|
Post by croxleyn on Aug 18, 2019 10:01:21 GMT
Fair comment. So, could one actually put points in, back onto the NLL which would be set "through" when the terminating train arrived - after all there wouldn't be anything approaching on the NLL. Then the points would be reverted to mainline use when the train was safely stopped in its correct position, at the same time that the east end bay entry points were switched? Then I guess the What-If brigade will whinge at the possibility of fouling the nearby diamond cross-over...
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,762
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris M on Aug 18, 2019 10:07:35 GMT
That would certainly be possible, but I suspect it wouldn't come cheap.
|
|
|
Post by phil on Aug 18, 2019 18:45:54 GMT
Fair comment. So, could one actually put points in, back onto the NLL which would be set "through" when the terminating train arrived - after all there wouldn't be anything approaching on the NLL. Then the points would be reverted to mainline use when the train was safely stopped in its correct position, at the same time that the east end bay entry points were switched? Then I guess the What-If brigade will whinge at the possibility of fouling the nearby diamond cross-over... The problem you run into here is pathing - it’s not just a case of saying ‘nothing is approching’ as you would have to provide signal protection or all moves from the Barking direction. In essence any arrival into the bay (or loop as you have suggested) would prevent any moves on the NLL. Aside from the considerable resignalling costs, given the intensive use of the NLL - including the interaction with other routes by freight, there is increased risk of importing delays from the Goblin to the rest of the system. Indeed one of the downsides of the Barking Riverside branch is that Goblin services lose their dedicated bay platform at Barking and will have to mix it with frequent C2C services massively increasing the opportunities for late running. Once again the difference between the Underground style ‘single line with no interaction with any other line’ setup has significant implications as to what is realistically feasible on the national rail network.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 19, 2019 6:43:10 GMT
So, could one actually put points in, back onto the NLL which would be set "through" when the terminating train arrived - after all there wouldn't be anything approaching on the NLL.. Not sure I understand this - how could you be certain there would be nothing approaching on the NLL? The NLL service is quite frequent these days, so I hear.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,762
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris M on Aug 19, 2019 8:16:33 GMT
As Phil says, signal interlocking would ensure there was nothing approaching on the NLL - but this would not come cheap and would potentially be disruptive to the NLL.
|
|
|
Post by croxleyn on Aug 20, 2019 19:00:54 GMT
So, could one actually put points in, back onto the NLL which would be set "through" when the terminating train arrived - after all there wouldn't be anything approaching on the NLL.. Not sure I understand this - how could you be certain there would be nothing approaching on the NLL? The NLL service is quite frequent these days, so I hear. Sorry, I meant the Barking Line that the train had just travelled along before branching into the platform track.
|
|
PGtrips
Ahh... don't you just love PG?
Posts: 113
|
Post by PGtrips on Aug 21, 2019 12:35:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Aug 21, 2019 17:20:42 GMT
710 105 (a West Anglia unit) has been out on test today on the Chingford Branch.
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Aug 24, 2019 14:02:43 GMT
Don't think it's been posted in here but ORR approval for 710s operation was given on 14/08/19.
There is a downloadable pdf on the ORR site but the URL is defying me pasting it here (problem with this tablet device, not the URL).
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Aug 24, 2019 15:49:59 GMT
Full document available here by clicking on the link from this tweet.
|
|
|
Post by patstonuk on Sept 9, 2019 9:49:18 GMT
It is reported elsewhere that 710263 entered public service earlier this morning on the DC Lines between Euston and Watford Junction.
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Sept 9, 2019 18:50:31 GMT
Indeed it has! Just the one in service at the moment, with more expected to follow over the coming weeks.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Sept 10, 2019 21:56:54 GMT
It plugs the 30 minute gap in the timetable, although some off-peak journeys are only for staff training.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Sept 11, 2019 21:33:53 GMT
Indeed it has! Just the one in service at the moment, with more expected to follow over the coming weeks. Alas, none were in service when I was there today! Even the staff training journeys were cancelled. I checked on realtimetrains (RTT) before travelling and even whilst on my way to where I wanted to see the new train... it showed as being out and about but failed to turn up at the allotted time. I was at Kensal Green - just outside the station above where the main lines go into a tunnel, with the station platforms to my left. The train I wanted to see was 5C29 www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/F02338/2019/09/11/advanced due at 13:07; and again at about 13:39 on a northbound working. What did impress me however was that RTT showed every Bakerloo line train, using the code LT, as if London Transport was one of the many Train Operating Companies.
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Sept 11, 2019 21:39:45 GMT
710 263 was originally brought into service on the GOBLIN. It's use on that service on the DC doesn't appear to have been replaced with another unit like-for-like. Given where we are with the number of units regularly used passenger service still in single figures, I reckon it would take a couple more units entering the pool before we start to see 710's becoming regular fixtures on the Watford DC.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Sept 11, 2019 21:53:53 GMT
710 263 was originally brought into service on the GOBLIN. It's use on that service on the DC doesn't appear to have been replaced with another unit like-for-like. Given where we are with the number of units regularly used passenger service still in single figures, I reckon it would take a couple more units entering the pool before we start to see 710's becoming regular fixtures on the Watford DC. I realised that it might be the only train that was out on that route and of course (as you say) the time will come when these are commonplace. It just means that the film I am planning to make showing my WCML footage from today will not include any 710's. I was going to go down to the platforms for the 13:39 train and also film it entering the tunnels just to the north of the station... and pose the question that because they are single bore and circular, does it make the 710's tube trains?
|
|
|
Post by edgemaster on Sept 12, 2019 15:21:47 GMT
What did impress me however was that RTT showed every Bakerloo line train, using the code LT, as if London Transport was one of the many Train Operating Companies. As far as Network Rail's timetabling systems are concerned, it is just any other Train Operating Company. Train operator codes are quite long-lived -- it hasn't changed since privatisation of BR.
|
|
|
Post by silenthunter on Sept 12, 2019 15:24:46 GMT
Indeed - there are some German station codes used by DB that pre-date the Second World War.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 23, 2019 16:54:30 GMT
Any views on how well the class 710s are now performing? For obvious reasons I am behind the times in terms of their coverage and reliability.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Sept 23, 2019 20:03:29 GMT
I can only comment about their performance from the point of view of a passenger, and I'd say that things seem to be going well.
I travelled on one today and saw a few others in service. Mostly these were on Goblin but I did also see 710 263 on the DC at Willesden Junction. To my surprise* it stopped and unlocked its doors, but only to allow what I assume were railway staff to board. Then after travelling about one coach length it stopped again, somewhat abruptly, before restarting again. Whilst stopped some amber lights on the carriage sides (door open indicators, I think) on the carriage sides were flashing.
*) Why was I surprised? It had a 5xxx train code on realtimetrains, which I thought to mean that it was a passenger train not in passenger service.
There were also red lights illuminated on the doors, I was too far away to see the pictogram but suspect it was a 'door not in use' warning light.
A few days ago I made a rare foray to territory that will eventually be served by the 710's - in this case the Chingford branch. Maybe its just me, but the 317s seem wider than the 710s. Anyway, I now have a greater understanding of comments I read a while ago suggesting that some passengers might not welcome the new trains - especially passengers who travel off-peak and are used to travelling in the declassified 1st class seating - its a multi-faceted issue as the four carriage unit which had Greater Anglia seat fabric had different (more comfortable - InterCity quality) 1st class seats than the four carriage unit that had London Overground seat fabric (outer suburban style seats).
|
|
|
Post by silenthunter on Sept 23, 2019 21:14:38 GMT
5xxx does mean an Empty Coaching Stock run. But that can also be used for staff training operations.
As for the 317s, the ones with the blue seating (3177xx) are the ex-Stansted Express units that were converted first from 317/1s; the other ones are the 317/8s, converted later.
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Sept 24, 2019 6:54:59 GMT
Chingford has had mostly 315s.317s are rarer.But yes,passengers won't like the wholly transverse seating. Why did LT change the original spec?
|
|
|
Post by cudsn15 on Sept 24, 2019 8:18:22 GMT
A Minority of passengers may grumble at first - they always do to any change - but within a couple of months they will just be glad that a train turns up relatively on time and gets them to their destination in a modicum of comfort.
|
|
|
Post by countryman on Sept 24, 2019 9:50:23 GMT
Chingford has had mostly 315s.317s are rarer.But yes,passengers won't like the wholly transverse seating. Why did LT change the original spec? Do you mean transverse, or is the seating longitudinal?
|
|
|
Post by phil on Sept 24, 2019 9:56:26 GMT
A Minority of passengers may grumble at first - they always do to any change - but within a couple of months they will just be glad that a train turns up relatively on time and gets them to their destination in a modicum of comfort. But if they now cannot get a seat thanks to the Tube style interior then they won't have a 'modicum of comfort'!
What TfL (and quite a few posters on here) don't seem to understand is that when it comes to commuting journeys from the outer fare zones to the centre, tube style seating is only suitable if you have tube style frequencies thus thus keeping the number of seats per hour at a high level or that said train will also be traversing the central area (where short station dwell times and the ability to crush load at rush hour is important).
On the West Anglia routes there is (and won't be even after Crossrail) any extra track capacity on the Liverpool Street approaches to add any more trains - thus the number of seats per hour will drop massively after the 710s are introduced i place of the 315s / 317s.
It will also be more gulling as fares on the route will continue to increase so as to comply with the DfT rules as regards annual fare increases.
The optimal layout for the Chingford branch (particularly as it does to ravel through the centre of London) is actually 2+ 2 seating with big vestibules around the doorways - thus providing a compromise between promoting short station dwell times but also given a seat to as many folk as possible.
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Sept 24, 2019 17:46:16 GMT
Chingford has had mostly 315s.317s are rarer.But yes,passengers won't like the wholly transverse seating. Why did LT change the original spec? Do you mean transverse, or is the seating longitudinal? It is the latter.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,762
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 24, 2019 18:01:46 GMT
Chingford has had mostly 315s.317s are rarer.But yes,passengers won't like the wholly transverse seating. Why did LT change the original spec? I believe the change to all longitudinal was for cost reasons - having single seating layout on all 710s was cheaper either now or long term. It will obviously also increase standing capacity, but I don't know to what extent that is needed as I only use the West Anglia routes off-peak.
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 24, 2019 18:38:58 GMT
"..But if they now cannot get a seat thanks to the Tube style interior then they won't have a 'modicum of comfort'!"
As you say that may well be the view of people travelling in from the furthest extremes of the line.
However a very different view may be held by people living nearer the centre who are currently finding it a nightmare to squeeze onto many peak hour services and who may never get a seat in either direction.
So if you always have to stand whilst commuting - at least the 710s have air conditioning and ample space to pass along the train to potentially locate any empty seats.
Far too often those middle seats in three seat groups are mysteriously "occupied by luggage". So the actual seated capacity of 315s is also somewhat overstated, and sadly transverse seating is far more prone to people placing feet on seats - you would have to be a giraffe to put your feet up on the opposing seats on the 710s.
Meantime the raw numbers tend to speak for themselves and suggest that the 710s should add useful capacity to the line and prove to be reliable people movers.
A 10 coach 710 formation potentially carrying 1,764 (482 seats plus 1,282 standing). Meantime a 12 coach 315 formation can only carry 1,293 people (954 seats and 339 standing). (ORR data)
Sticking with the current 315 services potentially means leaving nearly 500 people behind compared with a 710 service. Personally, and I stress this is a personal perspective, then faced with the choice of getting on board a 710 or being left behind and late for work, I suspect many commuters will prefer to just get on board the train.
As they say time will tell - but thus far the folks on Goblin seem mostly happy with their 710s. If traffic continues to grow once Barking Riverside comes on stream then it won't be too long before they need to move to more frequent trains and even introduce 5 car 710s - I just hope TFL have secured an option to obtain extra coaches at affordable prices.
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Sept 24, 2019 19:52:47 GMT
I have yet to travel on a 710, and have had few trips on 378s. My opinion of the all longitudinal seating is unprintable, especially given the crass and view destroying positioning of the destination indicators in the windows.
The arguments about space and the trade offs between seats and standing are fair, but the assumption that design can be focused on those travelling the shortest distances is grossly unfair to those travelling longer distances.
|
|
|
Post by silenthunter on Sept 24, 2019 20:27:20 GMT
There's never been a 12 coach 315 formation to my knowledge. Certainly not on TfL rail. Also, the 710s will likely operate as pairs of 4-car units at most.
|
|