post was simply agreeing with him that in the end, it doesn't matter about slippage, whatever the reason, unless services to the paying punters are compromised, which they haven't been in any meaningful way. I wouldn't say it's emotive - it's just a bit of a puzzle. And my post pretty much agreed with your sentiment. It makes sense to get the best use out of assets whenever possible when it does not affect services in any significant way. But the point really is, if they were always intending to get the maximum use out of the old stock, why on earth did they promulgate dates they had no intention of meeting and come up with a variety of excuses that made it look as if their planning was incompetent at best? Why not just say that, over the next few years, starting from 20xx, as the old stock become life expired it will be replaced with shiny, new, S-Stock? I'm just trying to get a handle on why they presented things in such a way that it looked as if they were a bit clueless when there was a perfectly sane and rational explanation that did not make them look incompetent. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,347
|
Post by Colin on Sept 24, 2015 11:38:21 GMT
To be fair, this image from the S stock mock up does indeed prove things are about a year or so adrift....  |
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Sept 24, 2015 12:36:53 GMT
Why not just say that, over the next few years, starting from 20xx, as the old stock become life expired it will be replaced with shiny, new, S-Stock? I'm just trying to get a handle on why they presented things in such a way that it looked as if they were a bit clueless when there was a perfectly sane and rational explanation that did not make them look incompetent. Agreed! Exactly what I was getting at (see one of my posts up-thread). The incompetence and cluelessness was giving dates in the first place when they'd no need to. As I said, a rod for their own backs.  |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 24, 2015 17:42:20 GMT
To be fair, this image from the S stock mock up does indeed prove things are about a year or so adrift.... Indeed, just as I thought too. Not the YEARS behind schedule that was referred to in another post! |
|
|
|
Post by Chris W on Sept 24, 2015 18:16:44 GMT
I also think the too'ing and fro'ing of the Metropolitan S8 stock to Derby certianly slowed things down.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,746
|
Post by class411 on Sept 25, 2015 7:42:45 GMT
To be fair, this image from the S stock mock up does indeed prove things are about a year or so adrift.... Indeed, just as I thought too. Not the YEARS behind schedule that was referred to in another post! I think the problem is that whilst that poster (which, AFAIK, I've never seen) gives a detailed time line for each line, most of the sources I've seen have just carelessly merged everything together and said things like "New trains on the District, H&C, and Met from 2010". So although what they said was technically correct, and based on LU's own data, it gave a completely inaccurate impression of what was going to happen, particularly from the perspective of, for example, someone who only used the District line. |
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Sept 26, 2015 4:07:01 GMT
class411 - the Wimbledon-Edgware Road service is part of the District line.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,746
|
Post by class411 on Sept 26, 2015 7:12:14 GMT
class411 - the Wimbledon-Edgware Road service is part of the District line. Er, yes, I know. (The big give-away is that it is green on the diagram. ) |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 26, 2015 8:46:19 GMT
class411 - the Wimbledon-Edgware Road service is part of the District line. I think we all know that Crusty, but what's your point? With my mod hat on, one liners like this don't really help move the discussion along, and can be viewed as sarcastic.
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Sept 26, 2015 9:01:53 GMT
class411 - the Wimbledon-Edgware Road service is part of the District line. I think we all know that Crusty, but what's your point? With my mod hat on, one liners like this don't really help move the discussion along, and can be viewed as sarcastic.
This was a reply to a post which suggested District line users could be disappointed by the lack of new trains. My point is that the timeline poster is saying that they will run on all the surface lines with anticipated dates.. They were running on part of the District close to the date on the poster. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 26, 2015 9:20:09 GMT
I think we all know that Crusty, but what's your point? With my mod hat on, one liners like this don't really help move the discussion along, and can be viewed as sarcastic.
This was a reply to a post which suggested District line users could be disappointed by the lack of new trains. My point is that the timeline poster is saying that they will run on all the surface lines with anticipated dates.. They were running on part of the District close to the date on the poster. Ok fair point. I didn't think you wrote your post with any bad intentions. It just helps everybody if you clarify your points with an explanation, which you have now done. |
|
|
|
Post by malcolmffc on Sept 28, 2015 6:42:33 GMT
To be fair, this image from the S stock mock up does indeed prove things are about a year or so adrift.... Indeed, just as I thought too. Not the YEARS behind schedule that was referred to in another post! "YEARS behind schedule" is an accurate description of the last milestone on that list though! |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 28, 2015 17:52:50 GMT
Indeed, just as I thought too. Not the YEARS behind schedule that was referred to in another post! "YEARS behind schedule" is an accurate description of the last milestone on that list though! Definitely! |
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Sept 28, 2015 18:34:30 GMT
Passing the length of the District paralleled by the LTS on Saturday, I was surprised by the large percentage of trains that were D78s. Is this particularly the case on weekends?
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,347
|
Post by Colin on Sept 28, 2015 22:03:48 GMT
Looking at one particular part of the railway will not give you the full picture - well, not unless you spend about 3 hours at Earls Court.
I wasn't working Saturday so don't know how the service was populated, but its often the case that the S stock will end up mainly on Wimbledon/Tower Hill's or Wilmbledon/Barking's.
When they are allocated to the Richmond/Upminster's they tend to be in blocks so you'll see four or five running one behind the other then the rest of the Richmond/Upminster service will be D stocks. If you happen to look at the east end of the line when those four or five are all west of Tower Hill, you'll get the impression you got.
FWIW I was at West Ham for around 10 minutes on Sunday at Lunchtime waiting for a c2c train with a few friends and we saw around five S stocks in each direction (couple of those were H&C's) and no D stock at all!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2015 22:27:30 GMT
For me personally, I was on the southern half of the Circle line on Saturday and I actually thought "oooh a D stock!" every time one went by, because they seemed to me to be the novelties (relatively, I still passed four or five, I'd guess), what with the Circles being all S stock and everything!
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Sept 30, 2015 20:58:13 GMT
Anyone notice at Paddington H&C the trains are doing the SDO announcement, or am I losing the plot? It's fixed in the latest software roll out now on most trains. It was only in error on Circles on their way towards Hammersmith. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 30, 2015 21:11:08 GMT
Have there really been no S7 deliveries for 3 weeks?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 23:17:56 GMT
Have there really been no S7 deliveries for 3 weeks? Bachman have delivered a lot of S Stock over the last few weeks!  XF |
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Oct 1, 2015 15:02:20 GMT
new workings list issued today:
On Saturday 3 October:
1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 32, 33, 51, 61, 62.
On Sunday 4 October:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 62, 65, 66.
M-F 5/10-9/10:
6, 7, 13, 21, 27, 32, 34, 40, 46, 50, 55, 56, 61, 62, 63, 64, 67, 103(AM only), 123(AM only), 124(PM only).
of course all +70-77 Wim-ERd
|
|
|
|
Post by tel on Oct 1, 2015 18:19:56 GMT
Noted 21503/4 at Barbican today (1st Oct) on T215 at 13:50.
HTH
Tel
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Oct 7, 2015 20:25:30 GMT
So one month since the last S7 delivery.
What is the hold up?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Oct 9, 2015 15:45:48 GMT
new workings list issued today:
On Saturday 10 October:
3, 5, 6, 11. 14. 3, 33, 34, 37, 40, 41, 101, 102, 103. 104. 105, 126, 127.
On Sunday 11 October:
1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 52, 55, 56, 57, 60, 62, 101, 102, 103. 104. 105.
M-F 12/10-16/10:
3, 7, 13, 22, 24, 32, 34, 37, 40, 46, 47, 50, 55, 56, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 103, 104, 123(AM only), 124(PM only).
of course all +70-77 Wim-ERd
|
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Oct 9, 2015 16:44:27 GMT
How far away are we from the point where S7 workings are no longer nominated, but down to whatever is available at the depot?
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Oct 10, 2015 8:46:01 GMT
How far away are we from the point where S7 workings are no longer nominated, but down to whatever is available at the depot? I think that will happen when all of the depot works are completed. S7's can run on any working now, but care has to be taken that not too many end up stabling at a place where there aren't enough roads to accommodate them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2015 14:47:14 GMT
How far away are we from the point where S7 workings are no longer nominated, but down to whatever is available at the depot? I think that will happen when all of the depot works are completed. S7's can run on any working now, but care has to be taken that not too many end up stabling at a place where there aren't enough roads to accommodate them. The current round of depot works is due to finish by the end of the year. Then there's another round next year (they were all supposed to be done together / by now but that's another story and one I am not going to dig further into). Because not all the works are complete the berthing for S stocks remains a constraint as does the total number of D / S stock berths. So, one of the issues is that when the next round of works start, some more berths will be lost temporarily and that is also a constraint. There are other constraints as well which I think DStock7080 touched on in a previous thread. Next batch of trains will hopefully get the go-head to roll out by the end of this month. By the end of December-ish it is likely that D stocks will become the nominated workings. |
|
As it stands I can't see anything service-wise to complain about so to me there's no problem at all.
