New NR press release describing significantly smaller depot for Hornsey
site:

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co...egoryID-8.aspx

Should it therefore be assumed that there will be some existing facilities
expanded on the existing MML route to compensate? IIRC there was some
debate about why they would need such a major development on the GN side for
what would be the lesser section of 'Thameslink North', IYSWIM...

Paul S

Would not the depot north of Cricklewood be a better place?


On 25/01/2011 5:20 PM, Paul Scott wrote:
New NR press release describing significantly smaller depot for Hornsey
site:

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co...egoryID-8.aspx


Should it therefore be assumed that there will be some existing
facilities expanded on the existing MML route to compensate? IIRC there
was some debate about why they would need such a major development on
the GN side for what would be the lesser section of 'Thameslink North',
IYSWIM...

Paul S

On Jan 25, 5:20*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
New NR press release describing significantly smaller depot for Hornsey
site:

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co...NEW-PLANS-FOR-...

Should it therefore be assumed that there will be some existing facilities
expanded on the existing MML route to compensate? *IIRC there was some
debate about why they would need such a major development on the GN side for
what would be the lesser section of 'Thameslink North', IYSWIM...

Paul S

Three Bridges


Richard

"Fat richard" wrote in message
...
On Jan 25, 5:20 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
New NR press release describing significantly smaller depot for Hornsey
site:

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co...NEW-PLANS-FOR-...

Should it therefore be assumed that there will be some existing
facilities
expanded on the existing MML route to compensate? IIRC there was some
debate about why they would need such a major development on the GN side
for
what would be the lesser section of 'Thameslink North', IYSWIM...

Three Bridges

Thanks, that definitely seems to be the case, and since posting I discovered
this morning via the Thameslink site news pages that they are currently
applying to expand the Three Bridges site, (that was agreed last year). I
wonder if the Crawley planners will go for the expansion, job creation or
views this time?

http://www.thameslinkprogramme.co.uk...epotggedit.pdf

I suppose it is important to realise that there is a difference between the
facilities required for overnight maintenance and stabling and the actual
depot that does the really detailed exam stuff and repairs - this is exactly
how Siemens maintain the SWT Desiro fleet - every unit is allocated to
Northam (Southampton) and visits there on rotation but there are a
significant number of other locations for overnight stabling, tanking,
toilets etc.

Paul S

Three Bridges

Must admit because I had been thinking the plan now of more Three
Bridges and less Hornsey was known in the public domain I had not
mentioned it.

--
Nick

On 26/01/2011 11:14, Paul Scott wrote:



I suppose it is important to realise that there is a difference between
the facilities required for overnight maintenance and stabling and the
actual depot that does the really detailed exam stuff and repairs - this
is exactly how Siemens maintain the SWT Desiro fleet - every unit is
allocated to Northam (Southampton) and visits there on rotation but
there are a significant number of other locations for overnight
stabling, tanking, toilets etc.


The impressive thing about Northam is that it caters for a large fleet
of trains on a very compact site. They are fortunate in having the old
docks branch lines as a capacious head shunt. Must admit I was
surprised that they didn't opt for a part of Eastleigh works though.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net

On Jan 26, 1:16*pm, Graeme Wall wrote:

I suppose it is important to realise that there is a difference between
the facilities required for overnight maintenance and stabling and the
actual depot that does the really detailed exam stuff and repairs - this
is exactly how Siemens maintain the SWT Desiro fleet - every unit is
allocated to Northam (Southampton) and visits there on rotation but
there are a significant number of other locations for overnight
stabling, tanking, toilets etc.

The impressive thing about Northam is that it caters for a large fleet
of trains on a very compact site. *They are fortunate in having the old
docks branch lines as a capacious head shunt. *Must admit I was
surprised that they didn't opt for a part of Eastleigh works though.


I suggest Northam works exactly because it is not located in London.

If you operate Londoncentric services, either as a terminal (SWT) or a
through route made up of 2 (future 3) routes back-to-backed like TL,
you don't plonk your depot in the middle, you locate it on the outer
sections of the core routes. Any TL operator rotating a huge fleet
of units via Hornsey would have something of a daily traffic control
nightmare. Northam works exactly because of its location, and this is
why Northampton is better than Bletchley, Aylesbury is better than
Marylebone, Crown Point is better than Stratford/Thornton, and so on.
Sure they all have ECS work, and there are special moves between
Northam and London area but translate that to the TL core do you
really want engineers ECS moves as well as service trains even off
peak , even with the short OLE extension they were planning to get
between MML and GNML.**

Given that even with the full TL pattern the GN side only gets 1/3 of
through trains and MML side 2/3, first it makes more sense for depots
on the MML side, but even greater sense its south of the river,
towards Brighton/Sussex coastway, at least as far out of Gatwick, in
which case 3B is the ideal.


** whats happened to that, maybe axed as an economy move and whats
been driving the depot changes ?

--
Nick

On 26/01/2011 13:31, D7666 wrote:
On Jan 26, 1:16 pm, Graeme wrote:

I suppose it is important to realise that there is a difference between
the facilities required for overnight maintenance and stabling and the
actual depot that does the really detailed exam stuff and repairs - this
is exactly how Siemens maintain the SWT Desiro fleet - every unit is
allocated to Northam (Southampton) and visits there on rotation but
there are a significant number of other locations for overnight
stabling, tanking, toilets etc.

The impressive thing about Northam is that it caters for a large fleet
of trains on a very compact site. They are fortunate in having the old
docks branch lines as a capacious head shunt. Must admit I was
surprised that they didn't opt for a part of Eastleigh works though.


I suggest Northam works exactly because it is not located in London.

[snip explanation]

Don't disagree but that wasn't my point.

I was commenting on putting the operation on a physically constrained
site. If you were going for a small site then I would have thought
Bournemouth might have been a better option with reduced ECS movements
required. Though Northam had access to a pool of trained labour with
the then run-down of Eastleigh works.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...

The impressive thing about Northam is that it caters for a large fleet of
trains on a very compact site. They are fortunate in having the old docks
branch lines as a capacious head shunt. Must admit I was surprised that
they didn't opt for a part of Eastleigh works though.

Wasn't there a theory at the time that it was only by building elsewhere
that Siemens could recruit a whole new workforce, ie mainly people who
didn't work for Alstom at Eastleigh?

Perhaps that might also explain why they built the LM maintenance base at
Northampton rather than Bletchley...

Paul

On 26/01/2011 13:49, Paul Scott wrote:
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...

The impressive thing about Northam is that it caters for a large fleet
of trains on a very compact site. They are fortunate in having the old
docks branch lines as a capacious head shunt. Must admit I was
surprised that they didn't opt for a part of Eastleigh works though.

Wasn't there a theory at the time that it was only by building elsewhere
that Siemens could recruit a whole new workforce, ie mainly people who
didn't work for Alstom at Eastleigh?

In which case why not go to Bournemouth?


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net