|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Aug 25, 2018 11:34:56 GMT
It looks as if Chilterns once a weekday service down to Paddington is set to change again as HS2 works in the Old Oak Common area will sever the link with the New North Mainline (NNML) negating the Chiltern service to run down to West Ealing via the Greenford Branch most likely taking effect during the winter timetable change. Kent Rail Productions captured on film what is believed to be a test run working empty on 5Z28 and 5Z44 on 24th August. |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Aug 25, 2018 22:57:07 GMT
Sorry but your message is a little unclear.
You used the word 'serve' but did you mean that the works will sever (or cut / block) the route, in the process forcing the parliamentary train to divert to West Ealing?
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Aug 26, 2018 8:08:30 GMT
Sorry but your message is a little unclear. You used the word 'serve' but did you mean that the works will sever (or cut / block) the route, in the process forcing the parliamentary train to divert to West Ealing? Simon Thank you, post corrected. |
|
londoner
thinking on '73 stock
Posts: 478 
|
Post by londoner on Aug 26, 2018 13:45:51 GMT
Will it call at the intermediate stations?
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 26, 2018 15:00:30 GMT
Will it call at the intermediate stations? It could, but it won't be able to call at Greenford |
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Aug 26, 2018 16:01:58 GMT
Will it call at the intermediate stations? I'm doubtful if it will, the equipment may well cater for the Chiltern service (the Greenford branch uses near identical turbo stars), but it's very existence is to avoid additional paper work meeting the franchise agreement not actually provide a meaningful service. I wonder why Chiltern bothered to divert this service via the Greenford branch given that they must have been given a derogation clause to exempt them from running to Paddington. Although since it wasn't their intention to withdraw the service, I guess they are not held accountable for works that prohibit them from running their services in this case by Network Rail/HS2 Ltd. |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Aug 26, 2018 23:21:40 GMT
Will it call at the intermediate stations? I'm doubtful if it will, the equipment may well cater for the Chiltern service (the Greenford branch uses near identical turbo stars), but it's very existence is to avoid additional paper work meeting the franchise agreement not actually provide a meaningful service. I wonder why Chiltern bothered to divert this service via the Greenford branch given that they must have been given a derogation clause to exempt them from running to Paddington. Although since it wasn't their intention to withdraw the service, I guess they are not held accountable for works that prohibit them from running their services in this case by Network Rail/HS2 Ltd. The whole point of a 'parliamentary' service is to maintain a link between the two places mentioned. Nowhere does the legislation state that it has to be a direct service - witness the bus service used between Ealing Broadway and Wandsworth Road when Cross Country stopped running trains between Reading and Brighton (which never called at either of the two stations the bus ran between anyway) that theoretically allowed potential travellers to make the same journey (train from Reading to Ealing, Bus to Wandsworth Road then train (via several changes) to Brighton.
Given the Chiltern service makes no station calls inwards of South Ruslip to Paddington then even before HS2 came along it could have still run via West Ealing (without stopping) to Paddington (subject to driver route knowledge etc.
Thus terminating the Chiltern service at West Ealing and making people use GWR / TfL Rail for onward transportation to Paddington requires no 'derogation' from anyone as such. The only complication is if Chiltern want to offer a direct fare from West Ealing (rather than stick with the current arrangements which assume a tube transfer between Paddington and Marylebone or going via Reading & Oxford)
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 27, 2018 9:35:24 GMT
A number of parliamentary services exist to keep a line (i.e actual track) officially open to passenger traffic, despite links remaining by other routes. Thus the infamous Ealing-Wandsworth link, kept three stretches of line officially in use - Acton Main Line to Acton Wells to Mitre Bridge, and Latchmere Junction to Wandsworth Road. The only trains to use those links had run non-stop through the area, from Reading to Bromley South/East Croydon.
A clearer example is the one train a week which runs via the "South Tottenham curves", making no stops between Hackney Downs and Seven Sisters. There are, of course, many other trains that provide a direct service between those two stations.
The West Ruislip-West Ealing service will keep the West Ruislip - Greenford section "open", the diversion to West Ealing being necessitated by the "temporary" closure of the section to OOC for the HS2 works. In the same way that the South Tottenham "parliamentary" was diverted by the direct route whilst the Goblin electrification was under way.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattdickinson on Aug 27, 2018 16:22:20 GMT
The other reason for the service is to retain driver route knowledge when Chiltern services are diverted from Marylebone.
|
|
|
|
Post by cudsn15 on Aug 28, 2018 7:56:51 GMT
In the same way that the South Tottenham "parliamentary" was diverted by the direct route whilst the Goblin electrification was under way. Did this run non stop to Seven Sisters does anyone know? |
|
cso
Posts: 1,042
|
Post by cso on Aug 28, 2018 8:14:55 GMT
The other reason for the service is to retain driver route knowledge when Chiltern services are diverted from Marylebone. Yet last time they all had a pilot with them between West Ruislip and Paddington. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 28, 2018 9:11:49 GMT
In the same way that the South Tottenham "parliamentary" was diverted by the direct route whilst the Goblin electrification was under way. Did this run non stop to Seven Sisters does anyone know? It has a scheduled stop at Hackney Downs. www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/L87176/2018/09/01/advanced |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Aug 28, 2018 11:57:11 GMT
The other reason for the service is to retain driver route knowledge when Chiltern services are diverted from Marylebone. Yet last time they all had a pilot with them between West Ruislip and Paddington.
One of the problems with this 'divert to Paddington' idea is that Paddington itself simply doesn't have the ability to handle diverted Chiltern services!
Yes, it could do if the GWR service was reduced to make space, but that is only likely due to GWML engineering work closing or halving its ability to handle the regular service.
As for route knowledge, one train a week is insufficient to keep all Chiltern drivers passed out on it - as such its quite possible that due to sickness / holiday / etc, a driver without the required route knowledge had to be given the job - and thus required a pilot for the section inwards of Ruslip.
|
|
londoner
thinking on '73 stock
Posts: 478
|
Post by londoner on Aug 28, 2018 13:59:28 GMT
The route is also kept open for diversionary routes on the GWR.
Video posted on Youtube by justinfoulger:
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 28, 2018 15:42:24 GMT
As for route knowledge, one train a week is insufficient to keep all Chiltern drivers passed out on it - as such its quite possible that due to sickness / holiday / etc, a driver without the required route knowledge had to be given the job - and thus required a pilot for the section inwards of Ruslip. So the service is needed anyway, but only at a level that allows enough drivers to acquire the route knowledge to act as pilots. It is not the only parliamentary service that is used to retain route knowledge - Overground to Battersea Park, and the South Tottenham curves, are two other examples. the invaluable PSUL website shows others which have a once-a-week variation on a long distance service, presumably for the same purpose (particularly as in many cases, such as the diversion of Sunday night sleepers in the Birmingham and Glasgow suburbs, there are other passenger services which use the tracks in question) |
|
|
|
Post by toby on Aug 28, 2018 16:22:53 GMT
Yet last time they all had a pilot with them between West Ruislip and Paddington.
One of the problems with this 'divert to Paddington' idea is that Paddington itself simply doesn't have the ability to handle diverted Chiltern services!
It happened about a month ago, the weekend service was half hourly iirc. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 28, 2018 16:45:02 GMT
The route is also kept open for diversionary routes on the GWR. The line has also been used by diverted West Coast main Line services from Euston to Birmingham via Willesden Junction, Acton Main Line, Greenford, High Wycombe, Leamington Spa and Coventry See www.flickr.com/photos/r-t-c/29602802051 |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Aug 28, 2018 22:38:40 GMT
One of the problems with this 'divert to Paddington' idea is that Paddington itself simply doesn't have the ability to handle diverted Chiltern services!
It happened about a month ago, the weekend service was half hourly iirc. Well weekend services are generally lighter in generalso I guess its possible that enough capacity is available at Paddington (and its approaches) to do this. It also follows that if it is a planned diversion for engineering works crew rostering can be altered so as to provide enough drivers with the route knowledge.
However there is practically zero chance of it happening during a weekday or if say a major police incident suddenly shut Marylebone....
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Aug 29, 2018 14:07:44 GMT
Few people alive today will know just how busy this line once was.
The volume of freight traffic in the days of steam was enormous, and sometimes there were few paths for the hourly Ealing - Greenford branch passenger service. Yes, there was freight from Park Royal too, but the volume of loose coupled freight coming down from Woodford Halse or Banbury down the NNML (New North Main Line) to the Greenford West junction to use the Greenford branch line was massive. A lot ended up in Acton Yard, though about 20% took the west fork at Drayton Green junction and went off to Southall, Hayes or Slough.
It is sad to see how this asset has been allowed to fall into near dereliction
|
|
|
|
Post by carltona on Aug 29, 2018 14:52:50 GMT
Will it call at the intermediate stations? I'm doubtful if it will, the equipment may well cater for the Chiltern service (the Greenford branch uses near identical turbo stars) A 165 is a "Turbo", the "Turbostar" is a 168, 170 or 171, basically the diesel version of the "Electrostar" found on c2c etc. The Chiltern version, the 168 "Clubman" has run to Paddington on the weekend diversions in the past. I read somewhere that not all Chiltern drivers sign the NNML but only certain links/depots. The service is not officially a "parliamentary" due to running five days a week and is mainly intended for route knowledge as well as keeping the route open as a passenger line. The diversions to Paddington are only for planned (weekend) engineering works that close the route to Marylebone. As mentioned GWR also run down there when the GWML is closed at some point between Didcot and Ealing. Recently, GWR have run via Oxford/Bicester. |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Aug 29, 2018 22:14:49 GMT
I'm doubtful if it will, the equipment may well cater for the Chiltern service (the Greenford branch uses near identical turbo stars) A 165 is a "Turbo", the "Turbostar" is a 168, 170 or 171, basically the diesel version of the "Electrostar" found on c2c etc. Nope
The Tubostar is in fact basically an updated version of the NSE Turbo class units*!
The 168s were effectively the prototype Turbostar build - although the units were not given the 'Turbostar' name and the first units to be marketed as such were the 170s built a couple of years later by the same manufacturer.
All the above units share a 23m based car body.
The 'Electrostar' units by contrast are based around a 20m car body and post dated the appearance of the Turbostar product by several years. While some components will obviously be shared between the two due to them being made by the same manufacturer, the reason the electric units got a similar sounding name is nothing more than good marketing. If there is any relationship its that the electric version evolved from the diesel version
*(with slight tweaks to the dimensions to make it slightly narrower - the GWR loading gauge was slightly more generous width wise than anyone else's meaning that many GWR steam locos and a fair bit of rolling stock was restricted from operating on other companies lines and therefore NSE designed the Turbo units to be slightly wider so as to take advantage).
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Aug 29, 2018 22:26:22 GMT
Few people alive today will know just how busy this line once was. The volume of freight traffic in the days of steam was enormous, and sometimes there were few paths for the hourly Ealing - Greenford branch passenger service. Yes, there was freight from Park Royal too, but the volume of loose coupled freight coming down from Woodford Halse or Banbury down the NNML (New North Main Line) to the Greenford West junction to use the Greenford branch line was massive. A lot ended up in Acton Yard, though about 20% took the west fork at Drayton Green junction and went off to Southall, Hayes or Slough. It is sad to see how this asset has been allowed to fall into near dereliction The national railway system is not a museum with vast amounts of money to be spent on assets that are no longer required simply to keep people happy.
The simple truth is that (1)the extension of the central line removed the need for local trains (2) electrification of the WCML removed the need for express passenger trains,(3) wagonload freight was obliterated by an improved road network and perhaps most importantly (4) the many factories which previously used to exist in the Park Royal area shut down.
The only need the national railway network has for the NNML these days is (1) to provide a diversionary termi for Chiltern (2) To facilitate the few remaining freight flows and (3) to turn locos etc via the Greenford loop. Given this usage a single track is perfectly adequate.
Of course at one stage there was a plan to run HS2 along the surface which would have seen the NNML return to becoming a proper mainline route again.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Aug 29, 2018 23:47:45 GMT
some components will obviously be shared between the two due to them being made by the same manufacturer, the reason the electric units got a similar sounding name is nothing more than good marketing. If there is any relationship its that the electric version evolved from the diesel version The cab fronts of Turbostars, both gangwayed and non-gangwayed versions, are very similar in appearance to those of Electrostars. |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Aug 30, 2018 0:28:19 GMT
some components will obviously be shared between the two due to them being made by the same manufacturer, the reason the electric units got a similar sounding name is nothing more than good marketing. If there is any relationship its that the electric version evolved from the diesel version The cab fronts of Turbostars, both gangwayed and non-gangwayed versions, are very similar in appearance to those of Electrostars. This is true - but in both designs the cabs (well the entire ends of all the carriages to be strictly accurate) are effectively 'bolt on' modules that make it easy to tailor one basic design to the requirements of different operators*.
For example there are a batch of Turbostar diesel units ordered by London Midland for their West Midlands franchise that combine an Electrostar style gangway cab (Electrostars are 20m long coach bodies) on Turbostar unit (23m coach bodies). Equally the non gangwayed Electrostars used on SE owe quite a lot to those cabs fitted to the Turbostar family.
However the main point is the longer Diesel powered Turbostar came first (not the shorter Electrostar) - and it can trace its linage directly back to the NSE Turbos (rather than the various Regional Railways 'Sprinter' designs).
* They can also be a source of water ingress - I recall a friend who worked in train maintenance for Southern telling me they were having trouble where due to slight misalignment between the body and the modules they were having to apply silicone sealant on a regular basis to various places to stop water leaks
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,223
|
Post by rincew1nd on Aug 30, 2018 7:21:44 GMT
I recall a friend who worked in train maintenance for Southern telling me they were having trouble where due to slight misalignment between the body and the modules they were having to apply silicone sealant on a regular basis to various places to stop water leaks. Makes a change from tape as on the 92ts! |
|
londoner
thinking on '73 stock
Posts: 478
|
Post by londoner on Dec 5, 2018 22:22:12 GMT
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,223
|
Post by rincew1nd on Dec 5, 2018 23:35:13 GMT
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,377
|
Post by Chris M on Dec 5, 2018 23:58:01 GMT
How far will you be travelling from Paddington - South Ruislip or beyond?
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,223
|
Post by rincew1nd on Dec 6, 2018 1:46:55 GMT
How far will you be travelling from Paddington - South Ruislip or beyond? Me? I won't be on it, I have a job interview to attend! |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,377
|
Post by Chris M on Dec 6, 2018 11:34:32 GMT
Well that's both good and bad!
|
|
