|
|
Post by t697 on Dec 19, 2015 20:26:59 GMT
One planning option considered was to retain some D78 stock to free more S7s for ATC installation at a time. Now doesn't appear likely to go that way. Never say never, at least while there are D stocks around, but it isn't likely now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Dec 20, 2015 8:08:16 GMT
Planning the "last D stock" activities will need to start soon as there are a number of platform alterations we need to get done once they are all gone so they won't be able to run round much after the last scheduled working has finished. Would these platform alterations restrict the free movement of the future RATs around the sub-surface network? |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,745 
|
Post by class411 on Dec 20, 2015 8:40:25 GMT
Planning the "last D stock" activities will need to start soon as there are a number of platform alterations we need to get done once they are all gone so they won't be able to run round much after the last scheduled working has finished. Do you mean that they won't be able to use the track at all, or that they will not be able to entrain/detrain passengers without special provisions? |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 20, 2015 10:43:50 GMT
Planning the "last D stock" activities will need to start soon as there are a number of platform alterations we need to get done once they are all gone so they won't be able to run round much after the last scheduled working has finished. Do you mean that they won't be able to use the track at all, or that they will not be able to entrain/detrain passengers without special provisions? I'm suspecting it's the latter, as some of the work will relate to moving the stopping marks and getting rid of the OPO monitors which currently restrict the opening of some doors on the S7's. D stock should be able to run on the line until the new signalling is installed, and who knows when that might be! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 13:04:30 GMT
Aldgate East area will be first around the latter part of 2017.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 15:30:43 GMT
My understanding is that some of the platform alterations (to move platform nosing stones closer to the track alignment) will infringe the gauge of the D stock so they won't be able to run (or at the very least the alterations can't be done until the D stock is gone). The RATs will need a bit of alteration to make them suitable to continue to run on District tracks (though mostly they will stick to the Met anyway).
The platform works will start late in 2016. There are some track alignment changes to improve the platform/train gap as well. These are planned for 2017 onwards and I don't think are contingent on D stock removal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 15:33:53 GMT
Do you mean that they won't be able to use the track at all, or that they will not be able to entrain/detrain passengers without special provisions? I'm suspecting it's the latter, as some of the work will relate to moving the stopping marks and getting rid of the OPO monitors which currently restrict the opening of some doors on the S7's. D stock should be able to run on the line until the new signalling is installed, and who knows when that might be! Sorry I should have been clearer. The works I was referring to were platform/train gap works. You are right that there are other works to take away some of the legacy OPO equipment. I'd be reasonably confident that the new signalling will start being commissioned some time in 2018. Good progress is being made. |
|
|
|
Post by br7mt on Dec 20, 2015 16:16:21 GMT
My understanding is that some of the platform alterations (to move platform nosing stones closer to the track alignment) will infringe the gauge of the D stock so they won't be able to run (or at the very least the alterations can't be done until the D stock is gone). The RATs will need a bit of alteration to make them suitable to continue to run on District tracks (though mostly they will stick to the Met anyway). The platform works will start late in 2016. There are some track alignment changes to improve the platform/train gap as well. These are planned for 2017 onwards and I don't think are contingent on D stock removal. I wonder how that will affect running TRC666 through the modified platforms. Regards, Dan |
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286
|
Post by rincew1nd on Dec 20, 2015 18:18:50 GMT
At the spring Acton Depot, the staff at Hearne House were proudly showing off their track recording equipment which is being mounted on trains in passenger service.
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Dec 20, 2015 20:22:25 GMT
You don't see many trees beside the District line tracks
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 22:10:03 GMT
I'm suspecting it's the latter, as some of the work will relate to moving the stopping marks and getting rid of the OPO monitors which currently restrict the opening of some doors on the S7's. D stock should be able to run on the line until the new signalling is installed, and who knows when that might be! Sorry I should have been clearer. The works I was referring to were platform/train gap works. You are right that there are other works to take away some of the legacy OPO equipment. I'd be reasonably confident that the new signalling will start being commissioned some time in 2018. Good progress is being made. Testing is due to start in early 2017 but you are correct it will start to be commissioned from Feb 2018 well thats the proposed start date from Hammersmith (H&C) to Paddington (H&C) being the first area. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 21, 2015 20:42:15 GMT
What is the maximum number of D stocks that could be used in service? They were certainly outnumbering the S7's on the District main today. Problem with S7 availability?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2015 22:12:59 GMT
If it is of any help, as of now, 32 trains have been withdrawn and disposed of (either Vivarail or Booths and one train for RAT conversion) and 43 remain. Whether all 43 are operational, I don't know.
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 21, 2015 22:21:25 GMT
So 43 D stock left with 29 nominated workings. I assume that the "sweating the assets" policy no longer applies!
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 23, 2015 20:53:45 GMT
Although today there were 38 - 39 D stocks in service, some way above the 29 nominated workings. That seems to be a big discrepancy. Not that I'm in any hurry to see the back of the D's, but why are so many more running than planned? I mentioned this the other day, but is there a temporary issue with the S7 availability?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2015 21:36:34 GMT
Although today there were 38 - 39 D stocks in service, some way above the 29 nominated workings. That seems to be a big discrepancy. Not that I'm in any hurry to see the back of the D's, but why are so many more running than planned? I mentioned this the other day, but is there a temporary issue with the S7 availability? In the last few days the utilisation has been around 34-35. There is no reason that there should be that many needed in service. By the end of Jan another 4 will have gone so it will start to force the reduction. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 23, 2015 21:47:56 GMT
Although today there were 38 - 39 D stocks in service, some way above the 29 nominated workings. That seems to be a big discrepancy. Not that I'm in any hurry to see the back of the D's, but why are so many more running than planned? I mentioned this the other day, but is there a temporary issue with the S7 availability? In the last few days the utilisation has been around 34-35. There is no reason that there should be that many needed in service. By the end of Jan another 4 will have gone so it will start to force the reduction. Yes I thought it was a bit high too! For the record, I saw D stock on the following workings: 2 3 4 5 6 11 13 14 15 22 24 26 30 35 37 41 42 44 47 50 51 53 54 56 63 64 65 66 67 101 102 103 104 107 121 122 123 126 (38 trains) Interestingly, some of the nominated D stock workings were covered by S stock. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,347
|
Post by Colin on Dec 24, 2015 2:29:31 GMT
Do your observations take account of reforms?
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,745
|
Post by class411 on Dec 24, 2015 8:41:58 GMT
So 43 D stock left with 29 nominated workings. I assume that the "sweating the assets" policy no longer applies! Did it ever? Although, superficially, it answered the question: "Why are they using D Stock when there are S Stock available?" that answer begged the questions: "Why did they spend umpteen millions on purchasing S Stock before they were needed", and "Why have they got rid of a lot of D Stock before strictly necessary"? There were (are) also a range of other answers (e.g. training and infrastructure work) that make more sense than buying a lot of very expensive trains well before they are needed. (Obviously they would need to have them a little before the D Stock were calculated to reach end of life, for contingencies) |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 24, 2015 9:13:26 GMT
Do your observations take account of reforms? There were a few reforms yesterday after the signal failure at Barking. Most of these were observed in the afternoon and evening peak after the disruption. |
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Dec 24, 2015 9:43:16 GMT
Although, superficially, it answered the question: "Why are they using D Stock when there are S Stock available?" that answer begged the questions: "Why did they spend umpteen millions on purchasing S Stock before they were needed", and "Why have they got rid of a lot of D Stock before strictly necessary"? Mainly because ordering them with the rest of the S stock meant that the overall price would come down. Letting the D stock live out the rest of their lives and then ordering a new set of trains would see a lot of background costs for things such as research and design, contract awards, certification, being doubled unnecessarily. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2015 13:02:03 GMT
So 43 D stock left with 29 nominated workings. I assume that the "sweating the assets" policy no longer applies! Did it ever? Although, superficially, it answered the question: "Why are they using D Stock when there are S Stock available?" that answer begged the questions: "Why did they spend umpteen millions on purchasing S Stock before they were needed", and "Why have they got rid of a lot of D Stock before strictly necessary"? There were (are) also a range of other answers (e.g. training and infrastructure work) that make more sense than buying a lot of very expensive trains well before they are needed. (Obviously they would need to have them a little before the D Stock were calculated to reach end of life, for contingencies) Not sure what you mean by "before they were needed". The introduction of the S stock fleet was intended to be aligned with the commissioning of new signalling. The trains were to be introduced, then fitted with new signalling followed by the timetable uplifts that needed the extra trains. It is common knowledge that some parts of that plan failed to materialise. Whilst superficially there may now a longer period during which the s stock fleet is not "needed" for signalling reasons it is needed for reasons of customer comfort, performance (Met line run times have improved for example), completing depot and infrastructure work that can't be done whilst D stock remain and so on. A few days or weeks when slightly more D stocks than necessary are out on the railway is inconsequential in the scheme of things. And even if the D stocks are covering for one or two failed S stocks (which I don't think they are) that suggests good prudence is in place in not getting rid of too many D stocks too early. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 24, 2015 13:29:23 GMT
Did it ever? Although, superficially, it answered the question: "Why are they using D Stock when there are S Stock available?" that answer begged the questions: "Why did they spend umpteen millions on purchasing S Stock before they were needed", and "Why have they got rid of a lot of D Stock before strictly necessary"? There were (are) also a range of other answers (e.g. training and infrastructure work) that make more sense than buying a lot of very expensive trains well before they are needed. (Obviously they would need to have them a little before the D Stock were calculated to reach end of life, for contingencies) Not sure what you mean by "before they were needed". The introduction of the S stock fleet was intended to be aligned with the commissioning of new signalling. The trains were to be introduced, then fitted with new signalling followed by the timetable uplifts that needed the extra trains. It is common knowledge that some parts of that plan failed to materialise. Whilst superficially there may now a longer period during which the s stock fleet is not "needed" for signalling reasons it is needed for reasons of customer comfort, performance (Met line run times have improved for example), completing depot and infrastructure work that can't be done whilst D stock remain and so on. A few days or weeks when slightly more D stocks than necessary are out on the railway is inconsequential in the scheme of things. And even if the D stocks are covering for one or two failed S stocks (which I don't think they are) that suggests good prudence is in place in not getting rid of too many D stocks too early. A good post there, although I'm not sure Met line passengers would agree regarding improved running times! Incidentally, how many D stocks are programmed to run on Sat and Sun? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2015 15:35:15 GMT
A good post there, although I'm not sure Met line passengers would agree regarding improved running times! Incidentally, how many D stocks are programmed to run on Sat and Sun? Thanks. Perhaps a touch premature on the run times but the May 16 TT will seek to take 60-90 seconds off the overall run time in each direction (from the sections north of Finchley Road). The Sat and Sun workings vary depending on the weekend and whether any closures are in place. For 2/3 Jan for example though there are 17 on Sat and 9 on Sunday. |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,745
|
Post by class411 on Dec 24, 2015 17:44:08 GMT
Did it ever? Although, superficially, it answered the question: "Why are they using D Stock when there are S Stock available?" that answer begged the questions: "Why did they spend umpteen millions on purchasing S Stock before they were needed", and "Why have they got rid of a lot of D Stock before strictly necessary"? There were (are) also a range of other answers (e.g. training and infrastructure work) that make more sense than buying a lot of very expensive trains well before they are needed. (Obviously they would need to have them a little before the D Stock were calculated to reach end of life, for contingencies) Not sure what you mean by "before they were needed". The introduction of the S stock fleet was intended to be aligned with the commissioning of new signalling. The trains were to be introduced, then fitted with new signalling followed by the timetable uplifts that needed the extra trains. It is common knowledge that some parts of that plan failed to materialise. Whilst superficially there may now a longer period during which the s stock fleet is not "needed" for signalling reasons it is needed for reasons of customer comfort, performance (Met line run times have improved for example), completing depot and infrastructure work that can't be done whilst D stock remain and so on. A few days or weeks when slightly more D stocks than necessary are out on the railway is inconsequential in the scheme of things. And even if the D stocks are covering for one or two failed S stocks (which I don't think they are) that suggests good prudence is in place in not getting rid of too many D stocks too early. My post was about whether or not there had ever been any intention to 'sweat' assets, whereas you seem to be reading it as criticising some aspect of the S stock introduction (which was not what was intended). To clarify further: For many months we would get posts every few weeks detailing introductions, and interruptions in introductions (although the latter often seemed to lack any back-up data). Generally, the reasons for the delays made sense and were reasonably understandable - virtually all large projects suffer from unforeseen delays. All of a sudden there was a suggestion that D Stock were running (when there were S Stock available) because of a policy of asset sweating. Although normal delays and asset sweating are not inherently mutually exclusive the two explanations did not sit easily together in this case. What I was asking, really, was whether there is any actual evidence that LU ever had any intention to asset sweat. Or was it just a red herring, thrown into the mix as a speculative suggestion? If asset sweating was, indeed, intended, I would expect that final phase of S-Stock introductions would be very carefully timetabled as S stock were held in reserve (even if in LU's possession), whilst the last of the D Stock's hours were used up. If it was not intended then I'd expect, at some point, to see the last of the D Stock disappear very quickly - as happened to the C stock on the HC&C. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2015 18:38:18 GMT
My post was about whether or not there had ever been any intention to 'sweat' assets, whereas you seem to be reading it as criticising some aspect of the S stock introduction (which was not what was intended). To clarify further: For many months we would get posts every few weeks detailing introductions, and interruptions in introductions (although the latter often seemed to lack any back-up data). Generally, the reasons for the delays made sense and were reasonably understandable - virtually all large projects suffer from unforeseen delays. All of a sudden there was a suggestion that D Stock were running (when there were S Stock available) because of a policy of asset sweating. Although normal delays and asset sweating are not inherently mutually exclusive the two explanations did not sit easily together in this case. What I was asking, really, was whether there is any actual evidence that LU ever had any intention to asset sweat. Or was it just a red herring, thrown into the mix as a speculative suggestion? If asset sweating was, indeed, intended, I would expect that final phase of S-Stock introductions would be very carefully timetabled as S stock were held in reserve (even if in LU's possession), whilst the last of the D Stock's hours were used up. If it was not intended then I'd expect, at some point, to see the last of the D Stock disappear very quickly - as happened to the C stock on the HC&C. I'd put any thoughts about "sweating assets" firmly to one side. The facts are simply - the S stock rollout continues, some depot and other works still need to be completed and this may or may not hold up rollout at some point and the D stock fleet will gradually reduce in line with the increase in S stock. There is no intention of holding onto D stock simply to get some more hours out of them for the reasons I said earlier - they need to go before some depot and platform works can be finished off. The last D stock is currently scheduled to go in September 2016 and if they can go any earlier they will. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 24, 2015 19:25:18 GMT
Let's enjoy the D stock while we still can, because after next September the S stock will rule the SSR without dissent for the next 40 years . . .
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,745
|
Post by class411 on Dec 25, 2015 9:04:16 GMT
Let's enjoy the D stock while we still can, because after next September the S stock will rule the SSR without dissent for the next 40 years . . . Indeed. I know; I miss the C Stock already. There was nothing quite like getting into a near empty C Stock at Hammersmith on a quiet, midweek, summer afternoon, and enjoying its feeling of space and familiarity as it rattled up the line. I've been promising myself a trip to Upminster for some time and I'd better get a move on- I've probably already missed the chance of doing it in summer. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 30, 2015 21:06:38 GMT
On the District main today: 30 D stock, 23 S stock.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,347
|
Post by Colin on Dec 31, 2015 14:20:46 GMT
Its very messy now.
I had the same duty two days on the trot this week; day 1 both trains were D stock and on day 2 the first was an S whilst the second was a D. On the third day I was spare and had the same train as the second one on this duty.....and that was an S. All of these trains came out Upminster depot each morning and I'm on earlies so none were reformed.
Another driver had a similar experience on two different days - same duty yet day 1 was two S's and on day 2 the first was a D.......again all trains originated from Upminster depot and he was on early turns with no reforms having occured.
The number of each stock in service is probably right, but the depots seem to be doing their own thing most days rather than paying any attention to the nominated lists that keep getting put out. Frankly I ignore the nomination lists now......just wait and see what appears in the platform....
|
|
