|
|
Post by q8 on Apr 9, 2005 4:21:48 GMT
 What do other members consider would be a good way to rationalise some of the service patters at present existing on the network? I personally think the Uxbridge branch should either be > 1. Taken over by the Jubilee or handed back to the District and the Ealing Broadway branch given to the Piccadilly. This would have several advantages. The stock onthe branch would be of the same size E.G SSL or tube. The recovery of service on the Piccadilly after disruption would be enhanced. The Uxbridge branch is an "all stations" line anyway and to change it's line wouldn't make a lot of difference people could still travel "fast" to town by cross platform interchange at Harrow or Wembley. My second proposal would see the Met at last connected to Watford High Street and taking over the DC lines to Euston with the stock released from the Uxbridge line to run it. It would also increase "out of town" stabling points by using the old Croxley depot (if it still exists) Thirdly and slighly askew I think the DLR should have a slight extension from Bank to Moorgate and be connected to the former Northern City line to Finsbury Park and then reconnected to the abandoned Alexandra Park line through to East Finchley for connection to the Northern. That would see the already built stations on the branch come into use and give an alternative route into the city for passengers in the areas concerned. All this would entail very little new construction as the infrastrucure is already there. By the way does anybody know if the Bakerloo tunnels beyond Elephant sidings to Camberwell do already exist as I was told by several old Bakerloo drivers that they do and that was the reason for the gap at the bottom of the plug in the southbound siding. I.E to enable people to access them for inspection purposes. I can certainly state that a strong draught used to come through that gap in the 70's and that rats used go in there a lot. Also when down there in the quiet of the night you sometimes got the uncanny sound of a train approaching and it was not the sound of the northern line above as it was not running (not ballast trains either) Another proposal would be to connect the Central line at Ealing Broadway up to the local main lines at take over the Greenford shuttle thing. Hey presto ! an alternative route to West Ruislip or even another loop like the one at the east end if the connection at Greenford were re-opened One other thing to add to this post. Why the hell are they bothering to build lots of extensions to the East London line when re-connecting it to the main line networks at Liverpool Street and New Cross/Gate would enable virutally the same thing? You see maximun benefit, minimum cost. They don't think do they  
|
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Apr 9, 2005 14:42:48 GMT
I personally think the Uxbridge branch should either be :- 1. Taken over by the Jubilee or handed back to the District and the Ealing Broadway branch given to the Piccadilly. This would have several advantages. The stock onthe branch would be of the same size E.G SSL or tube. The recovery of service on the Piccadilly after disruption would be enhanced. The Uxbridge branch is an "all stations" line anyway and to change it's line wouldn't make a lot of difference people could still travel "fast" to town by cross platform interchange at Harrow or Wembley. Jubilee no. Under the current politics, the missing link between Wembley and Harrow would cause some friction. There's already enough friction betweent the Met and Jub when they share the depot entry/exit roads for Neasden. Besides, have you seen the way they control their line? I won't elaborate on a public forum. They upset easily. The District having it (still alongside the Met) would make sense. This could leave the Picc to worry about Heathrow, and may enhance the Acton-Rayners section. When the new stock finally arrives, compatibility wouldn't be so much of an issue. As for service recovery, all the Picc does now is turn them short at Rayners etc. Leaving the slightly more reliable/frequent Met to take the punters forward to Uxbridge. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2005 15:34:23 GMT
The District having it (still alongside the Met) would make sense. This could leave the Picc to worry about Heathrow, and may enhance the Acton-Rayners section. Would be much better, IMHO, to have the District running up to Uxbridge! Apart from a selfish point of view that I'd enjoy doing an Uxbridge to Upminster rounder which would take a full duty, the Piccadilly line always divert trains to the Heathrow branch. There's been many times when I've been travelling in to Acton Town and had a 20 minute wait at Sudbury Town station. |
|
|
|
Post by james on Apr 9, 2005 19:29:03 GMT
The District having it (still alongside the Met) would make sense. This could leave the Picc to worry about Heathrow, and may enhance the Acton-Rayners section. When the new stock finally arrives, compatibility wouldn't be so much of an issue. And it would provide a vaguely possible fun reroute if the District were totally messed up: Uxbridge to Upminster via the Met. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2005 19:30:37 GMT
Would be much better, IMHO, to have the District running up to Uxbridge! Apart from a selfish point of view that I'd enjoy doing an Uxbridge to Upminster rounder which would take a full duty, ACTw - UXB - UPM - grub - UPM - ACTw!! lol could catch on! |
|
|
|
Post by james on Apr 9, 2005 19:43:02 GMT
Thirdly and slighly askew I think the DLR should have a slight extension from Bank to Moorgate and be connected to the former Northern City line to Finsbury Park and then reconnected to the abandoned Alexandra Park line through to East Finchley for connection to the Northern. That would see the already built stations on the branch come into use and give an alternative route into the city for passengers in the areas concerned. I'd been thinking something slightly different. The Central Line's overcrowded between Liverpool St and Bank, so extend the DLR to Liverpool St. Then have it rise up onto the former North London Railway north of Broad St. Stop it at Shoreditch, Hoxton, Haggerston, and Dalston Junction (instead of ELLX). Then cut back the NLL to run Richmond to Dalston (Junction rather than Kingsland, which would be closed). The DLR could then take over the eastern part of the NLL from Dalston to Canning Town (yes, and it's already planned beyond Stratford). The other major extension I'd make to the DLR would be to extend the line on an elevated structure along the north bank (with stations at Cannon St, Blackfriars, and Temple), then take over the former Kingsway Tram Tunnel and terminate at Holborn, thus getting the DLR to the West End. I like it! Because they're trying to make a big deal out of it. Really, the ELL only needs two services. Firstly a Shoreditch (or even Liverpool Street) to New Cross (Eastern Section) - this could continue to an outer terminus, as there is spare capacity after the Greenwich Line diverges. Secondly, an extension of the Districts terminating at Tower Hill to West Croydon via Forest Hill. This would have the effect of giving direct service to the West End to the only London stations on the Central section which don't already have it. |
|
|
|
Post by setttt on Apr 9, 2005 19:57:11 GMT
Another proposal would be to connect the Central line at Ealing Broadway up to the local main lines at take over the Greenford shuttle thing. Hey presto ! an alternative route to West Ruislip or even another loop like the one at the east end if the connection at Greenford were re-opened This may seem like a good idea, but believe me, drivers will not enjoy the experience of having youngsters from Copley Close (s*** hole estate that the line runs through from Drayton Green to South Greenford) throwing objects, hitching lifts on the back of the trains & stealing 'T' hammers. I rarely use the branch without seeing at least one of those things happening. Not pleasant at all! I'd been thinking something slightly different. The Central Line's overcrowded between Liverpool St and Bank, so extend the DLR to Liverpool St. A rival proposal to crossrail, superlink, shows a direct service from Tottenham Court Road to Liv St then Canary Warf. That should relieve the pressure on the Central between TCR and LSt at the very least. Superlink website www.superlinklondon.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2005 20:17:04 GMT
I'd been thinking something slightly different. The Central Line's overcrowded between Liverpool St and Bank, so extend the DLR to Liverpool St. Then have it rise up onto the former North London Railway north of Broad St. Stop it at Shoreditch, Hoxton, Haggerston, and Dalston Junction (instead of ELLX). Then cut back the NLL to run Richmond to Dalston (Junction rather than Kingsland, which would be closed). The DLR could then take over the eastern part of the NLL from Dalston to Canning Town (yes, and it's already planned beyond Stratford). Something like this might actually be possible, but not via Liverpool Street - instead, if a route could be found onto the old Broad Street route, the ELLX and the DLR could share the four-track formation to Dalston Junction. But I doubt such a route could be built easily, and thus I think it's a non-starter. The other major extension I'd make to the DLR would be to extend the line on an elevated structure along the north bank (with stations at Cannon St, Blackfriars, and Temple), then take over the former Kingsway Tram Tunnel and terminate at Holborn, thus getting the DLR to the West End. That's not likely to happen. Because they're trying to make a big deal out of it. Really, the ELL only needs two services. Firstly a Shoreditch (or even Liverpool Street) to New Cross (Eastern Section) - this could continue to an outer terminus, as there is spare capacity after the Greenwich Line diverges. Secondly, an extension of the Districts terminating at Tower Hill to West Croydon via Forest Hill. This would have the effect of giving direct service to the West End to the only London stations on the Central section which don't already have it. AGH, NO! Connecting the Inner Circle to NR like that wouldf put reliability in the pits! Remember, the Broad Street route was four tracks to Dalston Junction, and the four-track formation is still available. Once the ELLX actually gets up there, if the people building it have any sense they'll either put four tracks in or use the appropriate pieces of the formation. This means that when the inner parts of the ELLX fill up, four-tracking can be reinstated to send faster services from Dalston to Whitechapel, leaving room for the inner section services. |
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Apr 11, 2005 8:30:33 GMT
What Meant by my original was to hand the ELL over to the main line companies and re-connect it to them at Shoreditch and the southern termini. They already use dual-voltage stock on Thameslink so the same principle could apply to the ELL with 4 car units. Also it would mean the end of those poor sods on the ELL shunting up and down that long siding all day. (Yes I know they also do Jubilee work)
Never understood why the "Drain" wasn't connected to the northern at waterloo and bank either. Would be a useful link in the event of a cock-up
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2005 1:44:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Apr 18, 2005 5:16:24 GMT
 I've been doing a bit of adding up, and an Uxbridge - Upminster run would thrash West Ruislip - Epping's record for the longest tube journey. It would be 60.85 km's (or 38.03 miles) and (on timings resourced from District WTT 131 and Picc WTT 39) take around 1hr 59 mins from end to end. Cool Ay!! Lubbly jubbly. There and back X 2....Tattar guvnor!! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Apr 18, 2005 5:20:46 GMT
I've been doing a bit of adding up, and an Uxbridge - Upminster run would thrash West Ruislip - Epping's record for the longest tube journey. It would be 60.85 km's (or 38.03 miles) and (on timings resourced from District WTT 131 and Picc WTT 39) take around 1hr 59 mins from end to end. Cool Ay!! Anyone know how many trains would be needed peak and off peak for that alone? |
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Apr 18, 2005 10:12:06 GMT
Anyone know how many trains would be needed peak and off peak for that alone? Easy - but of course you don't just add up the minutes of a full rounder and divide by the amount of trains leaving until you return. You need a certain amount of padding or it will never work. 8 Minute off-peak with around 8 mins each end - 32-34 trains. 4 minute service with again 8 mins each end - 62-64 trains. Flashy 24-27tph service - around 106 trains should give you the service you want, with enough recovery each end - you're going to need it if you try and shove that many down. |
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Apr 18, 2005 15:12:20 GMT
With regard to Mr Citysigs figures for the number of trains required for and Uxbridge-Upminster service (for which I thank him) I can't such service ever being set up as to much stock would be reqired for it. Unless of course they dump one of the other branches or even two. Ealing Broadway should definitely be given over to the "Dark Blue railway" and the Wimbledon through service could be scrapped too. The Wimbledon line could be done with a Wimbleware/Tower Hill service. Then maybe enough stock could be released for the UX/UP runs. Failing that Uxbridge/Tower Hill would probably be the thing.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Apr 18, 2005 18:39:18 GMT
The biggest problem for the District is other lines !!
Stop the Met at Baker Street, then they won't conflict with the Circle/H&C's. Stop the H&C's at Aldgate, and run the Wimblewares to Moorgate. Leave the Circle as it is and you've got less confliction going on. There would also be the added benefit of training the Edgware Road drivers on the High st - Wimbledon road giving more flexibility if things go awry ie, Circle can't get the route at South Ken - send it to Parsons Green. Easy!
As for the Uxbridge idea, I agree with putting the Picc's to Ealing Broadway - but it's the Picc that would get most benefit from it with a far simpler service.
With all the extension plans going on at the DLR, I think they've got enough on their plate at the moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Apr 18, 2005 19:37:57 GMT
Stopping the Met at Baker Street is no longer an option under PPP. It's all part of one of those service agreements.
Stopping the H&Cs at Aldgate isn't really an option either. You have now left the north side of Aldgate un-served. Ok there are alternatives, such as walking or travelling to Tower Hill and back, but why put our customers through that when we have a bit of railway to run a service over for them.
Wimbledon-Moorgate. Been done. There are 2 sides to this. You would have constant crew changes at Edgware Road - which gives the pan-handle problems. On the other hand, to keep flexibilty particularly during shutdowns, both District and H&C crews would need to know most of each other's lines.
I don't mean to bring down anyone's ideas. We may hit on a really good one. Trouble is I've heard most of the above tossed around before, and at the end of the day there are plenty of reasons why we do things the way we do now.
As for the Picc, I don't think it should even have Ealing. I think they should stick to the Heathrow loop and leave the rest to sub-surface lines!
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Apr 19, 2005 1:58:09 GMT
As for the Picc, I don't think it should even have Ealing. I think they should stick to the Heathrow loop and leave the rest to sub-surface lines! At least we all agree on something !!  My thoughts were based purely from the driving seat of a D stock and what always seems to be in front slowing us down! |
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Apr 19, 2005 8:45:20 GMT
My thoughts were based purely from the driving seat of a D stock and what always seems to be in front slowing us down! There are only 7 of them on the same side as you, so quite often it's another District that's slowing you down. (Gets ready to be banned from the forum ;D) |
|
|
|
Post by james on Apr 19, 2005 10:38:12 GMT
Something like this might actually be possible, but not via Liverpool Street - instead, if a route could be found onto the old Broad Street route, the ELLX and the DLR could share the four-track formation to Dalston Junction. I meant instead of ELLX - I don't see any point in the northern part of that project. I don't see it as being any different to how DLR got to Bank in the first place (the LTS is on a viaduct too). I know it's unlikely, but suspend disbelief for a moment and you'll see it would be useful. Which particular junction(s) do you percieve as being bad for reliability? Just because trackways are there doesn't mean they have to be used. Railfans would love the return of New York's Sea Beach Super-Express, and the tracks themselves are largely in place in that case, but it doesn't make that a sensible idea. They probably would use half the formation. They definitely wouldn't put four tracks in instead of two. Hopefully, however, this gets cancelled when we get told we haven't got the Olympics. This is a classic case of joining up bits of track on the cheap, and then wondering why nobody rides it. I like your optimism, but why would anyone going from Shoreditch to the City or the West End want to go via Whitechapel and a load of stairs? Whitechapel is a two-track station. Have you ever seen what happens on the Brighton Main Line approaching London Bridge? In the eventuality of ELLX actually happening, the second pair of tracks absolutely shouldn't go to Whitechapel. |
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Apr 19, 2005 11:04:21 GMT
;D ;D
Both District and H&C crews would need to know most of each other's lines
AND SHOULD TOO!!! Thank you Mr Citysig
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2005 12:16:57 GMT
Which particular junction(s) do you percieve as being bad for reliability? All of them. Especially the Aldgate triangle. I like your optimism, but why would anyone going from Shoreditch to the City or the West End want to go via Whitechapel and a load of stairs? A chestnut can be seen getting smashed every once in a while about rebuilding Whitechapel at track level to increase capacity, in conjunction with new reversing capabilities at West Ham and Plaistow. I would not be surprised if lifts were installed to the District and ELL platforms. Whitechapel is a two-track station. Have you ever seen what happens on the Brighton Main Line approaching London Bridge? In the eventuality of ELLX actually happening, the second pair of tracks absolutely shouldn't go to Whitechapel. That's not the point of having four tracks. Considering that trains will be coming up from the south from destinations as far afield as Croydon and Crystal Palace, and also considering that the restoration of the Broad Street route is likely to cause a massive traffic increase, having the foresight to allow extra infrastructure to be installed is critical. As long as the ELLX stays out of Zone 1, it will become a major orbital route for people in the Southern Region who want access to Docklands, the City and maybe even the ECML and/or CTRL. Providing extra tracks to allow for increased services west or east along the NLL can then take place. |
|
|
|
Post by sunny on Apr 19, 2005 12:38:43 GMT
There are only 7 of them on the same side as you, so quite often it's another District that's slowing you down. (Gets ready to be banned from the forum ;D) As district drivers we do know what train we are following through the city and more often than not its a circle holding us up (only 7 or not ) |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Apr 19, 2005 13:08:10 GMT
As district drivers we do know what train we are following through the city and more often than not its a circle holding us up (only 7 or not ) Absolutely Sunny !! Don't forget it's not just the Circles but the H&C's at Aldgate east, Whitechapel, Plaistow and Barking as well. Also one line's service will always affect another's in some way or other. That was my point. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Team on Apr 19, 2005 15:05:00 GMT
There are only 7 of them on the same side as you, so quite often it's another District that's slowing you down. (Gets ready to be banned from the forum ;D) Yeah, that's fine. BUT why, oh why are ALL SEVEN in front of me?? (Get banned Citysig? I don't think so! This forum is for robust discussion, mutual ribbing and ritual humiliation as appropriate! And I'm not just referring to LU staff BTW!) |
|
|
|
Post by piccadillypilot on Apr 19, 2005 15:08:03 GMT
why are ALL SEVEN in front of me?? Because you deserve it? This forum is for robust discussion, mutual ribbing and ritual humiliation as appropriate! Noted. |
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Apr 19, 2005 18:49:33 GMT
As district drivers we do know what train we are following through the city and more often than not its a circle holding us up (only 7 or not ) The Circle you follow has to be following something else does it not. The only time all 7 are on one half of the Circle is when the well know District Control Room has kept them there. Absolutely Sunny !! Don't forget it's not just the Circles but the H&C's at Aldgate east, Whitechapel, Plaistow and Barking as well. Also one line's service will always affect another's in some way or other. That was my point. So now it's the H&Cs in your way! Yeah, that's fine. BUT why, oh why are ALL SEVEN in front of me?? I refer you to the answer I gave a couple of lines ago. So basically, it would appear that any line-sharing should be abolished. I would be in full agreement despite what I have said already, because at the end of the day who is it that gets caught in the crossfire? Us in service control that's who. The bloke on the Circle we had to put infront of you doesn't hear you on the phone to us moaning about it. If we had put him behind you, guess who would have phoned and moaned about that? It happens in the Aldgate area, it happens at Baker Street and during certain parts of the day it happens at Wembley Park - between same line operators there as well! I know some (or I hope most) of the above is some of that ribbing, but it would be a perfect opportunity to remind those staff on here - that Baker Street is always open for visiting and demonstration of the "big picture." You cannot say that about certain other rooms. But then we have nothing to hide ;D |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Apr 20, 2005 0:54:23 GMT
Now you get me !!
Line sharing dosen't work.
The other night it took me 10 mins to get from Tower Hill to Whitechapel. The timetable say's 4 mins. The delay was basically a Westbound H&C crossing infront at Aldgate East then another at Whitechapel. I am not saying it's service control, the signaller or anyone else's fault, just that things would run a whole lot smoother with one line and all the trains going the same way rather than criss crossing infront of each other all the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Apr 20, 2005 8:18:26 GMT
The other night it took me 10 mins to get from Tower Hill to Whitechapel. The timetable say's 4 mins. The delay was basically a Westbound H&C crossing infront at Aldgate East then another at Whitechapel. As I work almost permanant late turns I would be interested to know which evening and approximate time to see if I recall anything happening. Also, did you notice anything going the other way. If, say, a westbound H&C was sat down with the route from Aldgate East, the computer will use the routes which are available to it - in this case the eastbound H&C road. The decision may have been made, and then the westbound moved off, but it would still have meant the next eastbound having to "use" the route already set. Line sharing can and does work. Despite the moaning you may hear from H&C, Circle and Met drivers - normally moaning about each other, on the whole the top half of the Circle works relatively well. The lower half isn't that bad really let's be honest. Aldgate is a bit of a problem but then so is the other end. After all, the District only shares that half with one other service, whereas on the top half it is shared by 3. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Apr 20, 2005 18:35:05 GMT
As I work almost permanant late turns I would be interested to know which evening and approximate time to see if I recall anything happening. Also, did you notice anything going the other way. If, say, a westbound H&C was sat down with the route from Aldgate East, the computer will use the routes which are available to it - in this case the eastbound H&C road. The decision may have been made, and then the westbound moved off, but it would still have meant the next eastbound having to "use" the route already set. Line sharing can and does work. Despite the moaning you may hear from H&C, Circle and Met drivers - normally moaning about each other, on the whole the top half of the Circle works relatively well. The lower half isn't that bad really let's be honest. Aldgate is a bit of a problem but then so is the other end. After all, the District only shares that half with one other service, whereas on the top half it is shared by 3. Last Thursday at about 2215 I think (bad memory!!). My memory is slowly returning now. I do seem to remember an Eastbound H&C now you mention it. Your explanation of how the Aldgate area works certainly helps me to understand why it can be frustrating sometimes. I take your coments on board and would certainly agree that the Aldgate area is the worst of the lot. |
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Apr 21, 2005 8:09:17 GMT
Not guilty on that day ;D The way our shifts pan out, the night shift is generally in by about 2145.
Yes, hopefully you are now another driver who has a small insight into how it works, and will join the small handful who have learnt how hard we do try to keep things moving there. It's in our interest. Your controller wastes no time in trying to book items there, so sometimes its actually better to delay the H&C (although we hate doing that as well) just so we can deal with someone we know round the corner.
|
|
