SSL signalling upgrade scrapped

I think Seltrac should be used (if its as good as they say it is ?)

There are those in LU who regard the Seltrac system as a "a nuisance" because of all the cabling on the track. In the early days, some pressure was put on Tubelines to use a different system but they declined. The main reason for the re-tendering of the SSL re-signalling was to get a better price than was being offered by Westinghouse/BT under the Metronet umbrella. My spies tell me that, technically, anything other than Seltrac would be the preferred option.

My question is: Are the drawbacks of having Seltrac on the SSL, with all its cables on the track but making it compatible with the Jub & Picc, greater than the problems over the interfaces between having two incompatible systems over the joint sections.

The latest publicity I have seen states that the Hammersmith control centre will open Dec 2009! but I have been told it's more likely to be 2014.

Whether LUL gets Seltrac or not depends on if they employ a consultant to write the spec and which Consultant they choose. Some seem to have a rather high hit rate for Seltrac winning....... Some also have a very good record of advising LUL on NOPO every time there´s a strike.

On the subject of the BT/ Westinghouse combination and whether Westinghouse´s distance to go system works have you seem this:
www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_299460.html

I think your answer is implicit in the question... and I agree. Interfaces of this complexity smack of bad planning and are a legacy for future anxt.

If the long term aim is to adopt ATO on every line, then surely its only common sense to design one system for all, and as lines become due for resignalling in the future (be it 5 years or 50) adopt that system?

I'm sure not much can be done now, but planning for next time wouldn't hurt? I thought everything now was built with a planned obsolescence?

I believe all stocks of the time C/72M1TS/72M2TS/73TS had ATO provision some of the 72'sTS even had where the identra would have went I think because the design was based on 67TS. I know that the 72M2 TS even had the auto position and buttons on the console although covered up 73 TS was similar and even had prog on the selector barrel I think for auto reversing in sidings?

Perhaps it comes down to the PPP contractural agreement - if it states D stock replacement then the penalties for not doing so might be prohibitive? Given that Metronet went into Administration though, I'm not sure what the current situation would be with the contracts. I suppose if the signalling upgrade can go back to square one, it might be possible to do the same with the trains.

However, the D stock is at the end of the S stock delivery schedule, so taking a pessimistic (realistic) view replacement won't be complete until 2017/8-ish, by which time the D stock will be as-near-as-dammit 40 years old. That's perhaps a little early for retirement by some standards*, but not unreasonably so.

While the A stock is going on past its 50th birthday, if I were the chief rolling stock engineer I would be happy enough to take delivery of replacement stock in 2016, as at some point around then the 'bathtub' reliablity/failure curve of the D stock would probably be turning upwards. The passenger environment might be good for another 5-10 years after that because of the refurb, but if the bits below the floor start failing that loses relevance.

With the first train due in the New Year, there will be 6 years of testing and service experience with the S stock on the other sub-surface lines. That should be more than enough time to get S stock reliability to at least as good as D stock, hopefully better. You would hope that

The other thing in favour of early-ish replacement of the D stock is the nail in the coffin for the 1983 stock - narrow doorways with single-leaf doors. I would think the S stock should have improved dwell times - at least a few seconds at minimum - at busy stations. This would cut a minute or two off end-to-end journey times, before any gain due to improved performance of S stock compared to D.

* Milan's Peter Witt trams, and 38 stock on the IoW are the two that spring to mind. Replacement of the D stock at 38 years old is around the same as 59/62 stock.