|
Post by jimbo on Jun 14, 2024 1:54:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by grumpycat on Jun 15, 2024 23:36:30 GMT
Is there another way to access this got a 403 on that
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,712
|
Post by Chris M on Jun 16, 2024 6:10:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jun 18, 2024 22:00:29 GMT
and also TfL Investment programme report Quarter 4 2023/24 (10 December 2023 to 31 March 2024) emphasis added TfL Programmes and Investment Committee meeting 26 June 2024
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jun 19, 2024 19:42:12 GMT
what does "Quarter 2 2024/25" mean?
Spring 25?
Or does this refer to the financial year, which began on 6th April 2024 ... making Quarter 2 July - September 2024?
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jun 19, 2024 20:35:07 GMT
Correct. Financial year starts in April with quarter 1, so Quarter 2 2024/25 means summer 2024.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jun 27, 2024 17:50:40 GMT
‘Technical issues’ further delay DLR’s new trains www.railmagazine.com/news/2024/06/24/technical-issues-further-delay-dlr-s-new-trainsOne of my brothers has told me that he saw an article somewhere else that went in to greater detail about the technical issues. But he has not supplied me with a link to that information and without it I feel unsafe repeating something that is effectively in the 'hearsay' category, because it can not be verified.
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jun 27, 2024 20:32:03 GMT
Some doubt on build rate as latest report is 22 trains now built, but taking 13 built in 5 months, will be introduced to service at 10 in 5 months, or two trains per month, so no faster than build rate. Won't catch up the backlog, and 54 trains will take 27 months to enter service until mid-2026. So little slippage in the overall delivery plan for the whole fleet!
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jul 17, 2024 0:40:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thinlizzy on Sept 5, 2024 22:59:48 GMT
Train number 4, Unit 209 is now at Beckton depot
|
|
|
Post by grumpycat on Sept 27, 2024 0:23:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Sept 27, 2024 6:06:20 GMT
New reports have yet to appear, despite the meeting pages still showing "All papers (unless exempt from publication or accepted by the relevant Chair as an urgent item) are published five clear working days before each meeting." I presume this failing is connected to the computer problems currently within TfL.
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Sept 28, 2024 2:26:10 GMT
The TfL Investment Programme report - Quarter 1 2024/25 - (1 April to 22 June 2024) states: It is unclear if this means that they will miss calendar year 2024 or financial year 24/25, but the strategic milestones chart has "DLR rolling stock replacement: First capacity uplift. Key output 1 – full-length trains, Bank to Lewisham" shown as delivered on time in early Q4 2025, so January.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Sept 28, 2024 10:32:11 GMT
Early 1990s automated train control signalling is now 'legacy'??
I can understand that term being used on the Piccadilly and Bakerloo lines (where real humans still drive the trains), but its a surprise for the DLR. Especially as when introduced this was seen as a 'state of the art' system that was far advanced on the system the DLR used when it first opened.
As an aside, I am still sceptical about the need for train speed reductions, etc. Not with a technology that has been in service for 30+ years and has a proven safety record. (Sorry, a blunt comment: if trains had been crashing into each other we'd have known about it by now).
I can accept that the introduction of the new trains might have required software changes on the train control system* which somehow affects the existing fleet as well. But my sense of 'something not being right here' comes from my seeing TfL as an organisation that simply loves to reduce transport speeds. It did this to the 'main line' section of the Metropolitan line. Its done this on the roads - making bus travel less attractive to passengers via longer journey durations and more expensive for all London local government rates payers because of higher operating costs. Its also done this on Tramlink - yes there was a terrible disaster at one specific location but that did not require speed reductions on 'open country' sections of line which are far away from the sharply curved sections of track similar to that involved in the disaster.
Now its doing the same to the DLR - and as a result having to annoy some passengers by withdrawing through 'one seat' services.
--------------------- * An important lesson for the operators of overseas metro etc systems when they replace rolling stock on fully automated networks
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Oct 11, 2024 23:15:06 GMT
There has been a freedom of information request to find out why the new trains are not yet carrying passengers ... and TfL have responded with information that might not surprise anyone - in very simple language, 'slippery rails and braking' are an issue. A well known topic. clondoner92.blogspot.com/2024/10/transport-for-london-reveals-delays.htmlThere are two tweets below - the first one includes a quote of TfL's explanation, the second one has info that I've been waiting for many months before I felt that it was safe to share it in public
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Oct 12, 2024 0:15:57 GMT
Do the new CAF trains have sand hoppers for poor adhesion conditions? The S stock went that way, and the 24TS for the Picc will be the first tube trains so fitted.
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Oct 12, 2024 10:02:52 GMT
Early 1990s automated train control signalling is now 'legacy'?? I can understand that term being used on the Piccadilly and Bakerloo lines (where real humans still drive the trains), but its a surprise for the DLR. Especially as when introduced this was seen as a 'state of the art' system that was far advanced on the system the DLR used when it first opened. As an aside, I am still sceptical about the need for train speed reductions, etc. Not with a technology that has been in service for 30+ years and has a proven safety record. (Sorry, a blunt comment: if trains had been crashing into each other we'd have known about it by now). I can accept that the introduction of the new trains might have required software changes on the train control system* which somehow affects the existing fleet as well. But my sense of 'something not being right here' comes from my seeing TfL as an organisation that simply loves to reduce transport speeds. It did this to the 'main line' section of the Metropolitan line. Its done this on the roads - making bus travel less attractive to passengers via longer journey durations and more expensive for all London local government rates payers because of higher operating costs. Its also done this on Tramlink - yes there was a terrible disaster at one specific location but that did not require speed reductions on 'open country' sections of line which are far away from the sharply curved sections of track similar to that involved in the disaster. Now its doing the same to the DLR - and as a result having to annoy some passengers by withdrawing through 'one seat' services. --------------------- * An important lesson for the operators of overseas metro etc systems when they replace rolling stock on fully automated networks Why do you think that signalling technology is any different to any other form of information technology, and that a system of 30 years ago wouldn’t be “legacy”?
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Oct 12, 2024 13:15:41 GMT
In this context the word 'legacy' is a kind way of saying as old-fashioned as steam train era clockwork technology, past its 'use by' date and no longer relevant to our (present day society) railways. This is despite many railways still not have advanced to even this stage.
In its latter days the former Birmingham Airport Maglev was often seen as legacy, even though it was a magnetic levitation train - a technology that has still not been perfected sufficiently to have reached the 'widespread application' stage.
Of course I understand about the technology advancing and this sometimes creating issues with things like obtaining compatible spare parts. Fortunately its looking like this issue has been resolved on the Central line and no-one has suggested replacing the DLR's train control system with a 'present-era all-singing-all dancing' version.
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Oct 12, 2024 14:54:19 GMT
In this context the word 'legacy' is a kind way of saying as old-fashioned as steam train era clockwork technology, past its 'use by' date and no longer relevant to our (present day society) railways . This is despite many railways still not have advanced to even this stage. In its latter days the former Birmingham Airport Maglev was often seen as legacy, even though it was a magnetic levitation train - a technology that has still not been perfected sufficiently to have reached the 'widespread application' stage. Of course I understand about the technology advancing and this sometimes creating issues with things like obtaining compatible spare parts. Fortunately its looking like this issue has been resolved on the Central line and no-one has suggested replacing the DLR's train control system with a 'present-era all-singing-all dancing' version. Legacy means what it says. And it raises significant issues over not just parts but also people and skills.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,185
|
Post by Tom on Oct 13, 2024 9:28:47 GMT
Legacy in this context is a computing term meaning "denoting or relating to software or hardware that has been superseded but is difficult to replace because of its wide use". It's not one I like, especially considering that some 'legacy' systems are actually easier to modify!
|
|
gefw
Gone - but still interested
Posts: 189
|
Post by gefw on Oct 13, 2024 14:52:50 GMT
In this context the word 'legacy' is a kind way of saying as old-fashioned as steam train era clockwork technology, past its 'use by' date and no longer relevant to our (present day society) railways . This is despite many railways still not have advanced to even this stage. Of course I understand about the technology advancing and this sometimes creating issues with things like obtaining compatible spare parts. Fortunately its looking like this issue has been resolved on the Central line and no-one has suggested replacing the DLR's train control system with a 'present-era all-singing-all dancing' version. I would be confident that the DLR Train control/Signaling system has had several incremental upgrades over the years to address obsolescence and perhaps also to enable features associated with new trains. As am I. But that doesn’t alter the reality of the definition of “legacy”, and the challenge it poses to integrating new trains and their software with that existing signalling.
|
|