|
Post by ijmad on Jun 5, 2022 0:14:56 GMT
Looks like a lot of weekend closures will be in place to extend platforms! Unless the cars will be smaller.. Significantly shorter. A nine car NTFL will be about the same length as a six car 73ts. No platform lengthening is taking place.
|
|
|
Post by xplaistow on Jun 5, 2022 0:28:54 GMT
Looks like a lot of weekend closures will be in place to extend platforms! Unless the cars will be smaller.. Significantly shorter. A nine car NTFL will be about the same length as a six car 73ts. No platform lengthening is taking place. As mentioned upthread, the new trains will be about 6 metres longer than existing ones since the 73TS does not use the full length of the platforms.
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jun 5, 2022 4:04:06 GMT
New trains will have shorter cars, but similar train lengths to those they replace! So more cars to make a train. Allows walk-through car ends, smaller gap to platform, less bogies with alternate cars wheel-less, and therefore lighter trains using less energy.
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jun 5, 2022 11:57:17 GMT
The plan was always to get back to the length of a 1959 tube stock 7-car train - about 7 m longer than the 1973 tube stock - 113 m vs 106 m. A bogie car has a similar bogie centre dimension to a 1972 tube stock - about 1 metre shorter than a 1973 tube stock.
|
|
|
Post by ijmad on Jun 5, 2022 12:37:42 GMT
New trains will have shorter cars, but similar train lengths to those they replace! So more cars to make a train. Allows walk-through car ends, smaller gap to platform, less bogies with alternate cars wheel-less, and therefore lighter trains using less energy. Not to mention double doors all the way along the train, which will be a big improvement
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jun 5, 2022 21:48:44 GMT
But will they travel as quickly as 1973ts trains did when new?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jun 6, 2022 7:51:10 GMT
But will they travel as quickly as 1973ts trains did when new? Not sure of the maximum performance for future signalling but initially they will match the existing trains for signalling compatibility with existing signal overlaps. Remember too that 1973TS has never operated in passenger service at either of the two higher performance curves built into it. I recall from special test trains that the full performance is pretty quick though!
A recollection of faster passenger service speeds is likely more related to changes in permanent speed limits I think.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jun 6, 2022 13:46:21 GMT
But will they travel as quickly as 1973ts trains did when new? I do not find the 73 tube stock fast at all. I find it to be slow. Compared to the Victoria line it gets left well behind.
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Jun 6, 2022 15:05:55 GMT
Looks like a lot of weekend closures will be in place to extend platforms! Unless the cars will be smaller.. Significantly shorter. A nine car NTFL will be about the same length as a six car 73ts. No platform lengthening is taking place. When one compares the physical elements of a 9car NTFL with anything else, like a 6car 73TS here, the terms 9car and 6car as comparators become meaningless. Suitable alternative comparative term ? No idea, apart from stating train lengths in m (and the non serious suggestion at the end). One (of several) reasons Thameslink uses the terms FLU and RLU (full and reduced length unit) for 12car and 8car (700/1 and 700/0) dates from the early project days: it was far from clear how many cars the long-er and short-er trains would have, nor haow many units would make up each train, as the whole thing was up to whatever solution the potential makers bid. (There are other reasons for FLU and RLU too.) The Germans use the terms vollzug mittelzug and kleinzug for long intermediate and short trains. If you take an S-bahn for example where mixed 420 and 423 units operate, one 420 being about the same length as one 423, these are vollzug 9car 420 or 12car 423, mittelzug 6car 420 or 8car 423, or kleinzug 3car 420 or 4car 423. They don't refer to quantity of cars on passenger info systems. Perhaps we have altzug (73TS) and neuzug (NTFL) for the Die Linie Piccadilly ?
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,176
|
Post by Tom on Jun 6, 2022 16:23:03 GMT
At the expensive of going off-topic, the Berlin U-Bahn does the same, only it's 'kurzzug'. Other metros where uncoupling takes place do the same, though in some examples the signage doesn't always match up where the train actually stops.
It's probably not a major issue for the Piccadilly line considering the difference is all of a few metres.
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Jun 6, 2022 18:13:54 GMT
At the expensive of going off-topic, the Berlin U-Bahn does the same, only it's 'kurzzug'. Other metros where uncoupling takes place do the same, though in some examples the signage doesn't always match up where the train actually stops. It's probably not a major issue for the Piccadilly line considering the difference is all of a few metres. You are right. It is kurz not klein. My error. / set mode (offtopicity) = on
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jun 6, 2022 20:39:46 GMT
But will they travel as quickly as 1973ts trains did when new? I do not find the 73 tube stock fast at all. I find it to be slow. Compared to the Victoria line it gets left well behind. when built they were stated as having an enhanced operation for the airport service (not exact words, but general meaning) I did not know that they were actually designed for faster running than was ever allowed when in public service. I wonder ... how fast? Hammersmith - Action Town in 5 minutes?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jun 6, 2022 21:45:00 GMT
when built they [73TS] were stated as having an enhanced operation for the airport service (not exact words, but general meaning) I did not know that they were actually designed for faster running than was ever allowed when in public service. I wonder ... how fast? Hammersmith - Action Town in 5 minutes? Yes one of several fleets built for the Tube with performance for new signalling that got delayed until after the trains were scrapped...
I just checked and current timing is 7 minutes. 5 might have been possible but more likely a timetabled 6. There would be speed restrictions in the Hammersmith area, the kink at Stamford Brook and approaching Acton Town I'd expect. In full performance it climbed the bank towards Ravenscourt Park still accelerating quite hard. 55mi/h on the flat would be easy, maybe more. A speed I shouldn't detail here downhill on brake testing north end of the Met! It was a development test for high speed running under new signalling - as ever then cancelled at the time!
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,176
|
Post by Tom on Jun 6, 2022 22:45:09 GMT
Yes one of several fleets built for the Tube with performance for new signalling that got delayed until after the trains were scrapped... Interesting that, because a lot of the Piccadilly line was resignalled (basically everything east of Barons Court excluding King’s Cross) around the time of, or even after, the introduction of 1973 stock. I wonder if the high level design, with overlap calculations etc, was done slightly before 1973 stock performance data was available? Even so, I would have expected that it would be available by the time sites beyond Holborn were being designed, so from 1977 onwards.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jun 7, 2022 5:08:46 GMT
I seem to recall that with Barons Court to Acton Town still requiring 'Flag Down' and no automatic enforcement of the setting the difference was felt to be too great to implement a higher 'Flag Up' level until resignalling was completed. So still waiting...
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jun 8, 2022 20:56:29 GMT
Rather sobering to be reminded that 1973 tube stock has never been permitted to reach its full potential performance after 50 years, and that the expected new trains will be restricted in the same way upon delivery. There is hope of resignalling to allow full performance within ten years, but then current TfL funding has only another fortnight to run!
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jun 10, 2022 0:52:10 GMT
It seems that the new trains will be initially restricted to perform as 1973 tube stock that they replace, but those trains still remain restricted as the 1959 tube stock that they replaced. The 1959 tube stock was a post-war build of 1938 tube stock, and inter-worked with some of those trains, so I presume had similar performance. Does that mean that the new trains will perform as Piccadilly trains have over almost 90 years! Surely the new trains will know their location and, once the old trains have all gone, could have improved performance in areas resignalled since the 1973 stock was delivered?
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jun 10, 2022 6:50:33 GMT
It seems that the new trains will be initially restricted to perform as 1973 tube stock that they replace, but those trains still remain restricted as the 1959 tube stock that they replaced. The 1959 tube stock was a post-war build of 1938 tube stock, and inter-worked with some of those trains, so I presume had similar performance. Does that mean that the new trains will perform as Piccadilly trains have over almost 90 years! Surely the new trains will know their location and, once the old trains have all gone, could have improved performance in areas resignalled since the 1973 stock was delivered? Amazingly 1959 tube stock had worse performance than 1938 tube stock. This meant that the remaining 1938ts on the Piccadilly had to be restricted (series only on one motor car if I recall directly. This was an issue for the S stock where a whole variety of restrictions on different parts of the SSR could have led to very restricted 0erformance ( e.g., very poor performance north of Finchley Road). An automatic flag switch system was superimposed on the CSDE system, which already had a suitable safety rating. As far as I recall the performance selected was C stock flag down and A stock flag up. I'm sure t697 will be along to explain more. Perhaps this can be done for the Piccadilly line trains.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jun 10, 2022 7:18:56 GMT
It seems that the new trains will be initially restricted to perform as 1973 tube stock that they replace, but those trains still remain restricted as the 1959 tube stock that they replaced. The 1959 tube stock was a post-war build of 1938 tube stock, and inter-worked with some of those trains, so I presume had similar performance. Does that mean that the new trains will perform as Piccadilly trains have over almost 90 years! Surely the new trains will know their location and, once the old trains have all gone, could have improved performance in areas resignalled since the 1973 stock was delivered? The new trains will be manually driven using the same coloured light/fixed block signal system with the same speed restrictions as the 1973 stock, they won't "know their location" until the signalling is upgraded to CBTC and given TfL's current financial situation no one knows when that will be
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jun 10, 2022 18:23:25 GMT
It seems that the new trains will be initially restricted to perform as 1973 tube stock that they replace, but those trains still remain restricted as the 1959 tube stock that they replaced. The 1959 tube stock was a post-war build of 1938 tube stock, and inter-worked with some of those trains, so I presume had similar performance. Does that mean that the new trains will perform as Piccadilly trains have over almost 90 years! Surely the new trains will know their location and, once the old trains have all gone, could have improved performance in areas resignalled since the 1973 stock was delivered? The new trains will be manually driven using the same coloured light/fixed block signal system with the same speed restrictions as the 1973 stock, they won't "know their location" until the signalling is upgraded to CBTC and given TfL's current financial situation no one knows when that will be The S stock got their Interrunning 'Flag Switch' function automated using the interim CSDE/SDO system to tell the train the performance state to be in according to location. This gave a more assured selection of the correct performance curve than a manual selection. Possibly the 24TS equivalent system could do the same using their new track to train beacons. I don't know whether it is actually planned to do that though to make best use of the existing signalling.
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jun 14, 2022 7:33:11 GMT
If there will be no significant performance upgrade with delivery of the new trains, why is so much being put into sub-station upgrades? Are they life expired?
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jun 14, 2022 8:14:24 GMT
If there will be no significant performance upgrade with delivery of the new trains, why is so much being put into sub-station upgrades? Are they life expired? Modern trains more power hungry, air-conditioning etc. As with CLIP, possible upgrade to 750V DC on the cards too?
|
|
|
Post by quex on Jun 14, 2022 8:41:20 GMT
Modern trains more power hungry, air-conditioning etc. Siemens themselves quote that the new trains consume 20% less energy - but I don't doubt what Dstock7080 is saying, as it's been a rule of thumb for generations that a new fleet of trains uses more power than that is replaces. So how is the 20% saving achieved? Is the power drawn in short, large intensive spikes, requiring upgrades to the supply, but for the rest of the time draw is much lower? Or is it to do with the regenerative braking and the overall/average energy?
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jun 14, 2022 11:46:19 GMT
Modern trains more power hungry, air-conditioning etc. Siemens themselves quote that the new trains consume 20% less energy - but I don't doubt what Dstock7080 is saying, as it's been a rule of thumb for generations that a new fleet of trains uses more power than that is replaces. So how is the 20% saving achieved? Is the power drawn in short, large intensive spikes, requiring upgrades to the supply, but for the rest of the time draw is much lower? Or is it to do with the regenerative braking and the overall/average energy? There is a variety of things that contribute to the impression that the need to upgrade the power supply is in conflict with the lower power consumption of the trains. The big contributor to reduced energy is the regenerative brake. The Victoria line is a good example of how more performance is delivered with less power. The maximum current allowed was increased to 4500 A to accommodate peak traction and braking power flows. But coasting was enabled, reducing power demand. In short, the peak capacity went up from 27 trains/hour (TPH) to 36 TPH. Run time was also reduced, meaning that 27 TPH was delivered with 37 1967 TS trains and 36 TPH with 41 2009 TS trains. All this led to a 30% increase of capacity and the impact on power consumption (electricity consumption not peak current) was a 16% reduction. On the Piccadilly line not all these benefits will be delivered until the signalling is replaced and ATO introduced.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jun 14, 2022 18:30:06 GMT
Amazingly 1959 tube stock had worse performance than 1938 tube stock. This meant that the remaining 1938ts on the Piccadilly had to be restricted (series only on one motor car if I recall directly. This was an issue for the S stock where a whole variety of restrictions on different parts of the SSR could have led to very restricted 0erformance ( e.g., very poor performance north of Finchley Road). An automatic flag switch system was superimposed on the CSDE system, which already had a suitable safety rating. As far as I recall the performance selected was C stock flag down and A stock flag up. I'm sure t697 will be along to explain more. Perhaps this can be done for the Piccadilly line trains. Ah, so that's how the 38TS were kept to signalled speeds. Perhaps when 59TS/62TS was specified in the '50s, it was clear that resignalling the Piccadilly and Central for higher performance was decades into the future, so no need for more performance to be purchased.
The S stock has four 'Interrunning' profiles; - S8 trains 'L' or 'Flag Down' equivalent matches 'A' stock Flag Down but with tractive effort ramped down sharply above 50 mi/h. - S8 'H' or 'Flag Up' equivalent matches 'A stock Flag Up. Originally it matched the 'A' stock Flag Up very low accelerating rate too, but as the power supply upgrade was completed, S8 'H' was changed to have the same initial acceleration as S8 'L' as this was found to remain compatible with the legacy signalling but improved run times quite a bit particularly on the stopping services. S8 'H' ramps off the tractive effort sharply above 60 mi/h. - S7 'L' matches C stock Flag Down but ramps off sharply above 40 mi/h. D stock Flag Down was virtually the same.
- S7 'H' matches D stock Flag Up but ramps off sharply above 45 mi/h. The S7 therefore performs fairly similar to D stock with Coasting Control cut in. The fifth profile is the full performance ATC profile. Again it ramps off tractive effort sharply from about 60 mi/h but the capability is higher than any of the others. Operating the train in Auto mode, the ATC doesn't always use the highest acceleration though, for several factors. It was satisfying getting all those selections done and automated via the CSDE. I thought it was the last chance to automate the Flag Switch function but with the Piccadilly resignalling deferred, perhaps someone has the chance to do similar on 24TS.
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jun 14, 2022 18:43:20 GMT
t697.........get out there influencing the 2024 TS project team!
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jun 15, 2022 7:34:42 GMT
t697.........get out there influencing the 2024 TS project team! A reliable source tells me it's all in hand. Two levels to match 73TS and two more as provision for the future.
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Jul 3, 2022 3:17:17 GMT
Hi all, hope you don’t mind humouring my slightly random question?
Was a stock cascade ever considered as a way of assessing issues on different lines? As I understand it, additional stock is one component that could facilitate proposed service pattern and frequency changes in both Northern and Piccadilly lines. Was there ever consideration to prioritise an order for enough newtfL trains for an enhanced/split Northern line, which would allow the 106 1995ts to serve the Piccadilly (in combination with resignalling and takeover of the Ealing Broadway branch)?
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,665
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 3, 2022 11:21:48 GMT
I'm not aware of any suggestions of sending the 1995 stock to the Piccadilly line. There was talk about combining the 1995 and 1996 stocks on either the Northern or Jubilee line with a new fleet of trains for the other (I can't remember which way round it was going to be off the top of my head), but I think the post-pandemic funding issues have put that into the long grass if not stopped it all together.
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jul 3, 2022 12:23:52 GMT
Hi all, hope you don’t mind humouring my slightly random question? Was a stock cascade ever considered as a way of assessing issues on different lines? As I understand it, additional stock is one component that could facilitate proposed service pattern and frequency changes in both Northern and Piccadilly lines. Was there ever consideration to prioritise an order for enough newtfL trains for an enhanced/split Northern line, which would allow the 106 1995ts to serve the Piccadilly (in combination with resignalling and takeover of the Ealing Broadway branch)? Be assured that all sorts of ideas were brainstormed when developing the plans for the deep tube stock. Transferring 1995 tube stock was one of the more problematic ideas, quickly binned, as the trains aren't TfL's and the maintenance is contracted out. It would have also harmed the idea of increasing capacity though the extra 7 m of train length. Splitting the Northern line in two remains an objective that can only be realised when Camden Town is properly remodelled, at least at platform level, to enable easy cross platform interchange between the branches. One suspects that none of this will happen until the time comes to replace the trains, though perhaps the idea of replacing the Jubilee trains and transferring the 1996 tube stock to the Northern line having reverted them to 6-car might be resuscitated. I doubt if anyone is paying too much attention right now in the absence of a firm funding agreement.
|
|