|
Post by District Dave on Jan 4, 2011 19:36:26 GMT
As SE13 says, you're very welcome!
As with he, I'm no expert on these more historical matters and I have to say it's not something I've heard of previously - even anecdotaly.
But that doesn't mean to say I'm right!. There are bound to be others who know more than I! So please do ask challenging questions - I'm sure someone wil provide informed answers.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jan 3, 2011 20:39:58 GMT
How can a mistake like this be made. Is it not simply a case of when laying down the track to keep the measurements right? :: As stated by Colin the layout in Lillie Bridge has existed for many years. In the work that was involved in upgrading the depot to bring it up to current standards much work has taken place renewing some areas of track, removing redundant track, points etc. and upgrading traction current rails and supplies (and much, much more). The specific issue with 10 Top is that there is an old weighbridge which is of course made up of large areas of metal plates over which currenr rails cannot be laid - hence (at least in part) why there are larger than normal gaps in the traction current rails. The problem here (I think!) was largely the old issue of 'not seeing the wood for the trees' and though this may seem a bit lame I can assure you it is true; I spent a great deal of time in the depot whilst work was ongoing and believe me it was only very late in the day that it was 'seen' and raised as a problem.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 31, 2010 16:08:56 GMT
Not sure about the 'movie star' sunglasses - they were genuine London Underground issue in the days before I had to wear my specs all the time - the advance of age!
It was an interesting experience being involved in that; I didn't just do the driving - I also helped with the planning of what we were going to do when, which trains to use and giving guidance re: the technical and commentary stuff.
It was a nightmare getting the filming done - the weather conspired against us for weeks (it was filmed late-August) and the railway was completely destroyed the day we filmed! That's why there were quite a few anxious glances at my watch.
One day I'll write the whole story from what I can recall of it!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 31, 2010 15:53:27 GMT
Essentially Colin has it right.
The issue with 10 Road is that there are two sets of points that need to be updated and this hasn't been done yet (I've heard a suggestion that March/April will see that done) but at the moment the loss of these two stabling points isn't an issue as there are eight stablers each night so they are surplus at the moment.
The issue with 'no C Stock on 10 top' is that there are hude gaps in the current rails and there's at least an even chance that a C Stock could end up all night 'off juice' - not a desireable situation! Not sure how this will finally be sorted.
With the support of my colleague I/O's it's introduction went well - after much hard work in getting drivers familiarised with the area before it went live.
So essentially it's now all up and running; there are a few minor issues as to the operation of the signals in the area which need to settle down and become familiar, but that's nothing major.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 30, 2010 10:45:45 GMT
It occasionallty looks like that if the graffiti monsters get at it - which is not uncommon down there! The lack of a sign was *probably* when the old Network Southeast sign was taken down. In the Video 125 DVD 'East London and District' Driver's Eye View (on which I just happen to do the Richmond -> Upminster trip) the narration is wrong - IIRC it say the box is closed and that the area is controlled from Wimbledon; by the time the DVD came out it was too late for it to be corrected. Peter Middleton had said he'd submit the script for scrutiny but never did and it ended up getting confused with the Wimbledon branch.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 22, 2010 19:41:26 GMT
Folks,
Having reviewed the content of this thread having been alerted to it by a fellow member of LU staff, it has been decided that there was too much specific information contained which potentially could compromise LU's security and procedures.
Whilst we appreciate that there is of course considerable interest in what occured in this specific incident and the inevitable discussion and speculation which will arise from it and the procedures that might or might not have been involved, we have to consider that such specific detail may well be of considerable interest to others with less innocent intentions; I trust that you take my drift!
Please be mindful that posts on this forum are publically visible when getting into specific discussions.
Thankyou.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 21, 2010 19:40:24 GMT
Though I haven't had a chance to read the actual Service Report for the day I would suggest these would have been sleet trains.
On night duties these include the option for passenger stock trains fitted with deicer units to run during engineering hours for the purpose of laying deicer fluid (actualy more correctly ice prevention fluid) on the current rails and to clear existing build up of snow with the sleet brushes fitted to the trains.
So I would suggest that there were passenger stock trains running through the open sections but these would not have been in passenger service.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 20, 2010 11:29:12 GMT
Don't forget that the new S Stock (for example) is fully covered by CCTV (and a very efficient system from what I can see) which is selectable by the driver at any time, recorded and if a passenger alarm is activated the CCTV automatically switches to the camera closest to the handle which has been operated.
I accept that there is not the physical seperation but this in itself causes it's own problems.
Don't forget that many TOC stocks have interconnecting doors that open automatically, so they probably are no more of a deterrent.
Probably another case of no right or wrong answer.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 19, 2010 15:20:04 GMT
Yes, all start and finish at Acton (though some finish in Ealing Commo Depot).
Earliest start is 04:45 - there are a pretty high number of 'dead earlies' - but fewer extreme late finishes ( many of those go to the late link) - latest book off is 01:30.
No - he produces the duty books on computer (not sure which programme he uses) but he does make them available in a format compatible with hand held devices; many now like them in that format so I'm sure they'll be available shortly.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 19, 2010 10:43:26 GMT
Firstly, on the duty book front - I've had a reply from the guy that does them. He hasn't got an electronic version yet but has promised to let me know when one's available. But you'll be there in a couple of weeks and there should be a hard copy available for you.
As you probably know you'll be in the pool when you first come to the depot (and, to be honest, probably for some time afterwards) so you may be able to ask for what you prefer, but I have to say earlies are always in demand at Acton so I don't want to build your hopes up.
As you probably know Acton doesn't have a Mafia so any change over of duties that you might want has to be done on the basis of mutual changeovers, but again I emphasise that earlies are in short supply.
You may also know that we have a 'link' system of earlies, inside, lates and a conventional roster (no nights at all). To show the demand for the early link I'm about third on the list for them and I've been at the depot for almost eleven years!
Sorry if that sounds a bit negative but I don't want to build up your hopes unrealistically!
On the training front - I have you down to do your first week just going with one of Acton's I/O's on his own turns (will be earlies though) so can I suggest that you give Acton a ring and they'll let you know where to be and when.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 18, 2010 22:36:10 GMT
Hi Ryan - looking forward to meeting you. I've got your training all planned out (seriously!).
I'll make some enquiries of the guy who does the duty books to see if I can get an electronic copy of the duty book.
Acton's a pretty good depot; relatively small compared to some and everyone pretty much gets on with everyone else - you should enjoy it.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 18, 2010 18:07:53 GMT
On D stocks, its unit numbers 7000 to 7048 even numbered (west end) units only. Now you're just showing off
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 17, 2010 18:05:55 GMT
This is indeed the case.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 12, 2010 21:06:28 GMT
Oops sorry - you're quite right - misread PG for LB I believe what you suggest is correct - effectively losing 29Rd, though I think other track etc. will be improved - much of it is very 'tired' and of course all the signalling will need to be upgraded in the fullness of time. So the net result of the loss of one road at PG and two roads at TS means that LB will be a permanent facility, and also that there will be more trains to be stabled eventually.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Dec 12, 2010 15:53:54 GMT
BTW, what's the plan to remodel PG? It's all wrapped up with the proposed redevelopment of the Earl's Court exhibition Centres, Ashfield House and surrounding area. I think there's a variety of proposals but I think they will all need to include the rafting over of the whole of the depot! Time will tell I'm sure.........
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Nov 28, 2010 11:33:06 GMT
But the Lillie Bridge stablers will (I'm pretty sure) all be after the last ex-OLY service and how will the sleepers etc. het back to ECT. All in the name of cistomer service.
Similarly trains stabling ex West Ken will tip out at Hammersmith - again because of detrainment.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Sept 11, 2010 8:55:18 GMT
A couple of incidents have occurred recently on LU that members will have noted were not discussed openly.
In order to explain why the forum staff may choose to limit discussions it’s important that members appreciate who reads this forum:
• Members • Railway enthusiasts • LU/TfL staff (variety of levels including company Directors & the Mayor’s office) • Other internet readers… including the PRESS!
How many times have we read a tabloid newspaper and rolled our eyes knowing that the story is sensationalistic, full of inconsistencies or making a minor issue appear as something catastrophic? Some years ago a post on this forum was quoted word for word in print by a national newspaper. That newspaper never asked for permission to do so and never acknowledged their source.
Knowing therefore that we are a source of reference for the press, we do NOT want the DD forum to be the direct or indirect source of speculation as the result of an innocently made post. Members may wish to speculate publicly on the causes of an incident, however the danger is that a speculative post ends up being quoted as fact to sell a newspaper or increase readership. Ask yourself; when have certain elements of the press ever let the facts get in the way of a good lie when publishing a story??!!!
In addition there are often internal/external investigations being carried out and speculation will be unwelcome. Usually LU staff won’t even know many facts themselves and if they have been involved in an incident, they certainly will not be party to ALL the information and/or would be bound by virtue of being directly involved in any investigation such that they cannot speak publically.
This forum is made up of members who are a cross section of LU staff and enthusiasts. It is one of the few places where professionals and those interested in a topic can interact! The staff intend to keep it that way!
The forum staff know that members may disagree with the pulling of threads or limiting discussion from time to time, however the Admins/Mods will be looking at a BIGGER picture. Consequently we are damned if we do and are damned if we don't. We want to make the right decisions for the right reasons and hope that members understand our position and appreciate our logic and approach.
The staff appreciate that members would perhaps like a brief outline of an incident rather than no reference to it at all on the forum. The Admins have discussed this and moving forward, were an incident to occur, the staff will make a statement briefly describing what is believed to have happened at that time. If we feel that it would be inappropriate for members to speculate or comment further, the Admins will make that request in the same post with an explanation why and lock the thread. This is not to silence members, but instead to prevent posts from being published that could be inappropriately used by others with the end result that the atmosphere or culture of the forum is adversely affected.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jul 8, 2010 18:25:03 GMT
Bear in mind though that EC2 and the surrounding area is all due for redevelopment - I think the plans are for a Westfield style shopping mall across the whole area - LU is to sell the air space above Lillie Bridge and I suppose it'll all be rafted over. Ashfield House will go too I understand. Living 5mins away from the Depot, I never heard anything about the Shopping mall. All I know is that they want to build houses on the site There seem to be a raft of rumours but either way it is destined for redevelopment so it seems! I don't think this is an appropriate venue to conjecture about the local planning intentions.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jul 8, 2010 10:23:02 GMT
EDIT: just noticed something no one else seems to have noticed....4 pages in and the thread title still suggests we're in France!! Oh yes - never noticed that ;D
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jun 24, 2010 21:02:24 GMT
Just to add a small point to this, you will have noted that the system is named the 'Tunnel Telephone Wires' - in the OP there is also mention of a piece of equipment that can be used to activate these wires.
This is a telephone handset carried in train cabs and this serves a two fold purpose:
1) When the telephone handset is clipped to the two wires it will switch off traction current as described above and
2) It provides a means of communication to the Service Controller.
The wires are also sometimes referred to as 'pinch and rub' wires, for the simple reason that that is what you do with them - pinch them together and rub them together to ensure they work - you will know this as tunnel lighting should illuminate.
It used to be possible to try the system out in the London Transport Museum at Covent Garden - there used to be a section of tunnel there which showed a variety of equipment typically installed in a tunnel. Not sure if it's still there since the museum was renovated.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jun 22, 2010 10:28:36 GMT
I thought all of triangle sidings will be lost, not just two??? Will there space on the 3 side for the new stock trains or will development have to be done in order to fit 3 trains there? This may just be rumour but I have heard the space on the 2 side will be used as offices. is this true? If not what will be made of this space once stabling has been permanently seized here? No - the works will allow for three trains as described. Where 37 and 38 Roads are now, this will reduce to one road and the other two (on the east side of thesidings) will be relaid to accomodate two S7's. There is already an accomodation block at Triangle sidings. I know of no plans that this will be altered. Your question about it's future if stabling ceases herefore becomes academic.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jun 22, 2010 10:24:01 GMT
Sorry to go off topic there. Going back to lillie bridge. If road 1 will stable 3 trains in a row on the same track wont that be alot of hassle if the train closest to olympia station end is defective? That will leave 2 trains stuck behind until the first train has been moved or the same if the middle train is defective. Not off topic at all! You may be aware that adjacent to the reception/outlet road towards Olympia is a siding - known as Whitely's siding. At the present time this is decommissioned but we have learnt that the plan is for this to be electrified and it will be long enough to accomodate an S7 train. So the plan is that should a train fail at the outlet signal (and therefore I presume this will be extended to 1 Road) it can be rerouted to the siding to get it out of the way. This of course assumes that it is possible to move the train at all - either under its own power or by means of an assisting train. This stabling arrangemet though is not new; Hammersmith depot for example have been stabling three trains on one road for many years.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jun 21, 2010 9:01:32 GMT
The required engineering works to the infrastructure to accommodate the S Stock seemed vast. I presume this was all costed out at the time the quote for the supply of the new Stock was being examined. Which begs the question is it worth it, rather than have the Stock designed to fit the existing infrastructure without all these extra works being necessary!! Certainly the cost is included within the overall S Stock programme. It is not a question of the stock 'fitting' the depot; the works involved are principally to do with walkways, power supplies and track renovations and alterations etc.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jun 20, 2010 8:08:47 GMT
Visually, from the West London Line, there doesn't seem to be much in the way between the buffers on road 1 and the other side of the space underneath EC2, but lengthening the shed roads to the end of the space would probably mean losing the connection to road 10. When a train is stabled at that position on 1 Road - which will be known as '1 Bottom' (and the same applies for a train in a similar position on 10 Road) - they are pretty much tight up to the walls of EC2. There is just room for a walkway to the wall side of the train, but it is very restricted; they will not form part of our walking route. I'm almost certain that you are correct concerning the loss of the connection to 10 Road, but I will try to remember to have a look next time I'm over there. I will go through the photos I've accumulated over the last few weeks and if any help this discussion I'll post them up
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jun 19, 2010 22:02:51 GMT
I think the only difference between that description and my view is that the shed roads (4 - 9) are not shown as running to the EC2 wall, but that they all come together into the road 10 headshunt. Quail (dated November 2008) shows this type of arrangement (not easy to do without a fixed font) for the southern end of the shed roads (and no. 10) (with = being the shed, | being the end of the shed / the wall of EC2, - and \ being the track and . being used as spacefillers.) =====|...................| 4 -----|----.............| 5 -----|----\............| 6 -----|-----\...........| 7 -----|------\..........| Earl's Court 2 Wall. 8 -----|-------\.........| 9 -----|--------\.......| =====|.............\......| 10--------------------| ...............................| Are you saying the roads 4-9 now all extend to the wall, whilst still retaining the access to the headshunt at the end of road 10? I have to say I'm having to do this from memory as to be honest beyond the sheds I'm not interested - we will not operate service trains beyond the shed on 7, 8 and 9 Roads - they are the only shed roads we will be using. If the depot require trains shunted to the south of the shed (i.e. towards EC2) this will be done by depot staff. Thinking about it I think I am incorrect in saying those roads go as far as the EC2 wall and your interpretation is more correct; certainly they all converge towards and eventually join 10 Road. However if we go back to your previous thought 'As it stands at the moment, most of the space underneath EC2 isn't really used. The layout is fine for engineering trains, but not so good for stabling passenger stock.' I am sure that the shed roads couldn't be extended sufficiently that they would offer enough space to stable trains without fouling the points towards 10 Road because of the physical structure of EC2; again I'd have to have a look to confirm this for certain!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jun 19, 2010 19:40:40 GMT
My idea of the current Lille Bridge layout is that the shed roads all come together after passing through the shed and link into the headshunt at the end of road 10. Some of the rest of the space is filled with sidings branching out from roads 1 and 3 (to the east of the shed). This is based on the Quail track maps and looking onto the site from the West London Line. The space between the shed and the wall underneath EC2 could be converted in to dead end sidings, rather than the current layout. This would give room for stabling units south of the shed, mainly underneath EC2. As it stands at the moment, most of the space underneath EC2 isn't really used. The layout is fine for engineering trains, but not so good for stabling passenger stock. With the greatest respect I think if you're basing your comments on Quail diagrams that are old and out of date; I suspect going back to before Earls Court 2 was constructed (or if later assumed there were no alterations to the layout when EC2 was built). At this time I can't post a schematic plan of the location but I will attempt to describe the layout as best I can; forgive me if this post becomes rather protracted! 1) 1 Road extends all the way under EC2 and comes to an end at the roadway which is off Empress Place. To give you an idea of its length, this is one of the roads on which we will stable three S Stock trains - each of which are over 117 metres long! There is currently a spur off 1 Road (1A Road) which extends up to the EC2 building - this is to be decommissioned 2) 10 Road is similar to 1 Road, excepting that there is no spur road - see later. 3) 2 Road Runs up as far as the EC2 building; at the top of this are pits which were built when the alterations associated to EC2 were done but apparently these were never used! There is also a spur from this road - 2A Road - as with 1A Road this is to be decommissioned. 4) 3 Road no longer exists - it was removed when the EC2 alterations were done. 5) 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 Roads are the shed roads; all these run up to the EC2 building and trains can be shunted between roads from these and all give access to 10 Road. 6) 11 and 12 Roads are both accessed from 10 Road - there are connections at both the West Kensington and EC2 ends. 7) The Stores Road (unnumbered) is adjacent to 12 Road and is also accessed via 10 Road, also at the EC2 end; this road roughly goes about as far as the mid point of the sheds. I hope all that makes some sense and helps you visualise how it's all set up. Though I have been getting many photos whilst I've been working over there, these are more associated with the stuff I've been doing, rather than general views of the site; I'll see if it's possible to get some that may give an idea of what I'm describing!
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jun 19, 2010 8:40:59 GMT
Vast could go some way to describe Ruislip but certainly does not describe Lille Bridge. But Lille Bridge does has room for expansion under Earl's Court 2. Currently only a couple of the tracks use the full length of the space available south of the shed. Two of the roads that will be used are the long roads to which you refer - 1 and 10 - and each of these will stable three trains each. As for the rest (certainly between 2 and 9) IIRC they all come to a dead end against the concrete of EC2! I'm fairly certain of this - I've been over there so many times lately I''m sufferning from Lillie Bridge fatigue! Bear in mind though that EC2 and the surrounding area is all due for redevelopment - I think the plans are for a Westfield style shopping mall across the whole area - LU is to sell the air space above Lillie Bridge and I suppose it'll all be rafted over. Ashfield House will go too I understand.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jun 17, 2010 13:55:23 GMT
4 Piccadilly Line trains start & stable at South Harrow sidings ever day/night I'm happy to stand corrected - thank you DWS.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jun 17, 2010 9:42:27 GMT
Thanks for the info Dave. So the option of anything at South Harrow has been ruled out, if ever considered? I have to say I've never heard any mention of anything involving South Harrow - certainly for the District (unless of course the old chestnut of the District reclaiming the Rayners Lane service appears again - as I'm sure it will!). I can't really comment about the state of South Harrow sidings, but I'd guess that a substantial amount of work would be required to bring them up to current standards in terms of walkways, security etc. I *think* the last I heard about the possibility of South Harrow being used was in the context of there being timetabled Piccadilly line trains (and then only a couple) stabling there over night, and I'm not aware that ever happened.
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Jun 17, 2010 8:18:55 GMT
No reason not to be if they transfer under TUPE arrangements with the depot transfer. AFAIK the depot will still stay within the Tubelines (or whoever) system - only parts of the depot are being allocated for use by the Operational side of the business. The P/way work, stores and battery locos will still continue to use the depot as now.
|
|