Now it appears that Thales are going to do the signalling on the sub surface
lines by default - will it be the same as used on the jubilee (and northern)
so that S stock and jubilee trains can swap tracks if required north of
neasden or will the usual LU silly buggers prevail and they'll go for a
different incompatible spec just for the sake of saving a few quid?

--
Spud

On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 18:07:08 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
performance characteristics. It will also have to allow TOC trains to
run between LU ones (Chiltern) and also cope with SWT's running rights

I'd forgotten about the chiltern trains. Presumably then lineside signals
will have to remain in place?

And its not just them, the Met shares the uxbridge branch with the piccadilly
which I'm guessing won't be done until new trains for that line turn up and
when they do they'll have to use the same system I suppose.

Even accepting that the S Stock should be pretty uniform when it comes
to its performance characteristics the network itself is very complex
as is the service pattern.

I wonder if its worth the pain in that case? Why not just go for moving
block signalling which will probably achieve most of the extra throughput
they're looking for and leave it at that?

--
Spud

wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 18:07:08 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
performance characteristics. It will also have to allow TOC trains to
run between LU ones (Chiltern) and also cope with SWT's running rights

I'd forgotten about the chiltern trains. Presumably then lineside signals
will have to remain in place?

And its not just them, the Met shares the uxbridge branch with the piccadilly
which I'm guessing won't be done until new trains for that line turn up and
when they do they'll have to use the same system I suppose.

The Picc also shares tracks with the District line, so in due course it
will need to use the same signalling system.

Even accepting that the S Stock should be pretty uniform when it comes
to its performance characteristics the network itself is very complex
as is the service pattern.

I wonder if its worth the pain in that case? Why not just go for moving
block signalling which will probably achieve most of the extra throughput
they're looking for and leave it at that?

Isn't this a form of moving block signalling? The trains will be more
frequent, with smaller gaps between them.

On 01/06/2014 20:36, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 18:07:08 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
performance characteristics. It will also have to allow TOC trains to
run between LU ones (Chiltern) and also cope with SWT's running rights

I'd forgotten about the chiltern trains. Presumably then lineside signals
will have to remain in place?

And its not just them, the Met shares the uxbridge branch with the piccadilly
which I'm guessing won't be done until new trains for that line turn up and
when they do they'll have to use the same system I suppose.

The Picc also shares tracks with the District line, so in due course it
will need to use the same signalling system.

Even accepting that the S Stock should be pretty uniform when it comes
to its performance characteristics the network itself is very complex
as is the service pattern.

I wonder if its worth the pain in that case? Why not just go for moving
block signalling which will probably achieve most of the extra throughput
they're looking for and leave it at that?

Isn't this a form of moving block signalling? The trains will be more
frequent, with smaller gaps between them.


What about the NLL between Gunnersbury and Richmond?

" wrote:
On 01/06/2014 20:36, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 18:07:08 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
performance characteristics. It will also have to allow TOC trains to
run between LU ones (Chiltern) and also cope with SWT's running rights

I'd forgotten about the chiltern trains. Presumably then lineside signals
will have to remain in place?

And its not just them, the Met shares the uxbridge branch with the piccadilly
which I'm guessing won't be done until new trains for that line turn up and
when they do they'll have to use the same system I suppose.

The Picc also shares tracks with the District line, so in due course it
will need to use the same signalling system.

Even accepting that the S Stock should be pretty uniform when it comes
to its performance characteristics the network itself is very complex
as is the service pattern.

I wonder if its worth the pain in that case? Why not just go for moving
block signalling which will probably achieve most of the extra throughput
they're looking for and leave it at that?

Isn't this a form of moving block signalling? The trains will be more
frequent, with smaller gaps between them.


What about the NLL between Gunnersbury and Richmond?

That's Overground, of course, also controlled by TfL. I don't know if any
freights use it -- presumably not during District service hours. The Met
line also has the Class 20 stock delivery trains. I don't know if they run
during service hours; I've never seen them other than parked at Neasden,
but I think I've read here of people who have seen them running through
Harrow.

On 01/06/2014 21:29, Recliner wrote:
" wrote:
On 01/06/2014 20:36, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 18:07:08 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
performance characteristics. It will also have to allow TOC trains to
run between LU ones (Chiltern) and also cope with SWT's running rights

I'd forgotten about the chiltern trains. Presumably then lineside signals
will have to remain in place?

And its not just them, the Met shares the uxbridge branch with the piccadilly
which I'm guessing won't be done until new trains for that line turn up and
when they do they'll have to use the same system I suppose.

The Picc also shares tracks with the District line, so in due course it
will need to use the same signalling system.

Even accepting that the S Stock should be pretty uniform when it comes
to its performance characteristics the network itself is very complex
as is the service pattern.

I wonder if its worth the pain in that case? Why not just go for moving
block signalling which will probably achieve most of the extra throughput
they're looking for and leave it at that?

Isn't this a form of moving block signalling? The trains will be more
frequent, with smaller gaps between them.


What about the NLL between Gunnersbury and Richmond?

That's Overground, of course, also controlled by TfL. I don't know if any
freights use it -- presumably not during District service hours. The Met
line also has the Class 20 stock delivery trains. I don't know if they run
during service hours; I've never seen them other than parked at Neasden,
but I think I've read here of people who have seen them running through
Harrow.

They'll need to refit the Capital Stars in order to run on that part of
the network.