The Central London Railway began with Camel Backed Electric locomotives
hauling unpowered carriages. In order to improve efficiency distinct
humps (mini summits) were built into the track profile at stations from
Notting Hill to Liverpool Street - incoming trains were slowed by the
rising gradient whilst outbound trains were hastened on their way by
the falling out bound gradient. The heavy unsprung locomotives were
soon replaced by multiple units with intermediate powered bogies. Does
anybody know if humps are still built into station tracks on new tube
lines.

Bob wrote:
The Central London Railway began with Camel Backed Electric locomotives
hauling unpowered carriages. In order to improve efficiency distinct
humps (mini summits) were built into the track profile at stations from
Notting Hill to Liverpool Street - incoming trains were slowed by the
rising gradient whilst outbound trains were hastened on their way by
the falling out bound gradient. The heavy unsprung locomotives were
soon replaced by multiple units with intermediate powered bogies. Does
anybody know if humps are still built into station tracks on new tube
lines.

No but the effect of Metromess and TubeCrimes track replacements means
that it feels as if you are going over speed humps at 50 mph, worst bit
of track used it be Pic Acton to Hammersmith.

www.waspies.net wrote in
:

Bob wrote:
The Central London Railway began with Camel Backed Electric
locomotives hauling unpowered carriages. In order to improve
efficiency distinct humps (mini summits) were built into the track
profile at stations from Notting Hill to Liverpool Street - incoming
trains were slowed by the rising gradient whilst outbound trains
were hastened on their way by the falling out bound gradient. The
heavy unsprung locomotives were soon replaced by multiple units with
intermediate powered bogies. Does anybody know if humps are still
built into station tracks on new tube lines.

No but the effect of Metromess and TubeCrimes track replacements means
that it feels as if you are going over speed humps at 50 mph, worst
bit of track used it be Pic Acton to Hammersmith.

I didn't know that new lines were not built with a rising gradient on the
approach to each station and a falling gradient on the departure from it.
I'd have thought that the reasons for which the humps were originally built
(helping slowing down on arrival, speeding up and reducing current
consumption on departure) would be as valid today as they were 150 years
ago.

"Bob" wrote in message
oups.com...
The Central London Railway began with Camel Backed Electric locomotives
hauling unpowered carriages. In order to improve efficiency distinct
humps (mini summits) were built into the track profile at stations from
Notting Hill to Liverpool Street - incoming trains were slowed by the
rising gradient whilst outbound trains were hastened on their way by
the falling out bound gradient. The heavy unsprung locomotives were
soon replaced by multiple units with intermediate powered bogies. Does
anybody know if humps are still built into station tracks on new tube
lines.


Howson's book on the Underground [1981] describes the Victoria line as being
built 'on a hump or sawtooth profile'; it is likely that the Jubilee line
was built with the same falling and rising gradients.

Paul

Is there anything approximating to a "200ft - Low - Club" on the London
Underground?
--
gordon

"www.waspies.net" wrote in message
...
Bob wrote:
The Central London Railway began with Camel Backed Electric locomotives
hauling unpowered carriages. In order to improve efficiency distinct
humps (mini summits) were built into the track profile at stations from
Notting Hill to Liverpool Street - incoming trains were slowed by the
rising gradient whilst outbound trains were hastened on their way by
the falling out bound gradient. The heavy unsprung locomotives were
soon replaced by multiple units with intermediate powered bogies. Does
anybody know if humps are still built into station tracks on new tube
lines.

No but the effect of Metromess and TubeCrimes track replacements means
that it feels as if you are going over speed humps at 50 mph, worst bit of
track used it be Pic Acton to Hammersmith.

Used to be being the operative words....I think the PPP mob replaced it
didnt they...is it better now?

Martin Underwood wrote:
www.waspies.net wrote in
:

Bob wrote:
The Central London Railway began with Camel Backed Electric
locomotives hauling unpowered carriages. In order to improve
efficiency distinct humps (mini summits) were built into the track
profile at stations from Notting Hill to Liverpool Street - incoming
trains were slowed by the rising gradient whilst outbound trains
were hastened on their way by the falling out bound gradient. The
heavy unsprung locomotives were soon replaced by multiple units with
intermediate powered bogies. Does anybody know if humps are still
built into station tracks on new tube lines.

No but the effect of Metromess and TubeCrimes track replacements means
that it feels as if you are going over speed humps at 50 mph, worst
bit of track used it be Pic Acton to Hammersmith.

I didn't know that new lines were not built with a rising gradient on the
approach to each station and a falling gradient on the departure from it.
I'd have thought that the reasons for which the humps were originally built
(helping slowing down on arrival, speeding up and reducing current
consumption on departure) would be as valid today as they were 150 years
ago.


I think it was an innovation on the Central London Railway wasn't it,
with the earliest lines not having it? None of them quite 150 years
ago anyway. Maybe 105.

The Central London Railway began with Camel Backed Electric
locomotives hauling unpowered carriages. In order to improve
efficiency distinct humps (mini summits) were built into the track
profile at stations from Notting Hill to Liverpool Street ...

I think it was an innovation on the Central London Railway wasn't it,

No.

with the earliest lines not having it?

The subsurface lines didn't do it; the cost of a cut-and-cover tunnel
increases with depth. Tubes are another matter, and the first deep
tube line, the City & South London Railway of 1890, did do it. (The
part of this line still in use today is from Stockwell to near Borough
on the Northern Line.)

I don't have exact details on all the humps, but the book on the C&SLR
by T.S. Lascelles says that "at most but not all stations there was
a short down grade of about 1 in 30 to assist trains in accelerating",
while Jackson and Croome in "Rails Through the Clay" say that "where
possible, intermediate stations were built on humps".
--
Mark Brader | "The job of an engineer is to build systems that
Toronto | people can trust. By this criterion, there
| exist few software engineers." --John Shore

My text in this article is in the public domain.

wrote in
:

Martin Underwood wrote:

I didn't know that new lines were not built with a rising gradient
on the approach to each station and a falling gradient on the
departure from it. I'd have thought that the reasons for which the
humps were originally built (helping slowing down on arrival,
speeding up and reducing current consumption on departure) would be
as valid today as they were 150 years ago.

I think it was an innovation on the Central London Railway wasn't it,
with the earliest lines not having it? None of them quite 150 years
ago anyway. Maybe 105.

Ah, so it's only a feature of the tube lines and not the cut-and-cover
lines? I didn't know that. In that case, my approximate figure of 150 years
(actually 143 years if you take the first Underground line as being built in
1863) changes to 105 years (Central line built in 1900), as you say.

Martin Underwood wrote:
wrote in
:

Martin Underwood wrote:

I didn't know that new lines were not built with a rising gradient
on the approach to each station and a falling gradient on the
departure from it. I'd have thought that the reasons for which the
humps were originally built (helping slowing down on arrival,
speeding up and reducing current consumption on departure) would be
as valid today as they were 150 years ago.

I think it was an innovation on the Central London Railway wasn't it,
with the earliest lines not having it? None of them quite 150 years
ago anyway. Maybe 105.

Ah, so it's only a feature of the tube lines and not the cut-and-cover
lines? I didn't know that. In that case, my approximate figure of 150 years
(actually 143 years if you take the first Underground line as being built in
1863) changes to 105 years (Central line built in 1900), as you say.


Apparently, from the other message, it was used on the C&SLR, which
would make it 115 or so.