Victoria line Terminal stations
 

John Rowland wrote:
Brian Watson wrote:

This got me thinking literally, "are there any depots or
strategically-placed triangular junctions at which a train could be
turned right round?"

LU trains are not, as far as I know, biased to be driven from one end
or the other,

But you can't necessarily couple the north end of one train to the south end
of another identical train, unless the original trains were facing the same
way as each other.


I think more of it tends to be able to couple both ways nowadays. The
C stock on Hammersmith, Circle and Edgware Road lines always could, for
obvious reasons. The A stock on the Metropolitan could as well
(although now many units only have the driving equipment at one end),
for less obvious reasons. I suppose because of Watford.

The CO/CP/COP stock could only couple one way, and did sometimes run on
the Circle till C stock took over the Edgware Road branch. They
managed to get it back to the District Line facing the right way.

The Northern Line stock could only couple in one direction but, because
of Kennington, half the units could never couple to the other half.
They seemed to cope somehow. The same on the Picadilly after Terminal
4 was opened.

I remember the 1962 stock on the Central always facing the right way
for years, despite the obvious loop. Maybe anything that went in the
depot from the Grange Hill end always left that way, but then one year
in the 1980s or so they seemed to stop bothering and it ended up fairly
random.

Given that all BR and some Underground stock had universal couplers, I
never understood by the Underground gave itself the problem of
couplings that had to face the right way.



but I could see circumstances such as the Circle Line
where it could be an advantage to turn a train to even out wear on
the wheels.


There's no dedicated stock for the Circle anyway. Also, even on a
non-circular line like the Central, that would mean that the north side
got more worn out, because of the way it bends and so on. I wonder if
it's really a problem?



There are no such facilities in depots. The two obvious triangular junctions
which can turn a train are visible on the tube map near Gloucester Road and
Aldgate. There is a non-obvious one linking Moor Park, Croxley and
Rickmansworth. The two obvious loops for turning trains are shown on the map
at Heathrow and Leytonstone-Hainault-Woodford, and the non-obvious one is at
Kennington, allowing trains from Goodge Street to head back to Goodge Street
without reversing. Trains cannot be turned on the Bakerloo, Victoria,
Jubilee, or East London Line without a significant trip on another line, and
trains cannot be turned on the Waterloo & City without being lifted by
crane.

Victoria line Terminal stations
 

"MIG" wrote

They seemed to cope somehow. The same on the Picadilly after Terminal
4 was opened.

I remember the 1962 stock on the Central always facing the right way
for years, despite the obvious loop. Maybe anything that went in the
depot from the Grange Hill end always left that way, but then one year
in the 1980s or so they seemed to stop bothering and it ended up fairly
random.

A few 3-car sets of Piccadilly stock were built with cabs at both ends, so
thatb they could substitute for either half of a 6-car train formed of two
unidirectional half-sets. A 3-car set was also needed for the Aldwych
branch.

For many years Woodford to Hainault was treated as a branch, with a service
entirely separate from the main Central Line service. Trains from the
Epping/Hainault - Ealing Broadway/West Ruislip service, if they went to
Hainault depot, always went via Newbury Park. Woodford - Hainault was used
for trials of the Victoria Line automatic operating system.

Peter

Victoria line Terminal stations
 

Peter Masson wrote:
"MIG" wrote

They seemed to cope somehow. The same on the Picadilly after Terminal
4 was opened.

I remember the 1962 stock on the Central always facing the right way
for years, despite the obvious loop. Maybe anything that went in the
depot from the Grange Hill end always left that way, but then one year
in the 1980s or so they seemed to stop bothering and it ended up fairly
random.

A few 3-car sets of Piccadilly stock were built with cabs at both ends, so
thatb they could substitute for either half of a 6-car train formed of two
unidirectional half-sets. A 3-car set was also needed for the Aldwych
branch.

For many years Woodford to Hainault was treated as a branch, with a service
entirely separate from the main Central Line service. Trains from the
Epping/Hainault - Ealing Broadway/West Ruislip service, if they went to
Hainault depot, always went via Newbury Park. Woodford - Hainault was used
for trials of the Victoria Line automatic operating system.



Long before there were through trains to Woodford via Newbury Park and
Hainault, there were always through peak services starting or ending at
Grange Hill via Woodford. I've always assumed that the reason for this
was that they went in and out of service at Hainault Depot at the
Grange Hil end without all having to go via Newbury Park (Woodford and
South Woodford probably had more punters than the rest of the line to
Epping).

Victoria line Terminal stations
 

In article . com, MIG
writes
I think more of it tends to be able to couple both ways nowadays. The
C stock on Hammersmith, Circle and Edgware Road lines always could, for
obvious reasons. The A stock on the Metropolitan could as well
(although now many units only have the driving equipment at one end),
for less obvious reasons. I suppose because of Watford.

Whether or not it can, the Metropolitan Line working timetables take
care to keep trains the same way round. When a train stables at night at
Rickmansworth after coming from Watford, the same train goes via Watford
in the morning. [By "same train", I mean that if the former stables in
siding 26N, then the first working from 26N will run via Watford.]

There are also some "train turning" conditional paths, running
Neasden-Watford-Ricky-Neasden (or the other way round).

--
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:

Victoria line Terminal stations
 

On Mon, 8 Jan 2007 16:52:05 -0000, "Peter Masson"
wrote:


"MIG" wrote

They seemed to cope somehow. The same on the Picadilly after Terminal
4 was opened.

I remember the 1962 stock on the Central always facing the right way
for years, despite the obvious loop. Maybe anything that went in the
depot from the Grange Hill end always left that way, but then one year
in the 1980s or so they seemed to stop bothering and it ended up fairly
random.

A few 3-car sets of Piccadilly stock were built with cabs at both ends, so
thatb they could substitute for either half of a 6-car train formed of two
unidirectional half-sets. A 3-car set was also needed for the Aldwych
branch.

For many years Woodford to Hainault was treated as a branch, with a service
entirely separate from the main Central Line service. Trains from the
Epping/Hainault - Ealing Broadway/West Ruislip service, if they went to
Hainault depot, always went via Newbury Park. Woodford - Hainault was used
for trials of the Victoria Line automatic operating system.

With modern LU stock it usually doesn't matter too much which way
round they are while running but where the units are the "wrong way
round" it can result in some (not all?) of them not matching
pre-positioned equipment in workshops, forcing additional ECS workings
to turn them; ISTR that (before "rusty-rail" movements were as common
as nowadays) such workings were occasionally the trigger for points
and track-circuit failures which paralysed services.

Victoria line Terminal stations
 

Charles Ellson wrote:

With modern LU stock it usually doesn't matter too much which way
round they are while running but where the units are the "wrong way
round" it can result in some (not all?) of them not matching
pre-positioned equipment in workshops, forcing additional ECS workings
to turn them; ISTR that (before "rusty-rail" movements were as common
as nowadays) such workings were occasionally the trigger for points
and track-circuit failures which paralysed services.


I'm surprised to hear that so called "rusty-rail" movements were less
common in the past - it just sounds like fairly good common sense to
me. Whilst I can see the 'bean-counters' potentially objecting to what
they might see as frivolous manoeuvres, if said manourvres demonstrably
improve operation and prevent failiures (or at least provide an early
pointer to upcoming problems) then they can only be - and be seen to be
- a good thing.

Victoria line Terminal stations
 

On 8 Jan 2007 11:24:58 -0800, "Mizter T" wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:

With modern LU stock it usually doesn't matter too much which way
round they are while running but where the units are the "wrong way
round" it can result in some (not all?) of them not matching
pre-positioned equipment in workshops, forcing additional ECS workings
to turn them; ISTR that (before "rusty-rail" movements were as common
as nowadays) such workings were occasionally the trigger for points
and track-circuit failures which paralysed services.


I'm surprised to hear that so called "rusty-rail" movements were less
common in the past - it just sounds like fairly good common sense to
me. Whilst I can see the 'bean-counters' potentially objecting to what
they might see as frivolous manoeuvres, if said manourvres demonstrably
improve operation and prevent failiures (or at least provide an early
pointer to upcoming problems) then they can only be - and be seen to be
- a good thing.

ICBW but ISTR rusty rail movements as a deliberate precautionary
policy being a 1970s introduction, quite possibly encouraged by the
bean-counters. In many cases it merely involves ensuring that
movements use all available routes through a particular area so is
effectively "free" in those cases.

Victoria line Terminal stations
 

In article . com,
(MIG) wrote:

The CO/CP/COP stock could only couple one way, and did sometimes
run on the Circle till C stock took over the Edgware Road branch. They
managed to get it back to the District Line facing the right way.

O/P stock was used on the Circle from the early 1950s.

The Northern Line stock could only couple in one direction but,
because of Kennington, half the units could never couple to the other
half. They seemed to cope somehow. The same on the Picadilly after
Terminal 4 was opened.

I remember the 1962 stock on the Central always facing the right way
for years, despite the obvious loop. Maybe anything that went in
the depot from the Grange Hill end always left that way, but then one
year in the 1980s or so they seemed to stop bothering and it ended up
fairly random.

Given that all BR and some Underground stock had universal
couplers, I never understood by the Underground gave itself the
problem of couplings that had to face the right way.

It was a problem with the introduction of automatic couplers. The
original (1938) designs didn't have enough contacts to duplicate
connections so they could couple both ways round. Previous District
mechanical Ward couplers were handed, IIRC.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Victoria line Terminal stations
 

MIG wrote:


And they would have to be the first trains into service, although that
probably isn't a problem.

In the last couple of years, the whole of the central section was
closed due to a problem at the bottom end and, being sure that there
are also two sidings at Victoria, I asked why they couldn't turn round
at Victoria. An LU person told me that they couldn't turn round at
Victoria any more.

Could this be true? As far as I know there are still two sidings there
as well.

There are two sidings at Victoria and one at King's Cross. It's not
uncommon for trains to terminate at the former and reverse, and I think
(although I'd have to check the WTT) that there is one train a day
scheduled to use both. Late evening if I recall correctly...

Cheers

Steve M

Victoria line Terminal stations
 

MIG wrote:

Also, even on a
non-circular line like the Central, that would mean that the north side
got more worn out, because of the way it bends and so on. I wonder if
it's really a problem?

Unbalanced wheel wear was seen as a potential problem for the
Eurotunnel shuttles, which is why the turning loop at the French end
has the opposite sense to the one at Folkestone. Whether that was
based on actual evidence I don't know.

Peter CS