reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

I was waiting at Turnham green for 25 mins for a richmond train.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Aosmosis wrote:
How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

I was waiting at Turnham green for 25 mins for a richmond train.

Yes, it happens. Richmond trains normally start from Upminster, so they
have 37 stations before Turnham Green in which to develop delays, not to
mention interleaving the service with the Hammersmith & City, the
Circle, and the Wimbledon, Ealing, Edgware Road and Olympia services of
the District. Richmond trains also have to share tracks and an
inadequate signalling system between Gunnersbury and Richmond. Delays
there on an eastbound service can affect the next westbound run of that
train.

Richmond trains are supposed to run every 10 minutes for most of the
day, so you may be due for a charter refund if your delay was more than
15 minutes.

The NLL (not NNL) is also fairly unreliable in my experience.

Was any announcement made at Turnham Green about the delay? When was
this?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 19:24:52 +0100, "Aosmosis" wrote:

How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

I was waiting at Turnham green for 25 mins for a richmond train.

Next time get the bus (or walk) to Gunnersbury, and get the
District/NLL from there. The NLL has a timetable, so at least you can
plan for that, even though they are sometimes late.

--
to respond via email, visit:
http://tinyurl.com/e48z9

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Richard J. wrote:

(snip)

The NLL (not NNL) is also fairly unreliable in my experience.


NLL being the North London Line, currently operated by Silverlink
Metro.

I'm an occasional user of the NLL, I find that the trains are often
delayed by a few minutes but cancelations are rare - unless that is
there's some major problem somewhere - and once you're on the train it
doesn't get held up by anything else. After all it is an every 15
minute (or every 20 in the evening) metro service that carries a lot of
people these days.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:32:27 +0100, Tom Robinson
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 19:24:52 +0100, "Aosmosis" wrote:

How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

I was waiting at Turnham green for 25 mins for a richmond train.

Next time get the bus (or walk) to Gunnersbury, and get the
District/NLL from there. The NLL has a timetable, so at least you can
plan for that, even though they are sometimes late.

There is also a live departure board on the ATOC site for Gunnersbury
so you can use that, if you are near to a computer with internet
access before you set off:

http://www.livedepartureboards.co.uk...dep.aspx?T=GUN

--
to respond via email, visit:
http://tinyurl.com/e48z9

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

"Richard J." wrote in message
.uk...
Aosmosis wrote:
How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

I was waiting at Turnham green for 25 mins for a richmond train.

Yes, it happens. Richmond trains normally start from Upminster, so they
have 37 stations before Turnham Green in which to develop delays, not to
mention interleaving the service with the Hammersmith & City, the Circle,
and the Wimbledon, Ealing, Edgware Road and Olympia services of the
District. Richmond trains also have to share tracks and an inadequate
signalling system between Gunnersbury and Richmond. Delays there on an
eastbound service can affect the next westbound run of that train.

Richmond trains are supposed to run every 10 minutes for most of the day,
so you may be due for a charter refund if your delay was more than 15
minutes.

The NLL (not NNL) is also fairly unreliable in my experience.

Was any announcement made at Turnham Green about the delay? When was
this?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

No aannouncement was made. Also there is a passenger help box. I pressed the
button and it said operator unavailable, please contact a memeber of staff.
Do do this I would have had to go downstairs touch out and approach the
ticket window. Totally unacceptable.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Aosmosis wrote:

"Richard J." wrote in message
.uk...

(snip)

Was any announcement made at Turnham Green about the delay? When was
this?


No aannouncement was made. Also there is a passenger help box. I pressed the
button and it said operator unavailable, please contact a memeber of staff.
Do do this I would have had to go downstairs touch out and approach the
ticket window. Totally unacceptable.


Fill in London Underground's online feedback form and tell them about
it, it won't take more than a few minutes:

https://www.tfl.gov.uk/tube/contacts/form.asp

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Tom Robinson wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:32:27 +0100, Tom Robinson
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 19:24:52 +0100, "Aosmosis" wrote:

How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

I was waiting at Turnham green for 25 mins for a richmond train.


What ever happened to the proposal too run a branch from the central
line to Richmond and discontinue the district service? Was it all
connected to Crossrail going ahead?

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

kytelly wrote:
Tom Robinson wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:32:27 +0100, Tom Robinson
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 19:24:52 +0100, "Aosmosis" wrote:

How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

I was waiting at Turnham green for 25 mins for a richmond train.

What ever happened to the proposal too run a branch from the central
line to Richmond and discontinue the district service? Was it all
connected to Crossrail going ahead?

Long gone. The proposal was coupled with a Bakerloo branch from
Willesden Junction to North Acton to take over the Ealing Broadway
branch of the Central line. That rather odd package was an alternative
option studied alongside Crossrail some 20 years or so ago as part of a
general cross-London rail study. It would have been very expensive for
the relatively small achievement of increasing District frequency
between Turnham Green and Ealing.


--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

kytelly wrote:
Tom Robinson wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:32:27 +0100, Tom Robinson
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 19:24:52 +0100, "Aosmosis"
wrote:

How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

I was waiting at Turnham green for 25 mins for a richmond train.


What ever happened to the proposal too run a branch from the central
line to Richmond and discontinue the district service? Was it all
connected to Crossrail going ahead?

There was a proposal in the 1920's for a Central Line extension from
Shepherd's Bush to Gunnersbury, and there was even an Underground map
poster showing it as a dotted line. There's one in the Acton Depot of
London's Transport Museum.

The only recent proposal of this sort was the "Corridor 6" option for
Crossrail, involving a tunnel from the GMWL at Wormwood Scrubs to just
west of Turnham Green, then via Gunnersbury and Richmond to Kingston,
which would have meant closing the District's service to Richmond. That
idea was dropped in 2004 in favour of the current plan to run Crossrail
to Maidenhead.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Next time get the bus (or walk) to Gunnersbury, and get the
District/NLL from there. The NLL has a timetable, so at least you can
plan for that, even though they are sometimes late.

Trains in the morning rush seem to always be 2-3 minutes late and
severe problems are rare; the short constant delays seem to be less of
a problem in the evening rush but more substantial delays (15 mins or
more) are more common. Punctuality does seem to have improved sharply
this year compared to last where it was rare that a train was not 5-7
mins late.

The staff and boards are best ignored, incidentally: the system that
reports the delay digitally appears to have been programmed as part of
a school project and the staff regularly just lie. I speak from many
months' experience. Only 2 weeks ago at Acton Central, the man at the
ticket counter told me that a train had just left Gunnersbury - a
colleague at that station assured me otherwise: the magic of mobile
phones, eh?

Incidentally, on the matter of the GCSE train arrival information
system: I was wondering how National Rail compile punctuality stats? Do
they use the same data that we see on the screens in the stations or do
they capture it separately? I ask as it is very common (as in
more-often-than-not common) that a train delayed by more than 5 mins
will simply be reported as being "On Time" at my station on the screen.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

wrote:
Incidentally, on the matter of the GCSE train arrival information
system: I was wondering how National Rail compile punctuality stats? Do
they use the same data that we see on the screens in the stations or do
they capture it separately? I ask as it is very common (as in
more-often-than-not common) that a train delayed by more than 5 mins
will simply be reported as being "On Time" at my station on the screen.

Not sure of the direct answer to your question, but I've noticed on
South Eastern trains that when the train is later than the magical four
minutes, the automated announcements always reflect this. So, for
example, if the 11.25 arrives at 11.28, the announcement will be "The
train at Platform 4 is the 11.25 to...", if it arrives at 11.30 the
announcement will be "The train at Platform 4 is the delayed 11.25
to...".

And who decided that +/- 4 minutes means "on time", anyway? Can't see
the Swiss accepting that...

Patrick

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Not sure of the direct answer to your question, but I've noticed on
South Eastern trains that when the train is later than the magical four
minutes, the automated announcements always reflect this. So, for
example, if the 11.25 arrives at 11.28, the announcement will be "The
train at Platform 4 is the 11.25 to...", if it arrives at 11.30 the
announcement will be "The train at Platform 4 is the delayed 11.25
to...".

And who decided that +/- 4 minutes means "on time", anyway? Can't see
the Swiss accepting that...

Patrick

I've always been troubled by the whole %age On Time concept both for
the reason you mention and the concept of using trains rather than
passengers as being On Time.

What I mean to say is that if you take - say - the NLL and look at the
delays. Last year the line reported punctuality of 95 or 96% - assuming
that this was based on the real running times of the trains and based
on my personal experiences, it must have meant that almost all the
off-peak trains were running on time. But these often run 10% full (and
those passengers are less likely to be daily users) while the rush hour
trains are packed.

Therefore, a much larger %age than 4% or 5% were delayed on the line.
This explains the mismatch between what - on the face of it - appears
to be a good figure and the experiences of regular passengers you hear
from, when discussing the line.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 12:15:11 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote:

What ever happened to the proposal too run a branch from the central
line to Richmond and discontinue the district service? Was it all
connected to Crossrail going ahead?

Long gone. The proposal was coupled with a Bakerloo branch from
Willesden Junction to North Acton to take over the Ealing Broadway
branch of the Central line. That rather odd package was an alternative
option studied alongside Crossrail some 20 years or so ago as part of a
general cross-London rail study. It would have been very expensive for
the relatively small achievement of increasing District frequency
between Turnham Green and Ealing.

It would have increased frequency on all branches of the District, and
on the Circle too.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

wrote:
wrote:
Incidentally, on the matter of the GCSE train arrival information
system: I was wondering how National Rail compile punctuality stats? Do
they use the same data that we see on the screens in the stations or do
they capture it separately? I ask as it is very common (as in
more-often-than-not common) that a train delayed by more than 5 mins
will simply be reported as being "On Time" at my station on the screen.

Not sure of the direct answer to your question, but I've noticed on
South Eastern trains that when the train is later than the magical four
minutes, the automated announcements always reflect this. So, for
example, if the 11.25 arrives at 11.28, the announcement will be "The
train at Platform 4 is the 11.25 to...", if it arrives at 11.30 the
announcement will be "The train at Platform 4 is the delayed 11.25
to...".

And who decided that +/- 4 minutes means "on time", anyway? Can't see
the Swiss accepting that...



On South Eastern, they do do some adjustments, but they can't handle
which train is going first on the "first train to" board. Eg, if you
stand at somewhere like Hither Green or Lewisham, where trains come
from different directions, if, say, the 1130 is now expected at 1145,
it will say that the first train to Charing Cross is expected at
platform x at 1145. It won't mention that the (on time) 1135 to
Charing Cross from platform y is actually going to be the first.

On Silverlink, which runs the NLL, as far as I am aware, the displays
never show anything except the scheduled times, with no adjustments or
variations due to actual events.

I have mentioned before that when there was major disruption for a few
days due to flooding, all the displays at Queens Park were left
switched on and displayed all the normal train times, none of which
were running.

You also tend to see that the next train is expected in 18 minutes,
just as the previous one turns up 2 minutes late.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

In article .com,
MIG wrote:
On Silverlink, which runs the NLL, as far as I am aware, the displays
never show anything except the scheduled times, with no adjustments or
variations due to actual events.

This is not true: at Camden Town, Leytonstone High Road and Upper Holloway
at least, the screens show the expected time - when the screens are working.

--
I don't play The Game - it's for five-year-olds with delusions of adulthood.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Mike Bristow wrote:
In article .com,
MIG wrote:
On Silverlink, which runs the NLL, as far as I am aware, the displays
never show anything except the scheduled times, with no adjustments or
variations due to actual events.

This is not true: at Camden Town, Leytonstone High Road and Upper Holloway
at least, the screens show the expected time - when the screens are working.



May be true at those, but I've used Queens Park a lot and never
observed anything to be displayed other than the scheduled train times,
which disappear when the train should have passed, whether it does or
not.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Aosmosis wrote:
How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

I think almost from the moment your question was rendered it's been
pumping awful!
--
gordon

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 13:29:17 +0930, Aidan Stanger wrote:

What ever happened to the proposal too run a branch from the central
line to Richmond and discontinue the district service? Was it all
connected to Crossrail going ahead?

It would have increased frequency on all branches of the District, and
on the Circle too.

I can see how it would've done so on the District, but how would it
increase the frequency on the Circle?

If you wait on the westbound Circle/District platform at somewhere
like Victoria, you should see (if all is going to plan) a cycle of
westbound destinations; something like: Ealing Broadway, Wimbledon,
Richmond, Circle Line, then the cycle repeats. Each cycle lasts 8.5
minutes at peak time, and this is the peak frequency on each District
branch and the Circle.

So, Circle frequency cannot currently be increased without reducing
the (already low) frequency on some or all of the District branches.

A bit of guesswork on my part suggests that if the Richmond branch
were transferred to another line (e.g. Crossrail), the cycle could
simply have the Richmond destination removed, shortening it to 6 mins
or so.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

"asdf" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 13:29:17 +0930, Aidan Stanger wrote:

What ever happened to the proposal too run a branch from the central
line to Richmond and discontinue the district service? Was it all
connected to Crossrail going ahead?

It would have increased frequency on all branches of the District, and
on the Circle too.

I can see how it would've done so on the District, but how would it
increase the frequency on the Circle?

If you wait on the westbound Circle/District platform at somewhere
like Victoria, you should see (if all is going to plan) a cycle of
westbound destinations; something like: Ealing Broadway, Wimbledon,
Richmond, Circle Line, then the cycle repeats. Each cycle lasts 8.5
minutes at peak time, and this is the peak frequency on each District
branch and the Circle.

So, Circle frequency cannot currently be increased without reducing
the (already low) frequency on some or all of the District branches.

A bit of guesswork on my part suggests that if the Richmond branch
were transferred to another line (e.g. Crossrail), the cycle could
simply have the Richmond destination removed, shortening it to 6 mins
or so.

It wouldn't be that simple. You would need to get rid of some H&C or Met
services as well in order to ensure there was sufficient capacity on the
north half of the Circle.

Peter Smyth

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 10:49:35 +0100, Peter Smyth wrote:

It wouldn't be that simple. You would need to get rid of some H&C or Met
services as well in order to ensure there was sufficient capacity on the
north half of the Circle.

Quite right. I had in mind (but forgot to mention) that some Mets
would have to be cut back to Baker Street.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Two other questions for fellow sufferers and experts...

1) Does anyone know why there is such inflexibility about scheduling
trains to the richmond branch?

Problems and delays occur pretty frequently, and it seems that LUL are
unable to do anything about maintaining a good rotation of trains to
the different destinations. A typical case is that you can be waiting
at Earls Court for a Richmond train and see Wimbledon, Parsons Green,
Ealing Broadway, Wimbledon, Ealing Broadway, Ealing Broadway and then
finally a Richmond train.

Surely it would be much better to admit timetables are messed up and
reschedule trains at Earls Court to maintain a regular flow of trains
to all 3 branches?

2) Does anyone know how to access the train information system via the
web?

I noticed that the platform assistants at Earls Court have new PDAs
that seem to show train position information. Anyone know how to see
this from outside LUL? It would be really handy to tell when a richmond
train is coming when I am planning to leave work for the day.

Cheers,

Harry
( hjb _at_ null _dot_ net )

wrote:
Aosmosis wrote:
How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

I think almost from the moment your question was rendered it's been
pumping awful!
--
gordon

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

NewsPosting wrote:

(snip)

2) Does anyone know how to access the train information system via the
web?

I noticed that the platform assistants at Earls Court have new PDAs
that seem to show train position information. Anyone know how to see
this from outside LUL? It would be really handy to tell when a richmond
train is coming when I am planning to leave work for the day.


The Underground ETA boards don't currently cover the District line, so
there is no way of getting this information. Obviously at Earls Court
you won't get an ETA display either, you just get the destination of
the next train (or the train at the platform) - information about other
services comes at the whim of the station staff annoucing it over the
PA system.

The other suggestion I have is getting an Ealing Broadway train,
getting off at Chiswick Park and walk the half mile down to Gunnersbury
station in the hope that a North London Line train will turn up. Given
that at Earls Court you often have no idea when the next Richmond train
is due doing this would be a bit of a gamble, as you might well miss
the Richmond District train whilst you're walking between stations.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

NewsPosting wrote:

The Underground ETA boards don't currently cover the District line, so
there is no way of getting this information. Obviously at Earls Court
you won't get an ETA display either, you just get the destination of
the next train (or the train at the platform) - information about other
services comes at the whim of the station staff annoucing it over the
PA system.

Hmm, puzzling, I'm sure I saw the platform assistant at earls court
look at something that seemed to be indicating train positions on the
line. Unfortunately they didn't show it for long enough for me to see
what info it actually had.

Apols, I could've been clearer - there is no public access (via the
internet) to any District line running information of this sort. There
is of course an internal LU system to keep track of where the trains
are - so perhaps the platform assistant was indeed accessing this
through their PDA.


[BTW.. thanks for the tip about Chiswick Park, unfortunately it's hard
to predict when the next richmond train is to know when it's worth it.]

If Earls Court had modern dot-matrix ETA displays ('train describers'
in LU parlance I believe) that listed the next five or so trains then
one could of course make an educated decision with regards to this
option - but of course Earls Court offers no such luxury.

I guess that given the complexity of Earls Court and perhaps the lack
of certainty over which platform a train will arrive at then this isn't
as simple as it seems, though there could at least be train describers
for each direction (east and west) which only become platform specific
when the train pulls in. Another complication is the possibility of
District line trains changing their destination mid-journey if there
are service gaps on certain sections, but other stations nontheless
have train describers that manage to cope with this.

I suspect it's all being worked on at the moment anyway and something
like what I speak of above will appear in years to come. I'm sure I've
read somewhere that LU's aspiration is to have the public ETA system
operational on all lines - but it's better if they get it right first
before releasing it.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:10:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

In message .com,
Mizter T writes
If Earls Court had modern dot-matrix ETA displays ('train describers'
in LU parlance I believe) that listed the next five or so trains then
one could of course make an educated decision with regards to this
option - but of course Earls Court offers no such luxury.

I guess that given the complexity of Earls Court and perhaps the lack
of certainty over which platform a train will arrive at then this isn't
as simple as it seems, though there could at least be train describers
for each direction (east and west) which only become platform specific
when the train pulls in. Another complication is the possibility of
District line trains changing their destination mid-journey if there
are service gaps on certain sections, but other stations nontheless
have train describers that manage to cope with this.

Isn't the existing TD at ECT listed?

Yes I understand this is the case.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

On 10 Aug 2006 07:19:08 -0700, "Mizter T" wrote:

NewsPosting wrote:

The Underground ETA boards don't currently cover the District line, so
there is no way of getting this information. Obviously at Earls Court
you won't get an ETA display either, you just get the destination of
the next train (or the train at the platform) - information about other
services comes at the whim of the station staff annoucing it over the
PA system.

Hmm, puzzling, I'm sure I saw the platform assistant at earls court
look at something that seemed to be indicating train positions on the
line. Unfortunately they didn't show it for long enough for me to see
what info it actually had.

Apols, I could've been clearer - there is no public access (via the
internet) to any District line running information of this sort. There
is of course an internal LU system to keep track of where the trains
are - so perhaps the platform assistant was indeed accessing this
through their PDA.

The system is called Trackernet. It takes its feed from the signalling
system. I believe it forms the basis of the ETA system that is available
via the web. However only a few lines offer full coverage and it is that
which has to be in place for the public ETA system. The system is
available to staff via the LU Intranet.

Trackernet is partially implemented on the sub surface network but there
are several sections that are not yet in place - particularly the
complex junction areas. The same applies with the Piccadilly Line - bits
of info are available but not yet the whole line. I don't know what the
programme dates are for all this being complete and available to the
public although I understand the intention is to provide network wide
coverage. However I would trust that the platform staff at Earls Court
are using their PDA provided information to provide announcements even
though they may only be able to see a part of the line and not all of
it.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Paul Corfield wrote:

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:10:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

In message .com,
Mizter T writes
If Earls Court had modern dot-matrix ETA displays ('train describers'
in LU parlance I believe) that listed the next five or so trains then
one could of course make an educated decision with regards to this
option - but of course Earls Court offers no such luxury.

I guess that given the complexity of Earls Court and perhaps the lack
of certainty over which platform a train will arrive at then this isn't
as simple as it seems, though there could at least be train describers
for each direction (east and west) which only become platform specific
when the train pulls in. Another complication is the possibility of
District line trains changing their destination mid-journey if there
are service gaps on certain sections, but other stations nontheless
have train describers that manage to cope with this.

Isn't the existing TD at ECT listed?

Yes I understand this is the case.


Ok - how about this. The existing listed train describers stay put, but
alongside them there is a new dot-matrix central train describer that
sits on the middle of the eastbound and westbound platforms that
displays the ETAs of trains. When the train pulls into the platform
then the existing train describers would be used - just as they are at
present. The new dot-matrix train describer could also show destination
information along with an arrow indicating which platform this applies
to.

I'm sure some such arrangement could be arrived at, and passengers
would really appreciate it.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:10:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald
] wrote:

In message .com,
Mizter T writes
If Earls Court had modern dot-matrix ETA displays ('train
describers' in LU parlance I believe) that listed the next five
or so trains then one could of course make an educated decision
with regards to this option - but of course Earls Court offers no
such luxury.
[...]

Isn't the existing TD at ECT listed?

Yes I understand this is the case.

But does that mean that LU must use it? Couldn't it be moved to
London's Transport Museum? It may have been high-tech when it was
installed, and it's worth preserving somewhere for that reason, but it
doesn't meet customer expectations or requirements these days.

I've seen so many people confused by it, believing for example that,
because the arrow is pointing to Ealing Broadway, the train at that
platform must be going to all the stations listed in that column (Ealing
B, Wimbledon, Putney Bridge, ...). Remember that you get lots of people
visiting exhibitions at Earl's Court for whom the Underground is quite
confusing enough without a TD of a sort they've never seen before.

It needs a big display showing the destination of the next train on each
platform, and the important intermediate stops, plus a central display
showing how many minutes to wait for subsequent trains (not with
platform numbers, because that might not be known at that stage).

(By the way, I heard someone the other day explaining to his wife on the
westbound District at Earl's Court that because their destination (West
Kensington) was on the left-hand branch of the schematic line diagram on
the platform (which had Earl's Court at the top and the lines running
downwards), the train on that side of the island platform must be going
to West Kensington. Logical in a way. Fortunately I was able to
prevent them boarding the Wimbledon train.)
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 17:28:00 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:10:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald
] wrote:

In message .com,
Mizter T writes
If Earls Court had modern dot-matrix ETA displays ('train
describers' in LU parlance I believe) that listed the next five
or so trains then one could of course make an educated decision
with regards to this option - but of course Earls Court offers no
such luxury.
[...]

Isn't the existing TD at ECT listed?

Yes I understand this is the case.

But does that mean that LU must use it? Couldn't it be moved to
London's Transport Museum? It may have been high-tech when it was
installed, and it's worth preserving somewhere for that reason, but it
doesn't meet customer expectations or requirements these days.

This is not what matters to those people who list buildings or features.
It is deemed to be part of the buildings as far as I know and therefore
has to remain in situ.

I would guess (I certainly don't know) that the listing provisions are
such that electronic displays are not permitted in the vicinity of the
old displays. Given that Earls Court platforms are quite "busy" in
terms of signs and buildings and stairways / lifts there may be very few
options in terms of where new displays could be positioned.

One thing that has set me wondering is that there are the new mobility
impaired lifts and walkways that can hardly be described as "in keeping"
with the remainder of the station so maybe the station is not listed.

Hmmm - I may make some enquiries to see if Metronet are planning to put
in new electronic displays as required under the contract or whether
there is a problem.

(By the way, I heard someone the other day explaining to his wife on the
westbound District at Earl's Court that because their destination (West
Kensington) was on the left-hand branch of the schematic line diagram on
the platform (which had Earl's Court at the top and the lines running
downwards), the train on that side of the island platform must be going
to West Kensington. Logical in a way. Fortunately I was able to
prevent them boarding the Wimbledon train.)

Well that's one way to interpret a diagram I suppose. However it's hard
to understand when you already have a familiarity with how something
like Underground signage works.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 17:28:00 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:10:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald
] wrote:

In message
.com, Mizter
T writes
If Earls Court had modern dot-matrix ETA displays ('train
describers' in LU parlance I believe) that listed the next five
or so trains then one could of course make an educated decision
with regards to this option - but of course Earls Court offers
no such luxury.
[...]

Isn't the existing TD at ECT listed?

Yes I understand this is the case.

But does that mean that LU must use it? Couldn't it be moved to
London's Transport Museum? It may have been high-tech when it was
installed, and it's worth preserving somewhere for that reason,
but it doesn't meet customer expectations or requirements these
days.

This is not what matters to those people who list buildings or
features. It is deemed to be part of the buildings as far as I know
and therefore has to remain in situ.

Up to a point, but there is a case for removing it if it detracts from
the effectiveness of the building. A case in point is the tiling at
Great Portland Street (see other thread), the replacement of which was
supported by English Heritage before being blocked by councillors,
partly because LU/Metronet jumped the gun.

I would guess (I certainly don't know) that the listing provisions
are such that electronic displays are not permitted in the vicinity
of the old displays. Given that Earls Court platforms are quite
"busy" in terms of signs and buildings and stairways / lifts there
may be very few options in terms of where new displays could be
positioned.

One thing that has set me wondering is that there are the new
mobility impaired lifts and walkways that can hardly be described
as "in keeping" with the remainder of the station so maybe the
station is not listed.

It is listed Grade II. (See
http://www.rbkc.gov.uk/Planning/scri...4/1%2052/1#top )
One has rather more freedom with Grade II to change things, though even
with a Grade I building like St Pancras Station, massive changes can be
approved. You are right about the walkways and lifts, which could be
said to impair the view of the TDs -- a good precedent!

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

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

But does that mean that LU must use it? Couldn't it be moved to
London's Transport Museum? It may have been high-tech when it was
installed, and it's worth preserving somewhere for that reason,
but it doesn't meet customer expectations or requirements these
days.

This is not what matters to those people who list buildings or
features. It is deemed to be part of the buildings as far as I know and
therefore has to remain in situ.

But it is not immutable, as the other recent changes to Earl's Court
evidence. It's high time LUL took the bull by the horns and came up with
acceptable modern displays.

I would guess (I certainly don't know) that the listing provisions
are such that electronic displays are not permitted in the vicinity of
the old displays. Given that Earls Court platforms are quite "busy" in
terms of signs and buildings and stairways / lifts there may be
very few options in terms of where new displays could be positioned.

One thing that has set me wondering is that there are the new
mobility impaired lifts and walkways that can hardly be described as
"in keeping" with the remainder of the station so maybe the station is
not listed.

A listed building can be altered. A number of changes to the Cambridge
Guildhall (vintage 1938 and listed Grade 2) have been made to bring it
into line with modern safety legislation, for example.

Hmmm - I may make some enquiries to see if Metronet are planning to
put in new electronic displays as required under the contract or whether
there is a problem.

Time they got a move on. Whenever I've had an extended wait at Earl's
Court I don't recall any announcements.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Aosmosis wrote:
How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

My limited experience of a week's use of the NLL (and observation of it
at Euston) suggested that reliability was a sick joke. A lot of it was
down to train failures; they'd do well to talk to Merseyrail to see how
they manage to avoid this being as much of an issue.

The NLL is a third-world disgrace to a capital city.

Neil

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Neil Williams wrote:
How reliable is the Richmond branch of the NNL and district line?

My limited experience of a week's use of the NLL (and observation of it
at Euston) suggested that reliability was a sick joke. A lot of it was
down to train failures; they'd do well to talk to Merseyrail to see how
they manage to avoid this being as much of an issue.

I've not been on Merseyrail in years, but I suspect that running
DC-only trains on a DC-only line presents fewer complications than
running 1970s AC/DC (let there be rock!) trains with regular
changeovers. Certainly, the 313s tend to break down at Drayton Park on
the FCC GN route far more than they do anywhere else along the line...

The NLL is a third-world disgrace to a capital city.

Wouldn't disagree, although arguably train length and frequency are
even more of a problem than reliability.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

John B wrote:

I've not been on Merseyrail in years, but I suspect that running
DC-only trains on a DC-only line presents fewer complications than
running 1970s AC/DC (let there be rock!) trains with regular
changeovers. Certainly, the 313s tend to break down at Drayton Park on
the FCC GN route far more than they do anywhere else along the line...

Good point.

Would there, then, perhaps be some merit in doing a swap for some
diesel units that are running services under the wires in places like
Greater Manchester, one wonders, until reliability on changeover can be
increased?

Eurostars do the changeover daily at speed, so it isn't impossible with
10-year-old technology.

Neil

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On 10 Aug 2006 07:19:08 -0700, "Mizter T" wrote:

NewsPosting wrote:

The Underground ETA boards don't currently cover the District line, so
there is no way of getting this information. Obviously at Earls Court
you won't get an ETA display either, you just get the destination of
the next train (or the train at the platform) - information about
other
services comes at the whim of the station staff annoucing it over the
PA system.

Hmm, puzzling, I'm sure I saw the platform assistant at earls court
look at something that seemed to be indicating train positions on the
line. Unfortunately they didn't show it for long enough for me to see
what info it actually had.

Apols, I could've been clearer - there is no public access (via the
internet) to any District line running information of this sort. There
is of course an internal LU system to keep track of where the trains
are - so perhaps the platform assistant was indeed accessing this
through their PDA.

The system is called Trackernet. It takes its feed from the signalling
system. I believe it forms the basis of the ETA system that is available
via the web. However only a few lines offer full coverage and it is that
which has to be in place for the public ETA system. The system is
available to staff via the LU Intranet.

Trackernet is partially implemented on the sub surface network but there
are several sections that are not yet in place - particularly the
complex junction areas. The same applies with the Piccadilly Line - bits
of info are available but not yet the whole line. I don't know what the
programme dates are for all this being complete and available to the
public although I understand the intention is to provide network wide
coverage. However I would trust that the platform staff at Earls Court
are using their PDA provided information to provide announcements even
though they may only be able to see a part of the line and not all of
it.

Actually, most of the Picc is done now Paul. We're just missing Ravenscourt
to Acton & Acton to Rayners. Still can only get destinations not numbers
mind...
--
Cheers, Steve.
Change from jealous to sad to reply.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 17:41:25 GMT, "Steve Dulieu"
wrote:


"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
.. .

Trackernet is partially implemented on the sub surface network but there
are several sections that are not yet in place - particularly the
complex junction areas. The same applies with the Piccadilly Line - bits
of info are available but not yet the whole line. I don't know what the
programme dates are for all this being complete and available to the
public although I understand the intention is to provide network wide
coverage. However I would trust that the platform staff at Earls Court
are using their PDA provided information to provide announcements even
though they may only be able to see a part of the line and not all of
it.

Actually, most of the Picc is done now Paul. We're just missing Ravenscourt
to Acton & Acton to Rayners. Still can only get destinations not numbers
mind...

Oh they must have filled in the gaps in the middle then. Still you do
need the two sections you mentioned before the public can have access -
putting in a partially complete system would just generate complaints
from those who could not benefit from the system.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

In article . com,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

John B wrote:

I've not been on Merseyrail in years, but I suspect that running
DC-only trains on a DC-only line presents fewer complications than
running 1970s AC/DC (let there be rock!) trains with regular
changeovers. Certainly, the 313s tend to break down at Drayton
Park on the FCC GN route far more than they do anywhere else along
the line...

Good point.

Would there, then, perhaps be some merit in doing a swap for some
diesel units that are running services under the wires in places
like Greater Manchester, one wonders, until reliability on changeover
can be increased?

Eurostars do the changeover daily at speed, so it isn't impossible
with 10-year-old technology.

The 313s are 35 year old technology. They were also designed for a
maximum speed of 30MPH on DC (series only motors).

--
Colin Rosenstiel

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

The 313s are 35 year old technology.

The units themselves are only about 30 years old though... (the 507s
and the 508s are the same age as me, 27).

They were also designed for a
maximum speed of 30MPH on DC (series only motors).

Really? Do they differ substantially from 507s and 508s? I always
assumed they were the same but with a 25kVAC-750VDC transformer on the
middle coach. The Merseyrail units are top speed 70mph, though I don't
know if they ever reach that, perhaps they do on the bit out to
Chester.

Neil

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

Neil Williams wrote:
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

The 313s are 35 year old technology.

The units themselves are only about 30 years old though... (the 507s
and the 508s are the same age as me, 27).

They were also designed for a
maximum speed of 30MPH on DC (series only motors).

Really? Do they differ substantially from 507s and 508s? I always
assumed they were the same but with a 25kVAC-750VDC transformer on the
middle coach. The Merseyrail units are top speed 70mph, though I don't
know if they ever reach that, perhaps they do on the bit out to
Chester.


There was a discussion about this in the past. I think the 30 mph
restriction only applied to the Moorgate line.

They were fitted with extra shoegear for the Silverlink routes,
presumably because of gap problems that didn't arise on the Moorgate
line.

I can't remember whether or not this had any bearing on the top speed.

reliability of NNL and district line richmond branch
 

In article . com,
(MIG) wrote:

Neil Williams wrote:
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

The 313s are 35 year old technology.

The units themselves are only about 30 years old though... (the
507s and the 508s are the same age as me, 27).

But the design first appeared in the the PEPs, about 35 years ago.

They were also designed for a
maximum speed of 30MPH on DC (series only motors).

Really? Do they differ substantially from 507s and 508s? I
assumed they were the same but with a 25kVAC-750VDC transformer
on the middle coach. The Merseyrail units are top speed 70mph,
though I don't know if they ever reach that, perhaps they do on the
bit out to Chester.

There was a discussion about this in the past. I think the 30 mph
restriction only applied to the Moorgate line.

Indeed. But the only /designed/ DC use of the stock was on the Northern
City (Moorgate) line. The wider DC use came much later when it was
decided that some of the units were surplus on the GN.

I think the 313s maximum on AC is 75. But the point is that the design
was for series only operation on DC, presumably to simplify the control
gear.

They were fitted with extra shoegear for the Silverlink routes,
presumably because of gap problems that didn't arise on the Moorgate
line.

I can't remember whether or not this had any bearing on the top
speed.

Different top speeds on AC and DC occur on other stock. Look at the
Eurostars.

--
Colin Rosenstiel