|
Post by abe on Sept 7, 2011 7:16:19 GMT
Really I wish the 1996 stock was 100% motor axled that would really give power a boost and that would cut journey times even more. Unfortunately it would heat the tunnels even more, and make the Underground even more uncomfortable in the summer months. There is no point doing this for a minor reduction in journey times that would be lost as soon as there is a slight delay on the line. And life isn't all about getting to wherever as fast as possible... sometimes it's about the journey.
|
|
|
Post by jardine01 on Sept 7, 2011 14:41:25 GMT
Under the privous old fixed block signaling trains used to still go fast. I know the old signaling system has hardly the most reliable signaling there ever was. Really and I am sure everybody agrees that ATO should of started in 1999 when the Jubilee line extenchion opened. But that never happened due to technical problems with it. Still though with this new timetable it does not seem to be as frequent as the Central line i waited 6 minutes at 3.40pm at Finchely road.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2011 15:49:07 GMT
Are you sure about that? My notes mention 1987 by whict time the '38TS were long gone. I could well be wrong there. I recall an old thread/post on this forum that said that was the reason. Perhaps it was to protect the step plate with the bakerloo. And was that when the jubilee line was re-signalled some time in the 80's?
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 21, 2011 19:44:57 GMT
Somebody mentioned the frequent stops for service regulation on the Vic earlier in this thread. They are still using the old timetable, which was designed with the 67 stock characteristics in mind. At Kings Cross southbound, pretty much every train is regulated for well over a minute (off peak). When it departs, the next train is already approaching. Really highlights the improved performance of the 09's compared to the 67's.
|
|
|
Post by jardine01 on Sept 22, 2011 6:10:52 GMT
When the 2012 Jubilee line timetable comes in hopefully this will be the one. Hopefully we should get full speeds all the time rather than the on off low target speeds. The new timetable should make trains quicker as it will have less time to get to the stations.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2011 21:39:12 GMT
Ok people, hopefully we can put this one to bed. I have sifted through all of the literature that was issued to us in Service Control, and nowhere does it mention "slowing trains down to lose/keep to time between stations." The whole TBTC system is concentrated about maximising line capacity by being able to "automatically" control each train. The speed of each train is governed by several factors, including the current line speed, the distance of the train ahead, approaches to stations and/or crossovers, temporary speed restrictions, etc.etc. Thus by being able to control the speed accurately, trains are able to be run at much closer distances, which means more trains can be run on each section of line. If you have done a section of line at xx speed, and yet another day did it at yy speed, it has nothing whatsoever with timekeeping, but is related to the other factors which can lead to speed reduction or, indeed, increase. The control "loops" which form the track-based communication control with each train are purely a modern method of signalling - that is they communicate how far ahead of each train the line is clear. There is no capacity within the loops to tell a train it is running early or late with regard to the timetable. Regulation is done in controlled areas along the line, with the use of platform station starters. Of course, should anyone have information to the contrary I would be very interested to see it, as indeed some of my colleagues would. Sorry for the late reply. I have only just noticed this thread. TBTC can definitely regulate trains against the timetable, as a later post says, by way of the System Regulation Server part of TBTC. When a train arrives at a station its journey time to the next station is calculated to allow it to arrive on time and a suitable velocity issued to it. Note the calculation is made as the train arrives so if it subsequently has an extended dwell time the train will still use the same velocity, probably making it slightly late and the system will then recalculate and either reduce the dwell (but not below a specified minimum) or speed the train up for the next station to station run. Whilst the timetable still has a little slack in it compared to achievable run times there will still be some slower runs between stations if trains are predicted to run early (but often on the system at Neasden you can see a whole line worth of trains within 2 to 3 seconds of perfect on time running with zero intervention from staff). Metcontrol - not sure why your material doesn't touch on this. It maybe that it was felt the regulation bit was more important for the Jubilee signallers and your material focused on the interaction between Jubilee and Met. I'll have a read through on Monday and see if we need to add anything.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2011 21:48:34 GMT
that MetControl is correct - I believe the operative phrase is 'manual destinations' - the Jubilly as I understand it is based on logical block, rather than moving block - if it were set up for moving block there would not be the 'pseudo-station' zones, nor so few defined 'intermediate stopping points'. Granted the system appears to have enough safety distances, conflict zones and velocity restrictions to allow moving block, but AIUI it is just logical block at present, therefore the timing regulation is between fixed locations ie stations or other dedicated stopping locations and not between the 'envelopes' of moving trains. The timing regulation is between stations or ISPs but the safety protection is between moving trains (and other safety object) so if the service is running late then moving block is minimising the distances between trains. Just watching two trains close together you can see the effect of moving block - as soon as one starts moving so does the next one move very soon afterwards. The timetable does mean that it is in a sense, as you suggest, still a bit of a hybrid compared to non timetabled or driverless Seltrac railways but still definitely moving block.
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Sept 23, 2011 15:26:46 GMT
Metcontrol - not sure why your material doesn't touch on this. It maybe that it was felt the regulation bit was more important for the Jubilee signallers and your material focused on the interaction between Jubilee and Met. I'll have a read through on Monday and see if we need to add anything. There is a great deal we were not told (and still are not told) when it comes to the operation of the Jubilee Line in general, so it doesn't surprise me that I don't have this information. Whilst it is interesting to find they have this sort of system, I am now astounded at just how pointless it is. Maybe more effort should have been focused on preventing those "once in 8 years" failures which have happened several times now, rather than trying to make the operation of the trains so "intelligent." But then that's progress I suppose
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Sept 23, 2011 16:44:48 GMT
Under the privous old fixed block signaling trains used to still go fast. I know the old signaling system has hardly the most reliable signaling there ever was. Really and I am sure everybody agrees that ATO should of started in 1999 when the Jubilee line extenchion opened. But that never happened due to technical problems with it. Still though with this new timetable it does not seem to be as frequent as the Central line i waited 6 minutes at 3.40pm at Finchely road. Come on Jardine01 - you really ought to have learned some spelling by now, it really isn't that difficult! previous not privous signalling rather than signaling (I don't think you're American) should have / should've not should of extension not extenchion
|
|
|
Post by plasmid on Sept 25, 2011 19:41:11 GMT
TBTC can definitely regulate trains against the timetable, as a later post says, by way of the System Regulation Server part of TBTC. When a train arrives at a station its journey time to the next station is calculated to allow it to arrive on time and a suitable velocity issued to it. Note the calculation is made as the train arrives so if it subsequently has an extended dwell time the train will still use the same velocity, probably making it slightly late and the system will then recalculate and either reduce the dwell (but not below a specified minimum) or speed the train up for the next station to station run. Whilst the timetable still has a little slack in it compared to achievable run times there will still be some slower runs between stations if trains are predicted to run early (but often on the system at Neasden you can see a whole line worth of trains within 2 to 3 seconds of perfect on time running with zero intervention from staff). Win.
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Sept 25, 2011 22:01:04 GMT
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Sept 25, 2011 22:35:04 GMT
Quite. I think that everybody's partially correct.
Why would there be a concept of 'winning'?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2011 9:56:32 GMT
Metcontrol - not sure why your material doesn't touch on this. It maybe that it was felt the regulation bit was more important for the Jubilee signallers and your material focused on the interaction between Jubilee and Met. I'll have a read through on Monday and see if we need to add anything. Metcontrol - I have read through the briefing material now. You are quite right (not that I doubted you) that the regulation part of the system isn't covered. It focused on the interactions with the Met as I thought; which was the most important stuff at the time. Now the dust has settled if you'd like some more info I am sure we can do something - suggest you ask your SCAC to contact the upgrade team to arrange. Or PM me and I'll tell you who I am so you can contact me direct.
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Sept 26, 2011 14:55:58 GMT
Thank you for the offer tridentalx, and I may take you up on the offer at a later date. If the system works "more or less" as we thought, then from a "Met Line" point of view we have the information needed. I have come across a small heap of further information whilst doing a bit of spring cleaning at work yesterday, so I'll have a browse through that and see if it covers everything.
Thanks again ;D
|
|