|
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
I popped along to Abbey Wood yesterday, the future Crossrail terminus.
It's moved along quite a bit since my last visit, with both of the third rail tracks now in their final positions, and quite a bit of Crossrail track in place near the portal, so here's a few of my pictures for people who don't frequent the North Kent line: https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57670104050133 I must admit I don't understand why Crossrail and the North Kent line have separate island platforms, rather than having the Crossrail pair between the third rail tracks, thus allowing cross-platform interchanges. The down third rail track could have been re-routed to the north of the portal, so that it was on the north, rather than the south of the new Crossrail pair. With that arrangement, both down tracks would flank one island platform, and both up platforms the other. It would save a lot of passengers the hassle of having to cross from island platform to the other. |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
On Fri, 02 Sep 2016 13:46:50 +0100
Recliner wrote: I must admit I don't understand why Crossrail and the North Kent line have separate island platforms, rather than having the Crossrail pair between the third rail tracks, thus allowing cross-platform interchanges. The down third rail track could have been re-routed to the north of the portal, so that it was on the north, rather than the south of the new Crossrail pair. With that arrangement, both down tracks would flank one island platform, and both up platforms the other. It would save a lot of passengers the hassle of having to cross from island platform to the other. Presumably that would require the crossrail tracks to cross the 3rd rail ones complicating signalling, power supply isolation and causing potential hold ups on both lines due to a problem on the other. -- Spud |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
wrote:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2016 13:46:50 +0100 Recliner wrote: I must admit I don't understand why Crossrail and the North Kent line have separate island platforms, rather than having the Crossrail pair between the third rail tracks, thus allowing cross-platform interchanges. The down third rail track could have been re-routed to the north of the portal, so that it was on the north, rather than the south of the new Crossrail pair. With that arrangement, both down tracks would flank one island platform, and both up platforms the other. It would save a lot of passengers the hassle of having to cross from island platform to the other. Presumably that would require the crossrail tracks to cross the 3rd rail ones complicating signalling, power supply isolation and causing potential hold ups on both lines due to a problem on the other. No it wouldn't. The Crossrail portal would be between the up and (slewed-north) down third rail tracks. The Crossrail tracks would stay between the third-rail tracks until the former's buffer stops at Abbey Wood. Beyond Abbey Wood, the two third-rail tracks would come together again and resume their former alignment towards Dartford. It would be a bit like how the diesel track pops up between the two Central line tracks at Greenford. |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
Recliner wrote:
wrote: On Fri, 02 Sep 2016 13:46:50 +0100 Recliner wrote: I must admit I don't understand why Crossrail and the North Kent line have separate island platforms, rather than having the Crossrail pair between the third rail tracks, thus allowing cross-platform interchanges. The down third rail track could have been re-routed to the north of the portal, so that it was on the north, rather than the south of the new Crossrail pair. With that arrangement, both down tracks would flank one island platform, and both up platforms the other. It would save a lot of passengers the hassle of having to cross from island platform to the other. Presumably that would require the crossrail tracks to cross the 3rd rail ones complicating signalling, power supply isolation and causing potential hold ups on both lines due to a problem on the other. No it wouldn't. The Crossrail portal would be between the up and (slewed-north) down third rail tracks. The Crossrail tracks would stay between the third-rail tracks until the former's buffer stops at Abbey Wood. Beyond Abbey Wood, the two third-rail tracks would come together again and resume their former alignment towards Dartford. It would be a bit like how the diesel track pops up between the two Central line tracks at Greenford. It's a while since I've been down that way. What is the Crossrail alignment between Woolwich and Abbey Wood? For Crossrail to run between the 3rd rail lines requires the Crossrail route to pass under a realigned down 3rd rail line at some point, or if the Crossrail lines were run as the outer pair, the westbound Crossrail line would need to pass under both 3rd rail lines. Incidentally, how are the Crossrail lines named in terms of "up" and "down"? Robin |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 16:56:35 -0000 (UTC), bob wrote:
Recliner wrote: wrote: On Fri, 02 Sep 2016 13:46:50 +0100 Recliner wrote: I must admit I don't understand why Crossrail and the North Kent line have separate island platforms, rather than having the Crossrail pair between the third rail tracks, thus allowing cross-platform interchanges. The down third rail track could have been re-routed to the north of the portal, so that it was on the north, rather than the south of the new Crossrail pair. With that arrangement, both down tracks would flank one island platform, and both up platforms the other. It would save a lot of passengers the hassle of having to cross from island platform to the other. Presumably that would require the crossrail tracks to cross the 3rd rail ones complicating signalling, power supply isolation and causing potential hold ups on both lines due to a problem on the other. No it wouldn't. The Crossrail portal would be between the up and (slewed-north) down third rail tracks. The Crossrail tracks would stay between the third-rail tracks until the former's buffer stops at Abbey Wood. Beyond Abbey Wood, the two third-rail tracks would come together again and resume their former alignment towards Dartford. It would be a bit like how the diesel track pops up between the two Central line tracks at Greenford. Popping up tends to require a bit more excavation. That costs more money and might in some places be undesirable anyway if only for the need to ensure support for what is being burrowed under. It's probably a bit late now anyway. It's a while since I've been down that way. What is the Crossrail alignment between Woolwich and Abbey Wood? For Crossrail to run between the 3rd rail lines requires the Crossrail route to pass under a realigned down 3rd rail line at some point, or if the Crossrail lines were run as the outer pair, the westbound Crossrail line would need to pass under both 3rd rail lines. Incidentally, how are the Crossrail lines named in terms of "up" and "down"? Robin |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
On 2016\09\02 20:04, Charles Ellson wrote:
Popping up tends to require a bit more excavation. That costs more money and might in some places be undesirable anyway if only for the need to ensure support for what is being burrowed under. It's probably a bit late now anyway. A virtual cross-platform interchange could be created by having several lifts along the platforms that go up, over and down. I doubt that the BCR would be favourable, and yet the cost must be a tiny fraction of the expense which was incurred on building multiple real cross-platform interchanges into the Victoria Line. |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 16:56:35 -0000 (UTC), bob wrote: Recliner wrote: wrote: On Fri, 02 Sep 2016 13:46:50 +0100 Recliner wrote: I must admit I don't understand why Crossrail and the North Kent line have separate island platforms, rather than having the Crossrail pair between the third rail tracks, thus allowing cross-platform interchanges. The down third rail track could have been re-routed to the north of the portal, so that it was on the north, rather than the south of the new Crossrail pair. With that arrangement, both down tracks would flank one island platform, and both up platforms the other. It would save a lot of passengers the hassle of having to cross from island platform to the other. Presumably that would require the crossrail tracks to cross the 3rd rail ones complicating signalling, power supply isolation and causing potential hold ups on both lines due to a problem on the other. No it wouldn't. The Crossrail portal would be between the up and (slewed-north) down third rail tracks. The Crossrail tracks would stay between the third-rail tracks until the former's buffer stops at Abbey Wood. Beyond Abbey Wood, the two third-rail tracks would come together again and resume their former alignment towards Dartford. It would be a bit like how the diesel track pops up between the two Central line tracks at Greenford. Popping up tends to require a bit more excavation. The line pops up anyway. It emerges from the tunnel portal. All I'm suggesting was that the portal could have between the North Kent tracks, rather than immediately to the north of them. That costs more money and might in some places be undesirable anyway if only for the need to ensure support for what is being burrowed under. It wouldn't have cost significantly more to build, and wouldn't require any special support. It's probably a bit late now anyway. For sure, I'm not suggesting that it be changed now, just questioning why it was done the way it was. |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
bob wrote:
Recliner wrote: wrote: On Fri, 02 Sep 2016 13:46:50 +0100 Recliner wrote: I must admit I don't understand why Crossrail and the North Kent line have separate island platforms, rather than having the Crossrail pair between the third rail tracks, thus allowing cross-platform interchanges. The down third rail track could have been re-routed to the north of the portal, so that it was on the north, rather than the south of the new Crossrail pair. With that arrangement, both down tracks would flank one island platform, and both up platforms the other. It would save a lot of passengers the hassle of having to cross from island platform to the other. Presumably that would require the crossrail tracks to cross the 3rd rail ones complicating signalling, power supply isolation and causing potential hold ups on both lines due to a problem on the other. No it wouldn't. The Crossrail portal would be between the up and (slewed-north) down third rail tracks. The Crossrail tracks would stay between the third-rail tracks until the former's buffer stops at Abbey Wood. Beyond Abbey Wood, the two third-rail tracks would come together again and resume their former alignment towards Dartford. It would be a bit like how the diesel track pops up between the two Central line tracks at Greenford. It's a while since I've been down that way. What is the Crossrail alignment between Woolwich and Abbey Wood? For Crossrail to run between the 3rd rail lines requires the Crossrail route to pass under a realigned down 3rd rail line at some point, or if the Crossrail lines were run as the outer pair, the westbound Crossrail line would need to pass under both 3rd rail lines. Incidentally, how are the Crossrail lines named in terms of "up" and "down"? Yes, I queried why the down third-rail track wasn't moved to the north side of the new portal. The third-rail tracks were moved slightly to the south anyway, and I'd originally thought that the final alignment would have seen the down line realigned to the north of the new portal (it would have had to have been left to the south of the portal during the construction phase, but the new down third-rail track could have been built to the north, once the Crossrail construction was complete). |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
wrote:
In article , (Recliner) wrote: I popped along to Abbey Wood yesterday, the future Crossrail terminus. It's moved along quite a bit since my last visit, with both of the third rail tracks now in their final positions, and quite a bit of Crossrail track in place near the portal, so here's a few of my pictures for people who don't frequent the North Kent line: https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57670104050133 I must admit I don't understand why Crossrail and the North Kent line have separate island platforms, rather than having the Crossrail pair between the third rail tracks, thus allowing cross-platform interchanges. The down third rail track could have been re-routed to the north of the portal, so that it was on the north, rather than the south of the new Crossrail pair. With that arrangement, both down tracks would flank one island platform, and both up platforms the other. It would save a lot of passengers the hassle of having to cross from island platform to the other. I think the conclusion was that, because of signalling interference problems it wasn't possible to route one DC track north of the portal. Another snag for now is that the only footbridge in use is a very long way from the stopping position of Up trains. It's about halfway along the platform. The new station building will be right at the eastern end of the platforms. |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
bob wrote:
Recliner wrote: wrote: On Fri, 02 Sep 2016 13:46:50 +0100 Recliner wrote: I must admit I don't understand why Crossrail and the North Kent line have separate island platforms, rather than having the Crossrail pair between the third rail tracks, thus allowing cross-platform interchanges. The down third rail track could have been re-routed to the north of the portal, so that it was on the north, rather than the south of the new Crossrail pair. With that arrangement, both down tracks would flank one island platform, and both up platforms the other. It would save a lot of passengers the hassle of having to cross from island platform to the other. Presumably that would require the crossrail tracks to cross the 3rd rail ones complicating signalling, power supply isolation and causing potential hold ups on both lines due to a problem on the other. No it wouldn't. The Crossrail portal would be between the up and (slewed-north) down third rail tracks. The Crossrail tracks would stay between the third-rail tracks until the former's buffer stops at Abbey Wood. Beyond Abbey Wood, the two third-rail tracks would come together again and resume their former alignment towards Dartford. It would be a bit like how the diesel track pops up between the two Central line tracks at Greenford. It's a while since I've been down that way. What is the Crossrail alignment between Woolwich and Abbey Wood? For Crossrail to run between the 3rd rail lines requires the Crossrail route to pass under a realigned down 3rd rail line at some point, or if the Crossrail lines were run as the outer pair, the westbound Crossrail line would need to pass under both 3rd rail lines. Incidentally, how are the Crossrail lines named in terms of "up" and "down"? I've read that it will use Tube-like Eastbound and Westbound on its own segregated tracks. Presumably it'll use the existing Up and Down terms on shared tracks, like the GWML. |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
On 02/09/2016 22:13, Recliner wrote:
Incidentally, how are the Crossrail lines named in terms of "up" and "down"? I've read that it will use Tube-like Eastbound and Westbound on its own segregated tracks. Presumably it'll use the existing Up and Down terms on shared tracks, like the GWML. That makes sense. While it would be possible to change from Up to Down at (say) Pudding Mill Lane portal, I doubt they want the risks of confusion. |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
Clive D.W. Feather wrote:
On 02/09/2016 22:13, Recliner wrote: Incidentally, how are the Crossrail lines named in terms of "up" and "down"? I've read that it will use Tube-like Eastbound and Westbound on its own segregated tracks. Presumably it'll use the existing Up and Down terms on shared tracks, like the GWML. That makes sense. While it would be possible to change from Up to Down at (say) Pudding Mill Lane portal, I doubt they want the risks of confusion. If Crossrail does use Up and Down, I think Farringdon would be the datum point, just as it is for Thameslink. |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
On 14.09.16 10:46, Clive D.W. Feather wrote:
On 02/09/2016 22:13, Recliner wrote: Incidentally, how are the Crossrail lines named in terms of "up" and "down"? I've read that it will use Tube-like Eastbound and Westbound on its own segregated tracks. Presumably it'll use the existing Up and Down terms on shared tracks, like the GWML. That makes sense. While it would be possible to change from Up to Down at (say) Pudding Mill Lane portal, I doubt they want the risks of confusion. Is that the way it works on Thameslink? I notice that the starter at SPILL has a D theatre-light indication. Does that indicate down? |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 17:23:40 +0100, "
wrote: On 14.09.16 10:46, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: On 02/09/2016 22:13, Recliner wrote: Incidentally, how are the Crossrail lines named in terms of "up" and "down"? I've read that it will use Tube-like Eastbound and Westbound on its own segregated tracks. Presumably it'll use the existing Up and Down terms on shared tracks, like the GWML. That makes sense. While it would be possible to change from Up to Down at (say) Pudding Mill Lane portal, I doubt they want the risks of confusion. Is that the way it works on Thameslink? The KSW2 sectional appendix uses Up v Down for both sides away from the zero point 4 chains north of Farringdon substation/62 chains south of Farringdon station, at least for what little of the northerly route (abutting LN3213) shows in SO280 of the Kent/Sussex/Wessex appendix. http://www.ontracconnect.co.uk/files...20MCL.2970.pdf [East Midlands route engineering arrangements WON 07 2015/2016] also uses Up v Down for LN3213 Farringdon to Kentish Town junction. I notice that the starter at SPILL has a D theatre-light indication. Does that indicate down? |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
|
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
|
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
On 15.09.16 9:28, Clive D.W. Feather wrote:
On 14/09/2016 18:23, wrote: I notice that the starter at SPILL has a D theatre-light indication. Does that indicate down? It will mean "track D". What "track D" means will depend on the location, and I don't have data for SPILL. Very likely it means "Down Line", with "U" used if the train is being switched to the Up Line. I believe the theatre lamps on SPILL Down indicate an X when crossing over. But if this is the northbound platform, it might be some way of distinguishing Kentish Town from Finsbury Park. Or something else. Possibly. The lines out of Euston are labelled A to E and every signal from Euston to Camden Junction displays the letter of the line the train will be on at the next signal, even if there's no choice. I'm not sure that I understood that? |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 15:23:41 +0100, "
wrote: On 15.09.16 9:28, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: On 14/09/2016 18:23, wrote: I notice that the starter at SPILL has a D theatre-light indication. Does that indicate down? It will mean "track D". What "track D" means will depend on the location, and I don't have data for SPILL. Very likely it means "Down Line", with "U" used if the train is being switched to the Up Line. I believe the theatre lamps on SPILL Down indicate an X when crossing over. But if this is the northbound platform, it might be some way of distinguishing Kentish Town from Finsbury Park. Or something else. Possibly. The lines out of Euston are labelled A to E and every signal from Euston to Camden Junction displays the letter of the line the train will be on at the next signal, even if there's no choice. I'm not sure that I understood that? IIRC you will get successive signals on Camden Bank with no intervening points thus no opportunity to change route. |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
|
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
Recliner wrote:
I must admit I don't understand why Crossrail and the North Kent line have separate island platforms, rather than having the Crossrail pair between the third rail tracks, thus allowing cross-platform interchanges. The down third rail track could have been re-routed to the north of the portal, so that it was on the north, rather than the south of the new Crossrail pair. With that arrangement, both down tracks would flank one island platform, and both up platforms the other. It would save a lot of passengers the hassle of having to cross from island platform to the other. Unless the Crossrails will shunt from one platform to the other via sidings, then it'll only reduce platform-changing by 50%, and in the up direction potentially add confusion about which platform to rush to whilst changing. Anna Noyd-Dryver |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
Clive D.W. Feather wrote:
On 14/09/2016 18:23, wrote: I notice that the starter at SPILL has a D theatre-light indication. Does that indicate down? It will mean "track D". What "track D" means will depend on the location, and I don't have data for SPILL. Very likely it means "Down Line", with "U" used if the train is being switched to the Up Line. But if this is the northbound platform, it might be some way of distinguishing Kentish Town from Finsbury Park. Or something else. The lines out of Euston are labelled A to E and every signal from Euston to Camden Junction displays the letter of the line the train will be on at the next signal, even if there's no choice. This no-longer appears to be the standard as its not being implemented like that in the forthcoming Cardiff Central resignalling. While no example comes to mind immediately, I'm sure there is at least one place where "D" is the initial of the destination. If the line speeds were lower, Colton Junction could have used "D" for Doncaster and "L" for Leeds. Later this year, Line D will be one of the lines through Cardiff Central (some of the others being A B C and E). Anna Noyd-Dryver |
Abbey Wood, latest pictures
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
Recliner wrote: I must admit I don't understand why Crossrail and the North Kent line have separate island platforms, rather than having the Crossrail pair between the third rail tracks, thus allowing cross-platform interchanges. The down third rail track could have been re-routed to the north of the portal, so that it was on the north, rather than the south of the new Crossrail pair. With that arrangement, both down tracks would flank one island platform, and both up platforms the other. It would save a lot of passengers the hassle of having to cross from island platform to the other. Unless the Crossrails will shunt from one platform to the other via sidings, then it'll only reduce platform-changing by 50%, and in the up direction potentially add confusion about which platform to rush to whilst changing. Yes, I assumed that Crossrail trains would have reversed via the sidings, so all Crossrail trains departed from the same island platform 2, shared with the Up North Kent line trains using platform 1. All Crossrail trains would have arrived at platform 3, with the Down North Kent line trains using platform 4. That way, Crossrail pax arriving at Abbey Wood could continue their journeys into Kent with an easy cross platform interchange, and vice versa. I've seen older maps that showed that convenient proposed layout. It's similar to what happens with Central lone Tube trains at Stratford. But I guess the layout they've implemented was cheaper and easier to build, and easier to operate, if less good for interchanging passengers. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk