|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Dec 23, 2019 18:38:29 GMT
I did notice in the recent rain how a train slowed down nearly to a halt halfway along the platform at Leyton. Obviously it was being driven by a real human - not a computer. But I'd rather have this than minimum braking by a computer - even where and when its not needed - this being something that has been mentioned on other threads as a negative side effect of automation using more modern automation technologies. New trains will (one hopes) have better braking capability, with this being a train function / not solely a function of the automated train control system. Most likely the driver anticipated that ATO would pull up short, switched the Selector to Coded Manual just as it was stopping, pushed the Traction Brake Control into the motoring arc and fully berthed the train. Some experienced drivers are so practised at this that there's hardly a pause between the two modes.
Alas I am not one of them...
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Mar 11, 2020 19:09:59 GMT
Oh dear. From yesterday's Standard...
Also there is no cash to expand Holborn or sort out the bottleneck at Camden Town. |
|
|
|
Post by PiccNT on Mar 11, 2020 23:13:57 GMT
Our signalling system makes each day an interesting one :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Mar 11, 2020 23:14:22 GMT
The new longer Piccadilly line trains provide a 9.5% increase in passenger capacity, compared with the existing trains at today's service level. This will increase peak trunk capacity from 99,000 passengers at today's service level, to 122,000 passengers with a 27tph peak service; this represents a 23% overall increase in peak service capacity, with nearly 20% reduced annual energy consumption compared with today's service. Unfunded Stage 2 is planned to replace existing signalling and procure 7 additional trains to provide faster more reliable up to 36tph automatic train operation by 2030. [source: Programmes and Investment Committee meeting papers for 5 March 2020]
|
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Mar 12, 2020 0:16:27 GMT
Since PICU I don’t think it’s any huge surprise that Picc resignalling has been deferred; the actual signalling kit (~1930s) isn’t a huge issue, is very much a known quantity and will benefit from the release of spare parts through 4LM. The weak link was very much Earls’ Court, and whilst we do still see failures these aren’t as pronounced as they were. The concern should squarely be aimed at the Central line, which of everything is possibly the most concerning; late 1980s kit from a time when technology rapidly advanced. With the limited pot of cash this isn’t any huge concern.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2020 7:41:55 GMT
It wasn’t so much Earls Court but the connection from Earls Court to the individual sites via a scanning system.
It basically worked as 1 cable could hold 5 pieces of information / functions. Some newer sites Ealing Broadway had a different type of system but was able to transmit and receive about 25 pieces of information / functions.
We was running out of spare lines especially at Acton Town a replacement add on was installed to try and remove the cabling between the Acton Town and Earls Court and use a fibre connection but that had issues.
So they decided to replace the whole line with fibre and take all the functions to sites via a ring network and each site now has a computer which can decipher the functions sent from South Kensington and correctly work the non safety circuits on the individual sites.
Unfortunately the safety circuits and equipment have remained the same. Now on the Picc and the District past West Kensington going west all non safety failures have more or less disappeared.
|
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Mar 13, 2020 7:39:01 GMT
" Mike Brown said that a £1.5 billion fleet of 94 trains due on the Piccadilly line from 2023 would not be able to run any faster or more regularly than at present because there was no money to upgrade the “knackered” signalling system."
So is Mike Brown discretely admitting that spend is not always being allocated to the places where they will give the best bang for bucks?
I am sure we have seen how "vanity projects" - Borismaster, Croxley Link, Bakerloo extension.. can quickly gobble up heaps of cash, sometimes over many years and perhaps were only progressed due to political rather than practical objectives.
Like most complex organisations it is too easy to overlook the embedded knowledge of the people actually working to provide public transport in London. A few years back "staff suggestion schemes" were all the rage and in among the usual comedy contributions many cheap practical and quick wins came forward. Whilst I guess those schemes may still exist it now seems their inputs automatically rank well below whatever is the latest "idea" of whatever politician is in charge.
I really wonder if big savings could be produced simply by having a small in-house vetting group to sift through and vet all ideas before anyone calls in outside consultants to produce detailed and costly assessments.
I rather suspect that money would have been better spent buying far cleaner conventional Euro6/full electric vehicles rather than Borismasters. Likewise the money paid out to consultants to produce several feet of paper assessing the Croxley Link proposal would be more than sufficient to fund the signalling upgrades needed as phase 2 of the Piccadilly Line upgrade which Mike Brown finds we cannot afford.
Hey ho - Hindsight is wonderful.
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Mar 13, 2020 9:26:15 GMT
" Mike Brown said that a £1.5 billion fleet of 94 trains due on the Piccadilly line from 2023 would not be able to run any faster or more regularly than at present because there was no money to upgrade the “knackered” signalling system." So is Mike Brown discretely admitting that spend is not always being allocated to the places where they will give the best bang for bucks? I am sure we have seen how "vanity projects" - Borismaster, Croxley Link, Bakerloo extension.. can quickly gobble up heaps of cash, sometimes over many years and perhaps were only progressed due to political rather than practical objectives. Like most complex organisations it is too easy to overlook the embedded knowledge of the people actually working to provide public transport in London. A few years back "staff suggestion schemes" were all the rage and in among the usual comedy contributions many cheap practical and quick wins came forward. Whilst I guess those schemes may still exist it now seems their inputs automatically rank well below whatever is the latest "idea" of whatever politician is in charge. I really wonder if big savings could be produced simply by having a small in-house vetting group to sift through and vet all ideas before anyone calls in outside consultants to produce detailed and costly assessments. I rather suspect that money would have been better spent buying far cleaner conventional Euro6/full electric vehicles rather than Borismasters. Likewise the money paid out to consultants to produce several feet of paper assessing the Croxley Link proposal would be more than sufficient to fund the signalling upgrades needed as phase 2 of the Piccadilly Line upgrade which Mike Brown finds we cannot afford. Hey ho - Hindsight is wonderful. The staff suggestion scheme was running when I joined London Transport in 1972. All suggestions are forwarded to the appropriate department for consideration and a written response. This is then reviewed by an independent handler and a reply sent to the person. As far as I am aware the scheme still uses this format. Hindsight is indeed a wonderful thing. Electric double deckers were not available when the Borismasters were ordered. A lot of the development work has been incorporated into later designs including the electric vehicles from ADL currently being introduced in London on routes like the 134. Indeed the bodywork has a lot of similarities to the Borismasters. |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,763
|
Post by Chris M on Mar 13, 2020 10:58:56 GMT
I am sure we have seen how "vanity projects" - Borismaster, Croxley Link, Bakerloo extension.. The Bakerloo extension is not a vanity project. Croxley link wasn't really, and certainly wasn't at the start, but sort of became one when Boris promised a blank cheque. The cable car and garden bridge on the other hand... |
|
|
|
Post by linus on Mar 13, 2020 16:27:53 GMT
Not forgetting the Borismasters, notwithstanding their ultra-fast 3-door loading capability redeeming factor ...
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Mar 13, 2020 16:51:57 GMT
Not forgetting the Borismasters, notwithstanding their ultra-fast 3-door loading capability redeeming factor ... which is soon to end, as already being converted to front entrance only. |
|
|
|
Post by occasionaltraveller on Mar 15, 2020 13:52:11 GMT
More pertinently, the new Piccadilly stock is not a vanity project either. The current stock is already 45 years old, it's life expired, it needs to be replaced as soon as possible. The lack of money to upgrade the signalling means that the new stock won't reach its full potential any time soon, but the same was true of the Northern Line 1995 Stock, the sub-surface railway S Stock, and even the Jubilee 1996 Stock.
The question is whether enough stock will be ordered to cover the expected timetable once the signalling is done. Northern and Jubilee lines are now short of their potential as they don't have enough trains. Perhaps the outlook will be different when other lines e.g. Bakerloo, Central have had their new trains, and whatever shortfall exists for the Picc can then be tacked on to the order.
It is to be hoped that resources can be found to update the signalling soon. The ending of the fares freeze will largely prevent further cutbacks, but thawing of the relationship between the Treasury and the Mayor will probably be necessary to increase investment in capital projects.
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Mar 15, 2020 15:45:13 GMT
The cancellation of the Mayoral elections this year means that the extension of the London ULEZ zone to the North/South circular roads in October 2021 is likely to go ahead.
This is bound to reduce the number of cars entering London and potentially increase those having to travel by Tube. The line upgrades are really needed as soon as possible.
Hopefully Mike Brown's successor will persuade the current mayor that extending the fares freeze is impossible.
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Mar 15, 2020 22:46:43 GMT
Hindsight is indeed a wonderful thing. Electric double deckers were not available when the Borismasters were ordered. A lot of the development work has been incorporated into later designs including the electric vehicles from ADL currently being introduced in London on routes like the 134. Indeed the bodywork has a lot of similarities to the Borismasters. Sorry for being so pedantic but the 134 uses Optare buses - a commercial rival to the ADL / BYD partnership which has brought battery electric buses to quite a few London bus services. |
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Mar 16, 2020 0:46:13 GMT
More pertinently, the new Piccadilly stock is not a vanity project either. The current stock is already 45 years old, it's life expired, it needs to be replaced as soon as possible. The lack of money to upgrade the signalling means that the new stock won't reach its full potential any time soon, but the same was true of the Northern Line 1995 Stock, the sub-surface railway S Stock, and even the Jubilee 1996 Stock. The question is whether enough stock will be ordered to cover the expected timetable once the signalling is done. Northern and Jubilee lines are now short of their potential as they don't have enough trains. Perhaps the outlook will be different when other lines e.g. Bakerloo, Central have had their new trains, and whatever shortfall exists for the Picc can then be tacked on to the order. It is to be hoped that resources can be found to update the signalling soon. The ending of the fares freeze will largely prevent further cutbacks, but thawing of the relationship between the Treasury and the Mayor will probably be necessary to increase investment in capital projects. Picc order will cover 30tph inc. Ealing Broadway branch & Turnham Green all day stopping, which all needs new signalling. In meantime 24tph service can become 27tph due to improved performance and larger fleet. Will need another 7 trains for 33tph, or 15 trains for 36tph, which could be added to train order for another line when funding is found. The Northern & Jubilee fleets were ordered sufficient to meet planned resignalling at the time, 30tph on Jubilee and Morden branch, 24tph on rest of Northern line without Battersea branch. New signalling has since proved more capable than envisaged, and additional trains were then planned for these lines, but unaffordable! |
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Mar 16, 2020 3:14:54 GMT
Hindsight is indeed a wonderful thing. Electric double deckers were not available when the Borismasters were ordered. A lot of the development work has been incorporated into later designs including the electric vehicles from ADL currently being introduced in London on routes like the 134. Indeed the bodywork has a lot of similarities to the Borismasters. Sorry for being so pedantic but the 134 uses Optare buses - a commercial rival to the ADL / BYD partnership which has brought battery electric buses to quite a few London bus services. Apologies should have been route 43. |
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jun 19, 2020 21:09:38 GMT
I wonder if there is any post-Covid update on the future of the Picc Line Upgrade (PLU). We know that the Crossrail fleet was sold and leased back to leave money to order new tube trains. Before Covid it was revealed that only half the new fleet was expected to be built at Goole. With further delays, and the now unlikely order of further trains for other lines, will construction of the new factory go ahead?
Work to enlarge South Harrow sidings was planned for late 2020, to allow transfer of some trains from Northfields whilst that depot was rebuilt. Then some trains from Cockfosters would have been moved down to the new Northfields whilst the eastern depot was rebuilt before the new trains arrived, all based on 4LM experience. Is there still money for these works?
We have heard the 4LM resignalling is running late and short of money. The PLU was delayed to run after 4LM as money was not available to run the two alongside each other.
Update anyone?
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Oct 19, 2020 4:25:12 GMT
I wonder if there is any post-Covid update on the future of the Picc Line Upgrade (PLU). We know that the Crossrail fleet was sold and leased back to leave money to order new tube trains. Before Covid it was revealed that only half the new fleet was expected to be built at Goole. With further delays, and the now unlikely order of further trains for other lines, will construction of the new factory go ahead? Work to enlarge South Harrow sidings was planned for late 2020, to allow transfer of some trains from Northfields whilst that depot was rebuilt. Then some trains from Cockfosters would have been moved down to the new Northfields whilst the eastern depot was rebuilt before the new trains arrived, all based on 4LM experience. Is there still money for these works? We have heard the 4LM resignalling is running late and short of money. The PLU was delayed to run after 4LM as money was not available to run the two alongside each other. Update anyone? Answering my own query, Siemens started construction of the new factory at Goole in July and appointed the first apprentices to commence studies in September. Train delivery has slipped six months due to the Virus. This week a sub-contract for train lighting ( www.sharecast.com/news/aim-bulletin/lpa-group-wins-significant-project-for-new-tube-trains--7677542.html ) still hopes for orders for another 216 trains, which includes the Lewisham extension! A start at South Harrow is still due before year end. But what are they doing there now? Originally they were going to lengthen the sidings for two or three trains each. But they found the shallow old Chiltern tunnel crossing the site at its south end, and the cost was too high for six tracks to bridge that to reduce weight distortion. So they then considered some new sidings to the north on the car park area, the original station forecourt. Does anyone now know what they will be doing within a couple of months? |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 19, 2020 7:41:52 GMT
Originally they were going to lengthen the sidings for two or three trains each, but they found the shallow old Chiltern tunnel crossing the site at its south end. I would have hoped they would have known it was there - or have the lessons of Old Street not been learned? |
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Oct 19, 2020 10:07:42 GMT
Originally they were going to lengthen the sidings for two or three trains each, but they found the shallow old Chiltern tunnel crossing the site at its south end. I would have hoped they would have known it was there - or have the lessons of Old Street not been learned? I presume the concept merely involved lines drawn on a surface map, but later more detailed designs took account of below surface conditions to work up probable costings. It was then that alternatives were considered. |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Oct 19, 2020 21:40:03 GMT
Originally they were going to lengthen the sidings for two or three trains each, but they found the shallow old Chiltern tunnel crossing the site at its south end. I would have hoped they would have known it was there - or have the lessons of Old Street not been learned? yes, but... at least the old tunnel was found before any harm (eg: collapse under the weight of several trains) had ensued! |
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Nov 12, 2020 19:00:17 GMT
Apologies if this has already been mentioned on DD but whilst everyone was focused on the Mothballing of CrossRail 2 project - there was a mention in the following tweet from Philip Haigh which reports that Andy Byford says they now have funds for the Piccadilly Line signalling upgrade. Phew! link |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Nov 12, 2020 20:35:52 GMT
Apologies if this has already been mentioned on DD but whilst everyone was focused on the Mothballing of CrossRail 2 project - there was a mention in the following tweet from Philip Haigh which reports that Andy Byford says they now have funds for the Piccadilly Line signalling upgrade. Phew! linkI wonder how that was funded - yes its good news There are also many 'interesting' replies to that tweet! |
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Nov 13, 2020 0:19:23 GMT
Philip Haigh says TfL's Andy Byford says that TfL has put Piccadilly Line resignalling back into spending plans because it would have been madness to introduce new trains without new signalling. No mention of funds there! In fact TfL only has a funding agreement as far as March 2021. Beyond that requires further negotiations, so they are unable to enter contracts, but can make plans of their dreams. The TfL submission to the Government's Spending Review has Picc resignalling 2021 to 2030 costing £2.5bn with revenue uplift £40m per annum by 2041. Since new trains are expected 2024 to 2026, they will be introduced without new signalling, but surely this is not madness since the longer trains with improved performance allow a 23% capacity uplift with 27tph rather than current 24tph. A further service uplift to 30tph and beyond from 2030 to 2041 with new signalling will be great, but still awaits the money.
|
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Nov 13, 2020 21:31:59 GMT
Jimbo: There won't be much improved performance unless the new signalling comes or they make alterations to the existing signalling. On LU, signal overlaps are determined based on the calculated speed of the train at the signal. This means, like on the sub surface railway that more or less the existing performance must be retained*. It might just be possible to tweak the initial acceleration to get away from stations a bit quicker than 1973 tube stock, but returning to the 1973 tube stock curve once the train is out of the station. In performance terms this won't be worth much.
*S stock was set to emulate C stock in C stock areas and A stock out on the Metropolitan line.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196 
|
Post by Tom on Nov 13, 2020 22:21:01 GMT
As it happens, some high level documents for the Piccadilly line upgrade crossed my desk this week.
There are some plans for signalling alterations to achieve 27tph - but to my knowledge these plans only cover one station, in one direction, which is viewed as the key to unlocking the additional capacity.
Some of the meetings I've attended have implied that the solution must be a signalling only one, but I'm fairly sure a change to the signalling alone won't deliver the improvements needed. The headway improvement from 24 trains per hour to 27 is a saving of around 17 seconds, which is actually a quite considerable amount, and I don't believe a signalling-based solution at the site in question will deliver any more than about 5 or 6 seconds - the rest needs to come from improved dwell time management.
In any case, headway improvements at one site only have one effect - they simply move the pinch point somewhere else on the line.
|
|
|
|
Post by marri260 on Nov 14, 2020 21:44:47 GMT
Very interesting indeed. I assume the area in question is Caledonian Road - Kings Cross WB? (If I may ask please!).
Certainly in the AM peak, that is the major bottleneck for the line. The signaling has a big part to play in that, but so does the loading / unloading of the leading car in Kings Cross WB platform, a vast number of whom only travel one stop to Russell Square!
|
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Nov 15, 2020 17:54:34 GMT
Interesting indeed, but I am not sure how replacing the signalling would make much difference in that location if the true problem is platform dwell time.
Inherently even with fancy new signalling and enough drivers and serviceable trains lined up waiting to enter the station you still cannot shove any more peak hour trains through that platform whilst passengers still insist on trying to cram into one section of the platform/train.
If we assume TFL is not going to copy the Tokyo Metro and recruit a sumo wrestling team to help speed up boarding at critical stations, then the immediate prospect of service improvement looks like it will come from the greater crush capacity of the new trains, which together with a few more doors may reduce platform dwell times without new signalling.
I wonder whether merging town bound flows from the two branches at Acton Town actually poses a more tricky challenge for signallers to deliver an even flow of peak hour services into town.
It does seem a shame they did not modify the old Platform 5 to become a through platform to handle all town bound District services. That would allow the piccadilly to use platforms 3 and 4. Then whenever a bunch of town bound piccadilly trains arrives at Acton Town, passengers can cross the platform to board the train due to leave first, allowing the other train to be held in the other platform to regulate the service intervals without backing up following services.
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Nov 15, 2020 18:35:20 GMT
The Victoria line modernisation / resignalling seemed to have improved passenger behaviour a bit to help dwell times. When passengers can see the next train is only a minute away, they are less inclined to delay the one in the platform in general.
The trouble with a platform 5 at Acton Town would be the inconvenience changing Picc/District, which is relevant to quite a number of people.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Nov 15, 2020 22:59:15 GMT
Platform 5 was only short for the South Acton shuttle train. The current signalling was intended for 27tph, and this operated on the Picc with the current trains for some years. The new longer trains with all double doorways should cut all dwell times, so should operate a better 27tph than the current trains did.
|
|
