|
|
Post by Christopher J on Aug 27, 2005 12:20:13 GMT
I went past Neasden Depot Depot on a Southbound Met service a few weeks ago and I noticed that there were ATO/ATP 'Code Begins' and 'Code Ends' markers (as found on the Central Line) scattered around the northern entrance to the depot.
Anybody know if there is ATP/ATO equipment actively installed in the Depot and if it is compatible with the 96s?
Thanks in advance.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196 
|
Post by Tom on Aug 27, 2005 12:27:57 GMT
Installed but never commissioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Aug 27, 2005 12:35:24 GMT
Installed but never commissioned. But may be soon. We had some chaps pop up yesterday afternoon looking at how our stuff will be changed once the Jub goes to ATO (in short our stuff will not change except that we will no longer control the Jubilee!) They were telling us of some areas where equipment will soon be installed on the northern section of the line (similar to what they have already under test on the extension). When all is said and done, the previous comments of "It's years away, and Baker Street will have the Jub for a while yet" seem to have been replaced of late with "The money is on the table, let's do it." |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2005 15:12:17 GMT
I'm curious as to how they will prevent the Met signalling from going bananas when ATO/ATP routes are set across the layout for Jub trains to go on and off Neasden Depot - how much work will be needed in MG and MM IMRs?
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Aug 27, 2005 19:55:38 GMT
Probably depot moves will be done in coded manual. As for signalling technology, if separation of the systems is desiredthe old jubilee levers will become slot levers or similar.
|
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Aug 30, 2005 10:33:33 GMT
I'm curious as to how they will prevent the Met signalling from going bananas when ATO/ATP routes are set across the layout for Jub trains to go on and off Neasden Depot - how much work will be needed in MG and MM IMRs? This, amongst other problems, are currently been looked into. The Jubilee is very very close to leaving Baker Street. It's just a question of how to split certain sites, and once split, how to operate them. The working of the depot is just one problem. Regardless of ATO, it is not yet known how we will "share" the routes available. Currently, we control the sharing, but when two control rooms both want trains in and out of depot, it will become a different story. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2005 15:48:49 GMT
I'm curious as to how they will prevent the Met signalling from going bananas when ATO/ATP routes are set across the layout for Jub trains to go on and off Neasden Depot - how much work will be needed in MG and MM IMRs? This, amongst other problems, are currently been looked into. The Jubilee is very very close to leaving Baker Street. It's just a question of how to split certain sites, and once split, how to operate them. BAET suggested converting the JG levers to slot levers, which when reversed by the MG levers would interface with the ATO kit. Would that work? The working of the depot is just one problem. Regardless of ATO, it is not yet known how we will "share" the routes available. Currently, we control the sharing, but when two control rooms both want trains in and out of depot, it will become a different story. How is such sharing implemented between places like Earls Court and Cobourg Street, for the Picc/Vic? |
|
|
|
Post by Harsig on Aug 30, 2005 16:42:01 GMT
The working of the depot is just one problem. Regardless of ATO, it is not yet known how we will "share" the routes available. Currently, we control the sharing, but when two control rooms both want trains in and out of depot, it will become a different story. How is such sharing implemented between places like Earls Court and Cobourg Street, for the Picc/Vic? That is not in the least bit comparable to the situation that will exist in the Wembley/Neasden Areas when control of the Jubilee Line is split from the Met. Moves between the Vic and Picc lines are very few and far between and in fact are no different from any other situation where a train passes from one control room to another. In any case as far as I am aware the whole of the Finsbury Park area is controlled by Cobourg St, even the Picc line section. The problem that will exist at Wembley is principally that of depot access. All depot reception roads at Neasden are bi-directional; that is they can be used by trains both entering and leaving the depot. Now the question arises: What happens if the Met Line wants to put a train to depot at the same time as the Jubilee Line wish to bring a train out of depot? Depending on circumstances it is entirely possible that both trains must use the same depot reception road e.g. if the Met train is in one of the northbound platforms and the Jubilee train is to go to Stanmore then there is no choice; both trains must run through the dip. At present when such a conflict arises, we in the SCC at Baker St make a judgment as to which train should have priority. We can do this in the best interests of the overall train service because we have control of both the Met and Jubilee Lines in the area and can see exactly what effect the decision will have on other services on both lines. When control of the Jubilee line is taken away from us we will now only be interested in the effect on the Met service, while the Jubilee control room will only be interested in the Jubilee service. Each control room will feel that they should have priority. This has nothing directly to do with the type of signalling installed and we have heard nothing about how they propose to solve this problem. In the long term perhaps the only solution will be to stop the Jubilee Line using Neasden depot on a regular basis  |
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,968
|
Post by towerman on Aug 30, 2005 19:10:59 GMT
Which will probably happen when SSL gets its new stock.
|
|
