|
New York Times on Crossrail
On 03/08/2017 12:50, Recliner wrote:
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 12:28:02 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message -septe mber.org, at 07:19:00 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: But IEPs aren't expected on that line. Aren't they... No, all the ones on order are spoken for by VTEC and GWR. Not true: do your research. Cite please. Class 802/2s have been ordered for Hull Trains (5) and TPE (19). IEP is a DfT procurement programme, rather than a type of rolling stock. The Hull Trains and TPE trains (and some of the GWR ones) are being bought conventionally by "normal" ROSCOs, rather than as part of the IEP. cf random industrial saddle tanks not necessarily being J94s, or Javelin being a brand name for a service to Stratford during the 2012 Olympics which was operated on behalf of (cont'd platform 94) -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
New York Times on Crossrail
On 03/08/2017 14:52, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:55:05 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: As an aside, and don't take this the wrong way, but have you recently had some traumatic event? You seem to be arguing much more than usual, often claiming expertise that you don't have. Perhaps you should take a break of a few weeks from posting on, or even reading, these news groups? I've recently become a bit less tolerant of people spouting nonsense, I agree. Usenet being a brilliant place to go to avoid people spouting nonsense... -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
New York Times on Crossrail
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 03/08/2017 12:50, Recliner wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 12:28:02 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message -septe mber.org, at 07:19:00 on Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: But IEPs aren't expected on that line. Aren't they... No, all the ones on order are spoken for by VTEC and GWR. Not true: do your research. Cite please. Class 802/2s have been ordered for Hull Trains (5) and TPE (19). IEP is a DfT procurement programme, rather than a type of rolling stock. The Hull Trains and TPE trains (and some of the GWR ones) are being bought conventionally by "normal" ROSCOs, rather than as part of the IEP. Yes, I know, but it's a convenient, widely-used shorthand that everyone understands. And this stock might well be ordered by the DfT anyway. cf random industrial saddle tanks not necessarily being J94s, or Javelin being a brand name for a service to Stratford during the 2012 Olympics which was operated on behalf of (cont'd platform 94) |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at
00:02:59 on Sat, 5 Aug 2017, Arthur Figgis remarked: But IEPs aren't expected on that line. Aren't they... No, all the ones on order are spoken for by VTEC and GWR. Not true: do your research. Cite please. Class 802/2s have been ordered for Hull Trains (5) and TPE (19). IEP is a DfT procurement programme, rather than a type of rolling stock. The Hull Trains and TPE trains (and some of the GWR ones) are being bought conventionally by "normal" ROSCOs, rather than as part of the IEP. While I agree with that, until an order is placed for class 800-something for the MML then it's just as much vapourware as this for 'The North': "... deploying alternative-fuel trains on the route by 2021", the date for the MML refranchise, the deadline for new tiolets in HSTs, and most ludicrous: "hydrogen power". ps. and there's always the weasel words - "subject to business case" -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
|
New York Times on Crossrail
On Thursday, August 3, 2017 at 2:06:46 PM UTC+5:30, wrote:
As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Trains from the north either terminate at King's Cross or go to a through station under St Pancras. To reach the latter, a tunnel was burrowed under the canal to the north of St Pancras. When I checked a few months back, the tunnel wouldn't be pressed into service for at least a year. |
New York Times on Crossrail
Ding Bat wrote:
On Thursday, August 3, 2017 at 2:06:46 PM UTC+5:30, wrote: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Trains from the north either terminate at King's Cross or go to a through station under St Pancras. To reach the latter, a tunnel was burrowed under the canal to the north of St Pancras. The two Canal Tunnels, actually, built over a decade ago. When I checked a few months back, the tunnel wouldn't be pressed into service for at least a year. Yes, they will finally go into passenger service next year, but as Roland showed, the tunnels are already being used for ECS movements. It's on the Thameslink for all, even Spud, to see: http://www.thameslinkprogramme.co.uk.../canal-tunnels |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:31:33 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 13:28:13 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, d remarked: Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... ....we will ignore everything you say, as you've now admitted it's founded upon ignorance. Feel free to point out where I said anything of the sort. Your clearly admitted ignorance of the most basic details of the Thameslink routes. So not knowing about part of the new thameslink route means I don't know anything at all? Oh how handwaving convenient for your limp riposte. -- Spud |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:29:05 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:31:33 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 13:28:13 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, d remarked: Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... ....we will ignore everything you say, as you've now admitted it's founded upon ignorance. Feel free to point out where I said anything of the sort. Your clearly admitted ignorance of the most basic details of the Thameslink routes. So not knowing about part of the new thameslink route means I don't know anything at all? Oh how handwaving convenient for your limp riposte. You've also previously demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about the Thameslink route from Blackfriars to London Bridge in the thread you started entitled 'Blackfriars - London Bridge: "When was there last a service that went through both these stations? I noticed theres a 3 track chord linking the line from blackfriars to the charing X line but the tracks were rusty and there were some road-rail maintenance machines sitting on it. Is it just for occasional out of service stock movements now?" |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Mon, 07 Aug 2017 11:25:13 +0100
Recliner wrote: On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:29:05 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:31:33 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 13:28:13 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, d remarked: Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... ....we will ignore everything you say, as you've now admitted it's founded upon ignorance. Feel free to point out where I said anything of the sort. Your clearly admitted ignorance of the most basic details of the Thameslink routes. So not knowing about part of the new thameslink route means I don't know anything at all? Oh how handwaving convenient for your limp riposte. You've also previously demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about the Thameslink route from Blackfriars to London Bridge in the thread you started entitled 'Blackfriars - London Bridge: And? Like I've said, I wasn't interested in the thameslink project. How does that translate to "everything"? -- Spud |
New York Times on Crossrail
wrote:
On Mon, 07 Aug 2017 11:25:13 +0100 Recliner wrote: On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:29:05 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:31:33 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 13:28:13 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, d remarked: Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... ....we will ignore everything you say, as you've now admitted it's founded upon ignorance. Feel free to point out where I said anything of the sort. Your clearly admitted ignorance of the most basic details of the Thameslink routes. So not knowing about part of the new thameslink route means I don't know anything at all? Oh how handwaving convenient for your limp riposte. You've also previously demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about the Thameslink route from Blackfriars to London Bridge in the thread you started entitled 'Blackfriars - London Bridge: And? Like I've said, I wasn't interested in the thameslink project. How does that translate to "everything"? It's a reasonable assumption to make about any line you don't use regularly. |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 3:55:15 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:29:05 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:31:33 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 13:28:13 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, d remarked: Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... ....we will ignore everything you say, as you've now admitted it's founded upon ignorance. Feel free to point out where I said anything of the sort. Your clearly admitted ignorance of the most basic details of the Thameslink routes. So not knowing about part of the new thameslink route means I don't know anything at all? Oh how handwaving convenient for your limp riposte. You've also previously demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about the Thameslink route from Blackfriars to London Bridge in the thread you started entitled 'Blackfriars - London Bridge: "When was there last a service that went through both these stations? I noticed theres a 3 track chord linking the line from blackfriars to the charing X line but the tracks were rusty and there were some road-rail maintenance machines sitting on it. Is it just for occasional out of service stock movements now?" What's wrong with lacking knowledge? You too don't know everything. |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Sunday, August 6, 2017 at 4:29:45 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote:
Ding Bat wrote: On Thursday, August 3, 2017 at 2:06:46 PM UTC+5:30, wrote: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Trains from the north either terminate at King's Cross or go to a through station under St Pancras. To reach the latter, a tunnel was burrowed under the canal to the north of St Pancras. The two Canal Tunnels, actually, built over a decade ago. They're unfortunately named. A canal tunnel used to be for waterborne vessels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...United_Kingdom I was referring to the one for north to south traffic; obviously, there's another for the other direction. When I checked a few months back, the tunnel wouldn't be pressed into service for at least a year. Yes, they will finally go into passenger service next year, but as Roland showed, the tunnels are already being used for ECS movements. It's on the Thameslink for all, even Spud, to see: http://www.thameslinkprogramme.co.uk.../canal-tunnels |
New York Times on Crossrail
Ding Bat wrote:
On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 3:55:15 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:29:05 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:31:33 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 13:28:13 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, d remarked: Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... ....we will ignore everything you say, as you've now admitted it's founded upon ignorance. Feel free to point out where I said anything of the sort. Your clearly admitted ignorance of the most basic details of the Thameslink routes. So not knowing about part of the new thameslink route means I don't know anything at all? Oh how handwaving convenient for your limp riposte. You've also previously demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about the Thameslink route from Blackfriars to London Bridge in the thread you started entitled 'Blackfriars - London Bridge: "When was there last a service that went through both these stations? I noticed theres a 3 track chord linking the line from blackfriars to the charing X line but the tracks were rusty and there were some road-rail maintenance machines sitting on it. Is it just for occasional out of service stock movements now?" What's wrong with lacking knowledge? You too don't know everything. That's certainly true: there are many, many things I don't know. But I don't go round pouring scorn on things I know little or nothing about, as Spud/Boltar does. |
New York Times on Crossrail
Ding Bat wrote:
On Sunday, August 6, 2017 at 4:29:45 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: Ding Bat wrote: On Thursday, August 3, 2017 at 2:06:46 PM UTC+5:30, wrote: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Trains from the north either terminate at King's Cross or go to a through station under St Pancras. To reach the latter, a tunnel was burrowed under the canal to the north of St Pancras. The two Canal Tunnels, actually, built over a decade ago. They're unfortunately named. A canal tunnel used to be for waterborne vessels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...United_Kingdom I agree, and it's also a rather ambiguous name: one that linked it to the area might have been better (eg, St Pancras tunnels?). I was referring to the one for north to south traffic; obviously, there's another for the other direction. Well, it might have been a double-track tunnel. |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 07:17:41 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote: Ding Bat wrote: On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 3:55:15 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:29:05 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: "When was there last a service that went through both these stations? I noticed theres a 3 track chord linking the line from blackfriars to the charing X line but the tracks were rusty and there were some road-rail maintenance machines sitting on it. Is it just for occasional out of service stock movements now?" What's wrong with lacking knowledge? You too don't know everything. That's certainly true: there are many, many things I don't know. But I don't go round pouring scorn on things I know little or nothing about, as Spud/Boltar does. Such as? In case you hadn't noticed that example you cited is a simple question. -- Spud |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 15:01:39 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote: wrote: And? Like I've said, I wasn't interested in the thameslink project. How does that translate to "everything"? It's a reasonable assumption to make about any line you don't use regularly. What odd logical fallacies you come up with sometimes. -- Spud |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 12:53:09 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote:
Ding Bat wrote: On Sunday, August 6, 2017 at 4:29:45 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: Ding Bat wrote: On Thursday, August 3, 2017 at 2:06:46 PM UTC+5:30, wrote: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Trains from the north either terminate at King's Cross or go to a through station under St Pancras. To reach the latter, a tunnel was burrowed under the canal to the north of St Pancras. The two Canal Tunnels, actually, built over a decade ago. They're unfortunately named. A canal tunnel used to be for waterborne vessels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...United_Kingdom I agree, and it's also a rather ambiguous name: one that linked it to the area might have been better (eg, St Pancras tunnels?). I was referring to the one for north to south traffic; obviously, there's another for the other direction. Well, it might have been a double-track tunnel. Tunneling today is done with an automated mole having a circular cross section, so a Paris style semi-circular tunnel for double-track is impracticable. Where does London have multi-track tunnels? Snow Hill? The route of the former Circle Line? FWIW, the Canal tunnels' portal is double-track. |
New York Times on Crossrail
On 2017\08\08 10:40, Ding Bat wrote:
Tunneling today is done with an automated mole having a circular cross section, so a Paris style semi-circular tunnel for double-track is impracticable. Where does London have multi-track tunnels? There are numerous between Kings Cross and Potters Bar. I doubt they are all cut-and-cover. |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 02:40:15 -0700 (PDT), Ding Bat
wrote: On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 12:53:09 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: Ding Bat wrote: On Sunday, August 6, 2017 at 4:29:45 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: Ding Bat wrote: On Thursday, August 3, 2017 at 2:06:46 PM UTC+5:30, wrote: As an aside, how do trains on the ECML get south of the river, where's the link to the current thameslink route? Trains from the north either terminate at King's Cross or go to a through station under St Pancras. To reach the latter, a tunnel was burrowed under the canal to the north of St Pancras. The two Canal Tunnels, actually, built over a decade ago. They're unfortunately named. A canal tunnel used to be for waterborne vessels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...United_Kingdom I agree, and it's also a rather ambiguous name: one that linked it to the area might have been better (eg, St Pancras tunnels?). I was referring to the one for north to south traffic; obviously, there's another for the other direction. Well, it might have been a double-track tunnel. Tunneling today is done with an automated mole having a circular cross section, so a Paris style semi-circular tunnel for double-track is impracticable. Where does London have multi-track tunnels? Snow Hill? The route of the former Circle Line? FWIW, the Canal tunnels' portal is double-track. That's true of most Tube tunnel portals, as the initial shallow section is cut and cover. The TBMs only do the deep tunneling. All of the sub-surface LU line tunnels are cut and cover. That's not just the Circle line, but the Met line to Finchley Road and the District line tunnels in East London. The Piccadilly line tunnel to Hatton Cross is also shallow cut and cover double track. All of the old mainline railway tunnels are also cut and cover, and usually double track. Even the Brunel ELL Thames tunnel, though obviously not cut and cover, is double-track. I've not seen an analysis, but there must be almost as much double track tunnel in central London as deep bore single track tube tunnels. |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 10:49:50 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote: On 2017\08\08 10:40, Ding Bat wrote: Tunneling today is done with an automated mole having a circular cross section, so a Paris style semi-circular tunnel for double-track is impracticable. Where does London have multi-track tunnels? There are numerous between Kings Cross and Potters Bar. I doubt they are all cut-and-cover. No, definitely not, but they weren't drilled using TBMs, either. Given when they were built, I assume they were cut by hand. |
New York Times on Crossrail
"Recliner" wrote in message ... Ding Bat wrote: On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 3:55:15 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:29:05 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:31:33 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 13:28:13 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, d remarked: Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... ....we will ignore everything you say, as you've now admitted it's founded upon ignorance. Feel free to point out where I said anything of the sort. Your clearly admitted ignorance of the most basic details of the Thameslink routes. So not knowing about part of the new thameslink route means I don't know anything at all? Oh how handwaving convenient for your limp riposte. You've also previously demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about the Thameslink route from Blackfriars to London Bridge in the thread you started entitled 'Blackfriars - London Bridge: "When was there last a service that went through both these stations? I noticed theres a 3 track chord linking the line from blackfriars to the charing X line but the tracks were rusty and there were some road-rail maintenance machines sitting on it. Is it just for occasional out of service stock movements now?" What's wrong with lacking knowledge? You too don't know everything. That's certainly true: there are many, many things I don't know. But I don't go round pouring scorn on things I know little or nothing about, as Spud/Boltar does. but you do go around stating your personal opinions as fact and berate anyone who tries to tell you you are mistaken tim |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 12:21:54 +0100, "tim..."
wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... Ding Bat wrote: On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 3:55:15 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:29:05 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:31:33 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 13:28:13 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, d remarked: Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... ....we will ignore everything you say, as you've now admitted it's founded upon ignorance. Feel free to point out where I said anything of the sort. Your clearly admitted ignorance of the most basic details of the Thameslink routes. So not knowing about part of the new thameslink route means I don't know anything at all? Oh how handwaving convenient for your limp riposte. You've also previously demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about the Thameslink route from Blackfriars to London Bridge in the thread you started entitled 'Blackfriars - London Bridge: "When was there last a service that went through both these stations? I noticed theres a 3 track chord linking the line from blackfriars to the charing X line but the tracks were rusty and there were some road-rail maintenance machines sitting on it. Is it just for occasional out of service stock movements now?" What's wrong with lacking knowledge? You too don't know everything. That's certainly true: there are many, many things I don't know. But I don't go round pouring scorn on things I know little or nothing about, as Spud/Boltar does. but you do go around stating your personal opinions as fact and berate anyone who tries to tell you you are mistaken I assume you're referring to my expectations for the future? Obviously no predictions are fact, but I don't make predictions that aren't well researched and supported by evidence. And they're not necessarily my opinions or what I would like to happen, just what majority opinion thinks will happen. Of course they're not certain to happen, because no predictions can be 100% accurate, but at least I research what I state. |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 12:21:54 +0100
"tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message -septem er.org... Ding Bat wrote: On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 3:55:15 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:29:05 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:31:33 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 13:28:13 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, d remarked: Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... ....we will ignore everything you say, as you've now admitted it's founded upon ignorance. Feel free to point out where I said anything of the sort. Your clearly admitted ignorance of the most basic details of the Thameslink routes. So not knowing about part of the new thameslink route means I don't know anything at all? Oh how handwaving convenient for your limp riposte. You've also previously demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about the Thameslink route from Blackfriars to London Bridge in the thread you started entitled 'Blackfriars - London Bridge: "When was there last a service that went through both these stations? I noticed theres a 3 track chord linking the line from blackfriars to the charing X line but the tracks were rusty and there were some road-rail maintenance machines sitting on it. Is it just for occasional out of service stock movements now?" What's wrong with lacking knowledge? You too don't know everything. That's certainly true: there are many, many things I don't know. But I don't go round pouring scorn on things I know little or nothing about, as Spud/Boltar does. but you do go around stating your personal opinions as fact and berate anyone who tries to tell you you are mistaken Neither do I. However feel free to post an example of where I've done it if you're so sure. Thats the amusing thing about you, recliner, perry and ambulance blocker, you tend to accuse me of this sort of thing yet when I ask for some examples you all mysteriously go quiet. Ain't that strange? -- Spud |
New York Times on Crossrail
wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 12:21:54 +0100 "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message -septem er.org... Ding Bat wrote: On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 3:55:15 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 08:29:05 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 16:31:33 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 13:28:13 on Fri, 4 Aug 2017, d remarked: Indeed what? Is knowing the precise junction layouts of the various lines a prerequsite of being able to discuss this? No, but it would help you not look like a total prat. When I start wearing an anorak and hanging around at the end of platforms carrying a thermos flask and notebook I might give a ****. Until then... ....we will ignore everything you say, as you've now admitted it's founded upon ignorance. Feel free to point out where I said anything of the sort. Your clearly admitted ignorance of the most basic details of the Thameslink routes. So not knowing about part of the new thameslink route means I don't know anything at all? Oh how handwaving convenient for your limp riposte. You've also previously demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about the Thameslink route from Blackfriars to London Bridge in the thread you started entitled 'Blackfriars - London Bridge: "When was there last a service that went through both these stations? I noticed theres a 3 track chord linking the line from blackfriars to the charing X line but the tracks were rusty and there were some road-rail maintenance machines sitting on it. Is it just for occasional out of service stock movements now?" What's wrong with lacking knowledge? You too don't know everything. That's certainly true: there are many, many things I don't know. But I don't go round pouring scorn on things I know little or nothing about, as Spud/Boltar does. but you do go around stating your personal opinions as fact and berate anyone who tries to tell you you are mistaken Neither do I. However feel free to post an example of where I've done it if you're so sure. Thats the amusing thing about you, recliner, perry and ambulance blocker, you tend to accuse me of this sort of thing yet when I ask for some examples you all mysteriously go quiet. Ain't that strange? It's too painful to go through all your previous misspelt postings. But, rest assured, I'll try to remember to point them out next time. Let's start with your latest Waterloo thread — was that meant to be fact or opinion? |
New York Times on Crossrail
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 14:17:53 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote: wrote: Thats the amusing thing about you, recliner, perry and ambulance blocker, you tend to accuse me of this sort of thing yet when I ask for some examples you all mysteriously go quiet. Ain't that strange? It's too painful to go through all your previous misspelt postings. But, Painful? Thats an interesting euphamism for not possible. rest assured, I'll try to remember to point them out next time. Let's start with your latest Waterloo thread — was that meant to be fact or opinion? Are you unable to seperate the 2 parts? Actually, tell a lie, they'd installed a bouncy castle and a funfair. -- Spud |
New York Times on Crossrail
On 2017\08\08 11:54, Recliner wrote:
That's true of most Tube tunnel portals, as the initial shallow section is cut and cover. The TBMs only do the deep tunneling. I've just looked at numerous tube portals in Bing Maps using the 45 degree view. The pair of round portals are clearly visible in most. I have found none which clearly match your description. |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 12:21:54 on Tue, 8 Aug 2017,
tim... remarked: but you do go around stating your personal opinions as fact and berate anyone who tries to tell you you are mistaken Can you two get a room, before I'm forced to go out and buy some more popcorn? -- Roland Perry |
New York Times on Crossrail
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2017\08\08 11:54, Recliner wrote: That's true of most Tube tunnel portals, as the initial shallow section is cut and cover. The TBMs only do the deep tunneling. I've just looked at numerous tube portals in Bing Maps using the 45 degree view. The pair of round portals are clearly visible in most. I have found none which clearly match your description. I don't think the round Tube tunnels are visible at either end of the Jubilee line, nor the Bakerloo line, nor the western end of the Piccadilly line; not sure of the eastern end, but I don't think so. The Central line Stratford tunnel portals are separate, with Crossrail tracks in between, while the (separate) western portals are buried under the Westfield development and no longer visible. I'm not sure about the Northern line northern portals, but the tube tunnels are visble at Morden. The Victoria line and Drain are entirely underground, so no portals. The DLR Bank tunnel round tube tunnels are visible, but I don't think the other DLR tube tunnels are. |
New York Times on Crossrail
|
New York Times on Crossrail
wrote:
In article , () wrote: On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:47:29 +0100, Basil Jet wrote: On 2017\08\08 11:54, Recliner wrote: That's true of most Tube tunnel portals, as the initial shallow section is cut and cover. The TBMs only do the deep tunneling. I've just looked at numerous tube portals in Bing Maps using the 45 degree view. The pair of round portals are clearly visible in most. I have found none which clearly match your description. The Picaddilly tunnel where it goes down after Barons Court is just visible on those maps and isn't round portals. Only because there's a (fairly short) covered way before the tunnels start. Of course, but that was exactly my point (read the thread): many of the tube tunnel portals have a short, double-track, cut and cover section before the separate circular deep tubes start. As a result, the latter aren't visible from outside. |
Twin portals are the norm on LUL (was New York Times onCrossrail)
On 2017\08\08 22:02, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote: On 2017\08\08 11:54, Recliner wrote: That's true of most Tube tunnel portals, as the initial shallow section is cut and cover. The TBMs only do the deep tunneling. I've just looked at numerous tube portals in Bing Maps using the 45 degree view. The pair of round portals are clearly visible in most. I have found none which clearly match your description. I don't think the round Tube tunnels are visible at either end of the Jubilee line, Finchley Road - N/A shared with Met. Canning Town - the lines are covered by a structure which I believe has something to do with flood protection. nor the Bakerloo line, N/A straddling DC line nor the western end of the Piccadilly line; N/A shared with District not sure of the eastern end, Bounds Green, Southgate South and Southgate North all have twin portals visible from the air. Southgate North is very visible from a footbridge (IRL, not on the internet) which enables you to easily see that the entrance is larger than the exit for air pressure reasons. but I don't think so. The Central line Stratford tunnel portals are separate, with Crossrail tracks in between, while the (separate) western portals are buried under the Westfield development and no longer visible. I'm not sure about the Northern line northern portals, Finchley - N/A because of depot access between passenger tracks Golders Green - 3 tubes visible (sic) Hendon Central - 2 tubes visible Colindale - can't tell, but almost certainly has separate tubes visible in the right light but the tube tunnels are visible at Morden. Visible from the platforms IIRC. The Victoria line and Drain are entirely underground, so no portals. The DLR Bank tunnel round tube tunnels are visible, but I don't think the other DLR tube tunnels are. |
Twin portals are the norm on LUL (was New York Times onCrossrail)
On 2017\08\09 03:18, wrote:
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 02:22:46 +0100, Basil Jet wrote: nor the western end of the Piccadilly line; N/A shared with District Where do District trains share a tunnel entrance with the Piccadilly ? You're right, they don't... the Picc trains descend between the District tracks west of West Kensington. I can't be sure from Bing what the portal looks like. visible from the air. Southgate North is very visible from a footbridge (IRL, not on the internet) which enables you to easily see that the entrance is larger than the exit for air pressure reasons. Is that this location http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1400129 Yes The exit northbound is two different sizes in quick succession http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1400129 I think the outer one is to create an impression of symmetry with the entrance, which is the same size but extends inward with the larger diameter. I'm not sure why symmetry would be important in a portal pair though. |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message
-septe mber.org, at 21:02:55 on Tue, 8 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked: The Victoria line Must make getting the trains in and out of the depot at Northumberland Park a bitch. and Drain Up to a point. The depot at Waterloo (which I've had a walking tour round back in the day) is more sunken than under*ground*. https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5067/5...83047678_b.jpg are entirely underground, so no portals. https://binged.it/2frzpgA -- Roland Perry |
Twin portals are the norm on LUL (was New York Timeson Crossrail)
wrote:
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 02:22:46 +0100, Basil Jet wrote: nor the western end of the Piccadilly line; N/A shared with District Where do District trains share a tunnel entrance with the Piccadilly ? AFAIK they only share tracks occasionally between Hammersmith and Acton town and the odd District non passenger working to Northfields. The District and Picc lines share track from Acton Town through Ealing Common station to Hanger Lane Junction. Once in a while, a District line train gets sent, wrongly, towards North Ealing, and occasionally Piccadilly line trains serve Ealing Broadway. Years ago it used be a District route shared with the Piccadilly but that stopped long before the line was extended to Heathrow Originally it was purely a District line route all the way to Hounslow. The Piccadilly line came later. |
New York Times on Crossrail
In message , at 07:44:52 on Thu, 3 Aug
2017, Roland Perry remarked: 2. Bedford to Kettering. Newly electrified, Is it, already? Not completed, but intended to be. We are talking about NR and Grayling here. The only thing you can reasonably expect is that whatever they claim today may change tomorrow. suitable for 125 mph electric or diesel trains. IEPs will outperform the existing diesels. 3. Kettering to Leicester and on to Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield. Electrification work started, Just a few bridge works. but work will be suspended indefinitely. Bi-mode IEPs will be able to run, but performance will be worse than current diesel trains, specially the Meridians. So keep the Meridians. Yes, but not the HSTs. There's only one tph (to Nottingham) operated by HSTs, and now electrification has been cancelled they'll have to find something else to replace the HST. But I doubt it'll be IEPs. It occurs to me that if the line is electrified to Corby (despite it being "North of Kettering", that's what the "Bedford to Kettering electrification" is all about) then they could release the three Meridians used for that service to replace HSTs on the main line. -- Roland Perry |
Twin portals are the norm on LUL (was New York Times on Crossrail)
|
Twin portals are the norm on LUL (was New York Times on
In article , (Basil Jet)
wrote: On 2017\08\09 03:18, wrote: The exit northbound is two different sizes in quick succession http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1400129 I think the outer one is to create an impression of symmetry with the entrance, which is the same size but extends inward with the larger diameter. I'm not sure why symmetry would be important in a portal pair though. Aesthetics. London Transport was very keen on them in the 1930s, thanks to Frank Pick. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
New York Times on Crossrail
In article ,
() wrote: On Tue, 08 Aug 2017 19:42:39 -0500, wrote: In article , () wrote: On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:47:29 +0100, Basil Jet wrote: On 2017\08\08 11:54, Recliner wrote: That's true of most Tube tunnel portals, as the initial shallow section is cut and cover. The TBMs only do the deep tunneling. I've just looked at numerous tube portals in Bing Maps using the 45 degree view. The pair of round portals are clearly visible in most. I have found none which clearly match your description. The Picaddilly tunnel where it goes down after Barons Court is just visible on those maps and isn't round portals. Only because there's a (fairly short) covered way before the tunnels start. So there is a short section on the approach to the tunnels from the surface that was dug and covered . Seems to match what Recliner described fairly accurately. Are you saying that section just because it is short does not count as Cut and Cover. In the case of the Piccadilly line portal east of Baron's Court it's all part of the structure of the cutting from which the tunnels start. It's even possible that part of the covered way was added later when the tracks between West Kensington and Hammersmith were rearranged when the Piccadilly was projected westwards in the 1930s. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:21 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk