Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2006 1:16:24 GMT
Is it just me, or is anyone else struggling with the idea of a "flying junction" underground?  Well, we have one on the District (W/B ECT to RMD/EBY/OLY goes over E/b WIM - ECT) and we're full loading gauge! |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Jan 19, 2006 9:42:01 GMT
Don't you mean under?   ;D And not forgetting High Street Kensington to Earls Court, which goes under the main line from Gloucester Road. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2006 15:35:21 GMT
Don't you mean under? ;D And not forgetting High Street Kensington to Earls Court, which goes under the main line from Gloucester Road. Yes - surely a flying junction implies a bridge or a viaduct, if it involves digging it's burrowing - the generic term is (I think) "grade separation." |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2006 17:32:30 GMT
Don't you mean under? ;D Oops. Yes, under. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2006 18:50:10 GMT
I wonder why the grade-separated junctions at Earls Court are asymmetrical - I don't doubt that a diveunder taking the e/b main under the e/b local for Wimbleware services would be very welcome in increasing the amount of hair on the Line Controller's head...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2006 19:37:16 GMT
A simple set of points to allow trains from Wimbledon to access platform 1 would be a big help - at the moment if you have a train sat down in platform 2 then Wimbledon (the busiest) branch is shut down.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Jan 20, 2006 0:17:16 GMT
I did hear a rumour once that 'they' were going to restore the points at either end of Earls court to allow access to both platforms in each direction - dunno how true it is/was though?
BTW - nice to see the District taking over a Northern line thread!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2006 6:28:33 GMT
BTW. Which signal is it at Camden Town on the northbound is it that you can stop at it and be on a down gradient but you roll BACKWARDS if you release the brakes.? E11a Bank Branch Northbound  but as long as you remember to place TBC in full motoring before releasing brakes you're OK I'm not very technical (as you can probably imagine), but say you were driving a Northern Line train a few years ago, on a 72 to get to a motoring position you would have to go from Rheo 1 and Hold' through 'Off and Release' and 'Shunt' to get to a full motoring position - so in my mind there is a time (albeit for a second or two) where everything is released. Is this near enough correct? |
|
|
|
Post by jimini on Jan 21, 2006 14:33:35 GMT
Thanks Phil, that's the one I was after! Whilst I'm on a roll, anyone got the same sort of map for the junction @ Kennington? Many thanks all ~ Jim. |
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Jan 21, 2006 18:07:59 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2006 19:08:32 GMT
but as long as you remember to place TBC in full motoring before releasing brakes you're OK[/quote]
How's this possible? I thought you couldn't do this, unless you were in an A stock. The 72 and the 95 stocks only had / have the one handle (or similar device, in 95s case) don't they?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2006 20:40:21 GMT
but as long as you remember to place TBC in full motoring before releasing brakes you're OK How's this possible? I thought you couldn't do this, unless you were in an A stock. The 72 and the 95 stocks only had / have the one handle (or similar device, in 95s case) don't they? Whot yer do on a 95, is push the TBC forward *then* rotate the handle. Brakes come off and you get full power! |
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Jan 21, 2006 20:42:04 GMT
On a one-arm-bandit if you move the handle directly from 'rheo 1/holding' to a motoring position there is indeed a fraction of second where the brakes are off but the motors will have kicked in before you have a chance to roll back.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2006 21:12:56 GMT
but as long as you remember to place TBC in full motoring before releasing brakes you're OK How's this possible? I thought you couldn't do this, unless you were in an A stock. The 72 and the 95 stocks only had / have the one handle (or similar device, in 95s case) don't they? Whot yer do on a 95, is push the TBC forward *then* rotate the handle. Brakes come off and you get full power! Yes, i know, but what that's saying is that you have to put full power on BEFORE releasing the brakes - and, from what I gather, and from your response, this isn't possible, unless on an A stock.  OK - glad i cleared that up |
|
|
|
Post by abe on Dec 1, 2006 11:31:48 GMT
The really strange thing about Camden Town is that not only did the CCE&HR build two southbound platforms, to allow trains converging at the junction to wait appropriately, they also built two northbound platforms as well. I wonder why they thought that two northbound platforms would be desirable. The line to Hampstead was authorized in 1893; the Highgate branch was added to the plans in the early 1900s (can't remember the exact date) prior to construction. The Board of Trade, who had to approve the detailed designs, were against running junctions in deep-level tubes, and pressured the company to run Camden Town to Highgate as a separate shuttle service - hence both branches needed two platforms. They also demanded changes to the signalling at Camden to protect the junction. However, as the northbound and southbound are on different levels with no connection there were never any reversing facilities here. The plans to run as a shuttle were abandoned before the line opened; otherwise a crossover would have been needed on the Highgate branch. This answer now causes the following question: if they decided that the crossover wasn't needed because it wouldn't be a shuttle, why did they keep both northbound platforms. My suspicion is that the low-level station design had been completed (and was probably under construction) by this time, and the amount of replanning needed to move the nortbound platform south of the junction (or the junction north of the platform) would have been excessive. It was a lot easier to just leave out the crossover tunnel. Of course, others might have different views as to this, which I'd be keen to read. I have a particular interest in digging into this type of problem! |
|
;D
but as long as you remember to place TBC in full motoring before releasing brakes you're OK
OK - glad i cleared that up 
