![]() |
Planned upgrade for rail routes (aka Outer Circle Line, London)
|
Planned upgrade for rail routes (aka Outer Circle Line, London)
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:54:32 GMT, Jack Taylor wrote:
So they're getting 24 3-car Electrostars for the North London Railway, replacing 23 3-car 313s and 3 3-car 508s? That's not much of a capacity upgrade - some might even call it the opposite. That was my immediate thought. It's all very wooly and unclear. It certainly looks as if it's replacement on like-for-like basis *unless* by North London Railway they mean the North London Line (Richmond to Stratford) on its own, releasing the current 313s to strengthen Euston to Watford and West London Line services or increase frequency? The plans are for the current (self-contained) WLL service to be replaced with through running from the NLL (Stratford to Clapham Junction), so it wouldn't be possible to use a different type of stock just for the WLL. The Euston to Watford service will be axed completely, but this only uses something like 4 of the 23 313 units. It seems apparent to me from the figures that the proposed doubling of the frequency on the WLL and NLL (and the reopening of the Queens Park - Camden Road route) will be achieved simply by running the 376s in addition to the 313s, rather than the 376s replacing the 313s. The options in the contract would then allow the 313s to be replaced at a later date with a subsequent build of 376s. |
Planned upgrade for rail routes (aka Outer Circle Line, London)
asdf wrote:
The plans are for the current (self-contained) WLL service to be replaced with through running from the NLL (Stratford to Clapham Junction), so it wouldn't be possible to use a different type of stock just for the WLL. The Euston to Watford service will be axed completely, but this only uses something like 4 of the 23 313 units. It seems apparent to me from the figures that the proposed doubling of the frequency on the WLL and NLL (and the reopening of the Queens Park - Camden Road route) will be achieved simply by running the 376s in addition to the 313s, rather than the 376s replacing the 313s. The options in the contract would then allow the 313s to be replaced at a later date with a subsequent build of 376s. Yehbutnobut. As far as I can tell (certainly according to NR's RUS - http://tinyurl.com/hbkhq ), the medium-term plan to take effect by 2009 when these trains are introduced is for: Stratford - Richmond x 4 Stratford - QP x 2 Barking - Clapham x 2 Barking - Gospel Oak x 2 Watford - Croydon (via Clapham) x 1 Shepherds Bush - Croydon (via Clapham) x 1 This is the same frequency as at present on Stratford to Richmond. The Stratford to QP service should involve roughly the same amount of stock as the current Euston to Watford service (slightly longer journey time but 2tph instead of 3tph). The Barking services will all need to be diesel (Turbostars with a 376-style interior are preferred, according to the RUS). The only requirement for additional electric stock is on Watford/Shepherds Bush to Croydon, and that's only if it's decided that these services should be operated by NLR instead of Southern (the through Brighton to Watford service will be axed either way). So I don't think we're going to see 313s and 376s running together after the full 376 fleet has been delivered. The longer-term plan (2014 onwards) is the same, except that it involves infrastructure works that allow 4tph to QP and all GOBLIN trains running through to Clapham. This would also be the timescale for any GOBLIN electrification, so it would either involve a big new order of 376s if electrification goes ahead, or a couple of new 376s and a couple of new Turbostars. The 313s will have been out of use for some years by this point so probably won't be effective even as a stopgap. -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
Planned upgrade for rail routes (aka Outer Circle Line, London)
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:56:36 +0100, "Peter Masson"
wrote: "R.C. Payne" wrote in message ... wrote: Is it really sensible/cost-effective to have 100mph capability for these, rather than modify (presumably re-gear) for better acceleration - or have a lower-spec traction package? I can't imagine that there's much chance of the units exceeding 50mph, unless they operate on other (non-TfL) routes at some point in the future. Perhaps it's cheaper that way, as they can just supply another off-the-shelf electrostar. What is the top speed of a 376? I'm guessing that is what these trains will end up being. 100 mph isn't mentioned in the TfL press release. It looks as though the Beeb saw the word Electrostar, looked up the details of the Southern and Kent Coast 375/377s. put two and two together and made five. Or maybe the BBC was simply being accurate when it said "the Bombardier company said"? http://www.bombardier.com/en/0_0/pre...724&sCateg=1_0 Bombardier Wins A £223 Million Order From Transport For London For 152 Electric Multiple Unit Cars For The United Kingdom "The 100mph Class 376 units are specially designed for suburban operations and are part of the proven and reliable Electrostar family of products. 1,614 Electrostar cars are already in daily passenger service with three UK operators, c2c, South East Trains and Southern Railways." It is not really the BBC's fault if they have taken the data from official sources - I doubt they employ teams of Class 376 spotters to verify official statements by train builders. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Orbirail mess (was Planned upgrade for rail routes (aka OuterCircle Line, London))
John B wrote:
asdf wrote: The plans are for the current (self-contained) WLL service to be replaced with through running from the NLL (Stratford to Clapham Junction), so it wouldn't be possible to use a different type of stock just for the WLL. The Euston to Watford service will be axed completely, but this only uses something like 4 of the 23 313 units. It seems apparent to me from the figures that the proposed doubling of the frequency on the WLL and NLL (and the reopening of the Queens Park - Camden Road route) will be achieved simply by running the 376s in addition to the 313s, rather than the 376s replacing the 313s. The options in the contract would then allow the 313s to be replaced at a later date with a subsequent build of 376s. Yehbutnobut. As far as I can tell (certainly according to NR's RUS - http://tinyurl.com/hbkhq ), the medium-term plan to take effect by 2009 when these trains are introduced is for: Stratford - Richmond x 4 Stratford - QP x 2 Barking - Clapham x 2 Barking - Gospel Oak x 2 Watford - Croydon (via Clapham) x 1 Shepherds Bush - Croydon (via Clapham) x 1 This is the same frequency as at present on Stratford to Richmond. (snip) The information coming out of various transport orifices regarding the future "Orbirail" service patterns is a bit of a mess. The most recent TfL plan prior to the publication of NR's RUS was relatively simple. THe first phase was: 4tph Stratford to Richmond 4tph CJ to Stratford 2tph Gospel Oak to Barking. However, NR's RUS now says that TfL's proposal (service variant SLC2 for implementation in Jan 2011) is the rather bewildering: 4tph Stratford to Richmond 2tph Gospel Oak to Barking 2tph CJ to Willesden Jcn 2tph CJ to Barking 4tph Caledonian Rd to Stratford and a possible 4tph Caledonian Rd to Dalston "ELL precursor" (what purpose that would serve, I have no idea - they don't even say whether that's supposed to be to Kingsland or Junction, and if it's to Junction, why not just run the proper ELL service?) Compare that the NR's medium-term proposal; the TfL one offers the Queen's Park services only as far as Caledonian Road, and offers a better service on the WLL (4tph exclusive of any Southern services, rather than inclusive in the NR proposal). The long-term NR proposal does match up with what TfL proposed for its second phase: 4tph Stratford to Richmond 4tph CJ to Barking 4tph QP to Stratford ....which would (together with the non-TfL Watford J to East Croydon and Shepherd's Bush to East Croydon services) also offer an excellent 6tph between Shepherd's Bush and Clapham Junction. I'm going to assume that what NR state TfL's SLC2 specification to be in this Cross-London RUS supercedes what TfL originally submitted to the RUS consultation. The newer version only offers half the service (4tph) between Gospel Oak and Camden Road - although perhaps this is to avoid the scenario in the previous proposal where new demand might be generated by the 8tph along that corridor, only for the service to fall back to 4tph later on. I'm also unsure quite why TfL offer 2 extra tph on the WLL from the start whilst NR delay it until the long-term. It's all very confusing! Previous reports also suggested that the Olympics transport package was funding improvements for 6-car trains on the NLL, but that now seems unnecessary... -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Orbirail mess (was Planned upgrade for rail routes (akaOuter Circle Line, London))
On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, Dave Arquati wrote:
4tph Caledonian Rd to Stratford I think we should start referring to the former of those two stations as Barnsbury. As it is, every time i read about NLL service patterns, i start wondering where the Picc/NLL curve is. tom -- Baby got a masterplan. A foolproof masterplan. |
Orbirail mess (was Planned upgrade for rail routes (aka Outer Circle Line, London))
In article , Dave Arquati
writes However, NR's RUS now says that TfL's proposal (service variant SLC2 for implementation in Jan 2011) is the rather bewildering: [...] and a possible 4tph Caledonian Rd to Dalston "ELL precursor" (what purpose that would serve, I have no idea Could it be to let them get experience with the effects of pathing the ELL on to the NLL, before it opens? -- Clive D.W. Feather | Home: Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: |
Orbirail mess (was Planned upgrade for rail routes (aka OuterCircle Line, London))
Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In article , Dave Arquati writes However, NR's RUS now says that TfL's proposal (service variant SLC2 for implementation in Jan 2011) is the rather bewildering: [...] and a possible 4tph Caledonian Rd to Dalston "ELL precursor" (what purpose that would serve, I have no idea Could it be to let them get experience with the effects of pathing the ELL on to the NLL, before it opens? That's what I thought, but it doesn't seem to work - it must either run to Dalston Kingsland or Dalston Junction; if it's the former, then wouldn't they need to build expensive and temporary turnback facilities? If it's the latter, then there seems to be little point running a precursor when the proper ELL could be run through. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Orbirail mess (was Planned upgrade for rail routes (aka Outer Circle Line, London))
In article , Dave Arquati
writes Could it be to let them get experience with the effects of pathing the ELL on to the NLL, before it opens? That's what I thought, but it doesn't seem to work - it must either run to Dalston Kingsland or Dalston Junction; if it's the former, then wouldn't they need to build expensive and temporary turnback facilities? If it's the latter, then there seems to be little point running a precursor when the proper ELL could be run through. Not if they build the junction, with temporary buffer stops on the ELL route, early, well before finishing the rest of the ELL stuff (in particular, the link from Whitechapel to the viaduct). -- Clive D.W. Feather | Home: Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: |
Orbirail mess (was Planned upgrade for rail routes (aka Outer Circle Line, London))
On Mon, 4 Sep 2006 13:25:16 +0100, Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
Could it be to let them get experience with the effects of pathing the ELL on to the NLL, before it opens? That's what I thought, but it doesn't seem to work - it must either run to Dalston Kingsland or Dalston Junction; if it's the former, then wouldn't they need to build expensive and temporary turnback facilities? If it's the latter, then there seems to be little point running a precursor when the proper ELL could be run through. Not if they build the junction, with temporary buffer stops on the ELL route, early, well before finishing the rest of the ELL stuff (in particular, the link from Whitechapel to the viaduct). The link from Whitechapel to the viaduct is part of ELLX Phase 1. The connection from Dalston Junction to Canonbury, and through running onto the NLL, is part of Phase 2, so it won't need to happen till much later. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:26 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk