Automatic tubes?
 

Anyone know which of the tube lines are now driven automatically?
Further is the system the same as was used on the Woodford loop and
Victoria line?
--
Clive

Automatic tubes?
 

In article ,
Clive wrote:
Anyone know which of the tube lines are now driven automatically?

Central and Victoria. And DLR.

Further is the system the same as was used on the Woodford loop and
Victoria line?

I don't know what was used on the Woodford Loop, but the two systems
in use today are different.

--
Mike Bristow - really a very good driver

Automatic tubes?
 

Clive wrote:
Anyone know which of the tube lines are now driven automatically?

Central and Victoria, using different systems.

Further is the system the same as was used on the Woodford loop and
Victoria line?

The system used on the Central is different to that used on the Woodford
loop and Victoria line.

Some info here http://www.davros.org/rail/signallin...s/central.html

Automatic tubes?
 

Brimstone wrote:
Clive wrote:
Anyone know which of the tube lines are now driven automatically?

Central and Victoria, using different systems.

Both lines, of course, rely on a driver in the cab to control the
on-board systems, so they are not completely automatic.

In Paris, Line 14 of the Métro has no staff on trains or, as far as I
could see, on platforms. Even at the terminus, if you fail to alight,
they take you into the reversing siding for a few minutes before
starting the return journey.

When I was last in Paris in April, there were reports in the local press
that Line 1 would be converted to automatic (crewless) operation, which
will involve the installation of platform-edge doors at all stations.
One of the stated reasons for the conversion was to reduce the number of
closures due to strikes. Bob Crow, look out!

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Automatic tubes?
 

In message , Mike Bristow
writes
In article ,
Clive wrote:
Anyone know which of the tube lines are now driven automatically?

Central and Victoria. And DLR.

Further is the system the same as was used on the Woodford loop and
Victoria line?

I don't know what was used on the Woodford Loop, but the two systems
in use today are different.

Can you tell me what the difference is?
--
Clive

Automatic tubes?
 

14 codes on the Central as opposed to four on the Victoria for a start.
The track circuits which carry the codes are also of a different type,
but the principles are fairly similar.

Automatic tubes?
 

Both lines, of course, rely on a driver in the cab to control the
on-board systems, so they are not completely automatic.
In Paris, Line 14 of the Métro has no staff on trains or, as far as I
could see, on platforms. Even at the terminus, if you fail to alight,
they take you into the reversing siding for a few minutes before
starting the return journey.

That sounds to me very unsafe, in the event of an emergency like what
we had here recently, evecuation would have been much slower, plus some
stations need to have different 'dwell times.'

Automatic tubes?
 

Joe wrote:
Both lines, of course, rely on a driver in the cab to control the
on-board systems, so they are not completely automatic.
In Paris, Line 14 of the Métro has no staff on trains or, as far
as I could see, on platforms. Even at the terminus, if you fail
to alight, they take you into the reversing siding for a few
minutes before starting the return journey.

That sounds to me very unsafe, in the event of an emergency like
what we had here recently, evecuation would have been much slower,

Not necessarily. In the case of the Piccadilly Line bombing, people in
the rear five cars had nobody to help them until rescuers arrived along
the tunnel from King's Cross. The tunnels in Paris are mostly double
track with no fourth rail, which makes evacuation easier.

plus some stations need to have different 'dwell times.'

Maybe, but I can think of various ways of achieving that automatically.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Automatic tubes?
 

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 00:35:10 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

Maybe, but I can think of various ways of achieving that automatically.

Certainly if (as is likely outside the UK) people are disciplined and
refrain from blocking sensors to hold doors open.

Something similar is used on bendy buses in Hamburg. The rear door is
on a timer with a sensor in the step. If someone is standing on the
step (thus, it is assumed, trying to board), the door remains open.
After the step is cleared and the time has passed, it closes and the
driver can depart.

IMX, it has only been when the bus has been crammed full and people
have accidentally stood on the step that this has caused delays. I
never experienced anyone doing it deliberately. In the UK, I expect
the scallies would soon realise...

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Automatic tubes?
 

could see, on platforms. Even at the terminus, if you fail to alight,
they take you into the reversing siding for a few minutes before
starting the return journey.

The HSE would be wetting their nappies over that if it happened here.
Don't forget on the tube we have to have the farce of a driver walking
down the train checking its empty and closing each carriage one by one
before he takes it out of service. Just in case someone should be
transported into dangerous territory known as a siding! Yes I know some
idiot a few years back fell between cars on a central line train after
he got taken into a siding and tried to get out while it was moving but
then
a number of people die each year falling out of windows. Perhaps we
should have a law that says all windows should be sealed too.

B2003

Automatic tubes?
 

Certainly if (as is likely outside the UK) people are disciplined and
refrain from blocking sensors to hold doors open.

Easily solved - make the doors close harder as they do in some other
countries so if you block them it actually hurts. People would soon
refrain from doing it.

B2003

Automatic tubes?
 

Boltar wrote:
could see, on platforms. Even at the terminus, if you fail to
alight, they take you into the reversing siding for a few minutes
before starting the return journey.

The HSE would be wetting their nappies over that if it happened
here. Don't forget on the tube we have to have the farce of a
driver walking down the train checking its empty and closing each
carriage one by one before he takes it out of service.

That's because the car-end doors can be opened by passengers. On Line
14 in Paris, there are full-width gangways between cars, so there's no
risk of a passenger getting on to the track. (And on other lines with
older stock, it needs the Métro equivalent of a J-door key to open the
car-end doors.)
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Automatic tubes?
 

"Richard J." wrote in message
. uk...
Boltar wrote:
could see, on platforms. Even at the terminus, if you fail to
alight, they take you into the reversing siding for a few minutes
before starting the return journey.

The HSE would be wetting their nappies over that if it happened
here. Don't forget on the tube we have to have the farce of a
driver walking down the train checking its empty and closing each
carriage one by one before he takes it out of service.

That's because the car-end doors can be opened by passengers. On Line
14 in Paris, there are full-width gangways between cars, so there's no
risk of a passenger getting on to the track. (And on other lines with
older stock, it needs the Métro equivalent of a J-door key to open the
car-end doors.)
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Richard

LUL did have a FACT (Fully Automatically Controlled Train) as part of the
design development - it was one of the sets used on the Woodford to Hainault
section, but never went into passenger service (I don't think it was ever
intended to do so). The train did run during the day with the doors opening
and closing automatically with staff ensuring that no passengers actually
got on. The only basic addition to the basic Vic Line system was auto
opening and closing of doors, plus auto start.

OTOH, it was one of the 1960 stock sets.

Peter
--
Peter Corser
Linslade, Beds, UK




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Automatic tubes?
 

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:35:00 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

That's because the car-end doors can be opened by passengers. On Line
14 in Paris, there are full-width gangways between cars, so there's no
risk of a passenger getting on to the track. (And on other lines with
older stock, it needs the Métro equivalent of a J-door key to open the
car-end doors.)

So how do the passengers get out in an emergency?

Automatic tubes?
 

"Boltar" typed


Certainly if (as is likely outside the UK) people are disciplined and
refrain from blocking sensors to hold doors open.

Easily solved - make the doors close harder as they do in some other
countries so if you block them it actually hurts. People would soon
refrain from doing it.

B2003

Until it breaks a kid's neck...

They already close quite hard enough IMO.

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

Automatic tubes?
 

On 31 Jul 2005 02:29:21 -0700, "Boltar"
wrote:

Certainly if (as is likely outside the UK) people are disciplined and
refrain from blocking sensors to hold doors open.

Easily solved - make the doors close harder as they do in some other
countries so if you block them it actually hurts. People would soon
refrain from doing it.

In an unsupervised, computer-controlled situation this would be
downright dangerous.

On the main line, where there is someone supervising door closure, the
doors do usually close quite harshly. Anyone who's tried to hold back
the doors of a Class 153 DMU[1], for example, will know this.

[1] I did this once to assist a guard in boarding, as the external
staff controls had for whatever reason failed. The sensible thing
might have been for me to hold the emergency release instead, but she
operated that and I held the door back once open. The force with
which it then attempted to close was rather surprising.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Automatic tubes?
 

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:50:47 +0100, asdf
wrote:

So how do the passengers get out in an emergency?

I think it would be necessary to have side platforms and emergency
release on the side doors like the DLR underground sections do, as
passengers may well try to leave the train while others are still
moving in an emergency, in the absence of any supervision.

OOI, does it have this?

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Automatic tubes?
 

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:35:00 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

Boltar wrote:
could see, on platforms. Even at the terminus, if you fail to
alight, they take you into the reversing siding for a few minutes
before starting the return journey.

The HSE would be wetting their nappies over that if it happened
here. Don't forget on the tube we have to have the farce of a
driver walking down the train checking its empty and closing each
carriage one by one before he takes it out of service.

That's because the car-end doors can be opened by passengers. On Line
14 in Paris, there are full-width gangways between cars, so there's no
risk of a passenger getting on to the track. (And on other lines with
older stock, it needs the Métro equivalent of a J-door key to open the
car-end doors.)

Are the new trains for LUL going to have corridor connections and if
not, why not?

Automatic tubes?
 

The Picc's 1973 Stock were originally hard & fast in closing and
certainly deterred obstruction. Alas LT (as as) gave in to complains
and reduced the air pressure.

Automatic tubes?
 

That is a proposal for the Victoria Line I believe but I think you will
need articulation on all cars to achieve this. This removes the
opportunity to swop defective units easily, and operating block trains
increases the number of spares needed. Whether the infracos are
prepared to pay for that we'll see.

Automatic tubes?
 

In message , Peter Corser
writes
OTOH, it was one of the 1960 stock sets.
The stock was 59 stock.
--
Clive

Automatic tubes?
 

Cheeky wrote:
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:35:00 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

Boltar wrote:
could see, on platforms. Even at the terminus, if you fail to
alight, they take you into the reversing siding for a few minutes
before starting the return journey.

The HSE would be wetting their nappies over that if it happened
here. Don't forget on the tube we have to have the farce of a
driver walking down the train checking its empty and closing each
carriage one by one before he takes it out of service.

That's because the car-end doors can be opened by passengers. On
Line 14 in Paris, there are full-width gangways between cars, so
there's no risk of a passenger getting on to the track. (And on
other lines with older stock, it needs the Métro equivalent of a
J-door key to open the car-end doors.)

Are the new trains for LUL going to have corridor connections and if
not, why not?

Sub-surface lines: yes. Deep-level tubes: no.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Automatic tubes?
 

Sorry...do you mean sub-surface are paying for extra cars but tube
aren't?

Or articulation is only viable on deep tubes? (if so why?).

Automatic tubes?
 

In article .com,
() wrote:

Sorry...do you mean sub-surface are paying for extra cars but tube
aren't?

Or articulation is only viable on deep tubes? (if so why?).

Other way round, surely?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Automatic tubes?
 

Automatic tubes?
 

Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:50:47 +0100, asdf
wrote:

So how do the passengers get out in an emergency?

I think it would be necessary to have side platforms and emergency
release on the side doors like the DLR underground sections do, as
passengers may well try to leave the train while others are still
moving in an emergency, in the absence of any supervision.

OOI, does it have this?

I believe the control centre can broadcast on a train's PA to tell
passengers what to do. I assume there must be an emergency release on
some of the side doors. Only Line 14 has an evacuation walkway in the
tunnels.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Automatic tubes?
 

asdf wrote:
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:35:00 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

That's because the car-end doors can be opened by passengers. On
Line 14 in Paris, there are full-width gangways between cars, so
there's no risk of a passenger getting on to the track. (And on
other lines with older stock, it needs the Métro equivalent of a
J-door key to open the car-end doors.)

So how do the passengers get out in an emergency?

Good question, and I don't know the answer (and can't find it in Brian
Hardy's Paris Metro Handbook). Maybe there's an emergency release on
the sliding doors. I've seen emergency ladders clipped in place at car
ends. Métro trains don't have front doors in the cabs like LU,
presumably because the tunnels are mainly double-track.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Automatic tubes?
 

"Mike Bristow" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Clive wrote:
Anyone know which of the tube lines are now driven automatically?

Central and Victoria. And DLR.

Further is the system the same as was used
on the Woodford loop and Victoria line?

I don't know what was used on the Woodford Loop,
but the two systems in use today are different.

Woodford to Hainault was used as a prototype for the Victoria Line, and so
was presumably identical or similar to the system still in use on the
Victoria. I think it was removed years or even decades before the Central
Line ATO was introduced.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

Automatic tubes?
 

Until it breaks a kid's neck...

A kid could break their neck in a bus door which can be quite
violent. Perhaps you could campaign for them to be made out of
marshmallows with cotton wool sides?

They already close quite hard enough IMO.

Well I can hold a tube door open with 3 fingers so unless you're a
3 stone midget with a muscle wasting disease I hardly think they close
hard at all. Besides , I'm sure other countries have had the usual
"think of the children/pensioners/some-other-sobsville-group"
argument and ignored them. Just like we should.

B2003

Automatic tubes?
 

I thought non-emergency inter-car connection wouldn't work on
sub-surface without articulation because of some of the tight curves
and consequential outswing at car ends. This is very pronounced on the
D Stock but obviously would be less so on the new SSL 'S Stock' cars
which will be shorter. Not so much a problem on the Victoria Line which
was built to more modern standards I would have thought.

If pasengers can walk through an entire train as Metronet suggest, and
not just within a unit, this implies block-formed trains, or at least
no double-ended units (i.e. occasional middle cabs). As soon as you
lose the flexibility to swop units and split trains easily, you will
need more trains overall to ensure that one defective car doesn't
'stop' an entire 6, 7 or 8-car train.

Richard J. wrote:
wrote:
Richard J. wrote:
Cheeky wrote:

Are the new trains for LUL going to have corridor connections and if
not, why not?

Sub-surface lines: yes. Deep-level tubes: no.

Sorry...do you mean sub-surface are paying for extra cars but tube
aren't?

Or articulation is only viable on deep tubes? (if so why?).

Cheeky asked about corridor connections, by which I assume he meant
passenger-accessible corridors between cars. The answer is that that
the new sub-surface trains will have, in Metronet's words
"interconnecting gangways, allowing passengers to walk through the
entire train". But the mock-ups of the new Victoria Line trains show
conventional inter-car doors as at present.

I don't understand your point about extra sub-surface cars.

Articulation, by which I assume you mean sharing one bogie between two
cars, is a different issue altogether. The Paris Métro has wide
inter-car connections on its latest stock, but the cars are not
articulated in that sense.

Finally, you're very welcome to join this conversation, but please quote
the previous text (which I've reconstructed above), otherwise it gets
very difficult to work out which sub-thread you've attached yourself to.
In Google Groups, you do that by clicking on "show options", then on the
"Reply" immediately after the Subject line, not the "Reply" at the end
of the message.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Automatic tubes?
 

wrote:
I thought non-emergency inter-car connection wouldn't work on
sub-surface without articulation because of some of the tight curves
and consequential outswing at car ends.

It works in Paris on the very sharp curves at Bastille on Line 1 without
articulation.
e.g. http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?15538

This is very pronounced on the D Stock but obviously would be
less so on the new SSL 'S Stock' cars which will be shorter.
Not so much a problem on the Victoria Line which was built to
more modern standards I would have thought.

True, but I guess they'll want to use the same design for the Bakerloo.

If pasengers can walk through an entire train as Metronet suggest,
and not just within a unit, this implies block-formed trains, or at
least no double-ended units (i.e. occasional middle cabs). As soon
as you lose the flexibility to swop units and split trains easily,
you will need more trains overall to ensure that one defective car
doesn't 'stop' an entire 6, 7 or 8-car train.

Perhaps, but there are many other factors affecting availability and
cost. Not splitting trains would probably give a small reliability
bonus, for example.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Automatic tubes?
 

"Joe" wrote in message .

That sounds to me very unsafe, in the event of an emergency like what
we had here recently, evecuation would have been much slower, plus some
stations need to have different 'dwell times.'

I looked at this point on the Copenhagen system which is
completely unmanned and has platform doors for safety
reasons.

The dwell times all appeared to be much longer than necessary
even at the busy stations, and it seemed to wait for the same time
at the less busy ones.

tim

Automatic tubes?
 

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 22:53:48 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:



Cheeky asked about corridor connections, by which I assume he meant
passenger-accessible corridors between cars. The answer is that that
the new sub-surface trains will have, in Metronet's words
"interconnecting gangways, allowing passengers to walk through the
entire train". But the mock-ups of the new Victoria Line trains show
conventional inter-car doors as at present.

That's exactly what I was getting at :)

presumably the different geometry of the deep-tube units makes this
more difficult to achieve...