|
|
Post by d7666 on Feb 28, 2014 17:33:00 GMT
See link below QUOTE ... Alongside new modern signalling systems, the new trains will help LU meet the challenge of London's growing population - set to increase from 8.4 million today to around 10m by 2030 - by increasing capacity on: ... ... the Waterloo & City line by 50 per cent; and, ... New Tube for London programme will see approximately: ... 10 trains for the Waterloo & City line. ... END QUOTE www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/29683.aspxand from the link within that link (d) Waterloo & City line: a 50 per cent increase in line capacity can be achieved through remodelling of the track layout at Waterloo, an increased fleet size of new generation trains and re-signalling to enable a 30tph peak service level by 2032. -- Nick |
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on Feb 28, 2014 18:18:30 GMT
10 trains sounds more like a 100% increase - 20 cars now 40 in the future?
|
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Feb 28, 2014 19:24:33 GMT
10 trains sounds more like a 100% increase - 20 cars now 40 in the future? How do you know they will be 4 car trains ? If they are 3 car you'd have 30 cars which is 50% if you use numbers of cars alone. Or 10 2car trains - which in media sopeak could what they have now - 10 car units, each unit being half a train. Anyway, line capacity increase are not just measured by numbers of cars in trains. -- Nick |
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on Mar 1, 2014 8:17:03 GMT
d7666 - well, they won't be three car trains, for sure (that would mean either shortening the present 4 car trains, or extending a typical train to 2x3 which is probably physically impossible down there) and if these are articulated trains, as envisaged, a 2 car set would be slightly odd - in any case 2x10 would give you 20 cars (and while I agree that capacity is not just a matter of the number of cars, a 50% increase in capacity with the same number of cars is a big ask). In short, it's not clear what "10" represents.
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Mar 1, 2014 8:40:58 GMT
d7666 - well, they won't be three car trains, for sure (that would mean either shortening the present 4 car trains, or extending a typical train to 2x3 which is probably physically impossible down there) and if these are articulated trains, as envisaged, a 2 car set would be slightly odd - in any case 2x10 would give you 20 cars (and while I agree that capacity is not just a matter of the number of cars, a 50% increase in capacity with the same number of cars is a big ask). In short, it's not clear what "10" represents. Read the first post |
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Mar 1, 2014 10:14:31 GMT
d7666 - well, they won't be three car trains, for sure (that would mean either shortening the present 4 car trains, or extending a typical train to 2x3 which is probably physically impossible down there) and if these are articulated trains, as envisaged, a 2 car set would be slightly odd - in any case 2x10 would give you 20 cars (and while I agree that capacity is not just a matter of the number of cars, a 50% increase in capacity with the same number of cars is a big ask). In short, it's not clear what "10" represents. It's a logistical nightmare gettingtrainsin and out of the W&C. I remember watching in Lower Marsh the craning in and out of every car, the clearances are minute Don't know if its on there but it might be on Youtube. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2014 11:50:36 GMT
The cars would have to be the same length as the 482s or shorter otherwise they'd never make it around the curves.
|
|
|
|
Post by southfieldschris on Mar 1, 2014 12:58:29 GMT
I used to travel to work on the 482's predecessors - this is making me feel old  |
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,487
|
Post by DWS on Mar 1, 2014 14:40:46 GMT
d7666 - well, they won't be three car trains, for sure (that would mean either shortening the present 4 car trains, or extending a typical train to 2x3 which is probably physically impossible down there) and if these are articulated trains, as envisaged, a 2 car set would be slightly odd - in any case 2x10 would give you 20 cars (and while I agree that capacity is not just a matter of the number of cars, a 50% increase in capacity with the same number of cars is a big ask). In short, it's not clear what "10" represents. It's a logistical nightmare gettingtrainsin and out of the W&C. I remember watching in Lower Marsh the craning in and out of every car, the clearances are minute Don't know if its on there but it might be on Youtube. Why is it a nightmare this word is overused. The job of lifting the stock has been done before and it will be done again, if it is needed. The London Underground has 150 years of running of underground railways. I am proud to have a been worker on a great system. |
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on Mar 1, 2014 14:45:45 GMT
@crusty - I did, and I still can't explain the number 10... You will have noticed that the rest of the order is for whole trains (eg 100 for the Central) - so - what are these?
@others - and it's not just the craneage, but if these are to be articulated stock, then the question arises of re-equipping the depot to lift whole sets at once.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Mar 1, 2014 15:00:23 GMT
It's a logistical nightmare gettingtrainsin and out of the W&C. I remember watching in Lower Marsh the craning in and out of every car, the clearances are minute Don't know if its on there but it might be on Youtube. Why is it a nightmare this word is overused. The job of lifting the stock has been done before and it will be done again, if it is needed. The London Underground has 150 years of running of underground railways. I am proud to have a been worker on a great system. DWS, I appreciate what you're saying, my comment was basically that the W&C is the only line where trains can't be delivered as a whole unit. When the latest stock was delivered Baylis Road was closed as there was a convoy of low loaders. I was chatting to one of the engineers and he said "We must get them lowered in the right order!" In no way was my comments intended to be disrespectful to anyone. In fact I was amazed at the precision of the crane drivers when there literally was just inches to spare. |
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Mar 1, 2014 15:33:25 GMT
d7666 - well, they won't be three car trains, for sure (that would mean either shortening the present 4 car trains, or extending a typical train to 2x3 which is probably physically impossible down there) and if these are articulated trains, as envisaged, a 2 car set would be slightly odd - in any case 2x10 would give you 20 cars (and while I agree that capacity is not just a matter of the number of cars, a 50% increase in capacity with the same number of cars is a big ask). In short, it's not clear what "10" represents. I agree it is not clear what 10 means. But I dis-agree you can dismiss three car trains as if this will never be considered. See the Copenhagen articulated trains made up of 7 short cars of same train length as more conventional trains, and w.r.t. W&C a new 2x3 is the same as the present 4. TFL is looking for innovation here. A bidder might do this. -- Nick |
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on Mar 1, 2014 16:36:03 GMT
d7666 - yes I considered the "Copenhagen Option" but concluded that that was unlikely, not least because the Copenhagen trains are quite wide, to take advantage of their short length and the reduced end/centre throw, and I doubt that anything fatter would fit the Drain's loading gauge. Dividing a 72m train into 6 rather than 4 is certainly innovative, but I'm not at all clear what would be gained by doing that - no significant weight loss*, for example, and a weight gain of two intermediate block ends (even worse if they have cabs). * Same number of bogies as a non-articulated 4.
|
|
|
|
Post by rsdworker on Mar 1, 2014 16:47:16 GMT
copehagen is simllar to DLR but without middle carriage - the size of trains are simllar to S stock width which can fit in sub surface tunnels and overground not narrow deep bored tunnels without walkway but can fit in deep tube with walkway (DLR has those)
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 1, 2014 18:43:14 GMT
The previous 1940 tube stock ran in 5 car formations at peak capacity so maybe a return to this working will be considered?
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Mar 6, 2014 8:14:39 GMT
I would suggest that 30tph is impossible as it's simply not possible to unload a train in that time, ensure the train is empty, for the driver taking the train out to open the leading cab (assuming there's a driver), wait for the next incoming train to cross over, then reset the road and depart.
|
|
|
|
Post by stuartroy on Mar 6, 2014 9:08:05 GMT
The OP mentioned remodelling of the track layout at Waterloo. Would it be possible to install a crossover at the north end, thereby eliminating the "depot shuffle" to turn trains round and making it unneccesary to ensure a full tip-out?
|
|
|
|
Post by JR 15secs on Mar 6, 2014 12:49:59 GMT
The OP mentioned remodelling of the track layout at Waterloo. Would it be possible to install a crossover at the north end, thereby eliminating the "depot shuffle" to turn trains round and making it unneccesary to ensure a full tip-out? Not long after LU took over the W&C the provision of a scissor's cross over was looked at following a full report of what would have to be altered to bring up the then then standard, all considered as well as making the line driverless (sorry). |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196 
|
Post by Tom on Mar 8, 2014 0:48:41 GMT
I'm amused by the plan to remodel the track layout... I produced a scheme design for that ten years ago!
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Mar 8, 2014 6:29:29 GMT
The press release states approximately 10 trains for the line
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Mar 8, 2014 7:50:10 GMT
I still think it's a physical impossibility to run a short line like the W&C which has to completely unload or load on a headway of less than 2 minutes.
|
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Mar 9, 2014 16:33:19 GMT
I still think it's a physical impossibility to run a short line like the W&C which has to completely unload or load on a headway of less than 2 minutes. Easy. At Waterloo you either load or unload but not both on the same platform. You can easy load only in 2 mins and easy unload only in 2 mins. At Bank alternate platforms gives 4 mins to do it on, not 2, the train that is unloading is not the train that is loading. As far as tipping out is concerned, all that is needed is a simple change to track/train protection and a parallel change to the rule book to allow over carries. -- Nick |
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Mar 9, 2014 16:37:50 GMT
The OP mentioned remodelling of the track layout at Waterloo. Would it be possible to install a crossover at the north end, thereby eliminating the "depot shuffle" to turn trains round and making it unneccesary to ensure a full tip-out? It would be simpler to eliminate the need fpr full tip out all that is needed is a simple change to track/train protection and a parallel change to the rule book to allow over carries. -- Nick |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2014 9:29:22 GMT
I'm amused by the plan to remodel the track layout... I produced a scheme design for that ten years ago! So what happened to the scheme design that you produced? |
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Apr 6, 2014 17:34:37 GMT
The benefit Bank has is there is an island platform. At Waterloo, if expensive alterations were made to create a crossover at the north end of the station the two separate platforms will limit the benefits.
If carryovers were accommodated it would be better as it limits the need for tip out time. Ultimately, the W&C is a great candidate for ATO.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Apr 6, 2014 22:48:06 GMT
Maybe using both platforms for arrivals but only one for departures might help mitigate this?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2014 11:21:55 GMT
I have a question regarding the new tube for London. If it proves a success on the Pic and Central Lines would it replace 92 and 96 stock on the Jubilee and Northern lines? I would assume this would make maintenance and procurement easier and cheaper.Would platform edge doors need to be fitted on the Northern Line?
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Apr 15, 2014 10:37:18 GMT
I'm amused by the plan to remodel the track layout... I produced a scheme design for that ten years ago! So what happened to the scheme design that you produced? It was abandoned on cost grounds. I think I've got a copy somewhere though. |
|
