|
TfL 5-year investment programme
No-one's yet mentioned the TfL 5-year £10bn investment programme,
announced today, which uses the borrowing powers recently given to the Mayor. Press release at: http://tube.tfl.gov.uk/content/press...es/0410/12.asp Full document at: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/...-year-plan.pdf Reading one of the news sites, someone complained that Crossrail and Thameslink 2000 weren't included - but since Crossrail is being arranged separately and TL2K isn't a TfL project, I don't think this is something to latch on to desperately. Most projects in the Plan have been announced before, but there are a few items of interest: * Tube air-cooled trains project, which has been mentioned before but for which I don't have any details (would anyone be able to point me at any?) * Bus Countdown replacement system which someone mentioned on here recently. The timescale in the document calls it "Bus Countdown next stop & audio". * Oyster rollout to all of Silverlink Metro which I think many people guessed at. * The computer-generated picture of Hoxton station uses the brown TfL Rail roundel on the wall of the viaduct (I thought that was an interesting touch!). -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
TfL 5-year investment programme
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:41:42 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote:
No-one's yet mentioned the TfL 5-year £10bn investment programme, announced today, which uses the borrowing powers recently given to the Mayor. Press release at: http://tube.tfl.gov.uk/content/press...es/0410/12.asp Full document at: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/...-year-plan.pdf Reading one of the news sites, someone complained that Crossrail and Thameslink 2000 weren't included - but since Crossrail is being arranged separately and TL2K isn't a TfL project, I don't think this is something to latch on to desperately. Most projects in the Plan have been announced before, but there are a few items of interest: well precisely. The biggest disappointment is that there is nothing very radical in terms of pushing the bus network onto the next level which was part of the TfL proposition to government. Looks like that battle has been lost - at least for now. The other disappointment concerns the relegation of tram based solutions but I imagine this reflects the now quite strong "anti" bias in government and the understandable decision to pursue LU schemes while they have the chance as they will deliver more benefit overall. * Tube air-cooled trains project, which has been mentioned before but for which I don't have any details (would anyone be able to point me at any?) there was an option in the SSL PPP Contract for air conditioned trains on the SSL network. That option has been exercised. The balance of the "air cooled" work relates to trials with additional water pipes to cool deep tube tunnels - as suggested via the LU / Mayor "gives us your bright ideas" initiative. No idea what lines it will be trialled on. * Bus Countdown replacement system which someone mentioned on here recently. The timescale in the document calls it "Bus Countdown next stop & audio". Well the Band 3 radio, AVL and Countdown systems are to be replaced with one overall system which make a huge amount of sense. The next stop and audio facility will probably be driven off the back of the AVL system and interfaced into the on bus displays and PA systems which are prevalent in DDA compatible vehicles. This is my educated guess. * Oyster rollout to all of Silverlink Metro which I think many people guessed at. I would agree that there is no great surprise. I'm waiting for the decision that hives Silverlink County off into the West Coast franchise and then moves all of Silverlink Metro into TfL Rail. That would fit in very nicely with the DLR takeover of NLL south of Stratford, the removal of through Southern Railway trains from the West London Line as well as the "franchising" cough of the East London Line extension. The transfer of Silverlink Metro en block to TfL Rail turns that division into an operator overnight. The next interesting question is whether the Infrastructure Controller role moves across in whole or in part - the performance of Network Rail (with its wider powers following the rail review) will be crucial in framing how this issue is resolved. All IMO, of course. * The computer-generated picture of Hoxton station uses the brown TfL Rail roundel on the wall of the viaduct (I thought that was an interesting touch!). Yes - I did a bit of a double take on that but it fits in with my "logic" above about ELLX and Silverlink Metro. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
TfL 5-year investment programme
Paul Corfield wrote in
: On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:41:42 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote: No-one's yet mentioned the TfL 5-year £10bn investment programme, announced today, which uses the borrowing powers recently given to the Mayor. ... well precisely. The biggest disappointment is that there is nothing very radical in terms of pushing the bus network onto the next level which was part of the TfL proposition to government. Looks like that battle has been lost - at least for now. The other disappointment concerns the relegation of tram based solutions but I imagine this reflects the now quite strong "anti" bias in government and the understandable decision to pursue LU schemes while they have the chance as they will deliver more benefit overall. The biggest disappointment is just how little you get for £ 10,000,000,000 these days... |
TfL 5-year investment programme
David Jackman wrote:
The biggest disappointment is just how little you get for £ 10,000,000,000 these days... It's a lack of balls on the part of politicians. My personal favourite is http://www.personalrapidtransit.com/. A similar UK designed system is being considered for Swindon[1] at the moment. IIRC ~£8 million/mile as opposed to ~50 million/mile for light rail/tram of approx similar capacity. [1] http://www.southwestrda.org.uk/news/...ReleaseID=1089 -- Colin Smith: Colin.Smith at archeus.plus.com |
TfL 5-year investment programme
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 18:50:07 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote:
there was an option in the SSL PPP Contract for air conditioned trains on the SSL network. That option has been exercised. The balance of the "air cooled" work relates to trials with additional water pipes to cool deep tube tunnels - as suggested via the LU / Mayor "gives us your bright ideas" initiative. No idea what lines it will be trialled on. Isn't this just exactly the same as the chunnel?, Im not sure where the bright idea was needed. I assume as you say "additional" as its already in use on the underground? Steve |
TfL 5-year investment programme
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Mr. Precision wrote:
David Jackman wrote: The biggest disappointment is just how little you get for £ 10,000,000,000 these days... It's a lack of balls on the part of politicians. My personal favourite is http://www.personalrapidtransit.com/. Yes, this is what we need: a safe, clean, quiet, energy-efficient urban transport system, using small, light vehicles, with no schedules or fixed routes, which delivers people wherever they want to go, 24 hours a day, ~3 times faster than cars or buses. And kids can use it. All that, and it's cheap, too. The thing is, it's already been done: IT'S CALLED A BICYCLE! Jesus. tom ps 10 billion would buy about 100 million bikes ... -- POTATO POWER IS UNTRACEABLE POWER |
TfL 5-year investment programme
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 07:03:45 GMT, Steve Peake
wrote: On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 18:50:07 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote: there was an option in the SSL PPP Contract for air conditioned trains on the SSL network. That option has been exercised. The balance of the "air cooled" work relates to trials with additional water pipes to cool deep tube tunnels - as suggested via the LU / Mayor "gives us your bright ideas" initiative. No idea what lines it will be trialled on. Isn't this just exactly the same as the chunnel?, Im not sure where the bright idea was needed. I assume as you say "additional" as its already in use on the underground? Don't know if it is the same as the Chunnel, I mean additional in the context of more equipment being placed inside or close to our tunnels, not that there are any such water pipes for this purpose there at present. I am not aware that we have any cooling facilities for the tunnels which use water - the typical arrangement is to use the trains to push air through the tunnels and vent shafts and fans. From what I understand the only place with remotely modern equipment is the Jubilee Line Extension part of the network. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
TfL 5-year investment programme
Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Mr. Precision wrote: David Jackman wrote: The biggest disappointment is just how little you get for £ 10,000,000,000 these days... It's a lack of balls on the part of politicians. My personal favourite is http://www.personalrapidtransit.com/. Yes, this is what we need: a safe, clean, quiet, energy-efficient urban transport system, using small, light vehicles, with no schedules or fixed routes, which delivers people wherever they want to go, 24 hours a day, ~3 times faster than cars or buses. And kids can use it. All that, and it's cheap, too. The thing is, it's already been done: IT'S CALLED A BICYCLE! And 99.9% of journeys are made on other forms of transport. Tell you anything? People would rather use anything as long as it isn't a bicycle. On a bike you have to put effort in, you get tired, you get cold, you get wet, you get dirty, you get knocked down, you get sweaty and Oh, you only travel at 15kph. If you believe bicycles are the answer, you haven't thought the question through. -- Colin Smith: Colin.Smith at archeus.plus.com |
TfL 5-year investment programme
"Mr. Precision" wrote the following
in: And 99.9% of journeys are made on other forms of transport. Tell you anything? People would rather use anything as long as it isn't a bicycle. On a bike you have to put effort in, you get tired, you get cold, you get wet, you get dirty, you get knocked down, you get sweaty and Oh, you only travel at 15kph. And this is why people are getting fatter. -- message by the incredible Robin May. "The British don't like successful people" - said by British failures Who is Abi Titmuss? What is she? Why is she famous? http://robinmay.fotopic.net |
TfL 5-year investment programme
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:49:23 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote:
Don't know if it is the same as the Chunnel, I mean additional in the context of more equipment being placed inside or close to our tunnels, not that there are any such water pipes for this purpose there at present. I am not aware that we have any cooling facilities for the tunnels which use water - the typical arrangement is to use the trains to push air through the tunnels and vent shafts and fans. From what I understand the only place with remotely modern equipment is the Jubilee Line Extension part of the network. I've the chunnel ones on tv, big 40cm pipes in both running tunnels with chilled water flowing through. I guess any tunnel ones must be quite small, don't know how many it would take to make a difference. Steve |
TfL 5-year investment programme
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Mr. Precision wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote: On Tue, 12 Oct 2004, Mr. Precision wrote: David Jackman wrote: The biggest disappointment is just how little you get for £ 10,000,000,000 these days... It's a lack of balls on the part of politicians. My personal favourite is http://www.personalrapidtransit.com/. Yes, this is what we need: a safe, clean, quiet, energy-efficient urban transport system, using small, light vehicles, with no schedules or fixed routes, which delivers people wherever they want to go, 24 hours a day, ~3 times faster than cars or buses. And kids can use it. All that, and it's cheap, too. The thing is, it's already been done: IT'S CALLED A BICYCLE! And 99.9% of journeys are made on other forms of transport. Tell you anything? Yes, that most people are lazy and stupid. And also that at present, the road network is wrongly configured. People would rather use anything as long as it isn't a bicycle. Okay then, space hoppers all round! On a bike you have to put effort in, you get tired, No, you get _fit_. You only have to put in as much effort as you like - i quite enjoy a bit of exercise in the morning. If you're terribly attatched to your 30 minutes of sitting on your arse avoiding eye contact, you can take a more leisurely pace. you get cold, you get wet, Only in the winter, whereas you get hot and sweaty on the tube all year round. you get dirty, I'm really advocating bikes for trips in cities, where we have roads, which are typically not surfaced with mud. YMMV. you get knocked down, That's more of a problem with cars (and lorries in particular) than bikes. you get sweaty and Oh, you only travel at 15kph. And yet you get there, door to door, faster than by any other mode of transport. If you believe bicycles are the answer, you haven't thought the question through. On the contrary - and i haven't just thought about it, i've done it! tom -- I'm angry, but not Milk and Cheese angry. -- Mike Froggatt |
TfL 5-year investment programme
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:41:42 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote: No-one's yet mentioned the TfL 5-year £10bn investment programme, announced today, which uses the borrowing powers recently given to the Mayor. Press release at: http://tube.tfl.gov.uk/content/press...es/0410/12.asp Full document at: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/...-year-plan.pdf Reading one of the news sites, someone complained that Crossrail and Thameslink 2000 weren't included - but since Crossrail is being arranged separately and TL2K isn't a TfL project, I don't think this is something to latch on to desperately. Most projects in the Plan have been announced before, but there are a few items of interest: well precisely. The biggest disappointment is that there is nothing very radical in terms of pushing the bus network onto the next level which was part of the TfL proposition to government. Looks like that battle has been lost - at least for now. The other disappointment concerns the relegation of tram based solutions but I imagine this reflects the now quite strong "anti" bias in government and the understandable decision to pursue LU schemes while they have the chance as they will deliver more benefit overall. * Tube air-cooled trains project, which has been mentioned before but for which I don't have any details (would anyone be able to point me at any?) there was an option in the SSL PPP Contract for air conditioned trains on the SSL network. That option has been exercised. The balance of the "air cooled" work relates to trials with additional water pipes to cool deep tube tunnels - as suggested via the LU / Mayor "gives us your bright ideas" initiative. No idea what lines it will be trialled on. Found the relevant info online after a little digging - South Bank Uni are working with LU to introduce a trial at Victoria's Victoria line platforms where 200 l/s water from the River Tyburn (apparently) is pumped through a space between the two platforms, and fans draw hot air from the platforms across the cold water, with an air temperature reduction of about 5°C. The warmed water will be sent off to the Thames (presumably by the time it gets there, it will have cooled down). -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
TfL 5-year investment programme
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
... * Tube air-cooled trains project, which has been mentioned before but for which I don't have any details (would anyone be able to point me at any?) there was an option in the SSL PPP Contract for air conditioned trains on the SSL network. That option has been exercised. The balance of the "air cooled" work relates to trials with additional water pipes to cool deep tube tunnels - as suggested via the LU / Mayor "gives us your bright ideas" initiative. No idea what lines it will be trialled on. Found the relevant info online after a little digging - South Bank Uni are working with LU to introduce a trial at Victoria's Victoria line platforms where 200 l/s water from the River Tyburn (apparently) is pumped through a space between the two platforms, and fans draw hot air from the platforms across the cold water, with an air temperature reduction of about 5°C. The warmed water will be sent off to the Thames (presumably by the time it gets there, it will have cooled down). If anyone's interested, the journal papers (published before the specific plan to use Victoria station as a trial was announced) are online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2003.10.017 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2003.10.018 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2003.10.019 Angus |
TfL 5-year investment programme
Tom Anderson wrote:
The thing is, it's already been done: IT'S CALLED A BICYCLE! And 99.9% of journeys are made on other forms of transport. Tell you anything? Yes, that most people are lazy and stupid. And you really think ranting about bicycles is going to change that? And yet you get there, door to door, faster than by any other mode of transport. Motorcycle is the fastest mode of transport through London. They keep running these tube vs bus vs car vs motorcycle vs bicycle competitions across London and the motorbike just keeps winning. I ride a motorcycle, my choice. I wear a grands worth of safety kit, I get wet and I don't believe for a second that it's the answer to London's mass transit problems. If you believe bicycles are the answer, you haven't thought the question through. On the contrary - and i haven't just thought about it, i've done it! Aren't you glad to be one in a thousand... Or is it one in ten thousand? I forgot. -- UCE probe. Don't send mail to there's nobody home. The address captures spammer addresses and /dev/nulls all their mail. Regards, Colin.Smith at archeus.plus.com |
TfL 5-year investment programme
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Mr. Precision wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote: The thing is, it's already been done: IT'S CALLED A BICYCLE! And 99.9% of journeys are made on other forms of transport. Tell you anything? Yes, that most people are lazy and stupid. And you really think ranting about bicycles is going to change that? Er, no. If i wanted to change the world, i wouldn't be posting on usenet. And yet you get there, door to door, faster than by any other mode of transport. Motorcycle is the fastest mode of transport through London. They keep running these tube vs bus vs car vs motorcycle vs bicycle competitions across London and the motorbike just keeps winning. Ah, i hadn't considered motorbikes - that sounds quite plausible. I ride a motorcycle, my choice. I wear a grands worth of safety kit, I get wet and I don't believe for a second that it's the answer to London's mass transit problems. Why not? For what it's worth, i agree with you, and i'd say that the reasons are the poor safety (although i don't actually know how dangerous motorbikes are), the cost, and the fact that motorbikes don't really make more efficient use of road space, since although they are smaller, they still require a lot of space around them. If you believe bicycles are the answer, you haven't thought the question through. On the contrary - and i haven't just thought about it, i've done it! Aren't you glad to be one in a thousand... Or is it one in ten thousand? I forgot. I like to think of us as the elite avant garde of the revolution. tom -- there is not much call for a Chinese George Michael |
TfL 5-year investment programme
Tom Anderson wrote in message ...
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Mr. Precision wrote: Tom Anderson wrote: The thing is, it's already been done: IT'S CALLED A BICYCLE! And 99.9% of journeys are made on other forms of transport. Tell you anything? Yes, that most people are lazy and stupid. And you really think ranting about bicycles is going to change that? Er, no. If i wanted to change the world, i wouldn't be posting on usenet. And yet you get there, door to door, faster than by any other mode of transport. Motorcycle is the fastest mode of transport through London. They keep running these tube vs bus vs car vs motorcycle vs bicycle competitions across London and the motorbike just keeps winning. Ah, i hadn't considered motorbikes - that sounds quite plausible. I ride a motorcycle, my choice. I wear a grands worth of safety kit, I get wet and I don't believe for a second that it's the answer to London's mass transit problems. Why not? For what it's worth, i agree with you, and i'd say that the reasons are the poor safety (although i don't actually know how dangerous motorbikes are) Pretty dangerous is the answer. I don't think that the figures make good reading. Something like 1-2% of the traffic, 20-25% of the fatalities. How many of those had an accident while riding in a manner that contributed to the risk compared to people riding in the right position within the speed limit and at the speed suitable for the conditions I don't know (but would like to) Still got a bike though before anyone thinks I'm slagging motorcyclists off. |
TfL 5-year investment programme
Dave Babb wrote:
Pretty dangerous is the answer. I don't think that the figures make good reading. Something like 1-2% of the traffic, 20-25% of the fatalities. How many of those had an accident while riding in a manner that contributed to the risk compared to people riding in the right The single most common accident involving motorcyclists is a car pulling out of a junction across the path of the bike. position within the speed limit and at the speed suitable for the conditions I don't know (but would like to) Approx 40% of accidents adjudged the motorcyclists fault, but that's highly averaged, each accident is unique. Speed isn't the big issue, motorcyclists are more likely to stick to limits than other drivers in an urban environment where the overwhelming majority of accidents occur, less likely to obey limits on country roads. Motorcyclists are more likely to be involved in a single vehicle accident in a country environment than a car is and when they do, it's more likely to be fatal. Inexperienced riders misjudging corners and their own skill is the doozie. In terms of numbers of accidents per mile, experienced motorcyclists are about half as likely to be involved in an accident as an experienced car driver. The problem is that we are 50 times more likely to be killed or seriously injured when we do smack into something. Inexperienced motorcyclists (L plates) on the other hand are damned near suicidal according to the stats, the ones who survive learn to be safe. Still got a bike though before anyone thinks I'm slagging motorcyclists off. Motorcyclists are aware of and simply accept the risks. The second most dangerous form of transport in the UK. Only horses are more dangerous. -- UCE probe. Don't send mail to there's nobody home. The address captures spammer addresses and /dev/nulls all their mail. Regards, Colin.Smith at archeus.plus.com |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:20 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk