On 20/07/2018 09:45, wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 17:49:49 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2018\07\19 14:24, wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:39:54 +0100
Robin9 wrote:
Now, of course, the Stratford/North Woolwich section is a tram service
with additional stops and 3rd rail has been replaced by overhead cables
until South Acton Station.

As for the Woolwich Ferry, I don't recall many pedestrians ever using
it. It was always busy with vehicles.

I didn't mean the current woolwich ferry , I remember reading somewhere
that there was a foot ferry to north woolwich that landed at a quay just
near the station.

It's a foot tunnel. I've never heard of a foot ferry in Woolwich.
Pedestrians are of course allowed on the car ferry.

Interesting, didn't know there was a foot tunnel at woolwich.


Though from a nostalgia-fuelled visit last year it is at times more a
cycle tunnel - and I don't mean the cyclists "scooting" their bike where
it's quiet the way they used to 60 years ago.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 July 2018 05:24:31 UTC+1, Basil Jet wrote:
It's looking fairly likely that TfL will have to give away their diesel
trains before the electric trains are ready, and might end up
bustituting for a while.

https://www.londonreconnections.com/...nsport-update/

Overtaken by events. The proposed timetable change that would require the
172s to move to West Midlands Trains has been cancelled. Therefore, if
necessary, the 172 could stay beyond November 2018.

Ah, every cloud has a silver lining!


Two class 710s have been moved to Willesden to ease storage issues at
Derby. Still awaiting the type approval sign off for them to actually run
on NR tracks. Only then can a range of activities commence which would
allow them to be used for driver training on the GOBLIN. Two more 710s
may follow to Willesden but, again, only for storage at this point.


I was wondering if TfL Rail 345s could be used for at least part of the
GOBLIN driver training? I know the software is different, but presumably
the 710s and 345s are very similar to drive, and there's no shortage of
345s waiting to go into service. If so, it could reduce the amount of
hands-on training needed on the tardy 710s.

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 02:24:35 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 July 2018 10:13:34 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
=20
It's looking fairly likely that TfL will have to give away their diesel=
=20
trains before the electric trains are ready, and might end up=20
bustituting for a while.
=20
https://www.londonreconnections.com/...-and-crossrai=
l-a-london-transport-update/
=20
=20
TfL certainly has a lot of looming issues. But I'd have thought it could
redeploy some of the 315s displaced from the Shenfield line as a very
short-term GOBLIN replacement fleet. Presumably Bombardier would have to
fund this, as it's months late with the new Aventras, and it currently
maintains the 315s anyway.

No you can't redeploy 315s. They do not have body mmounted CCTV cameras so =
you need to either retrofit them with this kit - pointless as they going to=
the scrapheap. You could fit platform CCTV and monitors at stations assum=
ing there is space - this would take many months to do and get sign off. Th=

I assume there are rules saying they can't just look out of a window when
closing the doors to check for obstructions?

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 02:29:44 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 July 2018 10:16:01 UTC+1, wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 05:24:29 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
It's looking fairly likely that TfL will have to give away their diesel=
=20
trains before the electric trains are ready, and might end up=20
bustituting for a while.
=20
Its not hard to see why this has happened when you witness the responses =
of
so called "professional" railway employees on here when I suggested perha=
ps
TfL should have ordered a few more 378s when they had the chance or perha=
ps BR=20
should have just electrified the goblin with DC decades ago. It really is=
no=20
surprise the british rail industry is an utter basket case when this is t=
he=20
calibre of the people working in it.

As I was the person who gave you a honest answer to your past questions abo=
ut the 710s vs 378s then I assume you are tarring me with your insults abou=
t "so called professional railway employees". I have always tried to give y=

I wasn't thinking of you tbh. However please explain why tfl didn't order
any more 378s for the goblin when they ordered more cars for the ELL back
in 2013 when the goblin electrification had been given the go-ahead.

On Friday, 20 July 2018 10:41:18 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 July 2018 05:24:31 UTC+1, Basil Jet wrote:
It's looking fairly likely that TfL will have to give away their diesel
trains before the electric trains are ready, and might end up
bustituting for a while.

https://www.londonreconnections.com/...nsport-update/

Overtaken by events. The proposed timetable change that would require the
172s to move to West Midlands Trains has been cancelled. Therefore, if
necessary, the 172 could stay beyond November 2018.

Ah, every cloud has a silver lining!


Two class 710s have been moved to Willesden to ease storage issues at
Derby. Still awaiting the type approval sign off for them to actually run
on NR tracks. Only then can a range of activities commence which would
allow them to be used for driver training on the GOBLIN. Two more 710s
may follow to Willesden but, again, only for storage at this point.


I was wondering if TfL Rail 345s could be used for at least part of the
GOBLIN driver training? I know the software is different, but presumably
the 710s and 345s are very similar to drive, and there's no shortage of
345s waiting to go into service. If so, it could reduce the amount of
hands-on training needed on the tardy 710s.

Well you can't run a 345 on the GOBLIN - won't fit anywhere as they're all too long. No point teaching LO drivers on the GEML as most of them will never drive it - only those working the Romminster shuttle. I also can't see anything that might interrupt the launch of Crossrail being countenanced by TfL. That's the "must happen" event of the year - only 5 and a bit months to go.

I also suspect that the 345s have different performance parameters than the 710s given the need for very rapid acceleration and braking on Crossrail plus higher speeds to run skip stop out west. Their cabs should also be different to reflect the different signalling tech that the trains work with.

I really don't think there are practical alternatives that involve short term use of "alien" rolling stock. TfL, Arriva and Bombardier simply have to get through the slog of getting the 710s into service as fast as they can. The only fall back, if the 172s have to leave, is to revert to a bus replacement service. That would be enormously embarrassing but if Bombardier cannot get the trains to work what else can be done in a short time period at minimum expense? TfL have no money to splash around on more complex and costly alternatives. The shame of it all is that an electrified line and new trains are what is needed but getting there has been painful beyond belief and an object lesson in "how not to do this".

--
Paul C
via Google

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 10:41:18 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
I also suspect that the 345s have different performance parameters than the=
710s given the need for very rapid acceleration and braking on Crossrail p=
lus higher speeds to run skip stop out west. Their cabs should also be dif=
ferent to reflect the different signalling tech that the trains work with.

Is there any case for a common cab EMU control panel to be mandated so that
cross training between various stocks is less of a chore in the same way
that all airliners by airbus (don't know about boeing) tend to have the
controls in similar locations no matter what the aircraft?

On 18/07/2018 10:40, Recliner wrote:

No, they're destined for the scrapyard, but have been kept in reserve

Oooooooh.

Oh, only Class 315s.


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:56:59 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 10:41:18 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
I also suspect that the 345s have different performance parameters than the=
710s given the need for very rapid acceleration and braking on Crossrail p=
lus higher speeds to run skip stop out west. Their cabs should also be dif=
ferent to reflect the different signalling tech that the trains work with.

Is there any case for a common cab EMU control panel to be mandated so that
cross training between various stocks is less of a chore in the same way
that all airliners by airbus (don't know about boeing) tend to have the
controls in similar locations no matter what the aircraft?

Just because they have similar controls doesn't mean you, the pilot,
can walk off an A320 straight onto an A380. Airbus do indeed tout
that possibility but there is a requirement for additional training if
only because of the increased weight and 4 engines. Not only that
but the differences between early A320s and the latest neo models
isn't simply a matter of new engines; display systems in the cockpits
have moved on as well.

I would suggest that the continuous evolution of control systems means
that a single cab configuration, designed now, would be seen as
obsolete quite quickly

Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:56:59 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 10:41:18 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
I also suspect that the 345s have different performance parameters than the=
710s given the need for very rapid acceleration and braking on Crossrail p=
lus higher speeds to run skip stop out west. Their cabs should also be dif=
ferent to reflect the different signalling tech that the trains work with.

Is there any case for a common cab EMU control panel to be mandated so that
cross training between various stocks is less of a chore in the same way
that all airliners by airbus (don't know about boeing) tend to have the
controls in similar locations no matter what the aircraft?

Just because they have similar controls doesn't mean you, the pilot,
can walk off an A320 straight onto an A380. Airbus do indeed tout
that possibility but there is a requirement for additional training if
only because of the increased weight and 4 engines. Not only that
but the differences between early A320s and the latest neo models
isn't simply a matter of new engines; display systems in the cockpits
have moved on as well.

I would suggest that the continuous evolution of control systems means
that a single cab configuration, designed now, would be seen as
obsolete quite quickly

Interestingly, Southwest, the biggest buyer of 737s, has always persuaded
Boeing not to change the flight deck and controls too much as the plane has
gone through multiple generations.

On 2018\07\20 23:55, Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:56:59 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 10:41:18 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
I also suspect that the 345s have different performance parameters than the=
710s given the need for very rapid acceleration and braking on Crossrail p=
lus higher speeds to run skip stop out west. Their cabs should also be dif=
ferent to reflect the different signalling tech that the trains work with.

Is there any case for a common cab EMU control panel to be mandated so that
cross training between various stocks is less of a chore in the same way
that all airliners by airbus (don't know about boeing) tend to have the
controls in similar locations no matter what the aircraft?

Just because they have similar controls doesn't mean you, the pilot,
can walk off an A320 straight onto an A380. Airbus do indeed tout
that possibility but there is a requirement for additional training if
only because of the increased weight and 4 engines. Not only that
but the differences between early A320s and the latest neo models
isn't simply a matter of new engines; display systems in the cockpits
have moved on as well.

I would suggest that the continuous evolution of control systems means
that a single cab configuration, designed now, would be seen as
obsolete quite quickly


Not if Boltar was in charge, because he would have bought enough
aeroplanes for 150 years in 1903.

--
Basil Jet - listening to (Mi-Mz)... Michael Chapman. Michael Karoli.
Michael Nyman. Michael Rother. Mick Karn. Mick Ronson. Mickey Hart.
Midlake. Mike Oldfield. Mike Watt. Miles Davis. Million Dead. Mini
Mansions. Ministry. Minutemen. Mission Of Burma. Mister Modo and Ugly
Mac Beer. Modest Mouse. Modified Man. Moebius. Mogwai. Moloko. Momus.
Monaco. Monks. Monstrance. Monte Cazazza. Moonshake. Mordant Music.
Morrissey. Morton Subotnick. Motörhead. Mouse On Mars. Mozart. Mr
Wright. Mudhoney. Mumford & Sons. Muse. MX-80 Sound. My Bloody
Valentine. My Brightest Diamond