On 27 Sep, 06:31, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
Just when I visit the place for the first time in several years...
what surprises will today bring?

No service at all on the Wimbleware, Circle or Hammersmith and ****ty,
if the BBC is anything to go by.

We know A-stock can get between Liverpool Street and Aldgate East
(because that's how units get to and from the ELL) - so why can LUL
not divert [some of] the Met service from Aldgate to join up with the
District?

Single-car D-stock is also allowed on the H&C west of Edgware Road,
but that might be harder to arrange. And HSK - Edgware Road is pretty
much f***ed no matter what...

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

On Thu, 27 Sep 2007, John B wrote:

On 27 Sep, 06:31, (Neil Williams)
wrote:

Just when I visit the place for the first time in several years...
what surprises will today bring?

No service at all on the Wimbleware, Circle or Hammersmith and ****ty,
if the BBC is anything to go by.

We know A-stock can get between Liverpool Street and Aldgate East
(because that's how units get to and from the ELL) - so why can LUL not
divert [some of] the Met service from Aldgate to join up with the
District?

The usual panoply of reasons:

- A stock drivers don't have route knowledge beyond Aldgate Junction (do
they?)

- Where would you reverse? A stock can get to Aldgate East, but there are
apparently infringements at Whitechapel, so they'd have to reverse using
the trailing crossover which apparently lies just east of Aldgate East; i
have no idea if it's signalled to make that easy, and even if it is,
that's a reverse on a running line.

- It might be enough additional time that you'd need more trains and
drivers, which might not be available.

- Er ...

- That's it.

tom

--
The future will accost us with boob-slapping ferocity. -- H. G. Wells

On 27 Sep, 13:17, Tom Anderson wrote:
We know A-stock can get between Liverpool Street and Aldgate East
(because that's how units get to and from the ELL) - so why can LUL not
divert [some of] the Met service from Aldgate to join up with the
District?

The usual panoply of reasons:

- A stock drivers don't have route knowledge beyond Aldgate Junction (do
they?)

Presumably some of them do, since there's pretty regular rotation of
ELL trains (and indeed, ELL trains are maintained at Neasden).

- Where would you reverse? A stock can get to Aldgate East, but there are
apparently infringements at Whitechapel,

According to CULG, they're allowed on the District between Aldgate
East Junction and Upminster. But at this point you would run into
driver knowledge problems...

so they'd have to reverse using
the trailing crossover which apparently lies just east of Aldgate East; i
have no idea if it's signalled to make that easy, and even if it is,
that's a reverse on a running line.

- It might be enough additional time that you'd need more trains and
drivers, which might not be available.

- Er ...

- That's it.

Yup, that sounds like it.

In another forum, someone has suggested that double-manning would
solve the problem - it certainly would in a 'actual safety' sense, but
since there's no problem in an 'actual safety' sense I'm not sure how
relevant that is...

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

In message . com, John
B writes

We know A-stock can get between Liverpool Street and Aldgate East
(because that's how units get to and from the ELL) - so why can LUL not
divert [some of] the Met service from Aldgate to join up with the
District?

The usual panoply of reasons:

- A stock drivers don't have route knowledge beyond Aldgate Junction (do
they?)

Presumably some of them do, since there's pretty regular rotation of
ELL trains (and indeed, ELL trains are maintained at Neasden).

Only ELL drivers know that bit (but there's not a lot of them), but not
Met drivers.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

On Sep 27, 1:29 pm, John B wrote:
According to CULG, they're allowed on the District between Aldgate
East Junction and Upminster. But at this point you would run into
driver knowledge problems...

Given the slothful speed tube trains generally move at I do sometimes
wonder why route knowledge is so important. Obviously on an intercity
train doing 100+ you could easily end up derailing on a high speed
curve if you didn't know it was coming. But whats the worse that can
happen on a tube train crawling along at 20mph thats got tripcocks
anyway? You'd see any curves or points coming up a mile off.

B2003

John B wrote:
On 27 Sep, 13:17, Tom Anderson wrote:


According to CULG, they're allowed on the District between Aldgate
East Junction and Upminster. But at this point you would run into
driver knowledge problems...

so they'd have to reverse using
the trailing crossover which apparently lies just east of Aldgate
East; i have no idea if it's signalled to make that easy, and even
if it is, that's a reverse on a running line.

- It might be enough additional time that you'd need more trains
and drivers, which might not be available.

- Er ...

- That's it.

Yup, that sounds like it.

In another forum, someone has suggested that double-manning would
solve the problem - it certainly would in a 'actual safety' sense,
but since there's no problem in an 'actual safety' sense I'm not
sure how relevant that is...

It's relevant because you could have a Met driver with A-stock knowledge
and an H&C driver with the route knowledge, but the problem remains
where to reverse.

The issue is then whether the platforms east of Aldgate will take 8
cars, including suitable reversing points such as Whitechapel or
Plaistow.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

On 27 Sep, 17:47, "Richard J." wrote:
In another forum, someone has suggested that double-manning would
solve the problem - it certainly would in a 'actual safety' sense,
but since there's no problem in an 'actual safety' sense I'm not
sure how relevant that is...

It's relevant because you could have a Met driver with A-stock knowledge
and an H&C driver with the route knowledge, but the problem remains
where to reverse.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant that double-manning *of C-stock* would
solve the "dysfunctional dead man's handle" problem. Double-manning A-
stock with H&C drivers would definitely still leave the "I don't know
how to work this train, and my mate over there doesn't know where he's
going" problem...

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

John B wrote:
On 27 Sep, 17:47, "Richard J." wrote:
In another forum, someone has suggested that double-manning would
solve the problem - it certainly would in a 'actual safety' sense,
but since there's no problem in an 'actual safety' sense I'm not
sure how relevant that is...

It's relevant because you could have a Met driver with A-stock
knowledge and an H&C driver with the route knowledge, but the
problem remains where to reverse.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant that double-manning *of C-stock*
would solve the "dysfunctional dead man's handle" problem.
Double-manning A- stock with H&C drivers would definitely still
leave the "I don't know how to work this train, and my mate over
there doesn't know where he's going" problem...

Why is that a problem? I thought that similar situations were allowed
on all railways, just as ships take on a pilot in unfamilar waters.

But you're right about double-manning of C-stock, which would have been
a simpler solution. They could have double-manned the H&C to
Whitechapel and also an Edgware Road - Parsons Green shuttle.

Anyway, it all seems back to almost normal now. Only the Circle has
"severe delays".

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

On 27 Sep, 22:31, "Richard J." wrote:
Anyway, it all seems back to almost normal now. Only the Circle has
"severe delays".

That sounds *entirely* normal...

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

On Sep 27, 6:20 pm, John B wrote:
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant that double-manning *of C-stock* would
solve the "dysfunctional dead man's handle" problem. Double-manning A-
stock with H&C drivers would definitely still leave the "I don't know
how to work this train, and my mate over there doesn't know where he's
going" problem...

Surely by now it would be time to design a standard layout for train
controls? They all do the same thing after all. I don't have to have
48 hours training to get into a model of car I've never driven before
- theres the steering wheel, brake , pedals , sorted. Off I go. Even
in commercial aircraft which are a magnitude more complex to operate
than any train ever built Airbus have managed to produce controls that
are consistent between different models. Why on earth can't train
builders do the same thing??

B2003