Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2015 18:48:15 GMT
How many more S7s are there to deliver?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2015 20:19:23 GMT
How many more S7s are there to deliver? There should be 80 delivered to the District and C&H depots and there are a further 5 (I think) at Ruislip so that leaves 48 still to come to London. I'll double check the numbers on Monday.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2015 20:26:46 GMT
Only one S7 outside at Ruislip as of yesterday afternoon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2015 20:34:57 GMT
My notes show, as of now, T149-159, T163-167, T169, T176-178 and T180 are at Old Dalby (21 trains)
T68, T81, T99 and T142 have been returned to Derby.
This leaves T168, T170-175, T179 and T181 onwards still to be delivered. Most, if not all (?) must be built by now?
T = Train build number.
|
|
|
Post by rsdworker on Oct 10, 2015 21:38:13 GMT
oh why the 4 returned back to derby?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2015 22:26:26 GMT
How many more S7s are there to deliver? There should be 80 delivered to the District and C&H depots and there are a further 5 (I think) at Ruislip so that leaves 48 still to come to London. I'll double check the numbers on Monday. I've just checked the delivery list and 48 is right (including the 6 that are tied up with the S8s going back to Derby).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2015 22:28:22 GMT
My notes show, as of now, T149-159, T163-167, T169, T176-178 and T180 are at Old Dalby (21 trains) T68, T81, T99 and T142 have been returned to Derby. This leaves T168, T170-175, T179 and T181 onwards still to be delivered. Most, if not all (?) must be built by now? T = Train build number. T68 was the first S7+1, T81 was the original Bombardier test train for the then new signalling system (which has, of course, gone belly up), T99 is an S6 (although its 7th car was in T68 and has to be reformed or maybe already has) and T142 was involved with more signalling tests at Old Dalby I forgot to mention that T100 and T101 haven't been delivered as they are S6s at the moment and their 7th car are in S7+1s T70 and T72, both still in London and on the Met.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2015 22:50:02 GMT
Are the 2 S7+1 still being used or are they just hanging around, the S8 mod work has been completed.
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Oct 11, 2015 7:16:30 GMT
The 2 S7+1's were both about last week
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2015 16:40:28 GMT
Forgive me if this is the wrong place. Are there currently any S stock in Derby for signalling testing? Are there any plans for one to go up if not in the near future?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2015 17:42:49 GMT
Forgive me if this is the wrong place. Are there currently any S stock in Derby for signalling testing? Are there any plans for one to go up if not in the near future? There is one at the test track at Old Dalby / Melton being made ready for some early signalling testing. This is being done as a reversible modification to test interfaces / software etc between the Thales system and the train. Next year a train will be fully fitted with the preproduction signalling equipment and wiring and that will form the basis for the fleet modification starting in Autumn 2016.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2015 19:33:22 GMT
I have heard there is a battery loco heading up that way as well for signal testing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2015 20:10:36 GMT
I have heard there is a battery loco heading up that way as well for signal testing. L29.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2015 14:18:18 GMT
I have heard there is a battery loco heading up that way as well for signal testing. L29. Cool. Means my source is perfectly correct
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Oct 19, 2015 20:22:28 GMT
So still no new deliveries since 8th September?
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,746
|
Post by class411 on Oct 20, 2015 11:35:28 GMT
So still no new deliveries since 8th September? Would there be anywhere (sensible) to put them? Since the prevailing view seems to be that they are maximising the use they get out of the D-Stock, is there even any point in getting new deliveries if they're not going to use them?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2015 20:07:47 GMT
Six more S stock will be put onto the District line between the end of October and the end of November. Six D stock will be withdrawn in consequence. The rollout will have to continue slowly over the coming months both because of existing depot and other constraints and also because of further berthing constraints next year for example the work to make Hammersmith depot / sidings ready for ATC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2015 20:30:02 GMT
How many S stocks V D stocks are running on the District line ATM?
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,746
|
Post by class411 on Oct 28, 2015 17:03:55 GMT
The rollout will have to continue slowly over the coming months both because of existing depot and other constraints and also because of further berthing constraints next year for example the work to make Hammersmith depot / sidings ready for ATC. Wait, are we now abandoning the idea 'sweating the (d) stock' explanation of a few weeks back? Initially introductions were delayed for a variety of reasons: Drivers not trained, infrastructure work not finished, Earth rotating on its axis, etc. Then, suddenly, it wasn't down to any of these things, it was because LU were 'sweating the stock'. Now we seem to be back to a new trickle of excuses/reasons for slow introduction of S stock. To be clear, only one of these types of explanations can be sensibly considered to be correct. If they are sweating the stock, the other explanations are a complete irrelevance. If, on the other hand, they are not, then the other explanations are what accounts for the seemingly never ending sequence of delays. But it can't be both
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 28, 2015 19:59:30 GMT
If they are sweating the stock, the other explanations are a complete irrelevance. If, on the other hand, they are not, then the other explanations are what accounts for the seemingly never ending sequence of delays. But it can't be both They are not entirely incompatible. The slow delivery could be because of training, supply chain etc - or indeed Vivarail not being ready to take any more D stock yet. The preponderance of D stocks at quiet times could be sweating the assets - i.e using the D stock and leaving the S stock in the sidings
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Oct 28, 2015 20:42:00 GMT
Sorry, I still can't see what the issue is here. Provided a train turns up on time to take the passenger to where he or she wants to go on time what is the problem with what class it is aside from some sadly misplaced advertising, and if it's only that what's the big deal? If I still took the District Line on a regular basis it wouldn't bother me unduly. When the 1992TS came online on the Central Line I can't remember any advertising as to when they'd be operating in totality. I just caught whatever turned up until one day when I went to London there were no 1962TS left........
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Oct 28, 2015 20:56:30 GMT
To be fair, the deadline for D stock withdrawal is summer 2016 - this is still very achievable. Most of the S stocks have already been built and it would be easy to accelerate delivery speed if that becomes necessary.
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Oct 28, 2015 21:04:29 GMT
To be fair, the deadline for D stock withdrawal is summer 2016 - this is still very achievable. Most of the S stocks have already been built and it would be easy to accelerate delivery speed if that becomes necessary. Ah yes......but my glass half full reasoning shows that, as a result of later introduction, these S Stock will now be fit for purpose for longer than originally expected! Therefore, rinsing the ball hooks out of D Stock is actually saving us money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2015 21:41:42 GMT
There are multiple reasons for the delays, most of which are already mentioned even if I do mention them again. Yes, infrastructure has been a problem. I am not sure if all of the necessary power upgrades have been completed, but as there was not much of SSL left to upgrade it should be finished by now. The drivers have been trained up for a while, so they should not be a problem. The one part that everyone has forgotten (and in my eye the main reason of the delay) is the training of the District line maintenance staff. Just to get a license to test the S stock trains for service, all the maintenance staff have to complete a 6 week basic systems course followed by a 4 day prep course. There have been massive setbacks to this recently caused by the strikes a few months ago amongst many other things delaying the restart of these courses. This is before you get to other natural wastage of trained people retiring or moving depot/shifts causing more shortage of trained staff.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 16:00:29 GMT
The rollout will have to continue slowly over the coming months both because of existing depot and other constraints and also because of further berthing constraints next year for example the work to make Hammersmith depot / sidings ready for ATC. Wait, are we now abandoning the idea 'sweating the (d) stock' explanation of a few weeks back? Initially introductions were delayed for a variety of reasons: Drivers not trained, infrastructure work not finished, Earth rotating on its axis, etc. Then, suddenly, it wasn't down to any of these things, it was because LU were 'sweating the stock'. Now we seem to be back to a new trickle of excuses/reasons for slow introduction of S stock. To be clear, only one of these types of explanations can be sensibly considered to be correct. If they are sweating the stock, the other explanations are a complete irrelevance. If, on the other hand, they are not, then the other explanations are what accounts for the seemingly never ending sequence of delays. But it can't be both Not sure who the "we" you refer to are. The forum will contain some facts and some opinions. Sweating the assets was not a correct assumption. However, keeping the D stock is easier only from the point of view of the number of staff trained to maintain them. The infrastructure constraints - whether you agree with them or not - are as I wrote above. A previous poster also mentioned the challenge of maintenance staff training which is a factor. Power upgrades is not a constraint as there are only a couple of pieces of work to finish and they will be complete before the number of trains in service makes this an issue. Also the constraints are not necessarily constant so the explanation can sensibly vary over time. For example we may currently only have enough berths for x trains and therefore the constraint is berths not training. If the number of berths increases but the training for y number of staff is not complete as planned then the constraint becomes training.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 17:28:26 GMT
The rollout will have to continue slowly over the coming months both because of existing depot and other constraints and also because of further berthing constraints next year for example the work to make Hammersmith depot / sidings ready for ATC. Wait, are we now abandoning the idea 'sweating the (d) stock' explanation of a few weeks back? Initially introductions were delayed for a variety of reasons: Drivers not trained, infrastructure work not finished, Earth rotating on its axis, etc. Then, suddenly, it wasn't down to any of these things, it was because LU were 'sweating the stock'. Now we seem to be back to a new trickle of excuses/reasons for slow introduction of S stock. To be clear, only one of these types of explanations can be sensibly considered to be correct. If they are sweating the stock, the other explanations are a complete irrelevance. If, on the other hand, they are not, then the other explanations are what accounts for the seemingly never ending sequence of delays. But it can't be both And to follow on from what @tridentalx has just said, please, class411, don't treat our membership as though they personally have written you a cheque you could not cash, or owe you an explanation.
I know it's nice to see the rollout progress and can be frustrating to see it delayed (if, at least, you like the S stock). I know, also, that you're trying to make genuine points about LU's planning and publicity. And I do appreciate that you obviously have an interest in getting to the bottom of this matter and maybe don't appreciate idle speculation, or the feeling you've been misled.
However, please be mindful (as I've said before), that the forum is a text-only medium and things sometimes don't read quite the way they were written. I, personally, felt that last message there was a little impolite. I'm quite willing to assume you intended your message as a rhetorical one not directed at anyone in particular. But, given the tone you have used when discussing this issue recently, I'd just like to remind you that we are not LU's publicity staff. We're just a bunch of enthusiasts and professionals wanting to have a good time and chat about the new trains that are coming ... maybe ... some time soon ... once the staff are fully trained (or was it once depot space was available ...? I don't know, something like that anyway )
We'll try and give you the best information we can and those who know will come along and fill in the gaps or correct the mistakes when they can, but we don't speak for LU.
***
However, could all members please try to remain always on the firm ground of fact and refrain from venturing onto the rocky outcrop of speculation, lest you fall into the turbulent waters and get had for breakfast by a fish so large even whistlekiller2000 wouldn't take it on.
Many thanks all.
As you were ladies and gents.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Oct 29, 2015 18:03:53 GMT
The rollout will have to continue slowly over the coming months both because of existing depot and other constraints and also because of further berthing constraints next year for example the work to make Hammersmith depot / sidings ready for ATC. Wait, are we now abandoning the idea 'sweating the (d) stock' explanation of a few weeks back? Initially introductions were delayed for a variety of reasons: Drivers not trained, infrastructure work not finished, Earth rotating on its axis, etc. Then, suddenly, it wasn't down to any of these things, it was because LU were 'sweating the stock'. Now we seem to be back to a new trickle of excuses/reasons for slow introduction of S stock. To be clear, only one of these types of explanations can be sensibly considered to be correct. If they are sweating the stock, the other explanations are a complete irrelevance. If, on the other hand, they are not, then the other explanations are what accounts for the seemingly never ending sequence of delays. But it can't be both Compared to the resignalling fiasco, LU twice changing their mind on system/supplier, and finding themselves boxed into the unfortunate position of now only having one realistic supplier, the completion of S stock rollout being a few months late is the least of anyone's worries. The signalling project has been in progress for a decade without delivering an inch of resignalled railway, by contrast the S stock rollout has gone reasonably smoothly.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,746
|
Post by class411 on Oct 29, 2015 18:17:35 GMT
And to follow on from what @tridentalx has just said, please, class411, don't treat our membership as though they personally have written you a cheque you could not cash, or owe you an explanation. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. I do feel that if people are posting speculation as fact, or posting ideas that contradict the general sense of what is going on, it's not unreasonable to try and 'shake the tree' and see if someone can bring things into sharper focus. Despite appearances, I'm not really that bothered about when the S Stock upgrade is complete. The more different types of stock one gets to use the better! What I've been finding a little perplexing is that contradictory statements are being made and no one seems to care, or try and separate facts from Chinese whispers. Indeed, it was most definitely not intended to be impolite to anyone. As I said, it was a 'shaking the tree' exercise; basically hoping that someone who had not noticed the contradictory information (and who might have added something of a clarification if he had), would be alerted and, perhaps, post. Apologies to anyone who thought I was directing criticism at them, personally.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 18:22:24 GMT
The signalling project has been in progress for a decade without delivering an inch of resignalled railway, by contrast the S stock rollout has gone reasonably smoothly. Au contraire, ye of little faith, the test track at Old Dalby has had some kit put on it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 20:29:59 GMT
The one part that everyone has forgotten (and in my eye the main reason of the delay) is the training of the District line maintenance staff. Just to get a license to test the S stock trains for service, all the maintenance staff have to complete a 6 week basic systems course followed by a 4 day prep course. There have been massive setbacks to this recently caused by the strikes a few months ago amongst many other things delaying the restart of these courses. This is correct. Someone told me there is a 6 month plus waiting list at Upminister to get everyone trained.
|
|