Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2008 19:18:58 GMT
I read something in the press or saw on TV that British Rail surburban trains are running a slower service than 20 years ago. I also remember when they were privatised, that the inter-city lines immediately increased their timings. For instance, London - Birmingham went from 90 mins to 100 mins as a default. Has LU done anything similar ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2008 20:19:32 GMT
The privatised Railways slackened the timings because it is easier to achieve a target if it is easier (a bit like the GCSEs!).
I expect that LU has remained at a steady speed over the years (during the peak at least) as rolling stock has improved in speed. Where/when ATO is used, speeds are increased as the trains' performance can be used to its fullest extent. This is especially important now as PPP targets depend on JTC (Journey Time Capability) which demands that journeys should be quicker.
|
|
|
Post by upfast on Aug 19, 2008 20:23:29 GMT
Run time has been extended by a significant amount on a number of lines.
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Aug 19, 2008 20:48:08 GMT
Hasn't the Central Line journey time lengthened since the 92TS had their motor troubles?
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on Aug 19, 2008 20:48:58 GMT
Run time has been extended by a significant amount on a number of lines. It's increased by about 10% since the 1960s. This is mainly due to OPO, increased traffic and reductions in signalling capability.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Aug 19, 2008 21:25:41 GMT
Hasn't the Central Line journey time lengthened since the 92TS had their motor troubles? Central line running times were reduced considerably in 2002, after the whole line had gone ATO. Subsequently, they were increased slightly when the top speed of the 92 stock was changed from 100 km/h to 85 km/h, due to Chancery Lane. However, they are still around 10% less tnan pre ATO. The Central is the only line where running time have reduced in recent years. Hopefully, ATO will enable other lines to follow suit. Even so, the Central could still do Epping - West Ruislip in about 3 minutes less, as there is recovery time bullt in along the route at certain locations.
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Aug 19, 2008 23:44:40 GMT
Hasn't the Central Line journey time lengthened since the 92TS had their motor troubles? Central line running times were reduced considerably in 2002, after the whole line had gone ATO. Subsequently, they were increased slightly when the top speed of the 92 stock was changed from 100 km/h to 85 km/h, due to Chancery Lane. However, they are still around 10% less tnan pre ATO. The Central is the only line where running time have reduced in recent years. Hopefully, ATO will enable other lines to follow suit. Even so, the Central could still do Epping - West Ruislip in about 3 minutes less, as there is recovery time bullt in along the route at certain locations. So when is the 92TS speed going to be uprated again? If not, why not, and what are Metronet doing about it? If motors are liable to fall off isn't that a danger at any speed?
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,775
|
Post by Chris M on Aug 20, 2008 0:07:02 GMT
I'm guessing here, but I presume the reasoning is that if it is vibration that causes the motors to fall off then the vibrations will be less significant at slower speeds. Also, if a motor does fall off, the result will be less serious at slower speeds.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Aug 20, 2008 8:43:03 GMT
After Chancery Lane, the 92 stock were fitted with brackets which can "catch" the motors if they fall off. I can't see them increasing the speed until either:
A) They change the motors b) They change the trains
This has been discussed on a thread in the Central line section.
|
|