North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Oct 29, 2015 21:45:57 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 Not forgetting a control centre at Hammersmith that's (reputedly) too small. Think they got as far as building an SER at Watford for the Westinghouse contract - wonder if that will be suitable for re-use?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 22:20:52 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. I mean rustle the tree, don't shake it
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Oct 30, 2015 6:50:17 GMT
I mean rustle the tree, don't shake it Indeed......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2015 8:43:43 GMT
Au contraire, ye of little faith, the test track at Old Dalby has had some kit put on it Not forgetting a control centre at Hammersmith that's (reputedly) too small. Think they got as far as building an SER at Watford for the Westinghouse contract - wonder if that will be suitable for re-use? Sticking to facts for a moment. The control centre at Hammersmith was built for a completely different signalling system that has a decentralised system architecture. The Thales system is centralised thus needs more space. It is true that it is smaller than would be ideal for the Thales kit but with some reconfiguration of the equipment rooms everything fits in. This is more a topic for the SSR signalling thread than S stock perhaps ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2015 20:36:41 GMT
Back on topic to S Stock with a quick update. December and January will see the number of S7s delivered to the SSR increasing to 94 and the aim will be to add at least 4 trains a month from then onwards.
Edit : should also have said that "nominated workings" will switch from S stock to D stock in the next few weeks. The list of specific workings hasn't been confirmed yet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2015 21:42:35 GMT
There are 89 S7s in London at the moment so that means 5 more are needed to make up 94 which leaves 39 to be delivered once the frequency increases.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Nov 24, 2015 18:30:10 GMT
Does anybody know when the S7+1 trains are due to be returned to S7's? They were being used to cover for the S8 mods, but didn't that finish ages ago?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2015 20:06:43 GMT
As far as I know only 1 has gone back to Derby and is still there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2015 21:28:23 GMT
Does anybody know when the S7+1 trains are due to be returned to S7's? They were being used to cover for the S8 mods, but didn't that finish ages ago? At least 1 S7 + 1 will be retained in that config to cover for S8s whilst they are away for ATC fitment so until at least early 2018. In addition a permanent S7 + 1 is being created from the additional Train 192 and an extra carriage to account for the extra train for the Met line extension.
|
|
|
Post by phoenixcronin on Nov 24, 2015 22:43:27 GMT
Will the permanent S7+1 have S8 transverse seats? I assume so?
Also so now there will be 192 S Stocks?
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 24, 2015 22:52:09 GMT
Will the permanent S7+1 have S8 transverse seats? If it did, it wouldn't be an S7+1 but an S8 (by definition)
|
|
|
Post by phoenixcronin on Nov 24, 2015 23:39:29 GMT
Will the permanent S7+1 have S8 transverse seats? If it did, it wouldn't be an S7+1 but an S8 (by definition) Ah ok fair enough but isn't it a bit awkward to have one met line train permanently different to all the others?
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Nov 24, 2015 23:40:17 GMT
Will the permanent S7+1 have S8 transverse seats? If it did, it wouldn't be an S7+1 but an S8 (by definition) I'd personally argue that it's not the seating configuration that differentiates a unit as an S7+1 or S8, but rather the inclusion of an extra car from a different unit, as was the case with the three on the Met. So, therefore, even if the extra unit has transverse seats it would be an S8, and should be numbered as such. That said... The S8-1 weren't S7, so it's really not plain cut. I'm not aware that T192 has yet been numbered (I could be wrong!), though, so ultimately that's what it boils down to. (All imo. Posting this after a looooooong shift so there's every chance I've missed details. Apologies!)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2015 12:44:50 GMT
Train 192 will be a proper S7, which is the replacement for the nominated Croxley train. This is Train 72 (S7+1 - 21328-21327). So the Met will have 58xS8 and 1xS7+1. Nothing has been decided yet on the numbering (which is a bit of a can of worms!).
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 25, 2015 13:18:31 GMT
As I understand it, an S7+1 is an S7 with an M2 car borrowed from an S8. But when all fifty-eight S8s are in service, where is the extra M2 car for the permanent S7+1 unit (23327?) coming from?
And is there a reason why there will be an odd-man-out on the Metropolitan, rather than building the extra unit to the same arrangement as the other S8s?
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,745
|
Post by class411 on Nov 25, 2015 14:01:55 GMT
And is there a reason why there will be an odd-man-out on the Metropolitan, rather than building the extra unit to the same arrangement as the other S8s? That's just what I was wondering.
|
|
|
Post by phoenixcronin on Nov 25, 2015 14:07:28 GMT
As I understand it, an S7+1 is an S7 with an M2 car borrowed from an S8. But when all fifty-eight S8s are in service, where is the extra M2 car for the permanent S7+1 unit (23327?) coming from? And is there a reason why there will be an odd-man-out on the Metropolitan, rather than building the extra unit to the same arrangement as the other S8s? I thought that S7+1's were formed of a normal S7 and an extra M2 from another S7, not an S8 Also I agree it's rather weird to have a Met line train different to all the others, why not just rebuild/build the unit as a normal S8 with S8 seating
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2015 15:45:55 GMT
As I understand it, an S7+1 is an S7 with an M2 car borrowed from an S8. But when all fifty-eight S8s are in service, where is the extra M2 car for the permanent S7+1 unit (23327?) coming from? And is there a reason why there will be an odd-man-out on the Metropolitan, rather than building the extra unit to the same arrangement as the other S8s? I thought that S7+1's were formed of a normal S7 and an extra M2 from another S7, not an S8 Also I agree it's rather weird to have a Met line train different to all the others, why not just rebuild/build the unit as a normal S8 with S8 seating The extra cars in the S7+1s came from other S7s - Trains 99, 100 and 101 which are S6s in Derby. Train 99 is now (or will be soon) back to proper S7 with the release of 23582.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 25, 2015 16:58:17 GMT
I stand corrected, but wherever the extra cars came from to make S7+1s, there won't be any left over to make up the new S7+1, so it looks like there will have to be a unique odd-numbered M2-type car with S7 layout built just for this unit. Even if best efforts are used to confine this odd 8 car unit with S7 seating unit to shorter-distance services (Uxbridge?) it will almost certainly turn up at Chesham one day!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2015 18:13:58 GMT
The 'new' S7+1 already exists and the Met already has its 59th train (Train 72 - 21328-21327 plus extra car 23586). To the best of my knowledge it will not have its seating configuration altered so an all-transverse-seat train will pop up anywhere in S8 land.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2015 18:25:46 GMT
I'm not following the details of car numbers but as well as the extra S7 I believe 2 extra M2 cars have been purchased. One to replace the one used for the Croxley train and one to allow an S7 + 1 to remain during ATC fitment without taking another S7 out of service (i.e. the one which would otherwise have to donate the M2 car). However, it has been a while since I saw anything on the commercial details so may have changed. After ATC fitment we will thus have 1 spare M2 car which will be retained in case of any fleet damage in the future.
A topic for the thread on SSR signalling but there will be in the region of 8 x S7 and 3 x S8 trains away for fitment at any one time starting next Autumn.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2015 19:32:45 GMT
Yes, the two extra cars will go into Train 100 and Train 101 to bring them back to S7s. As you say, I think the numbering is still 'up in the air'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2015 22:11:37 GMT
From a maintenance point of view, having a permanent S7+1 will be annoying as there are differences in location of parts.
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Nov 26, 2015 0:02:33 GMT
In addition to seating and numbering, there are a few things I'm wondering about these changes. I realise that the answers to several of these questions might not be known yet.
I understand from reading reganorak's and tridentalx's posts that that both remaining S7+1s will continue to operate until the S8 stock fleet has all been fitted with ATC, then at that point unit 21323 will return to standard 7-car formation with car 25384 becoming spare, while unit 21327 is now permanently part of the Met's fleet in its current formation. Am I correct in thinking that is the current plan?
With three S8s at Derby for modification at any one time, the Met should therefore have 57 trains available for service. By how much has the total number of trains required in service on the line increased since the S stock was first introduced, as the Met's available A stock fleet at that time was only 55 trains (or around 52 - 53 back when some were needed to operate the ELL)? Would having one less train (and therefore not needing the spare M2 car) result in cancellations due to stock shortages?
Both M2 cars in S7+1 units are 25xxx cars with de-icing equipment. Is unit 21327 likely to have that equipment removed from the 'extra' car (assuming it is currently fitted)? And will the new M2 cars for units 21383 and 21385 be de-icing cars?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2015 18:36:43 GMT
I'm guessing your question meant - why do we need the extra car/ train which is a fair question. All I can do is lay out the numbers.
There are according to my info 50 trains required for service on the Met plus there is a desire to get to 2 hot spares so 52 in effect with 3 out for ATC fitment = 55/58 which is manageable but 55/59 is better. As well as having spares for routine maintenance some of the distance based heavier maintenance will be coming up in 2016-17 which will take trains out of the fleet for several days at a time as well. There are some other constraints too which I don't think are public domain yet (nothing sinister). Ask me again in Feb or March.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Nov 27, 2015 23:14:19 GMT
fitting and testing of ATO equipment, would be a guess.
Simon
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2015 23:17:00 GMT
That's starts in (I think) August.
|
|
|
Post by wimblephil on Nov 28, 2015 14:36:01 GMT
I've just boarded a train at Wimbledon. As I got to the platform, none of the doors on first car were open, but a stream of people were exiting from the rest of the train (which left a lot of people in the first car frantically pushing the buttons!). I assumed that perhaps the train didn't hit it's mark correctly and so none of the first and last doors opened, however upon walking through the train to the last car, all doors were open. Just curious as to what may have caused none of the first to be open, but all of the last?
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Nov 28, 2015 17:34:12 GMT
I've just boarded a train at Wimbledon. As I got to the platform, none of the doors on first car were open, but a stream of people were exiting from the rest of the train (which left a lot of people in the first car frantically pushing the buttons!). I assumed that perhaps the train didn't hit it's mark correctly and so none of the first and last doors opened, however upon walking through the train to the last car, all doors were open. Just curious as to what may have caused none of the first to be open, but all of the last? If the train detects it's still within the platform and the Operator has kept the TBC in the braking arc, the train would only keep the front 3-doors closed, if the Operator stopped beyond the mark.
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Nov 28, 2015 17:56:34 GMT
new workings list issued:
On Sunday 29 November: 1, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 101. (still 15x D for rest)
M-F 30/11-04/12: 3, 5, 7, 13, 21, 22, 24, 25, 27, 30, 32, 33, 34, 37, 40, 46, 47, 50, 55, 56, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 103, 104, 123(AM only), 124(PM only). (still 36x D for rest)
of course all +70-77 Wim-ERd
|
|