|
|
Post by ruislip on Aug 26, 2008 21:02:35 GMT
Prior to the Met adopting them, did any other lines use them on a regular basis?
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Aug 26, 2008 23:07:58 GMT
The CO/CP farewell tour?.....
|
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on Aug 27, 2008 0:43:30 GMT
I was thinking about lines that used the set number on regular timetabled services. I did see some pics, however, from the COP farewell tour with a train having a 45x set number.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Aug 27, 2008 1:06:41 GMT
Howabout after 1958?
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Aug 27, 2008 12:50:30 GMT
I'm also sure that the Picc started using them fairly early on, mid-70s? The factor for the introduction of 4xx was almost certainly automatic junction working and programme machines.
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Aug 27, 2008 14:24:05 GMT
I thought they brought in the 4xx series to avoid confusion with District line trains when using the radios.
Don't know of any line that used them for regular timetabled services before the Met adopted them.
|
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Aug 27, 2008 16:15:32 GMT
They were introduced on the Met in readiness for the City area to move onto the signalling computers at Baker Street - mainly to avoid confusion between Met and District train numbers within the Aldgate area.
Their introduction was made in the timetable that saw the start of "stepping-back" at Aldgate during the peaks, which began a couple of years prior to the move to Baker Street. Cannot for the life of me think of dates at present, but possibly 1996?
Apart from "special services" or stock moves, I don't think any other line used the numbering for any great deal of time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Harsig on Aug 27, 2008 16:43:32 GMT
They were introduced on the Met in readiness for the City area to move onto the signalling computers at Baker Street - mainly to avoid confusion between Met and District train numbers within the Aldgate area. Their introduction was made in the timetable that saw the start of "stepping-back" at Aldgate during the peaks, which began a couple of years prior to the move to Baker Street. Cannot for the life of me think of dates at present, but possibly 1996? Apart from "special services" or stock moves, I don't think any other line used the numbering for any great deal of time. That is certainly the reason for the current use of 4xx numbers (and the inability of programme machines to deal with train numbers higher than 374 meant it had to be the Met that changed rather than the District or H&C/Circle Lines. The change was I think a bit later than Citysig suggests either 1998 or 1999. But it is worth noting, as I think MRFS42 alluded to earlier, the Met had previous form for using 4xx numbers in regular service. My one and only Met No 2 section timetable from 1964 has a number of 4xx trains which from the context would normally (but not in this particular timetable) be the uncoupled portions of other trains where this was practiced between the peaks. |
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Aug 27, 2008 17:47:02 GMT
The change was I think a bit later than Citysig suggests either 1998 or 1999. ...the uncoupled portions of other trains where this was practiced between the peaks. As for the first sentence, I was at Baker Street January 1998, and I am sure they had already been in use a while (I don't recall using "our" sheets with anything less than a 3-digit Met number). I'm on with a certain person on Friday who is bound to know the answer if we don't arrive at it before  As for the second sentence, this fits with the "stock move" theory. I remember test-runs and the like even on the H&C were numbered in the 4xx series (as opposed to the now 7xx series.) |
|
|
|
Post by Harsig on Aug 27, 2008 18:13:38 GMT
The change was I think a bit later than Citysig suggests either 1998 or 1999. As for the first sentence, I was at Baker Street January 1998, and I am sure they had already been in use a while (I don't recall using "our" sheets with anything less than a 3-digit Met number). I'm on with a certain person on Friday who is bound to know the answer if we don't arrive at it before Funny I was working the other way around, i.e. I started as a signalman in late 1996 and remember using the old numbers for some time. After a bit of digging I've located when the change occurred. It was WTT307 introduced 28th September 1997. |
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Aug 27, 2008 19:19:50 GMT
Funny you should say that, because I was working it out based on the assumption that you had worked with the old numbers as a signalman (and can recall you joined in 1996) and I worked with the new numbers in 1998 so it had to be in between - which of course it is ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2008 21:33:19 GMT
I remember the Aldgate supervisors coming to the Elephant to learn how stepping back works when I was a driver on the Bakerloo in 1997.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Aug 28, 2008 3:34:08 GMT
I remember the Aldgate supervisors coming to the Elephant to learn how stepping back works when I was a driver on the Bakerloo in 1997. Why didn't they look back to the past? There are plenty of 'inverted delta' WTT examples post 1946? (and 1988 too). |
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Aug 28, 2008 9:08:40 GMT
The past? When training for what would have been the future? And sit down and actually study timetables  Far better to see the real thing in action - even though I doubt the Bakerloo prepared them fully enough for the sorts of "tangled running" the Met unleashed upon them from day one. Train 1 arriving behind train 4 but before train 2. Step-back drivers booking-on nowhere near the stepping back location and relying on the first few trains to get them there... |
|
