|
Post by charleyfarley on Oct 6, 2012 17:04:31 GMT
A proportion of the soutbound trains due to reverse at Elephant to head north to Harrow & Wealdstone reverse at Piccadilly Circus instead. This would ease pressure on the Elephant and also give northbound passengers for stations north of Queen's Park waiting at stations between Piccadilly Circus and Paddington more chance of actually getting onto a train.
|
|
|
Post by andypurk on Oct 6, 2012 17:21:57 GMT
What about the Southbound passengers who want to get to Charing Cross or Waterloo in the evening peak and will be off-loaded onto a crowded platform at Piccadilly Circus instead?
Reversal at Lambeth North might work, but then this would hardly save any time over using Elephant and Castle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2012 17:30:03 GMT
Oh blimey! Well, it would be interesting! ;D The main bit would be all the other southbound trains queueing behind a reversing train and the hold ups there. Add to this, when an Elephant train (which may be pretty packed already) arrives it would have to try and pick up all the people who have just got off the train in front! Plus confusion to passengers who may end up going back to when they come from........
Also the northbound service could well get held up too as these trains await the train crossing over in front of them........
In a brief statement, it would be chaos ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Oct 6, 2012 18:47:13 GMT
Also add in the severe speed restriction over the crossover when reversing south to north, trains would soon be blocking back to Baker Street southbound.
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Oct 6, 2012 20:23:39 GMT
A proportion of the soutbound trains due to reverse at Elephant to head north to Harrow & Wealdstone reverse at Piccadilly Circus instead. This would ease pressure on the Elephant and also give northbound passengers for stations north of Queen's Park waiting at stations between Piccadilly Circus and Paddington more chance of actually getting onto a train. Good grief. Talk about cutting off your head to save an arm Lunacy. -- Nick
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on Oct 7, 2012 13:09:38 GMT
Just how much capacity would you lose during the reversal? Two paths in each direction? Three? Maybe 4 even, given the time taken to detrain the punters, wait for a path in the opposite direction, re-man the cab at the other end etc etc
GH
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2012 13:36:57 GMT
Recently someone accused me of being dismissive of the opinions of people who didn’t work inside the transport industry and that I should be more open to suggestions of member of the travelling public. Thank you for reinforcing my view that the punters have no more understanding of how things work down here than a tea leaf knows the history of the East India Company (thank you DA).
|
|
|
Post by charleyfarley on Oct 7, 2012 14:46:59 GMT
Thanks to The Major and to bruce for taking the time to explain why what I suggested would not work. The others who responded seem to have failed to notice the first two words of my post were "Would this". It was simply an idea by an ordinary punter put out for discussion - an idea, not a suggestion.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Oct 7, 2012 20:36:09 GMT
The only way to try and cut down on the problems you have highlighted Charley is IMO to extend beyond Elephant to a new 3 platform terminus. There just isn't the capacity at Elephant, athough perhaps ATO and stepping back (in use currently) may help. The Victoria line seems to manage.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Oct 15, 2012 21:12:47 GMT
The only way to try and cut down on the problems you have highlighted Charley is IMO to extend beyond Elephant to a new 3 platform terminus. There just isn't the capacity at Elephant, athough perhaps ATO and stepping back (in use currently) may help. The Victoria line seems to manage. The VIc line trains are able to run into Brixton platforms at full speed, due to the type of points and overruns beyond the station. They can also leave both platforms at full line speed, which is not the case at Elephant and Castle. This limits the theoretical maximum frequency. At one time, I believe the Bakerloo reversed 35pth at Elephant, although this was before Moorgate protection was brought in. I'm also not sure whether the 35tph was actually achieved in practice on a regular basis, or whether it led to chronic late running at the end of the peak.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Oct 15, 2012 21:15:54 GMT
How likely is Elephant to recieve similar high speed xovers in the future or is it just not possible with the current fabric there? There are overrun tunnels at Elephant so drivers had some margin for error in the old days perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Oct 15, 2012 21:50:30 GMT
High speed crossover is highly unlikely due to sever space restrictions in the crossover tunnel. The only way would be to enlarge the crossover tunnel towards Lambeth North. The sidings south of the station would also have to be moved further south to accommodate the high speed over run protection. I don't think that the expense would be worth the time gained. The money would be better spent extending the line southwards and terminating in a 3 road terminus. Taking into account the many speed restrictions on the Bakerloo Line the installation of a high speed crossover at Elephant would be a waste of money
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Oct 15, 2012 21:51:55 GMT
That's what I thought. Thanks. This demonstrates the difference in 60 years between the lines.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Oct 15, 2012 22:08:49 GMT
The only way to try and cut down on the problems you have highlighted Charley is IMO to extend beyond Elephant to a new 3 platform terminus. Rather than this being in the RIPaS boardNow oddly enough, I have a complete set of scale signalling diagrams for that extension fully dimensioned too! There were two versions drawn up c.1950 by the signalling department, one version had an intermediate station at Camberwell Gate, the other did not. There is also somewhere around in my files a third version with speed calculated at each signal. I also have a copy of a Lambeth North resignalling somewhere, I can't remember if it is contemporaneous with the Camberwell extensions plans, but it involved a significant resignalling and extra reversing siding (I think) with a larger lever frame, it's been a while since I last saw that file, so I can't date it accurately but I think it might have been in the late '30s because a similar hand drew the concept sketch for Bushey Heath and Elstree South with lever sizes. Remember, these plans are significantly different from the normal blue-sky thinking on the RIPaS board, these are genuine proposals worked up by the LPTB!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2012 22:16:41 GMT
Thanks to The Major and to bruce for taking the time to explain why what I suggested would not work. The others who responded seem to have failed to notice the first two words of my post were "Would this". It was simply an idea by an ordinary punter put out for discussion - an idea, not a suggestion. Well said and I agree with that view.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2012 22:24:25 GMT
The only way to try and cut down on the problems you have highlighted Charley is IMO to extend beyond Elephant to a new 3 platform terminus. There just isn't the capacity at Elephant, athough perhaps ATO and stepping back (in use currently) may help. The Victoria line seems to manage. A loop line could be another option which could also have a ventilation shaft to greatly improve the atmosphere down there.
|
|