|
Post by brigham on Nov 24, 2021 8:36:28 GMT
Misery Line? No way to board without walking along the platform?
Some people don't know they are born!
|
|
|
Post by ted672 on Nov 24, 2021 10:45:37 GMT
Misery Line? No way to board without walking along the platform? Some people don't know they are born! And "..... - but I well remember the 90's and the real jeopardy of wondering if you will get to work on time every day or even if a train will turn up at all some days! "
I travelled to school between Clapham North and Oval in the early 70s at a time when trains were shortened to six cars for some months. That was stressful!
Sorry, we're getting into the realms of Monty Python's "Four Yorkshiremen" sketch.
|
|
|
Post by ijmad on Nov 24, 2021 12:30:55 GMT
It seems that the Piccadilly end cars will be about 16 metres long, similar to current Bakerloo or Central Line end cars; the four even-numbered wheel-less cars are only some 10 metres long, suspended between adjacent cars; and twin-bogie cars 3, 5, and 7 will be around 14 metres long, similar to half a DLR unit. The total length of the train will be around 113 metres, some 6 metres longer than current trains, although earlier trains like current Bakerloo Line trains were another half-metre longer still. All doorways will be within the platforms at all stations, although current CCTV screens may obstruct leading doorways at some platforms until removed when the last of current trains are withdrawn. The new trains will feature in-cab CCTV. It would look very strange seeing different length carriages on the trains. So accustomed to either all the same length or just end cars with cab ends being different lengths. Wait until you notice the different door widths on the S Stock end cars
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 25, 2021 8:35:09 GMT
This new numbering scheme looks pretty unique to me! Any idea why it starts at 38xxx and runs over to 48xxx at the other end of the train? Was there a reason not to start at 30xxx or 35xxx? Very odd. As far as I can see the only previous uses of the 3xxxx and 4xxxx ranges were for 1949 stock UNDMs in the 30xxx and 31xxx ranges (including some converted from 1938 stock),and the 1956 stock (originally numbered in the 4xxxx range with the second digit ranging from 0 to 5). The Class 378s used on the London Overground have car numbers in the 38xxx range, which was not a range previously used for NR emu stock but seemed to sort-of-fit of with LO's use of 1xxxx and 2xxxx for 21st century Tube and Surface stocks respectively, but this range of course overlaps with the range now proposed for 2024 TS. (Historic number ranges) 1xxx, ex-District Trailers, 1959/62 Tube stock 2xxx, ex-Metropolitan DMs, 1959/62 Tube stock 3xxx, Standard Stock DM, 1967/72/83 Tube stock 4xxx, ex-District and Q stock DMs, 1967/72/83 Tube stock 5xxx, Standard Stock ControlTrailers, A,C stock DMs 6xxx, ex-Metropolitan driving trailers, A,C stock trailers 7xxx, Standard Stock Trailers, D stock DM 8xxx, ex-District and Q stock Trailers, D stock NDM 9xxx, ex-Metropolitan trailers, 1959/62 Tube stock 10xxx, 1935/1938 stocks 11xxx,12xxx 1935/1938 stocks, 2009 stock 13xxx,14xxx, O,P stock, 2009 stock 17xxx D stock trailers 2xxxx R and S stocks 3xxxx 1938 stock (converted 9 car NDMs) 4xxxx 1956 stock 5xxxx CO/CP stock, 1995 stock 6xxxx 1992 stock (W&C) 7xxxx "58 trailer" standard stock conversions to run with 1938 stock 9xxxx 1938 stock (9 car), 1992,1996 stock
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Nov 25, 2021 22:47:28 GMT
This is the first radical redesign of tube stock since the 1938TS put equipment below the floor. Subsequent deliveries have been progressive developments of that basic design. End single doors have been an annoying feature of tube trains since that time. I love end doors, I would not say they are annoying. I actually miss them. As the distance between doors is greater it appears on other stock
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Nov 25, 2021 22:51:09 GMT
It would look very strange seeing different length carriages on the trains. So accustomed to either all the same length or just end cars with cab ends being different lengths. Wait until you notice the different door widths on the S Stock end cars I realised that when they came out, I had to do a double take as though it was my eyes playing up, then realised it was smaller.
|
|
jimbo
Posts: 1,832
Member is Online
|
Post by jimbo on Nov 26, 2021 3:45:22 GMT
..... This new numbering scheme looks pretty unique to me! Any idea why it starts at 38xxx and runs over to 48xxx at the other end of the train? Was there a reason not to start at 30xxx or 35xxx? When the S stock numbering scheme was proposed, S7 units started with a middle digit of xx2xx, but this was found to clash with some National Rail rolling stock, so was changed to commence with xx3xx. Could there have been a similar numbering clash by starting at 30xxx or 35xxx, or would this not matter since Picc trains will not work on the National system?
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 27, 2021 12:02:40 GMT
..... This new numbering scheme looks pretty unique to me! Any idea why it starts at 38xxx and runs over to 48xxx at the other end of the train? Was there a reason not to start at 30xxx or 35xxx? When the S stock numbering scheme was proposed, S7 units started with a middle digit of xx2xx, but this was found to clash with some National Rail rolling stock, so was changed to commence with xx3xx. Could there have been a similar numbering clash by starting at 30xxx or 35xxx, or would this not matter since Picc trains will not work on the National system? There are indeed half a dozen Mark 1 corridor brake composites (BCK) numbered in the 212xx range registered with NR, owned by Riviera and West Coast Railways - the last survivors of a fleet originally numbering 276. A run from 38xxx to 48xxx, while missing the surviving Class 37 locomotives, overlaps with DMU and EMU vehicles in classes 378 and 380 (38xxx) and classes 139 and 395 (39xxx), the surviving HST fleet (both power cars and trailers, numbered between 41xxx and 44xxx), and Class 47 locomotives. Given the operator of Class 378, I would have thought that duplication would be a problem.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Nov 27, 2021 21:28:46 GMT
Deciding upon fleet numbers for the next batch of London tube trains sounds like "very hard work".
It never dawned upon me that it would matter if LU rolling stock numbers clashed with those of the mainline network.
Maybe though there is a single central database which not only includes (former) BR fleet numbers but also London Underground - and possible tram / light rail fleet numbers (even if never destined to run on Network Rail metals as tram trains).
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 27, 2021 22:46:28 GMT
It never dawned upon me that it would matter if LU rolling stock numbers clashed with those of the mainline network. . Nor would it have to me, except for the very limited cases where one network's trains runs on another's network: Gunnersbury to Richmond East Putney to Wimbledon Queens Park to Harrow & Wealdstone Amersham to Harrow-on-the-Hill Rotherham Central Pelaw to Sunderland and possibly where they run alongside, and therefore may need identification if an accident were to bring them into conflict Bromley-by-Bow to Upminster Stratford (London) Wimbledon, Elmers End, and Birkbeck to Beckenham Junction Birmingham Snow Hill to the Hawthorns Bulwell to Hucknall Altrincham to Navigation Road, Deansgate to Cornbrook, and Manchester Victoria Balgreen to Edinburgh Park ....actually, there's quite a few, when you come to list them
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,664
|
Post by Chris M on Nov 27, 2021 23:03:16 GMT
Especially as you've missed Greenford and West Ruislip-South Ruislip (Central line/NR); Canning Town-Stratford (DLR/Jubilee), Limehouse-Tower Gateway and Bow Church-Stratford (DLR/NR) and Custom House-Prince Regent (DLR/Crossrail) from the running alongside list just in London. Heathrow T5 (Picc/XR) and Greenwich (DLR/NR) may count as well, but there are always platforms in the way there. Then there are the heritage railways that share track/stations/alignments with the mainline.
|
|
|
Post by phil on Nov 28, 2021 22:33:35 GMT
Deciding upon fleet numbers for the next batch of London tube trains sounds like "very hard work". It never dawned upon me that it would matter if LU rolling stock numbers clashed with those of the mainline network. Maybe though there is a single central database which not only includes (former) BR fleet numbers but also London Underground - and possible tram / light rail fleet numbers (even if never destined to run on Network Rail metals as tram trains). It is a requirement that ALL vehicles operating on network rail are given a unique (to NR) number and that number be recorded / used on NRs systems like TOPS, TRUST, etc.
Now, its possible for one vehicle to carry two separate numbers - the most obvious examples being Heritage steam locos which are all given a 98XXX number by NR (which is painted inside the cab) but are allowed to carry historic numbers on the outside that have no relevance to NR.
So technically it would be possible for a LU train to carry two sets of numbers - but this in turn could easily cause confusion if wrongly quoted and given the frequency said LU vehicles traverse NR infrastructure (compared to a Heritage steamer say) its probably desirable to just give it one number for use on both companies systems.
|
|
jimbo
Posts: 1,832
Member is Online
|
Post by jimbo on Nov 28, 2021 23:54:42 GMT
So the Picc trains will not operate on network rail, so is this relevant? How will they be delivered from Europe, or from Goole? Maybe some NR transfer? But they would be enclosed between NR locos, so would it be relevant then?
|
|
|
Post by phil on Nov 29, 2021 0:35:08 GMT
So the Picc trains will not operate on network rail, so is this relevant? How will they be delivered from Europe, or from Goole? Maybe some NR transfer? But they would be enclosed between NR locos, so would it be relevant then?
For Piccadilly stock, I agree there is no operational need for its number sequence not to clash with any existing NR number series.
However given some of the stock is due to be assembled in Goole it may be that transfer south will be done of NR infrastructure - and for this each vehicle will have to be given a number which doesn't clash with anything already issued by NR.
That is they key point - it doesn't matter whether the entire unit is being top and tailed by locos + barrier wagons during the move - if one of the cars develops bad wheelflats during transit say and the move has to be stopped (there are devices scattered round NR which can automatically detect such things*) it will be necessary for NR to be able to identify the vehicle concerned - so it has to have a NR issued number.
Again there is no mandatory requirement for this NR number to be the same as the LU number - but there is some logic to giving them a single identity as it were to avoid confusion during the build / transfer / commissioning stages.
|
|
jimbo
Posts: 1,832
Member is Online
|
Post by jimbo on Nov 29, 2021 3:02:56 GMT
Post above suggests there will be some clashes with current fleets.
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Nov 29, 2021 14:14:53 GMT
So the Picc trains will not operate on network rail, so is this relevant? How will they be delivered from Europe, or from Goole? Maybe some NR transfer? But they would be enclosed between NR locos, so would it be relevant then? For Piccadilly stock, I agree there is no operational need for its number sequence not to clash with any existing NR number series.
However given some of the stock is due to be assembled in Goole it may be that transfer south will be done of NR infrastructure - and for this each vehicle will have to be given a number which doesn't clash with anything already issued by NR. That is they key point - it doesn't matter whether the entire unit is being top and tailed by locos + barrier wagons during the move - if one of the cars develops bad wheelflats during transit say and the move has to be stopped (there are devices scattered round NR which can automatically detect such things*) it will be necessary for NR to be able to identify the vehicle concerned - so it has to have a NR issued number.
Again there is no mandatory requirement for this NR number to be the same as the LU number - but there is some logic to giving them a single identity as it were to avoid confusion during the build / transfer / commissioning stages. Possibly people are over looking the number that is displayed on a main line vehicle, i.e. the number that trainspotters see, is not the full number : everything has a full 11 digit*** UIC number . This has been so for about 10 years now, there is a relevant standard on the web somewhere. These full numbers not normally displayed on GB main line rolling stock; the only actual example I know of is the new Mersey 777 have the 11 digit car numbers in their cabs. If - IF - everybody is following all standards, LU stock ought to have UIC 11 digit numbers somewhere, for when those vehicles run over main lines, for any reason. Usually - but not necessarily - the number displayed on an item is part of or all of the full UIC number. There are however numerous examples on mainland Europe where what is displayed has no connectionwith the UIC number. So where LU vehicle 12345 clashes trainspotter-wise with main line 12345, it is the other bits of the number, xx yy xx1 2345, the x's y's and z's that are different. Bear in mind even the main line GB number series is not fully in the public domain, it is quite possible that LU vehicles are allocated - but just not in public view - hence we don't know of them. Might not even be known to LU just to NRs computers ? *** 11 digits + 1 check digit
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 29, 2021 15:48:39 GMT
These full numbers not normally displayed on GB main line rolling stock; the only actual example I know of is the new Mersey 777 have the 11 digit car numbers in their cabs. Some CAF-built stock carries the full number commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CAF_mk5_seated_coach_with_class_92_locomotive.jpg As most emu vehicles on NR now have six-digit numbers I did wonder whether prefixing the 38xxx to 48xxx with a "3" or a "4" would make unique numbers, but alas (3)40xxx is occupied by class 345 (3)41xxx, 42xxx, 43xxx, 44xxx and 46xxx by class 745 (4)41xxx, 442xxx, 443xxx and 444xxx by class 385 Class 755 uses the 91,96, 97, and 98 ranges (why?) and Class 399 (the Sheffield tram trains) 99xxxx so the 93xxxx and 94xxxx ranges are free - but they are completely free so why start at (9)38xxx?
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Nov 29, 2021 16:32:24 GMT
These full numbers not normally displayed on GB main line rolling stock; the only actual example I know of is the new Mersey 777 have the 11 digit car numbers in their cabs. Some CAF-built stock carries the full number commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CAF_mk5_seated_coach_with_class_92_locomotive.jpg As most emu vehicles on NR now have six-digit numbers I did wonder whether prefixing the 38xxx to 48xxx with a "3" or a "4" would make unique numbers, but alas (3)40xxx is occupied by class 345 (3)41xxx, 42xxx, 43xxx, 44xxx and 46xxx by class 745 (4)41xxx, 442xxx, 443xxx and 444xxx by class 385 Class 755 uses the 91,96, 97, and 98 ranges (why?) and Class 399 (the Sheffield tram trains) 99xxxx so the 93xxxx and 94xxxx ranges are free - but they are completely free so why start at (9)38xxx? Not sure but think 91 96 etc are arbitrary discriminators precisely for the reason of demarcating numbers that clash somewhere
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Dec 3, 2021 0:18:47 GMT
re: 'other' trains on Network Rail tracks, there is a Class number that is reserved for these trains, whether Sarah Siddons, Tyne & Wear Metro or London Underground tube / surface stock. The photo below was taken inside Sarah Siddons. I *think* all LUL trains are Class 89, with different third numbers (onwards) according to type of train.
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Dec 3, 2021 14:16:28 GMT
LUL stock that works over Network Rail infrastructure has a nominal class 499 identity; my understanding is that these are not permanently allocated and will change daily based on the units that cross the boundary, although it is some time since I had the conversation so could be getting muddled.
There is no correlation between LUL numbering and TOPS numbering - either in the locomotive and carriage range or in the multiple unit range.
Sarah is unusual in having a permanent number in the class 89 range which is used for preserved electric and diesel locomotives able to operate on NR. As Sarah has run under power on numerous occasions - as well as been hauled dead - this is a necessity. The first 2 is derived from the locomotive’s ‘power output’, type 2, and the 12 is the last two digits of the locomotive’s ‘original’ number - in this case simply (L)12.
|
|
jimbo
Posts: 1,832
Member is Online
|
Post by jimbo on Dec 13, 2021 18:52:03 GMT
I see that the new Picc 2024TS car numbering system is now revealed in the November Underground News. ..... This new numbering scheme looks pretty unique to me! Any idea why it starts at 38xxx and runs over to 48xxx at the other end of the train? Was there a reason not to start at 30xxx or 35xxx? Today it came to me that the original artists impressions of the new trains showed end cars clearly numbered 38001 etc. This was some years back, and I took it then to be in homage to the honourable 1938TS. It was said that the new trains took design cues from the classic trains, including their colour palette. This has somewhat changed over the years. I never thought those car numbers would be adopted when delivery eventually arrived. I now think that is why the planned numbering scheme commences at an apparently random 38xxx.
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Dec 16, 2021 10:36:18 GMT
The first cab mock-up for the 2024 Stock has arrived in East London, for evaluation by stakeholders before being moved up to Siemens new Goole facility in March 2022.
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Dec 17, 2021 17:25:20 GMT
LUL stock that works over Network Rail infrastructure has a nominal class 499 identity; my understanding is that these are not permanently allocated and will change daily based on the units that cross the boundary, although it is some time since I had the conversation so could be getting muddled. That is my understanding also. When S-stock was moving to and from Derby, the main line train consists were reported as something like "class 20 locomotives + barrier wagons + class 499 stock", but no individual 499 unit numbers were reported; whether they were actually assigned I have no idea. Within the TOPS system, and within number that are actually displayed on trains, this is true. However, TOPS is not the complete story on main line rolling stock numbering. All GB main line stock does have, and has had for about 10 years now, full UIC 11-digit numbers. Mostly not displayed. If - if - LU are using that system somewhere, perhaps hidden from view, or perhaps the NR systems do it with LU stock, and equally hidden from public knowledge, there will be a correlation from other parts of the 11 digit number - and that is exactly what those other numbers are for. In general, any main line TOPS number, that is the displayed number, or, if you like, the trainspotter number of units are in the form abcdef where abc is the class number and def the individual identifier. In the 11 digit series, it is xx yy z abc def *** xx is a country code, but yy z are arbiters, and can be set up to mean whatever the allocating administration chooses them to be. It could be done that one or more digits means LU. There is already some use of these 11 digit numbers on stock running over LU - the recent grinding and or milling machines have them. One could argue those are for when those vehicles run over NR track, but that is EXACTLY the reason for them, not the reason for dimissing them. IMHO I doubt most LU stock does have such numbers as there is no real need for this, and, knowing now trainspotting things tend to leak, we'd already know. Nonetheless, if they do exist, that is how the correlation would work. *** actually xx yy z abc def - q but q is a check digit calculated from the other 11 digits, not an indentifier in itself
|
|
|
Post by fish7373 on Dec 18, 2021 17:27:38 GMT
|
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,959
|
Post by towerman on Dec 18, 2021 21:18:41 GMT
Hope the real thing gets the destination spelling right!!
|
|
jimbo
Posts: 1,832
Member is Online
|
Post by jimbo on Dec 19, 2021 18:50:44 GMT
New coupler after 90 years of Wedgelock!
At this stage of development, a similar coupler was intended for the S stock, but it failed to appear on the delivered vehicles!
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,176
|
Post by Tom on Dec 19, 2021 21:35:36 GMT
Hope the real thing gets the destination spelling right!! It's an interesting one, this. For years, many locals (myself included) have referred to the road outside Northfields Station as Northfields Avenue - it's actually Northfield Avenue, and has been since before the coming of the railway (though it was Northfield Lane for some time prior to becoming an Avenue). This is probably the first time I've seen the station named after the road!
|
|
|
Post by grumpycat on Dec 20, 2021 7:22:59 GMT
Even tho a mockup looks a stunner
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Dec 20, 2021 9:32:51 GMT
From a driver's point of view that looks ghastly
Left handed Traction Brake Controller Doesn't appear to be much foot=room under the "desk" And it looks like you have to reach over the screens to get to the radio/PA
If it is as bad as that photo looks I'd tell Siemens to go back and start again
Where is this BTW?
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Dec 20, 2021 11:15:16 GMT
The station, not a station.
|
|