Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() 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. |
#22
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "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 |
#23
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() 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). |
#24
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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: |
#25
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#26
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#27
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#28
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#29
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#30
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() 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 |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
London Victoria Rail and Coach Stations Link | London Transport | |||
New London floating cruise terminal | London Transport | |||
Walking from Heathrow Terminal 4 | London Transport | |||
Service Distribution To Terminal Points | London Transport | |||
Piccadilly line extension to Terminal 5/Heathrow Express extension to T5 | London Transport |