|
|
Post by spsmiler on Sept 9, 2022 22:51:45 GMT
)  I have to say while I love the green text, I'm not a fan of the capitalised 'M' in 'Mins'. I mean technically it should be 'min' instead of 'mins' but I can't hold it against that particular style of screen, as all of them have done that ever since the 1981 trials at St. James's Park. I guess the TfL style guide hadn't been invented back then... In this case I find it acceptable - three reasons: 1) Because it separates the line name from the journey / next train information 2) Green is more pleasant on the eye than the red used in those days 3) LEDs were not so sophisticated in colour shade choice in those days (especially because this is the first time this image is seen on page 2 I've retained the image in my reply) |
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Sept 10, 2022 7:15:06 GMT
Is changing an existing serviceable display for a different serviceable display a good use of funds?
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,743 
|
Post by class411 on Sept 10, 2022 10:38:45 GMT
Is changing an existing serviceable display for a different serviceable display a good use of funds? [ ] Yes [X] No |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,758
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 10, 2022 10:56:24 GMT
Serviceability is not a binary - reliability, ease of maintenance, availability of replacement parts, etc. all need to be considered.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Sept 10, 2022 23:30:26 GMT
It depends. If you've got a piece of equipment with obsolete components, it might well be prudent to replace a few of them with a newer equivalent, for which you have an assured supply of spares for several years to come, in order to provide a supply of spares for the older model.
We did this a few years ago with some track circuits on the Bakerloo line - they used obsolete microprocessors in their receiver units, and one site was converted to a newer, but functionally equivalent type of track circuit to provide an improved spares holding of the older type.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Sept 10, 2022 23:39:29 GMT
Though, the Central is reliable for having accurate indicators (SSR Lines I'm looking at you!) This is the benefit of a centralised control and information system. I remember the Central line pre-resignalling and it was often a case when travelling home of "Take the first train and look at the platform sign at White City - that's usually right!" If a train had come 'through the road' with an incorrect description, it was essential to be corrected prior to reaching North Acton and being offered the wrong route. Whilst Marble Arch was nominally staffed throughout the day, it was generally at White City where corrections were made, as White City also controlled North Acton. |
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Sept 11, 2022 13:42:01 GMT
It depends. If you've got a piece of equipment with obsolete components, it might well be prudent to replace a few of them with a newer equivalent, for which you have an assured supply of spares for several years to come, in order to provide a supply of spares for the older model. There are significant obsolescence issues with a lot of DMI kit***, both the actual signs and the gubbins behind it. They are all COTS (commerical off the shelf) items or bespoke assemblies of COTS kit. Late 20C and early 21C COTS kit seldom has more than about a 1 year manufacture run, 2 years on the market, maybe 5 years on the shelf if slow moving, and 10 years working life is optimistic. Yet much kit in LU use, especially Central Line***, is over double that life. We don't go around simply replacing items for the sake of it, but a huge amount of it is simply life expired. Also, not only are like for like items impossible to source, evolving standards and requirements and legislation and political demands for more|different information make like for like almost impossible. There is an entire albeit small workshop at Acton (not in REW) devoted to testing rebuilding and refurbishing DMI kit extending life as far as practical, some of which is based on cannibalising some recovered kit already replaced by new kit exactly per Tom's comment. *** and the entire Central signals control system I might add |
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Sept 11, 2022 13:48:45 GMT
Is changing an existing serviceable display for a different serviceable display a good use of funds? [ ] Yes [X] No See my other post, Is a dedicated workshop and staff constantly applying sticking plaster to current displays well past their life and in a lot of cases non-compliant a good use of funds ? [ ] yes [x] no |
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Sept 11, 2022 16:52:58 GMT
See my other post, Is a dedicated workshop and staff constantly applying sticking plaster to current displays well past their life and in a lot of cases non-compliant a good use of funds ? [ ] yes [x] no In answer to both surveys, the answer depends on the cost of the alternative and benefit of the kit provided. |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,758
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 11, 2022 17:20:21 GMT
Also the cost of replacement vs the cost of repair, and the political/executive choice of how funding is divided between capital expenditure (replacement) and operational expenditure (maintenance). I suspect that if replacement was significantly cheaper than maintaining the new kit money would have been found to do just that by now.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,743
|
Post by class411 on Sept 11, 2022 18:07:02 GMT
See my other post, Is a dedicated workshop and staff constantly applying sticking plaster to current displays well past their life and in a lot of cases non-compliant a good use of funds ? [ ] yes [x] no Yes, my response was more directed at changes that were introduced for the sake of style, rather than those for more pragmatic reasons. |
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Sept 11, 2022 19:29:54 GMT
the political/executive choice of how funding is divided between capital expenditure (replacement) and operational expenditure (maintenance). Having been through precisely the business case(s) process(s) with the business in question several times, there is no hard demarcation that capex is replacement and opex is maintenance nor were the terms opex and capex used anywhere in those processes; it is possible to do quite large replacement projects under maintenance; indeed the hardware I have replaced in the past, running into mid 6 figures all told, has almost always been done under maintenance. I'm not sure I've had more than one project funding that came from anywhere else, and that one ran to only mid 5 figures, peanuts in the grand scale of things, and, was actually a maintenance replacement of something way past end of life and unmaintanable. Capex and opex in any business is what that individual business may decide at the time, may change from year to year, or project to project, or whatever is decided. There are some businesses that might stick rigidly to definitions, but this does not apply to every business; some may not do it at all and have just one pot for all. A further twist is that something may be done under one budget but the end of year accounts will put it under another budget depending on what the business wants to report about itself at the end of a year. Edit: typos |
|
