|
|
Post by superteacher on May 3, 2011 20:59:11 GMT
Looking in the 6 month look ahead track closures section on the TFL website, there are a few suspensions planned for east of Royal Oak, with a shuttle service from there to Hammersmith. If this is the case, this will be a chance to ride a rarely used piece of track.
I believe this was last used regularly after the 7/7 attacks.
Is it fully signalled or controlled by a ground frame?
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on May 3, 2011 23:43:13 GMT
Memory might be failing me on this occasion, but I think the answer is 'neither'.
Individually handworked, I feel.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2011 0:33:24 GMT
Looking in the 6 month look ahead track closures section on the TFL website, there are a few suspensions planned for east of Royal Oak, with a shuttle service from there to Hammersmith. If this is the case, this will be a chance to ride a rarely used piece of track. I believe this was last used regularly after the 7/7 attacks. Is it fully signalled or controlled by a ground frame? Ground frame. When the post bombings shuttle ran, I was pilotman working from Westbourne Park and then single line Royal Oak to Paddington suburban |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196 
|
Post by Tom on May 8, 2011 18:12:19 GMT
I'm fairly sure they're individually operated, the only ground frame on a main running line is at Totteridge.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on May 9, 2011 2:19:15 GMT
I'm fairly sure they're individually operated, the only ground frame on a main running line is at Totteridge. Yes I think they are handworked as opposed to ground-frame worked. The ground frame in Morden Depot controls points on the running line side of the depot Stop boards. It will be interesting to see if it survives the TBTC resignalling. It survived the upgrade of Morden Depot in the 1990s for the 95 stock, though part of its function was taken over by a switch panel. |
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on May 9, 2011 6:19:26 GMT
Isn't East Putney #-over a GF?
|
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,487
|
Post by DWS on May 9, 2011 6:26:15 GMT
Isn't East Putney #-over a GF? Yes its a ground frame. |
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on May 9, 2011 11:15:38 GMT
I have yet to traverse all three maual #-overs...yes I am one of those nutters that likes to 'do' rare track. In another thread it has been mentioned about Croxley Tip [siding]...thankfully I have covered that one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2011 18:49:59 GMT
Dont forget north end of Wembley Central on the DC / Bakerloo lines .....
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on May 12, 2011 20:12:52 GMT
Excuse me but I am not familiar with that one..is it a GF as well?
|
|
|
|
Post by causton on May 12, 2011 21:02:31 GMT
SimSig shows it as a ground frame, but "Releasing the frame will cause two new ground signals to appear (these simulate a handsignaller - there are no signals there in reality)." - so no it isn't (assuming that document was/is still correct)  |
|
|
|
Post by londonse on May 13, 2011 14:46:23 GMT
Was it ever considered to make this a proper crossover and control it from a signal cabin?
Paul
|
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,487
|
Post by DWS on May 13, 2011 17:21:06 GMT
Was it ever considered to make this a proper crossover and control it from a signal cabin? Paul It was planned to control it from Edgware Road (H&C/ Circle) signal cabin, but it was never done  |
|
|
|
Post by citysig on May 13, 2011 20:45:05 GMT
Was it ever considered to make this a proper crossover and control it from a signal cabin? Paul It was planned to control it from Edgware Road (H&C/ Circle) signal cabin, but it was never done There are still rumblings that it will be converted and controlled from the new SCC at Hammersmith. If they're thinking of doing such things, then maybe a proper crossover at Paddington should be the way forward - given that Royal Oak has never served anything short of a service to Paddington. |
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,487
|
Post by DWS on May 14, 2011 2:00:36 GMT
It was planned to control it from Edgware Road (H&C/ Circle) signal cabin, but it was never done There are still rumblings that it will be converted and controlled from the new SCC at Hammersmith. If they're thinking of doing such things, then maybe a proper crossover at Paddington should be the way forward - given that Royal Oak has never served anything short of a service to Paddington. I agree that a crossover at Paddington (H&C ) would better than one at Royal Oak. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2011 20:05:33 GMT
[quote author=dws board=hc thread=16498 post=287491 time=1305338436
I agree that a crossover at Paddington (H&C ) would better than
one at Royal Oak.[/quote]
It would certainly be more useful for EB trains from Hammersmith, but why not a scissors crossing - more expensive, yes, but easier to operate if you want to run Padd(H&C)-Hamm(H&C) as a little train-set isolated from the rest of the system.
My point being: is there a sufficient operational need to justify doing anything hereabouts? Surely TfL would be better advised to save its pennies up till it can afford a fifth platform at Edgware Road?
|
|
|
|
Post by andypurk on May 14, 2011 21:14:59 GMT
[quote author=dws board=hc thread=16498 post=287491 time=1305338436 I agree that a crossover at Paddington (H&C ) would better than one at Royal Oak. It would certainly be more useful for EB trains from Hammersmith, but why not a scissors crossing - more expensive, yes, but easier to operate if you want to run Padd(H&C)-Hamm(H&C) as a little train-set isolated from the rest of the system. [/quote] Surely no need for an expensive scissors layout, just a pair of normal crossovers (trailing then facing or vv) would do the job, there is plenty of space west of Paddington. It would even be possible to just add a second crossover at Royal Oak and run a reasonably frequent service from Paddington by using both the tracks between Royal Oak - Paddington reversibly. After all, the current layout allows a reasonably frequent service to serve Paddington using just the eastbound line in both directions. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2011 15:24:16 GMT
The crossover just west of Royal Oak is to be used on Sat/Sun 3/4 September during weekend engineering work east thereof.
Trains will run from Hammersmith to Royal Oak, reverse and across the crossover onto the WB line back to Hammersmith.
Service both days every 10 mins (15 mins before 08.00 and after 23.30 (Sat) and before 10.00 and after 23.00 (Sun).
One for our track bashers here. ;D ;D Enjoy!!
|
|
|
|
Post by uzairjubilee on Aug 20, 2011 18:33:03 GMT
The crossover just west of Royal Oak is to be used on Sat/Sun 3/4 September during weekend engineering work east thereof. Trains will run from Hammersmith to Royal Oak, reverse and across the crossover onto the WB line back to Hammersmith. Service both days every 10 mins (15 mins before 08.00 and after 23.30 (Sat) and before 10.00 and after 23.00 (Sun). One for our track bashers here. ;D ;D Enjoy!! A boring track bash, but still a track bash. innocentabroad - A fifth platform at Edgware Road would be so good. |
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Aug 21, 2011 20:49:51 GMT
The crossover just west of Royal Oak is to be used on Sat/Sun 3/4 September during weekend engineering work east thereof. Trains will run from Hammersmith to Royal Oak, reverse and across the crossover onto the WB line back to Hammersmith. Service both days every 10 mins (15 mins before 08.00 and after 23.30 (Sat) and before 10.00 and after 23.00 (Sun). One for our track bashers here. ;D ;D Enjoy!! Indeed and it's been nicely polished up over this weekend - being used as part of some S7 testing on the branch between Hammersmith and Royal Oak. |
|
