|
|
Post by londonstuff on Nov 12, 2008 21:26:19 GMT
Going eastbound coming into Earl's court, trains coming from Olympia/West Ken can crossover onto the inside eastbound platform, which come from the Wimbledon branch, but as it's a one-way crossover, Wimbledon ones can't go onto the outside one.
Bearing in mind that a lot of trains from Wimbledon go to Edgware Road (and so need to crossover to the outside track after Earl's Court), wouldn't it be a good idea to have a scissors crossover before Earl's Court, so that if the outside platform (is it platform 1 or 4?) was free, it could go to the 'right' side sooner rather than later.
Is there a technical reason this couldn't be done, or wouldn't it be worth it, either from an improvement or cost point of view?
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Nov 12, 2008 21:37:25 GMT
I thought that there was indeed such a #-over in the past and it was taken out?
|
|
|
|
Post by happybunny on Nov 12, 2008 21:40:43 GMT
Yeah I heard so too Oracle, similarly there was also one, I understand on the Westbound, just east of the platforms ! Why these things were taken out who knows.... but they would be very useful now!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2008 21:43:20 GMT
There are persistent rumours that the crossover may be reinstated, but nothing ever happens!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2008 22:37:03 GMT
there did used to be a crossover at both ends of earls court the only exsistant reminder of this is when you come down the dip from triangle there is a repeater up by the last road where the fix red light is (think it is REC36A) well it still got the route indicator on it to bear right but the wiring of it has been removed
if the crossovers ever go back do not expect to see before the resignalling happens
|
|
|
|
Post by ribaric on Nov 12, 2008 22:44:18 GMT
An old DR Area manager (John Howard) told me the crossover to which you refer was removed as much to enable the programme machines (which were unable to be installed without some track simplification) and it was therefore a case of the technology leading the operation - as opposed to the other way round. He also said there was a financial case made for the removal but he didn't believe it.
|
|
Harsig
Posts: 983
Member is Online
|
Post by Harsig on Nov 13, 2008 9:54:55 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2008 23:35:01 GMT
Well, the trains have to cross either before or after the station, so I don't see how it would make much difference. Surely only a grade-separated junction (which I presume is prohibitively expensive if not altogether impracticable) would achieve a significant increase in capacity.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,763
|
Post by Chris M on Nov 15, 2008 0:05:31 GMT
The problem at present is that trains from Wimbledon have to wait outside the station if there is a train in platform 2, even if platform 1 is empty. If the train in platform 2 is broken/held for any reason (PEA, signal failure, etc) then trains from Wimbledon are stuck until the train is moved. If there was a crossover west of the station, trains could run into either platform and this wouldn't be a problem.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Nov 15, 2008 1:11:50 GMT
I'm not familiar withe Earl's, could someone post a diagram of the current layout?
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Nov 15, 2008 2:05:14 GMT
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Nov 15, 2008 10:41:23 GMT
What a terrible layout! Harrow-on-the-Hill is much better designed! Earl's really does need some X-overs to provide flexibility-because frankly there is none currently!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2008 11:18:21 GMT
Interesting idea, but I can only wonder with horror what any further complications to the Earls Court junction (however well-intentioned and aimed at relieving the problems there) would have on an already hideous part of the system.
As it is, this junction is far too complex already, imo, and seems responsible for an inordinate number of delays on the District. Travelling into Earls Court from the western arm of the line can take a ridiculously long time when all the trains are backed up. I've known the hold ups to begin at least as far back as Hammersmith - with the stretch from West Kensington to Earls Court being a truly frustrating experience (it feels like the train is stopping at every sleeper).
My own idea would actually be to dig a new deep-level tunnel for the district to bypass Earls Court from West Kensington - South Kensington non stop. People for Earls Court can easily change to the Piccadilly at Barons Court or South Ken.
Really - this ghastly station is truly dreadful and it's effect on the whole District line is utterly atrocious, imo.
|
|
slugabed
Zu lang am schnuller.
Posts: 1,480
|
Post by slugabed on Nov 15, 2008 11:33:15 GMT
My own idea would actually be to dig a new deep-level tunnel for the district to bypass Earls Court from West Kensington - South Kensington non stop. People for Earls Court can easily change to the Piccadilly at Barons Court or South Ken.. Deep-level District!! At least the platforms at South Ken have already been built! I've never seen any maps for this scheme (the old one)....where would it have gone underground? Was it an early attempt to solve just this very problem at Earl's Court? |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,763
|
Post by Chris M on Nov 15, 2008 11:36:00 GMT
Rather than bypass Earl's Court, if building something like this, I'd build another set of platforms for the eastbound (probably in a layout similar to Loughton), and make the current DR platforms westbound only.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2008 11:37:09 GMT
Deep-level District!! At least the platforms at South Ken have already been built! I've never seen any maps for this scheme (the old one)....where would it have gone underground? Was it an early attempt to solve just this very problem at Earl's Court? Sorry - it's not a real proposal, so far as I know. Just somemthing I frequently find myself daydreaming wistfully about as I'm on a train stopping every couple of yards between West Ken - Earls court!  Actually, I think the extra platforms you mention may have been built to serve an express Picadilly Line service. In which case, they'd be too small for District trains. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2008 11:41:54 GMT
Rather than bypass Earl's Court, if building something like this, I'd build another set of platforms for the eastbound (probably in a layout similar to Loughton), and make the current DR platforms westbound only. I certainly agree that something needs to be done about this dreadful junction. As things stand it simply does not work in any meaningful sense and is a permanent shambles that causes a daft amount of disruption to the line. |
|
|
|
Post by upfast on Nov 15, 2008 11:48:16 GMT
How about just moving the Train Operations complex?
|
|
|
|
Post by happybunny on Nov 15, 2008 13:39:31 GMT
More meal reliefs, pick ups at Acton and Barking might ease things up a bit through the ECT area
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2008 14:18:58 GMT
Deep-level District!! At least the platforms at South Ken have already been built! I've never seen any maps for this scheme (the old one)....where would it have gone underground? Was it an early attempt to solve just this very problem at Earl's Court? Sorry - it's not a real proposal, so far as I know. Just somemthing I frequently find myself daydreaming wistfully about as I'm on a train stopping every couple of yards between West Ken - Earls court! Actually, I think the extra platforms you mention may have been built to serve an express Piccadilly Line service. In which case, they'd be too small for District trains. The Metropolitan District Railway did obtain powers for a deep level line - I believe Earl's Court to Mansion House - in about 1900 - to do something about the then problems. The section as far as South Ken ended up being built as part of the Piccadilly line; which with electrification did enough to make the system adequate for the next hundred years. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2008 23:06:42 GMT
The problem at present is that trains from Wimbledon have to wait outside the station if there is a train in platform 2, even if platform 1 is empty. If the train in platform 2 is broken/held for any reason (PEA, signal failure, etc) then trains from Wimbledon are stuck until the train is moved. If there was a crossover west of the station, trains could run into either platform and this wouldn't be a problem. Well, true, but trains can be stuck at any station for that sort of reason - if that was a justification for additional capacity, no doubt the Jubilee line would have been built with "Loughton" type three platform stations throughout! I suppose you could get rid of conflicting movements (other than Olympias) by running all trains Wimbledon-City-Richmond-Edgware Rd/HSK-Wimbledon - with Ealing Broadway served by a shuttle from Hammersmith or Acton Town (obviously you could swop Ealing and Richmond in this scheme) - but I don't see it gaining much support somehow  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2008 23:44:16 GMT
Actually, there's another reason why the layout is broken - the grade-separated junction west of Earl's Court was misdesigned. Instead of bringing the northbound/eastbound line ex-Wimbledon across both lines from Ealing/Richmond, it only crossed the westbound line to Ealing/Richmond. If it had crossed both of them, then ex-Wimbledon trains today would exclusively use platform 1 and would be able to access HSK without the current flat crossing east of the eastbound island at ECT. You would still need the full set of crossovers behind the tailwalls of both island platforms for maximum flexibility, but the current layout with the missing crossovers would work much better if the grade separation had been better built west of ECT.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Nov 19, 2008 9:34:50 GMT
Very true indeed TOKEA. Surely it must have been anticipated though at some point that the layout would cause problems...the flyover has been there for just shy of a centuary.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Nov 19, 2008 9:37:20 GMT
Does anyone have any pictures of the tracks in that area btw? Of the tunnel portals or the start of the flyovers, or the tracks underneath.
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Dec 9, 2008 22:16:15 GMT
I can't remember an eastbound crossover at EC in my days on the District, early 1970's.
there certainly was plans for a deep level District Line. The platform tunnels still exist at South Ken; the Eastbound Picc uses the station tunnel; this is why the big bore tunnel carries on for a while after the Picc running tunnel dives off to the left.
The westbound station tunnel is still intact complete with platform and suicide pit. It was used as a control room in WW2, later as a training school. Today it's part of the "new" escalators, installed in the late 70's.
When the Olympia trains used to reverses at EC, there was even more fun!
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Dec 10, 2008 7:55:03 GMT
Am I mis-recalling but wasn't the Exhibition tunnels (subway) something to do with a District line that never proceeded?
|
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Dec 10, 2008 18:22:37 GMT
I suppose you could get rid of conflicting movements (other than Olympias) by running all trains Wimbledon-City-Richmond-Edgware Rd/HSK-Wimbledon - with Ealing Broadway served by a shuttle from Hammersmith or Acton Town (obviously you could swop Ealing and Richmond in this scheme) Except that you can't run a Acton Town - Richmond service! Also, I don't think all 'City' District trains would be able to run from the Wimbledon branch, reversing District trains at Hammersmith would cause problems for the Piccadilly, and if you run an Ealing - Acton Town shuttle, what happens to Chiswick Park! To get rid of all conflicting movements, wouldn't services in one direction have to be different to the other, because of how the track layout at Earls Court is? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2008 20:36:36 GMT
I suppose you could get rid of conflicting movements (other than Olympias) by running all trains Wimbledon-City-Richmond-Edgware Rd/HSK-Wimbledon - with Ealing Broadway served by a shuttle from Hammersmith or Acton Town (obviously you could swop Ealing and Richmond in this scheme) Except that you can't run a Acton Town - Richmond service! Also, I don't think all 'City' District trains would be able to run from the Wimbledon branch, reversing District trains at Hammersmith would cause problems for the Piccadilly, and if you run an Ealing - Acton Town shuttle, what happens to Chiswick Park! To get rid of all conflicting movements, wouldn't services in one direction have to be different to the other, because of how the track layout at Earls Court is? Yeah, Chiswick Park is a problem with this scheme (which wasn't an entirely serious suggestion) as IIRC it doesn't have any Picc line platforms. Have to send a few Piccs slow line from Hammersmith (can you do that?) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2008 21:14:41 GMT
Yeah, Chiswick Park is a problem with this scheme (which wasn't an entirely serious suggestion) as IIRC it doesn't have any Picc line platforms. Have to send a few Piccs slow line from Hammersmith (can you do that?) Chiswick Park doesn't have platforms on the fast lines but it is possible to send Piccs down the slow line from Hammersmith or Acton Town. |
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Dec 11, 2008 19:00:42 GMT
The exhibition tunnel at south Ken was purpose built to serve the museums. There was a proposal for a tube line form S Ken to run north under Holland Park.
|
|
