![]() |
Battersea extension
|
Battersea extension
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:28 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:39:50 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016, d remarked: And if you can't find someone you can't stalk them at work either can you? And if you could find them at work you could follow them home too. It's not necessarily the case that every work stalker follows the victim home. You'd expect that as the obvious escalation though. It's one possible escalation. Another might be making false complaints to the boss about the victim, which depending on their job might be quite serious for them (falsely accusing a teacher of interfering with children, for example). Thats malicious, but its not stalking as most people would interpret it though. -- Spud |
Battersea extension
|
Battersea extension
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:51:59 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: Just curious - does anyone know what form the architecture will take, will it be like the JLE, crossrail or something completely new? Also I presume the 2 new stations will have platform doors too which I imagine will mean some new kit on the trains - unless its already installed. The stations are being designed in line with the TfL Design Idiom. http://content.tfl.gov.uk/station-design-idiom-2.pdf Look at the references to "2015 palette" and this will give a clue as to what the new stns will look like in terms of their finish. They are fairly basic in their design with minimal clutter and complication and from the artists impressions I have seen look fairly unremarkable. Don't expect them to be icons of architectural brilliance. There is a project page at https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-informatio...line-extension and a link from that page to loads of documents. I can't readily find the artists impressions of the stations I've seen but they may be somewhere on the project / documents pages. We do know that the developer of BPS has changed their designs for the over station development which has caused design changes in the tube station. We also know that there is a "commercial discussion" ongoing about who pays for what. LU was previously on schedule before the developer changed their mind and the project is now umpteen weeks late. No idea about PEDs but I suspect they may not be installed at just two stations - quite a complication to add on a large line plus we do not yet know who will build the extra "compatible" 95 and 96 stock trains for expanded services on the Northern and Jubilee Lines. We also don't know if the door spacings will be identical to existing stock or not. Even a marginal difference could present issues with PEDs but obviously LU would want to minimise any such problems. I thought that one of the requirements for the new stock was that it was externally identical to the current 95TS trains (including the cabs, so drivers didnt need special training), but that they use modern technology below the floor? |
Battersea extension
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 15:17:32 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote: On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:51:59 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: stations - quite a complication to add on a large line plus we do not yet know who will build the extra "compatible" 95 and 96 stock trains for expanded services on the Northern and Jubilee Lines. We also I wonder if the trains will be compatible but with completely new electronics (I imagine a lot changes in 20 years), or whether they'll be a carbon copy of the current trains down to the transistor level because it'll be simpler and cheaper to do that which will mean Bombardier almost certainly getting the contract. -- Spud |
Battersea extension
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 15:17:32 +0100 Paul Corfield wrote: On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:51:59 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: stations - quite a complication to add on a large line plus we do not yet know who will build the extra "compatible" 95 and 96 stock trains for expanded services on the Northern and Jubilee Lines. We also I wonder if the trains will be compatible but with completely new electronics (I imagine a lot changes in 20 years), or whether they'll be a carbon copy of the current trains down to the transistor level because it'll be simpler and cheaper to do that which will mean Bombardier almost certainly getting the contract. They will have modern electrics, but why would Bombardier get the contract if they were identical? It had nothing to do with the 95/96 stock. Alstom is the almost certain winner of the deal, as it built the current 95/96 fleets. Also, note that the newer 95 stock has more modern drive trains than the slightly older 96 stock. |
Battersea extension
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:26:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner wrote: I thought that one of the requirements for the new stock was that it was externally identical to the current 95TS trains (including the cabs, so drivers didnt need special training), but that they use modern technology below the floor? It probably is but the procurement process is not yet complete and while I agree with your other post about Alstom being the front runner we must wait to see what happens. Obviously as close to identical or identical is highly desirable but I was only suggesting that there may be some small differences. A matter of millimetres here or there with door positions could cause issues about how PEDs, if they were to be fitted, would work across a mixed fleet. I also don't see PEDs being fitted at two stations with all the interfaces and changes to on board software on a large train fleet that would be necessary. I also don't see TfL tying themselves into PEDs with one door spacing that would be completely incompatible with the likely door spacing on the NTfL. I agree that PEDs are unlikely at these two new stations, but probably not because of NTfL, which isn't planned for the Northern Line, whose fleet is unlikely to be replaced for another 25 or so years. That's probably longer than the service life of PEDs. |
Battersea extension
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:46:11 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote: wrote: On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 15:17:32 +0100 Paul Corfield wrote: On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:51:59 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: stations - quite a complication to add on a large line plus we do not yet know who will build the extra "compatible" 95 and 96 stock trains for expanded services on the Northern and Jubilee Lines. We also I wonder if the trains will be compatible but with completely new electronics (I imagine a lot changes in 20 years), or whether they'll be a carbon copy of the current trains down to the transistor level because it'll be simpler and cheaper to do that which will mean Bombardier almost certainly getting the contract. They will have modern electrics, but why would Bombardier get the contract if they were identical? It had nothing to do with the 95/96 stock. Alstom is the almost certain winner of the deal, as it built the current 95/96 fleets. Also, note that the newer 95 stock has more modern drive trains than the slightly older 96 stock. I thought Bombadier had bought Alstoms train business in the UK a while back but it seems not. But weren't they built in Brum? -- Spud |
Battersea extension
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:46:11 -0000 (UTC) Recliner wrote: wrote: On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 15:17:32 +0100 Paul Corfield wrote: On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:51:59 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: stations - quite a complication to add on a large line plus we do not yet know who will build the extra "compatible" 95 and 96 stock trains for expanded services on the Northern and Jubilee Lines. We also I wonder if the trains will be compatible but with completely new electronics (I imagine a lot changes in 20 years), or whether they'll be a carbon copy of the current trains down to the transistor level because it'll be simpler and cheaper to do that which will mean Bombardier almost certainly getting the contract. They will have modern electrics, but why would Bombardier get the contract if they were identical? It had nothing to do with the 95/96 stock. Alstom is the almost certain winner of the deal, as it built the current 95/96 fleets. Also, note that the newer 95 stock has more modern drive trains than the slightly older 96 stock. I thought Bombadier had bought Alstoms train business in the UK a while back but it seems not. But weren't they built in Brum? The original ones were assembled in Washwood Heath, in the former MetCam factory that built many previous LU fleets, including the 59, 62, 67, 72, 73, D78 and 83 fleets. That factory was subsequently closed by Alstom, so the top-up Jubilee 96TS order was built in an Alstom plant in Barcelona. Bombardier only has one train factory in the UK, in Derby, which it acquired when it took over Adtranz. That factory built the 92, 09 and S stock fleets. It had nothing to do with the 95/96 or older LU fleets. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:43 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk