|
|
Post by citysig on Sept 12, 2011 23:11:33 GMT
Of course such workings (without loco change) are easily possible nowadays. A trip around the Circle Line doesn't actually need to take anywhere near the hour it is timetabled for. I've seen trains do it in 40-42 minutes.
However, we have to timetable our whole day's service, and have to arrange each junction so that all services from other branches mesh in realistically. We also have to guard against unforseen circumstances. It's no good having a timetable that looks fast and good, for it to be messed-up by someone operating a passenger alarm maliciously and causing a minor 1-2 minute delay. We need to be able to recover quicly and easily from such events without anyone really noticing it ever happened.
So whilst such timings are still possible, we timetable away from such feats to keep everything a lot more realistic and reliable.
|
|
|
|
Post by andypurk on Sept 12, 2011 23:17:29 GMT
for leisure purposes they already have.travel cards have doubled.a single anytime cash fare from rickmansworth to harrow is £4 and the same from amersham its only when the oyster option is taken is this reduced.at the cash fare its nearing chilterns equivalent fares north of amersham and in some cases exceeding it. also greater london users have the option of the bus for local journeys. So off-peak Amersham Travelcards are now £11.00 off-peak. Can you find me a mainline station a similar distance from London where the off-peak travelcard is only £11.00 or the off-peak cash single is only £4.00? Hint, for Hemel Hempstead to London (a similar distance to Amersham), the off-peak Travelcard is £17.50, the off-peak return is £12.10 and the off-peak single is £11.60. Similarly at Beaconsfield, on the Chiltern mainline, the off-peak Travelcard is £18.00. The Chiltern fares Amersham to Aylesbury are not a good comparison as they must be kept low due to the Amersham - London section, otherwise passengers would just drive to Amersham. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2011 23:24:22 GMT
Now don't go telling me Chiltern don't use recovery time. It hasn't always taken 14-17 minutes from Harrow to Marylebone  Of course Chiltern use recovery time. IIRC the records in both directions are sub 11 mins. Hell, the fastest steam time is under 11 and a half minutes!! Oh yes, and I have sat on an S Class for close to 4 mins at Harrow cos it arrived sooo early, so the Met also use recovery time - regulating the service - tea break time - whatever you want to call it ;-). Yes Neasden is a bit lively -certainly SB. I haven't seen a TSR board, but maybe the drivers who know where it is ease off for 'passenger comfort' which will explain why there always seems to be a slowing down - it's either that or dissipating excess recovery time - or possibly even catching up the train in front. ;D |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2011 23:29:18 GMT
for leisure purposes they already have.travel cards have doubled.a single anytime cash fare from rickmansworth to harrow is £4 and the same from amersham its only when the oyster option is taken is this reduced.at the cash fare its nearing chilterns equivalent fares north of amersham and in some cases exceeding it. also greater london users have the option of the bus for local journeys. So off-peak Amersham Travelcards are now £11.00 off-peak. Can you find me a mainline station a similar distance from London where the off-peak travelcard is only £11.00 or the off-peak cash single is only £4.00? Hint, for Hemel Hempstead to London (a similar distance to Amersham), the off-peak Travelcard is £17.50, the off-peak return is £12.10 and the off-peak single is £11.60. Similarly at Beaconsfield, on the Chiltern mainline, the off-peak Travelcard is £18.00. The Chiltern fares Amersham to Aylesbury are not a good comparison as they must be kept low due to the Amersham - London section, otherwise passengers would just drive to Amersham. I think my Oyster only charged me £3.50 from Zone 3 to Amersham off-peak via Central London. Pretty good value!. Paying £15 to ride the LT museum 1938TS return from Amersham to Harrow was very steep in comparison, especially when no-one even asked me for a ticket! Then again, I did get to experience Class 20 diesel Haulage SB from Amersham to Harrow, and then Sarah Siddons hauling us NB again - included in the price! |
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on Sept 12, 2011 23:44:48 GMT
You see, this is where the whingers in this thread fall down I'm afraid. Where this figure of an additional 7 minutes has come from I don't actually know. The average increase from, say Amersham to Baker Street is between 3 and 6 minutes. It is not a case of an extra minute per stop. Only three minutes for all those stations  I'll stop whinging for now... ;D Chiltern's future is pretty much up to them. Their peak service already omits many of our stations at the north end of the line, and getting them to stop additionally during times of trouble is not always easy. If they end up non-stopping everwhere except Amersham, then the only people they will affect is the Met Line customers who use them as an alternative. Well most of their fast services which non-stop Met stations are fully packed and are made up of 6 cars so cannot stop at these stations. Chiltern lose a lot of potential revenue from Aylesbury as many commuters prefer the faster, more frequent services from Tring over the slower services via the Met. So I doubt they want to stop more than 2tph required at Met stations by their franchise agreement. Going back to timings, I'm looking at the Summer 1961 edition of the 'UndergrounD Guide'. On Sundays there was a half-hourly fast service between Amersham and Baker Street (all stations to Moor Park, then Harrow and Finchley Road). A 45 minute journey time Amersham to Baker Street; 47 minutes return. (On weekdays the fast trains were to / from Aylesbury, with what look like loco changes at Rickmansworth for the Met. trains, as they got 4 minutes at that station. Presumably, on Sundays, electric trains operated through to Amersham, as there was an Amersham - Aylesbury shuttle). The service also had to cope with trains running non-stop between Rayners Lane and Finchley Road in the am peak on M-F and in the reverse direction during the pm peak. Presumably all of this was before the full combined fleet of A stock had been delivered - ? I'm wondering whether even faster Amersham line timings might be found a few years later - ? With slick working, Amersham fasts at 42 or 43 minutes - ? According to this: Fast Amersham - Baker St with the same stopping patterns as now took 41 minutes according to the peak 1977 timetable. The fastest all stations Amersham - Baker St service took 50 minutes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2011 23:46:39 GMT
Of course such workings (without loco change) are easily possible nowadays. A trip around the Circle Line doesn't actually need to take anywhere near the hour it is timetabled for. I've seen trains do it in 40-42 minutes. However, we have to timetable our whole day's service, and have to arrange each junction so that all services from other branches mesh in realistically. We also have to guard against unforseen circumstances. It's no good having a timetable that looks fast and good, for it to be messed-up by someone operating a passenger alarm maliciously and causing a minor 1-2 minute delay. We need to be able to recover quicly and easily from such events without anyone really noticing it ever happened. So whilst such timings are still possible, we timetable away from such feats to keep everything a lot more realistic and reliable. Yes, you are absolutely right. Recovery time is accepted. But it is where more and more recovery time is added to offset the effects of the old life expired equipment that cheeses people off. Like Harrow N junction as an example. Mind you, the layout there does not help. Having to cross the NB slow clearly creates pathing issues, and trains have to be running to time to ensure there are no hold ups. Recovery time can be a good and bad thing. In some cases, too much recovery time encourages slackness, because individuals know that they have a decent buffer of time to eat into. Drivers can be a little more leisurely, maintenace workers can fix that fault 'another time' because they know that a train down on power will still be able to keep to schedule. Same for track maintenance too. Oh - not so urgent to remove that TSR cos theres enough recovery time to cope with it!!! Platform staff can be more leisurely in despatching trains away. Where a train has a decent layover - as at Amersham for example, is there really a need to have so much recovery time? N.B comparing real running times, a stopper took 6.5 mins longer than the fast excluding station dwell between Wemb Pk and Rickmansworth. So I'm guessing an extra 20-30 secs for each station would add another 2-3 mins to that. If LUL were increasing the frequency of the service, then the slightly longer journey time wouldn't be an issue, because the overall journey time, including the maximum potential wait if you just missed a train would be lower. But clearly people using Amrsham have not only seen a decrease in frequncy, but they will also have a slightly longer journey time. So if you miss your train, you have to wait even longer for the next one, and your journey will take even longer than before. Definitley not an improved service, but I understand the reasons why it is being done. |
|
|
|
Post by redsetter on Sept 13, 2011 0:43:36 GMT
or the T1 bus to chesham £4.60 return.the only downside the last bus leaves chesham at 5pm.
the former zones 2-9 was formerly £5.60 that got bumped up to £11.00 when it was dropped.
it could be argued also that people could drive to hemel from watford,there are workaround's its just finding the one that works for you.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Sept 13, 2011 1:01:27 GMT
According to this: Fast Amersham - Baker St with the same stopping patterns as now took 41 minutes according to the peak 1977 timetable. The fastest all stations Amersham - Baker St service took 50 minutes. Aaaaah.. PTTs. I've got those WTTs stashed away on the shelves, the booked times might be interesting to look at for comparison. Might even be able to dig out 1906 and 1934 times - long before the four-tracking. Nice to see that 'Amersham Man' (in contradistinction to 'the man on the Clapham Omnibus') is still as alive as ever. Wilt thou never be happy, save drinking from the cup of the ivory statue or the lateen-rigged nau? |
|
|
|
Post by abe on Sept 13, 2011 7:29:39 GMT
now with the new timetable coming in december, watford south junction will be used much more intensively, this raises the question, i saw a video of the junction in 1992, it is different to todays one. this raises the question, when was the junction replaced and why was it replaced when the old one allowed trains to pass over it alot quicker?! Jumping back slightly (as this question doesn't seem to have been answered), the new Watford South Junction is slower for trains crossing between the local and fast lines, but has allowed the speed restriction on the local lines to be eased. At the time it was replaced very few trains crossed between the local and fast lines, so there was a clear benefit in allowing trains to and from Watford to increase their speed. I presume that the restriction on the original junction was because the points were on the curve of the local lines. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2011 13:04:20 GMT
I'm guessing the junction was replaced because it was life expired and on the assumption that few trains would be crossing Fast to slow and V.V.
I'm guessing that if the new TT scenario had been planned long in advance, the turnouts would have been designed for higher speeds 40-50mph be tween fast and slow. I'm sure the slow lines have a 50mph limit before a 30mph restriction for the curve to Watford.
|
|
I'll stop whinging for now... ;D
