North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jan 26, 2020 9:58:35 GMT
Since none of the Central, Bakerloo or Waterloo & City lines interact with other *automated* lines so maybe these should receive the same system as the Victoria line when they get new trains. As a regular Central line passenger I would much prefer this to become the reality than for this line to be given what in my own pov view is a system (Thales TBTC / CBTC) that is less good than what is already there. I say this on the assumption that the plan is for the Central line to be resignalled - if cash is tight it would make better sense to retain what already exists and provides good service. Its not so easy with the Piccadilly line as its trains share tracks with SSR services. NB: Whilst the Bakerloo shares tracks with London Overground trains, the latter are not automated - although perhaps track capacity would be enhanced if the shared route was automated with blue lamp signals for Bakerloo line trains and colour lamps for all others. Just as a common design of tube trains from Siemens is planned, a common signalling system and central control room is also intended for these lines. The Central line system will be due for renewal by then. Since the Piccadilly resignalling is now postponed maybe ten years for financial reasons, new systems will be developed by the time tenders are called and the Picc will need to interwork with the current SSR CBTC system in some way. Realistically it’s unlikely the remaining lines will get anything other than Seltrac, simply due to the compatibility issues. The days of the PPP “anything as long as it meets the spec” are seemingly over. Having said that, there’s already differences between the lines. The Jubilee and Northern lines have very minor differences (eg placing of RM hold boards, Northern Line didn’t bother with the route indicators, etc). Then there’s some more significant differences between JNUP and 4LM. Even with LT signalling there were differences between locations, so this isn’t necessarily anything new. There’s much more difference between Central Line, Victoria Line and Seltrac. You couldn’t just put someone from one system on the other without a reasonable level of training. |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Jan 26, 2020 16:01:34 GMT
Just as a common design of tube trains from Siemens is planned, a common signalling system and central control room is also intended for these lines. The Central line system will be due for renewal by then. Since the Piccadilly resignalling is now postponed maybe ten years for financial reasons, new systems will be developed by the time tenders are called and the Picc will need to interwork with the current SSR CBTC system in some way. Realistically it’s unlikely the remaining lines will get anything other than Seltrac, simply due to the compatibility issues. The days of the PPP “anything as long as it meets the spec” are seemingly over. Having said that, there’s already differences between the lines. The Jubilee and Northern lines have very minor differences (eg placing of RM hold boards, Northern Line didn’t bother with the route indicators, etc). Then there’s some more significant differences between JNUP and 4LM. Even with LT signalling there were differences between locations, so this isn’t necessarily anything new. There’s much more difference between Central Line, Victoria Line and Seltrac. You couldn’t just put someone from one system on the other without a reasonable level of training. I'm sure someone like mrfs42 or Tom or railtechnician will be able to give a far more sagacious comment, but LT did at least attempt somewhat to standardise its conventional signalling, where and when pragmatic (not withstanding XKCD's point on standardised standards). As these are all iterations of a private proprietary product, can we expect to see little or no attempt at greater harmonisation as the decades progress? It seems a crying shame that despite LT having pioneered ATO, it subsequently lost the ability [loosely put] to design, develop, and implement in house its own bespoke CTBC system. However, if what jimbo says is correct and the resignalling of a block of lines to the same standard is carried out, that is at least a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jan 26, 2020 23:54:12 GMT
It seems a crying shame that despite LT having pioneered ATO, it subsequently lost the ability [loosely put] to design, develop, and implement in house its own bespoke CTBC system. I agree. At least when London created a smart card ticketing system it was possible to get the core technology ported over to other cities in a way that created a revenue stream for London. Its a shame that similar was not achieved with automated train control - even though it was a (very crude by present-day standards) system which used mechanical clockwork based technologies (especially on the trains). |
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Jan 27, 2020 7:33:22 GMT
Yes, this was definitely raised. And yes, the point still stands! Since none of the Central, Bakerloo or Waterloo & City lines interact with other *automated* lines so maybe these should receive the same system as the Victoria line when they get new trains. As a regular Central line passenger I would much prefer this to become the reality than for this line to be given what in my own pov view is a system (Thales TBTC / CBTC) that is less good than what is already there. I say this on the assumption that the plan is for the Central line to be resignalled - if cash is tight it would make better sense to retain what already exists and provides good service. Its not so easy with the Piccadilly line as its trains share tracks with SSR services. NB: Whilst the Bakerloo shares tracks with London Overground trains, the latter are not automated - although perhaps track capacity would be enhanced if the shared route was automated with blue lamp signals for Bakerloo line trains and colour lamps for all others. It would probably not be a huge job to Automate the relevant sections of the overground on the Bakerloo, wether the current stock would be automatable is another question. (automatable is in the dictionary  ) |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Jan 27, 2020 18:53:35 GMT
I'm sure someone like mrfs42 or Tom or railtechnician will be able to give a far more sagacious comment, but LT did at least attempt somewhat to standardise its conventional signalling, where and when pragmatic (not withstanding XKCD's point on standardised standards). It appeared standard to drivers, and whilst a lot of components were the same it could also be very different in how it worked - even on the same line. It was, however, much more evolutionary than revolutionary and the core principles didn't change much. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2020 21:23:23 GMT
I'm sure someone like mrfs42 or Tom or railtechnician will be able to give a far more sagacious comment, but LT did at least attempt somewhat to standardise its conventional signalling, where and when pragmatic (not withstanding XKCD's point on standardised standards). It appeared standard to drivers, and whilst a lot of components were the same it could also be very different in how it worked - even on the same line. It was, however, much more evolutionary than revolutionary and the core principles didn't change much. Don't I know that too well |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jan 28, 2020 10:05:12 GMT
a few tweets... things not going well on the Met line
|
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Jan 28, 2020 10:14:30 GMT
Good to see the armchair expert brigade living up to their expected levels of petulance once again....
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jan 28, 2020 10:19:39 GMT
I've replied to some of the people in those tweets...
of course it might yet come to pass that Seltrac will be improved enough to render my "I want" comment as 'out of date'.
We shall see...
|
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Feb 1, 2020 8:49:39 GMT
unlike some tweets you see, there does not seem to be anything unreasonable or untrue in these, passengers have every right to complain at the service they are receiving
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Feb 1, 2020 9:01:40 GMT
Good to see the armchair expert brigade living up to their expected levels of petulance once again.... True, but the current service is a total embarrassment. And nobody is being held accountable for it. Nothing from the Mayor, TFL or Thales. I am proud of the Underground and it upsets me to see the depths to which this line has sunk. Of course, we expect teething troubles when new things are introduced. But this is an endemic failure which should never have been allowed to happen. |
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Feb 1, 2020 23:31:32 GMT
Good to see the armchair expert brigade living up to their expected levels of petulance once again.... True, but the current service is a total embarrassment. And nobody is being held accountable for it. Nothing from the Mayor, TFL or Thales. I am proud of the Underground and it upsets me to see the depths to which this line has sunk. Of course, we expect teething troubles when new things are introduced. But this is an endemic failure which should never have been allowed to happen. I completely agree with your sentiment especially given its association with my childhood. But this ludicrous idea that social media pedals that ranting in under 280 characters can actually enact something meaningful is sheer delusion. Lambasting the social media team achieves what? a never ending cycle of self loathing? If you want meaningful answers, take the time to write in. I have done so on a smattering of occasions through Customer Services, London Travel Watch or work on a whole host of issues and the vast majority of the time, you get a concerted detailed response that could never be conveyed over a Tweet. Yes it takes time, but if you want a proper answer, that in my opinion is the price worth paying. I guess the main issue I have doesn't lie with beleaguered passengers who are as fed up as the staff who have to deal with the catalogue of incidents but the short attention span of social media feeds. |
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Feb 5, 2020 13:53:31 GMT
When SMA3 is commissioned in February the reversing facilities at Aldgate East will be decommissioned thus Tower Hill will replace it. The early-Sunday AM ‘market’ trains from Upminster to Aldgate East are likely to be extended to Tower Hill. As SMA3 has been indefinitely delayed the reversing facilities at Aldgate East will be decommissioned this weekend 8-9 February. As a result, from 16 February the Sunday early-AM trains previously to Aldgate East: T31 05.37 ex-Upminster will be revised to reverse at Whitechapel pfm,2 06.16 T33 05.57 ex-Upminster will be revised to reverse at Whitechapel pfm.2 06.36. |
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Feb 5, 2020 17:15:36 GMT
Well, at least that's going to give EN cabin something to do!
|
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Feb 5, 2020 17:44:54 GMT
Beat me to it. 😂
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2020 18:18:20 GMT
Wow one extra lever I bet they will need a lie down afterwards
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Feb 5, 2020 20:37:41 GMT
When SMA3 is commissioned in February the reversing facilities at Aldgate East will be decommissioned thus Tower Hill will replace it. The early-Sunday AM ‘market’ trains from Upminster to Aldgate East are likely to be extended to Tower Hill. As SMA3 has been indefinitely delayed the reversing facilities at Aldgate East will be decommissioned this weekend 8-9 February. As a result, from 16 February the Sunday early-AM trains previously to Aldgate East: T31 05.37 ex-Upminster will be revised to reverse at Whitechapel pfm,2 06.16 T33 05.57 ex-Upminster will be revised to reverse at Whitechapel pfm.2 06.36. A bit pointless for market traffic if they don't get to the markets. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2020 22:25:42 GMT
Its only a 5min walk not exactly miles away
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Feb 6, 2020 1:48:36 GMT
Its only a 5min walk not exactly miles away A miss is as good as a mile. Loss of revenue too as Whitechapel is in Zone 2. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2020 7:30:02 GMT
Well when they remove the points at Aldgate East the next reversing point westbound to eastbound is Embankment on the District
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Feb 6, 2020 22:16:08 GMT
Joined.up thinking would suggest removing the points after the full reversing facilities become available at Tower Hill. Sadly, nothing surprises me any more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2020 8:35:10 GMT
By now SMA3 should of been commissioned and the points at Tower Hill commissioned.
As these big shut downs are months in the planning the decision was still to remove the points at Aldgate East.
To be fair even if the service is up the spout they are rarely used
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Feb 7, 2020 22:36:08 GMT
Joined.up thinking would suggest removing the points after the full reversing facilities become available at Tower Hill. Sadly, nothing surprises me any more. It's not quite that simple, sadly. Because of the decision to abolish the crossover, it doesn't appear in the SelTrac guideway data. Had it not been removed before commissioning, it would have been an undetected set of points which would have required a securing and inspection regime (think Cardiff) which is the sort of hazard that we should avoid, mainly because the controls to keep the risk at a level which is acceptable are human controls and thus liable to human error. Removal of the crossover was always planned to be prior to SMA3 commissioning, though the gap between plain lining and SMA commissioning is somewhat longer than first envisaged. |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Feb 8, 2020 18:14:38 GMT
Joined.up thinking would suggest removing the points after the full reversing facilities become available at Tower Hill. Sadly, nothing surprises me any more. It's not quite that simple, sadly. Because of the decision to abolish the crossover, it doesn't appear in the SelTrac guideway data. Had it not been removed before commissioning, it would have been an undetected set of points which would have required a securing and inspection regime (think Cardiff) which is the sort of hazard that we should avoid, mainly because the controls to keep the risk at a level which is acceptable are human controls and thus liable to human error. Removal of the crossover was always planned to be prior to SMA3 commissioning, though the gap between plain lining and SMA commissioning is somewhat longer than first envisaged. , or possibly other signallers, controllers; if you could pick a few locations where an additional crossover or scissors would be useful or pragmatic for service resilience and unplanned use, over those being envisaged for end-state, where would you provide them? |
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Feb 8, 2020 19:43:16 GMT
It's not quite that simple, sadly. Because of the decision to abolish the crossover, it doesn't appear in the SelTrac guideway data. Had it not been removed before commissioning, it would have been an undetected set of points which would have required a securing and inspection regime (think Cardiff) which is the sort of hazard that we should avoid, mainly because the controls to keep the risk at a level which is acceptable are human controls and thus liable to human error. Removal of the crossover was always planned to be prior to SMA3 commissioning, though the gap between plain lining and SMA commissioning is somewhat longer than first envisaged. , or possibly other signallers, controllers; if you could pick a few locations where an additional crossover or scissors would be useful or pragmatic for service resilience and unplanned use, over those being envisaged for end-state, where would you provide them? Ben - Thanks - I was thinking on very much the same lines - but perhaps that question should extend wider than just the SSR resignalling project to all LU lines - and indeed might justify a free standing thread otherwise any good responses may well get lost. I guess most responses will tend to focus on quick wins - on past connections which with hindsight people now realise should be reinstated, but it would also be great if responses also flagged up locations where additional flexibility could substantially increase service resilience even if that involved substantive new build. I suspect that for every line there is probably at least one location where extra flexibility would be massively welcome. I am sure for some the idea of even the slightest expenditure on short sections of new tunnel or track remodelling will be dismissed almost out of hand bearing in mind todays financial constraints, but that thought process has lead us to the current capacity constrained system and frustrated passengers and staff. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Mar 1, 2020 17:26:18 GMT
New SMA 3 go live date is the weekend of 25th & 26th July 2020 (operational proving weekend 30th & 31st May 2020).
As we’ve seen many times already, these dates are not guaranteed!
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Mar 1, 2020 19:32:55 GMT
SMA 3 was planned for Sept 2019 to follow SMA 2, so 10 month hold in programme! Presume new timetable now in December?
|
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Mar 1, 2020 19:48:43 GMT
SMA 3 was planned for October 2017...! With SMA 1 intended March 2017 and SMA 2 August 2017. The whole lot should have been finished in September last year...
Of course, this is only taking into account the Thales version resignalling dates, and not of the two previous contracts.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonathanlondon on Mar 4, 2020 14:09:55 GMT
Does that mean the planned software updates in SMA2 have been successfully deployed? The service seems to have improved. Thanks. New SMA 3 go live date is the weekend of 25th & 26th July 2020 (operational proving weekend 30th & 31st May 2020). As we’ve seen many times already, these dates are not guaranteed! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2020 14:54:21 GMT
Does that mean the planned software updates in SMA2 have been successfully deployed? The service seems to have improved. Thanks. New SMA 3 go live date is the weekend of 25th & 26th July 2020 (operational proving weekend 30th & 31st May 2020). As we’ve seen many times already, these dates are not guaranteed! Some updates were done over the weekend i believe |
|
)
