|
Post by t697 on May 6, 2020 8:45:20 GMT
Hope good products and good installation get selected. Come on - how long have you been here now? Just a trace of optimism... Silly me!
|
|
|
Post by t697 on May 6, 2020 8:43:45 GMT
London Road the odd one out due to: Single ended - all the others have two rail entrance/exits.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on May 1, 2020 14:44:39 GMT
Fair enough, I did mean the actual track circuits rather than other 33 1/3Hz fed equipment. I think the point still stands that it is not economic to build modern trains compatible with 33 1/3Hz track circuits and overall their replacement makes more sense. Hope good products and good installation get selected.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on May 1, 2020 14:04:21 GMT
It's not as simple as that. The trains' line filter inductors and capacitors would have to be very significantly bigger and heavier for the modern trains to be compatible with 33Hz track circuits. That would waste energy throughout the trains' life and compromise other aspects of the train design. The economically sensible compromise has been to specify for compatibility with 125Hz and above and renew the 33Hz track circuits. This time for the Picc that will just be Rayners Lane to Hangar Lane Junction, the last remaining 33Hz area on LUL. Plus the Delta track replacements nearly done already as described earlier in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 30, 2020 8:14:33 GMT
I expect signal sighting rules were different when two person operated 1959TS ran on the Picc. Even allowing for the wider viewing cone from the 59TS driving position, there may have been station starter signals requiring some driver head movement to check. But of course the driver wasn't also checking the passengers and platform. Then there's 40 years or so of minor mods where the shorter 73TS was the prevailing train and the stopping position of the cab may have been further back. Now of course the the new trains' length and sightlines add to the issue. I'm only mildly surprised it's as many as 100 or so signals to amend. Track circuit replacement is always fun, I see a vote for no EBI200s and I expect others would vote no FS2550 from early Met experience. Perhaps a simple 125Hz conversion would do. I've no axe to grind nor enough detailed knowledge to apply on that.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 28, 2020 22:26:41 GMT
I'm not directly involved but I think they will be no longer than the 7 car 1959TS the present fleet replaced. But I accept that doesn't necessarily eliminate some signalling change. If nothing else, the replacement of the last 33 1/3 Hz DEVs with something else.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 28, 2020 16:17:41 GMT
Fair enough. LO or another operator altogether?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 28, 2020 16:12:41 GMT
I thought there was a plan years ago to put the 1995 stock on the Piccadilly line and build a new fleet for the Northern Line to allow better services and the Battersea extension. The idea of 6 car trains in a like for like basis would not have given sufficient capacity. I seem to recall various plans for trains of 1995TS style for the Picc, the actual 95TS or a new set. Basically that would be pretty much a functionally and size-wise like for like replacement of the 1973TS. New signalling would then provide the capacity increase through improved performance and train frequency. Latterly issues of Accessibility and other factors have militated against the 6 long(ish) car schemes. Hence the more radical style trains now on order. Those trains will also be longer than the existing ones increasing line capacity a bit which will be handy since new signalling now looks a long way off.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 28, 2020 16:03:43 GMT
Not seen any 710 on the DC line for a while. I assume this is due to driver availability for those signed on the newer trains? 5 car 378 holds more people that's all..as we were running 2 trains an hour which I believe has now been upped to 3 trains an hour. So the plan is to replace the 378s on this route with smaller capacity trains. Can anyone remind me why that's a good idea or what's the plan for the 378s?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 22, 2020 11:20:28 GMT
West Acton?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 22, 2020 4:57:25 GMT
No train in picture B?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 17, 2020 5:17:45 GMT
D is not that far west (and remember the platforms are above street level) Putney Bridge?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 6, 2020 15:41:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 4, 2020 15:59:07 GMT
I'm a little confused about what a Pickering is. According to my Ian Allen book from ~1965, at that time there were 30 battery locomotives, 3 built by Gloucester in 1937 (L41, 42, 43), 6 by Gloucester by in 1939 (L35, 36, 38, 39, 40), 3 by Hurst Nelson in 1951 (L55, 56, 57), 4 more by Hurst Nelson in 1952, (L58-61) 1 built by Acton Works (L76) and 13 being built by Metro Cammell from 1965. Also listed are 14 Ballast Motor Cars built in 1923, (L62-75) but there is no builder's name associated. So as these numbers tie up with the post above, I assume these are the Pickerings. As only L56-61 are listed above and these 7 are the lowest numbers of the 14, what happened to L62-75? Apart from this batch of 14, all the rest are listed as Battery Locomotives, but these are Ballast Motor Cars. Would I be right in assuming that the Battery Locomotives only ran on battery power, or could they run off track power as well, but the ballast motors only ran off track power? Here's some info about R Y Pickering; www.gracesguide.co.uk/R._Y._Pickering_and_CoI'm not sure whether they built those locos, but that's the name I seem to recall rather than Hurst Nelson. And on the power question, the LUL Battery Locos run on line supply most of the time. They use the battery when working within a worksite where the power is off. Also for some shunting operations.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 3, 2020 17:37:33 GMT
Although externally similar (as all of the post-1936 locomotives were), that would not have been a Pickering example. I don’t have the dates to hand (I will keep looking), but I believe there were all withdrawn during the 1990s, leaving the fleet that still exists today, the oldest of which dates to the mid-1960s and was built by MetroCammell. Yes the remaining 29 locos were from 3 batches nominally 1964, 1969 and 1973. 64s and 69s from Met-Camm and the others from Crewe? So the youngest is not far off 47 years old. They all have traction motors that are pre-WW2 so there's a strong likelihood the motors will get to their centenaries! Not sure of scrapping dates of the older locos.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Apr 1, 2020 6:15:11 GMT
C - Ruislip Manor
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Feb 27, 2020 18:29:10 GMT
Once again this has absolutely nothing to do with station names. They are irrelevant. One of the adjacent stations has a physical characteristic the other does not. Greenford the only one with a non-LUL track - for the NR Shuttle service to Ealing?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Feb 27, 2020 18:17:07 GMT
OK, so yes the S stock does in principle use more power overall than an A stock train. An S8 train weighs about 40 tonnes more than an A stock for the various reasons already elaborated in this thread, but part of this is so as to provide higher performance right through the accelerating range, but not a higher top speed. How much of that available performance actually gets used and hence how much power drawn under the new signalling and timetables remains to be seen. The trains do have regenerative braking on all cars so you get a fair bit back when there are plenty of trains running to use that regenerated power. Regenerative braking efficiency was also improved as a result of the upgrade because the low loss conductor rail is low loss irrespective of whether power is coming from the sub-station or another train in regen braking. Regen braking is best when the power goes to other trains with only minimal amounts lost in uselessly heating the conductor rails.
Taking the special example of Harrow Siding, the S stock is able to motor at low speeds using a lower current than an A stock because the AC inverter is efficient and not wasting power in starting resistors. Same is true of DC chopper schemes. Therefore the traction control fuse wouldn't trip and prevent a train being motored in the siding while the signal was against it. Conversely, the Heating or Air Conditioning peak load could trip the fuse. The HVAC is of course thermostatically controlled but the peak HVAC load together with other auxiliary loads could be present for example if the doors had been open for a while in the platform for detrainment just before the train moved to the siding.
It was convenient to get rid of the life expired traction control set up when S stock was introduced. I seem to recall it was found that the main contactor may have been reclaimed from Q stock... I seem to recall the trainstop was located or relocated close to the train berthed position so if it SPAD'd the shunt signal to exit, it would stop before it derailed on the catch points.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Feb 23, 2020 22:49:32 GMT
S stock does have autoclose after 45 seconds which reduces heet/'coolth' losses at terminal stations and when there is a long dwell time, but that leads to complaints from a different portion of the psssenger population who seem to have embedded in them "LU doesn't have autoclose, never has, never should" and then get caught by autoclosing doors despite the scheme being the same as all other modern trains in the UK. Can't please everyone...
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Feb 21, 2020 6:08:24 GMT
C - Hillingdon
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Feb 10, 2020 20:27:03 GMT
Rayners Lane?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Feb 4, 2020 22:53:48 GMT
and how do they only get a bank of just 5 seats in the centre bay on the 1992 stock? the 1995 stock can fit 6 seats in the middle As well as the different doorway widths, don't forget that a 1995TS car is at least 1.5m longer than a 1992TS car.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Feb 4, 2020 22:14:10 GMT
I only noticed recently that the bridge to the west of the station appears to be built to accommodate another track that would route behind the westbound platform. Was that ever installed I wonder? The interesting link above doesn't show it in any photo, but maybe it was there at another time.
Perhaps it was the loco run round for the goods trains.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Feb 4, 2020 22:05:36 GMT
D - Goldhawk Road
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jan 25, 2020 11:17:45 GMT
Least used station on each line concerned?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jan 24, 2020 18:33:40 GMT
Also maybe of interest, the OPO mirrors and monitors seem to be in place ready except at Uxbridge where no sign of them at all. Perhaps the Heritage negotiations took just as long then as more recently... Fun to hear the signal bell on this obviously two person operated train.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jan 21, 2020 19:17:51 GMT
I wonder whether the IoW update could use the battery trains and dispense with conductor rails except at charging locations. Could make the update and maintenance cheaper perhaps, as well as reducing ground level electrification. Maybe only switch on the rail at the charging places when a train is detected present.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jan 17, 2020 7:50:23 GMT
Door spacing looks a bit uneven for a metro train. The end car looks like loading and unloading will be slower than the others. What's the story there I wonder. Perhaps station dwell times are generous compared to LUL.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Dec 30, 2019 21:25:27 GMT
MS car in S stock jargon is Motor Shoegear, i.e. motor car with shoegear.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Dec 30, 2019 10:52:29 GMT
More advanced in some ways but in others less so, like the Motor Alternator for auxiliary supply and I seem to recall traditional thyristors in the propulsion equipment instead of the then new fangled GTO ones. Might be wrong on that one, anyone else recall? Hi i have lot of info on the units but to difficult to put up on here. AUX was not Motor Alternator was a Static convertors and had GTO Traction according to the info i have, i still say the BRL one was the best When at Northfields Depot That`s my opinion. I'm sure there was an MA but on further reflection it may have been for the traction motors' separately excited fields. The blue train was certainly kept usable for a lot longer and used for various tests usually on the South Ealing Test Track so must have had quite a bit going for it!
|
|