|
Post by Chris W on Jul 3, 2022 20:04:43 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. THIS is my Rail Express article from November 2014 re the potential cascading of stock re the Northern/Jubilee Lines...
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Jul 4, 2022 2:40:12 GMT
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 rescisitated. I doubt if anyone is paying too much attention right now in the absence of a firm funding agreement. Thanks Chris and 100and thirty. Interesting that to hear that a variety of ideas were considered previously. Now I guess we’ll have to see what creative solutions arise in the face of the funding limitations.
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jul 4, 2022 4:25:07 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 rescisitated. I doubt if anyone is paying too much attention right now in the absence of a firm funding agreement. I presume your comment is about TfL's response to acquiring Tube Lines in 2010 with responsibility for upgrading the Piccadilly Line. The PPP contracts dated a decade earlier, only requiring a 20% increase in capacity on the Piccadilly, which could probably have been achieved through resignalling. Tube Lines were operating the Jubilee and Northern Lines, both with longer cars, and talked of ordering similar modern trains for the Piccadilly to be delivered from 2012 to 2014. They would therefore have presumably replaced the current 1973 tube stock with something of similar dimensions. I think tenders had been sought, but a contract was never awarded. Has anyone inside knowledge of what this might have produced? By 2010 concerns had arisen that rapid population growth could soon outgrow PPP targets. The collapse of Metronet in 2007 led to LU reviving plans for a radical new design of train, originally intended for the Victoria Line, but now for the Bakerloo and Central Lines, providing an economic order size. The Piccadilly Line order was more urgent, and became first in the list for the new trains. The last version for Camden Town reconstruction seemed to provide for new interchange subways at the north of the platforms to be provided first, constructed from the deep shelter spiral access shaft, with a northern ticket hall and escalators constructed from the surface to meet them. This could perhaps be split into two contracts to support Northern Line service separation earlier? At one time a further build of Piccadilly Line trains was intended to provide the extra trains required.
|
|
|
Post by ijmad on Jul 4, 2022 8:42:12 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. TfL said they wanted new trains for the Jubilee Line in their ' Investment to get London and the UK moving again' document (which was a number of options for central government to consider when it looked like the pandemic was ending in late 2020), which suggested cascading the 96ts to the Northern Line to bolster that fleet.
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jul 4, 2022 17:55:12 GMT
THIS is my Rail Express article from November 2014 re the potential cascading of stock re the Northern/Jubilee Lines... in the end the ITT for the extra trains specifically required them to, effectively have the same form, fit and function as the original trains. This was a challenge apropos the Alstom intellectual property as indicated in the article. They did in fact invite competitive bids from CAF as well as Alstom. It is a matter of great speculation as to why the contract was never placed. Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote partially removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jul 4, 2022 20:18:15 GMT
I'll guess that part of the story here is that to reduce costs TfL want brand new trains with a format and door spacing that is compatible with the platform screen doors.
Paris will be getting new trains for its metro line that from when it opened was fully driverless / unstaffed trains with all stations having platform screen doors. I *think* this is line 13.
For their new trains they also intend to replace the platform screen doors! I am not sure of the full extent of the works required, only that the word 'replace' is being used.
Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jul 6, 2022 17:08:41 GMT
The first body shell of a 2024 Stock car has been painted in the factory in Vienna, the finish is similar to the initial image with thin blue line below the windows: districtdavesforum.co.uk/post/500520
|
|
|
Post by grumpycat on Jul 11, 2022 0:01:48 GMT
Any images of it? Will look interesting
Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 11, 2022 6:50:09 GMT
I'll guess that part of the story here is that to reduce costs TfL want brand new trains with a format and door spacing that is compatible with the platform screen doors. Paris will be getting new trains for its metro line that from when it opened was fully driverless / unstaffed trains with all stations having platform screen doors. I *think* this is line 13. For their new trains they also intend to replace the platform screen doors! I am not sure of the full extent of the works required, only that the word 'replace' is being used. Line 14 is the only Metro line to be built driverless, opened 1998. It currently has three different stocks, 21 6-car MP89s, 11 6-car MP05s and a single 8-car MP14s, all of which obviously have identical door spacing. In 2012 it was announced that the MP89s and MP05s would be replaced by MP14s with the old stock cascaded to other lines although some will require a drivers cab Line 1 was converted to driverless in 2011, has MP05s Line 4 is currently being converted to driverless, has driver operated MP89s with the first driverless trains entering service this year All three lines use rubber tyres Two other lines use rubber tyres, Line 6 has MP89s and MP73s, Line 11 has ancient MP59s which will be replaced at some point in the future with MP14s Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote partially removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jul 24, 2022 21:30:02 GMT
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? I am sure if the 2009 stock on the Vic line did that unrestricted, it would still beat that time. They are phenomenal. I am not sure if it is AC voltage that allows these speeds. Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote partially removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jul 25, 2022 9:58:09 GMT
As always the issue is power measured in kilo Watts or Mega watts. The 2009 tube stock can draw much more power from the conductor rails than is allowed on the 1973 tube stock, and it uses it to good effect. But Victoria line has the benefit of modern signalling laid out to allow the trains to make use of that performance.
As t697 has said up thread, 1973 tube stock is capable of being faster but has to operate within the constraints of the signalling system. Modern trains with solid state traction equipment can be programmed to perform a little better within the constraints of the existing signalling system. Explaining this would take us way outside the subject of this topic.
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Jul 27, 2022 19:06:03 GMT
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? From memory the journey time quoted in the Fly The Tube opening poster campaign was around 42 minutes from King's Cross to Heathrow Central. King's Cross was used as the area had a lot of budget tourist hotels where guests were looking for a cheaper way to get to the airport. Over the years the journey time increased again and again. Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote partially removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by humbug on Aug 8, 2022 16:01:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Aug 8, 2022 17:55:11 GMT
I do ... but we must be forward looking, after all train automation was invented here, in London, on our UndergrounD railway! I have a cunning plan... more to come soon, I've been called away from the computer.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Aug 10, 2022 18:18:00 GMT
Perhaps these previous 3 posts would be better over in the Central line 92TS thread?
Done! - Tom
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Aug 11, 2022 0:23:57 GMT
I do ... but we must be forward looking, after all train automation was invented here, in London, on our UndergrounD railway! I have a cunning plan... more to come soon, I've been called away from the computer. As I said before, we must be forward looking, and not Luddites! But for financial issues the 1970s FACT (fully automated control of trains) project using a specially adapted 1960ts train on the Hainault - Woodford route might have become a reality here on our London Underground network. btw, not being employed on the railways means that my job is not on the line for speaking out on a topic I feel passionately about, and I do accept that I might be flamed for what I say. But, in my view of our present financial situation it is likely that what I propose below represents the only way that the transport minister will get his wishes and our Mayor plus the people of south-east London will get something that they want too. Win win! I am unsure of the reason why the Transport minister has suddenly started pushing for unstaffed trains here in London. It might be because he has seen what is happening in Paris with two metro lines being converted to full unstaffed operation. But these lines largely use subsurface twin-track tunnels so if there an emergency situation passengers could flee the train - and hope that they avoid live rails and being run down by trains approaching on the other tracks! The reason could also be political - maybe he thinks train drivers are overpaid, dislikes them going on strike etc - I wont dwell on that possibility here. Here in London our subsurface LUL lines are already automated (or will soon be) and to change technology and make them fully unstaffed will mean wasting significant amounts of money. But we do have some deep level tube lines that are in urgent need of investment - new trains, signalling etc. Present-day safety rules are so much more onerous than they were in the 1970s - beyond the emergency escape walkway and platform screen doors* I do not know what else would be needed for fully unstaffed trains to travel through deep level single bore tunnels. So that more or less rules out the deep level tube network for fully unstaffed trains. *btw, many people will see platform screen doors as a pre-requisite for full automation but there are some fully unstaffed urban railway networks which do not have these. eg: Lyon France line D and Vancouver Canada 'Sky-Train' But all is not lost for our transport minister. We do actually have some fully unstaffed passenger trains here in London - eg: at Heathrow Airport - where shuttle trains carry passengers around Terminal 5. If nothing else this proves that the concept is acceptable to both the British people and to our health & safety bods. However, what is significant here is that these are new build services which were designed for full automated from the start. So, to have fully automated urban travel trains here in London we need something brand new. Perhaps our beloved transport minister needs to get out his cheque-book and fund the oft-mooted west London orbital line? Of course this line will be welcomed by many people but its not London's most pressing need. Also planned is a new-build extension of the Bakerloo line. This line also needs new trains, and its northern section needs resignalling for greater capacity - because British Rail's 1980s resignalling reduced train capacity too much. I am unsure if resignalling the section north of Queens Park is even a planned Network Rail project, but (please take a sharp intake of breath) if a govt. transport minister asks for this and waves a cheque book then I feel sure that an agreeable timetable could be found. Especially if at the same time there was something else (perhaps another railway investment project elsewhere in the UK) that was wanted which the minister could help make a reality. Perhaps as we are in an era of corporate hubris where everything needs to be done in a showy way that makes everyone 'look good' the resignalling could be treated as a demonstration project to see blue signal aspect technology at work on a Network Rail owned section of railway. After all, the Watford DC route is a largely isolated line that is only used by urban trains (LUL and LO) - not freight, inter-city, etc. Oh and the project would include meeting NR requirements for the train driver staying at the front of the train, as per the other LUL ATO services. To make the stations fully accessible the solution adopted at Rotherham Central with dual height train / tram-train points to a possible solution for most stations. The section Queens Park - Elephant & Castle would be resignalled for automated trains as per much else of the LUL network. Being brand new Elephant - Lewisham could be built to meet all required safety standards for unstaffed trains. In so many ways it would be crazy to have a service that is human supervised for part of the route and then the human leaves the train so that it can continue its journey in fully autonomous mode. But it would be the cheapest way for a transport minister to have his wishes met, and at the same time for the people of London to benefit from a long overdue line upgrade with new trains, new signalling and an extension to serve an area of London that is currently a railway desert!
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Aug 11, 2022 7:45:38 GMT
Two points:
1). NOWHERE in London is a 'railway desert', unless, like Siam in the musical, your World Map shows only London.
2). "...perhaps another railway investment project elsewhere in the UK... ". This one belongs on the Fantasy board.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Aug 11, 2022 13:51:03 GMT
1). NOWHERE in London is a 'railway desert', unless, like Siam in the musical, your World Map shows only London. There are indeed many areas within London which do not have an easily reached (walking) railway station. Examples would include, Yeading, Hayes Mx, Noel Park, Collier Row, parts of the Old Kent Road, Camberwell New Road, Kensington Gore / Royal Albert Hall, Mount Pleasant etc. Pimlico and New Addington are examples of former railway deserts - the latter now has light rail but it is still more railway than tramway. I agree with your Fantasy board comment, it is why I just made a reference to the issue without suggesting any locations or other type of further details. Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote partially removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Aug 11, 2022 15:47:02 GMT
At the risk of going off topic, having walked regularly between trains and the Albert Hall and Mount Pleasant areas, the suggestion that they aren't easily walked is definitely in the category of 1st world problems.
Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Aug 11, 2022 18:11:39 GMT
To be honest, I am fed up with somebody trying to promote a railway to Yeading (get a 140 bus to Hayes or Northolt) on what should in theory be a serious board There is NO case for ANY railway to go to Yeading at ANY time. There are so many things that money needs to be spent on, nationally. A railway to Yeading wouldn't be on the top 1000 What has this to do with new tube stock for London? Perhaps it's the heat, but my tolerance threshold has lowered. IF I see "Yeading" again, other than as total fantasy, I think it is time to say "Goodbye"
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286
|
Post by rincew1nd on Aug 11, 2022 19:44:26 GMT
Can we focus on the new stock, please?
|
|
|
Post by grumpycat on Aug 13, 2022 0:05:11 GMT
Any updates like pictures of the new cars etc yet?
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Sept 7, 2022 21:16:14 GMT
The latest Government funding for TfL runs to 2024 and includes funding for the new Piccadilly and DLR trains, so they are pretty certain to be delivered as planned. However, there is no mention of new trains for the Bakerloo, although the option for a further run of trains has to be exercised this year. What will become of the new Goole factory without it?
When a Bakerloo order is made, for delivery around 2030 now, will it need to go for tender again or can they stick with Siemens? Placed say 2027 for only 33-36 trains, it will probably not be economic for its own design. There was intended to be a further build of trains for the Piccadilly of 7 or 15 identical trains for resignalling to 33 - 36 tph in the mid-2030s, which surely must go to Siemens. Possible completion of the Lewisham extension in the 2030s with funding would require another batch of similar Bakerloo trains. Experience with the tender for extra trains for the Northern and Jubilee Lines suggests that small quantities are uneconomic.
I can understand a later new tender for Central line trains, which could be of a different design some ten years on from the Picc trains and won't need to inter-work with them. The design might also suit the Jubilee line, although the latter could fit larger trains with its enlarged tunnels and gentle curves. The timing of new trains for the W&C depends on plans for driverless trains there, although perhaps the new PM is not so obsessed! Has the new PM or Minister made any statements in the past revealing their views on this?
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Sept 8, 2022 6:58:22 GMT
The scale of the factory at Goole is such that Siemens must have plans beyond the current TfL order. Paraphrasing a well known saying "train factories are for life, not for Christmas". Similarly, CAF have plans for their Newport factory beyond the current class 19X orders.
TfL always retain the right to tender for fleets where the order is not committed. The NTfL tender included priced options for Bakerloo, Central and Waterloo and City, but these would have to be exercised by agreed dates. I hope they still have time! Allowing the options to lapse before committing to the additional Piccadilly trains could well lead to a repeat of the Jubilee/Northern additional trains procurement which got cancelled (a job where I suspect the full story was never told). All that said, TfL's financial position in 2018 when the contract was let was quite healthy compared with where it is now.
It is a mistake to link the Jubilee and Central line fleets. All the factors that led to the Piccadilly line articulated train design (wide gangways, all double doors, air conditioning) do, of course apply to both, but the elephant in the room is the platform edge doors on the Jubilee which constrain that line's trains to the current layout. The gentler curves on the Jublilee might possibly allow gangways on the current two-bogie-car configuration that wouldn't be feasible on other lines. But it is unlikely they could be significantly bigger in profile than the Central line. Jubilee is constrained by the 1930s tunnels between Finchley Road and Baker St.
Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Sept 8, 2022 8:16:10 GMT
Driverless trains on London Underground, the Network Business Case dated August 2020 and leaked by ASLEF, suggested that current PEDs would be replaced when new trains are introduced. Presumably this is on the same basis that S8 dimensions did not follow A stock dimensions, limiting services for another 40 years by restricting them to the dimensions of the previous 40 years. I wonder if the recent closure of the Northern City branch for Bank reconstruction would provide a precedent for closure of the tunnel JLE stations for station modification to match a new fleet of trains.
|
|
|
Post by johnlinford on Sept 8, 2022 8:54:30 GMT
Especially helped by Crossrail providing an alternative route via Canary Wharf to Stratford a line closure like that isn't outside the realms of consideration, perhaps with a Canning Town - Stratford shuttle while the work is done, and perhaps opening in stages as they did with the extension? I wonder if the new rolling stock would start on the rest of the line while they did the work - presumably stabling of trains and depot space is a constraint?
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Sept 8, 2022 9:09:55 GMT
North Greenwich and the O2 would be a major problem.
Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by johnlinford on Sept 8, 2022 9:27:25 GMT
By the time this takes place the Silvertown Tunnel will likely have been completed allowing for an high-intensity bus replacement service. And there's always the Cable Car...
Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
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 Sept 8, 2022 9:31:02 GMT
And there's always the Cable Car... More practically, river bus services can convey large numbers of people to Greenwich, Canary Wharf, London Bridge and Westminster. For services towards Stratford there is a pier a short walk from East India DLR that has been served by replacement boat services on occasions before the dangleway was built (last time I was in the area the signs were even still there)
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Sept 8, 2022 11:24:03 GMT
By the time this takes place the Silvertown Tunnel will likely have been completed allowing for an high-intensity bus replacement service. And there's always the Cable Car... A bus service to where. Have you ever seen the size of the crowd at North Greenwich for an O2 event? Not a hope in hell of finding enough vehicles. Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote partially removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|