SSR Resignalling

It wouldn't be 4LM testing since it doesn't wholly cover any of the migration areas concerned. Crossrail works at Whitechapel have been the most frequent reason over the past few years given the notoriously tight clearances at that site.

There's no 4LM testing taking place at the moment due to Covid - some of the staff involved are furloughed and there is a whole package of (previously unplanned) works to ensure social distancing during testing, such as providing additional monitoring equipment and partitions in cabs, which are needed before testing can restart.

This weekend's closure, as goldenarrow correctly suggests, is due to Crossrail works.

Its not just operational staff that requires a refresh

Nothing planned past SMA7 its all been descoped SMA8 going onwards

Awww they put the years on it. Bless.

There's some newly installed point work that hasn't been used before to commission as part of SMA3 - namely the east end of middle platform road at Tower Hill, now has connection to both OR and IR, so trains will potentially be able to reverse west to east at Tower Hill. Obviously these points and paths over them become available as part of SMA3. They've now been in situ and unused for quite some time, so I'm sure that will add complication to bringing in SMA3, over and above updating train op's on driving in SMA areas and the added complication of social distancing making in-cab training difficult (a mild understatement).

At least one of those dates has already moved - like I said, it helps if the pencil has an eraser on the end.




If so, nobody has told the project team or the contractor...

Same as it is now with Trainstop protection

Trainstops will only be provided on the Fast lines and will only be involved with the Chilterns. The signalling north of Harrow on the Hill will be known as Overlay where the fixed signals will control CBTC so the Mets can remain automatic

CBTC is less maintenance on the whole as there is not many “ wayside “ assets.

I think it's linked to Ownership.

The Met is LUL track which Chiltern is allowed to run over, the District branches are NR owned/Signalled which the District is allowed to run over.

Thing is Chiltern currently use APT not TPWS. This is becoming a problem as the equipment is starting to wear out and no longer being supported by the manufacturer.

That only applies to LU metals, they have use TPWS when running on Network Rail lines.

Doh, yes I'm getting my ATP and Tripcocks mixed up.

And I have no idea Chiltern were operating an APT!

I recall the Chiltern route getting ATP at around the same time as the new trains - a complete line modernisation project. This was early days of Network SouthEast, ATP was touted as the optimal way to make the lines safer and was expected to be introduced on other routes too.

Coming back to 'today', TPWS might make sense as it would then permit any equipped locomotive / train to use these tracks, including Chiltern's loco hauled push-pull trains. I think Mk3 passenger carriages are in gauge for this route as in days gone by BR HST's - which feature MK 3 carriages - were known to use this route, albeit very rarely. It would also mean that both LU and Chiltern would benefit from no longer having to maintain trainstop trains & lineside equipment and make this route more compatible with planned route enhancements connected with the Oxford - Cambridge reopening projects.

The only downsides are that without trainstops Heritage train operations might be impacted. That said, I thought that Sarah Siddens is equipped for TPWS. I am not sure but suspect that this signalling system can also be fitted to steam locomotives. Does the new-build replica named 'Tornado' have it?

As for the 1938 tube stock train, and service stock Track Recording train... well, erm, I assume that it could be fitted, if required, but finance is the issue!