Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2005 15:41:50 GMT
What's the line speed over this crossover when reversing off the platform? I bashed this rare bit of track on Sunday and was thrown around quite a bit as we traversed it - it felt like the driver was in series on the CTBC.
Also, I noted that drivers were issued instructions to pull right up to PB3 - is the berth track circuit short enough that not doing so would backlock the track circuit over the crossover and hold PB20 on?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2005 16:12:40 GMT
not knowning the site 100% that sounds about right regarding the signalling
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2005 9:03:01 GMT
What's the line speed over this crossover when reversing off the platform? I bashed this rare bit of track on Sunday and was thrown around quite a bit as we traversed it - it felt like the driver was in series on the CTBC. The driving technique diagrams I have do not have the line speed for the crossover marked. However I will find out. Also, I noted that drivers were issued instructions to pull right up to PB3 - is the berth track circuit short enough that not doing so would backlock the track circuit over the crossover and hold PB20 on? Yeah thats because it is very tight, leaving only about 200meters between the points and PB3 The question has to be asked how you managed to go over the crossover ?
|
|
|
Post by ikar on Oct 29, 2005 17:04:45 GMT
I don't know but I think that it is 20 mph
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 29, 2005 17:13:19 GMT
ikar
Please leave expert answers to the experts.
On this forum it is quite useless making a reply which begins 'I don't know but I think...'
If you don't know for sure DON'T POST
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2005 20:53:34 GMT
Also, I noted that drivers were issued instructions to pull right up to PB3 - is the berth track circuit short enough that not doing so would backlock the track circuit over the crossover and hold PB20 on? Yeah thats because it is very tight, leaving only about 200meters between the points and PB3 The question has to be asked how you managed to go over the crossover ? The Picc was reversing at HPC due to the closure in the Barons Court area for track replacement. Is Down Street siding ever used for actual disruption reversal anymore? It seems to me that it would have been only slightly less painful to turf everyone off at Green Park and reverse part of the service via the siding, with the remainder reversing via HPC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2005 23:15:09 GMT
Is Down Street siding ever used for actual disruption reversal anymore? It seems to me that it would have been only slightly less painful to turf everyone off at Green Park and reverse part of the service via the siding, with the remainder reversing via HPC. Yes, quite often. There was a P.U.T at KX a while ago and the service was reversed at HPC and AGR. There is also a booked train that terminates at Green Park in the evening, and reverses at HPC to go back east. Please leave expert answers to the experts. Too true. Whats the point guessing ? I have a fairly good idea what the line speed for the move is, however I will check it before I post, as there is no point posting incorrect facts. If nothing else, it is annoying.
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 30, 2005 6:05:27 GMT
This is curious. I my time there were standing instructions on ALL lines working supplements to rule book that passage through all crossovers and turnouts was never to exceed 15 MPH unless there were a lower limit on place. Like all rules it was sometimes broken but rarely.
Therefore I should think that Hyde Park comes under that rule unless things have changed in the meantime.
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Oct 30, 2005 11:40:12 GMT
I read on another group that from the new year they are planning to reinstate some crossovers on the Picc to improve flexibility. Does someone (MA or other?) have any more details?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2005 17:57:31 GMT
I read on another group that from the new year they are planning to reinstate some crossovers on the Picc to improve flexibility. Does someone (MA or other?) have any more details? Since the Lodnon Bombings on 7/7 & 21/7, this talk has been going around in relation to most lines, the picc being one of them. Personally I think the picc has enough crossovers in central london anyway. Thats about it as it goes; no more has really been said on the subject.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2005 18:12:49 GMT
Since the Lodnon Bombings on 7/7 & 21/7, this talk has been going around in relation to most lines, the picc being one of them. Personally I think the picc has enough crossovers in central london anyway. Thats about it as it goes; no more has really been said on the subject. The Picc most certainly does not have enough crossovers in central London, as the shutdown between HPC and Arnos Grove aptly demonstrated. The restoration of the Covent Garden crossover makes sense in so many ways - I'll never understand why it was taken out in the first place...
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Oct 30, 2005 18:50:25 GMT
Of course it now costs much more to reinstate than it would have done (presumably) to keep it intact...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2005 1:19:17 GMT
Of course it now costs much more to reinstate than it would have done (presumably) to keep it intact... So very true unfortunately. As Tom has mentioned in another thread, the cost and hassle involved in reinstating such a crossover is enormous. All over LUL there are junctions and crossovers that function safely and efficiently on a daily basis, but would not be allowed to be installed or operated under rules applicable now. It's only because they are 'already there' that they are able to operate. Like the bay platform at Liverpool Street (Met/Circle/H&C). It was briefly decommissioned to save money, and could not be recomissioned later because the 'rules' had been changed in the mean time.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,309
|
Post by Colin on Oct 31, 2005 1:27:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rikio on Oct 31, 2005 10:54:45 GMT
Is there not a crossover between KX and Russel Square?
It is therefore "unfortunate" as it were that this is where the incidient occured as it effectivly means that crossover is out of action, and you have to move to the next ones. If a problem causes a shut down after Russel Square, Trains could be reversed at KX and HPC.
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Oct 31, 2005 12:05:29 GMT
There's one just south of KXSP.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2005 12:12:40 GMT
And it replaced the crossover at York Road, presumably due to the presence of the trailing chord junction with the Northern Line.
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Oct 31, 2005 12:20:40 GMT
Indeed - '64 I think it was that York Rd crossover closed?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2005 18:27:15 GMT
The Picc most certainly does not have enough crossovers in central London, as the shutdown between HPC and Arnos Grove aptly demonstrated. That was unfortuneate that the crosover at KX could not be used.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2005 19:46:32 GMT
The Picc most certainly does not have enough crossovers in central London, as the shutdown between HPC and Arnos Grove aptly demonstrated. That was unfortuneate that the crosover at KX could not be used. Thinking about it again, if the events have taken place just that bit closer to Russell Square, surely it might, with strenuous paperwork entry, have been possible to do the s/b mainline shunt at KX. Of course, they did not, and the crossover was subsequently out of use.
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Nov 2, 2005 14:29:43 GMT
But wouldn't that have required the juice to be on between KX and RS? I think it's possible to isolate station-to-station sections of track, but I don't know about any smaller distances than that. Then remember what the authorities are like. I'd doubt they'd let trains move near the obstruction while was being investigated.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2005 15:05:00 GMT
But wouldn't that have required the juice to be on between KX and RS? I think it's possible to isolate station-to-station sections of track, but I don't know about any smaller distances than that. Then remember what the authorities are like. I'd doubt they'd let trains move near the obstruction while was being investigated. It depends on where the section switches are. If there were a conveniently located set of section switches (keeping in mind the Northern Line chord, which may necessitate a set of switches) and the tragedy had occurred elsewhere, it may have very well been possible to use the s/b line for a main line shunt.
|
|
|
Post by Harsig on Nov 2, 2005 20:57:52 GMT
In fact for such a big and prolonged shut down there would be no problem in cutting gaps in the conductor rails where they were needed even if they didn't previously exist. It is quite common for this to be done for weekend possessions. In fact in the case of the Kings Cross explosion I very much doubt that any consideration would have been given to using the crossover there unless the train involved had been west of Russel Square at the very least.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2005 21:16:21 GMT
In fact for such a big and prolonged shut down there would be no problem in cutting gaps in the conductor rails where they were needed even if they didn't previously exist. It is quite common for this to be done for weekend possessions. In fact in the case of the Kings Cross explosion I very much doubt that any consideration would have been given to using the crossover there unless the train involved had been west of Russel Square at the very least. Which is precisely what I stated. I've not heard of deliberate gaps being made in conductor rails before, though - is this usually done often?
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by Tom on Nov 2, 2005 22:23:26 GMT
Oh yes - it's quite a regular occurrance for 15m gaps to be created when there aren't any conveniently located section switches.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,309
|
Post by Colin on Nov 2, 2005 22:27:46 GMT
There was a perfectly simple explanation for the service being suspended in the way it was following 7/7 -
Trains in 'tube' tunnels produce a flow of air in front. This would have disturbed evidence and the asbestos that was found to be present.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,358
|
Post by Chris M on Nov 2, 2005 23:11:40 GMT
Oh yes - it's quite a regular occurrance for 15m gaps to be created when there aren't any conveniently located section switches. Does this not increase the chances of a train becomming gapped?
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,309
|
Post by Colin on Nov 2, 2005 23:31:28 GMT
It's done for engineering works - there should not be a train there! If one did get that far, getting gapped would be a good thing as it would provide additional protection to those working on the track.
|
|