On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, Andy wrote:

On Dec 13, 6:36 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, Paul Scott wrote:
"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
h.li...
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Andy wrote:

On Dec 12, 6:21 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Andy wrote:

and there would be no connection back onto the LUL system for major
servicing anyway.

The St. Mary's curve to the District / Hammersmith & City lines is due to
be taken out early next year and so the line will be 'on its own' with no
connections to NR or LUL for a long time.

Why is this link being removed? Are platforms being extended over it or
something?

Its only purpose is for ELL trains to get back to their main depot -
Neasden is it? Once the ELL is rebuilt for main line spec trains, they
will have no requirement to enter the LU system, indeed they are
probably out of gauge for length anyway. The power supply and signalling
systems at either side of the curve will be incompatible, so the track
connection would appear irrelevant and unnecessary.

I smell circular reasoning! Why can't the ELL going to use A stock?
Because St Mary's curve is being taken out. Why is St Mary's curve being
taken out? Because the ELL isn't going to use A stock!

If the curve was left in, and other provisions made for continuing to run
tube trains, the line could reopen soon and carry on running as before
until the extensions are ready, at which point it could go over to NR
operation. Yes, this would be more difficult and expensive than the
current plan, but it would also mean that an entire line didn't have to
close for three years!

Apart from having a fourth rail, what would need to be done to make the
line tube-friendly? I imagine NR signals would be fine, you'd just have to
train drivers to read those instead of LU signals (do they do this already
towards Richmond and Amersham?). What's the situation with platform
height?

Interestingly, the Always Touch Out website says that the
infrastructure works were planned to be completed by May 2009 with
test running from there on as some stock would be available. However,
there appears to be some 'funny' dates in the construction section of
the link. http://www.alwaystouchout.com/project/3. I've not been
able to find any other information about the timescale of the
infrastructure works. If this outline plan is correct, then I could
certainly see a much earlier reopening, providing that there are
enough Class 378s are available to run a service.

Aha. Let's hope!

Another consideration with running A Stock on the route is how would you
deal with the interface between LUL and NR signalling on the St. Mary's
curve? The curve is only 450m junction to junction and the standard
National Rail overlap is 200 yards (185m). There are already
restrictions on the curve: only one train is allowed on the connection
at once due to clearance issues with a train going the otherway.

I think i'd run the whole thing as some sort of special-case token-based
thing, where signallers have to manually lock the section the train is
moving into, then order it to move, and then put the system back to
automatic when it's in the right place. Assuming that's possible. It's a
link that would see very little traffic, so this should be adequate.

You would also need a trip cock tester on the curve or you would need to
install temporary tripcocks to allow the A-stock to run.

Good point.

On the other shared lines, tripcocks are fitted to the signals and the
NR trains (Class 313 in all cases) are also fitted.

Interesting. Probably not appropriate in this case, as the use of LU stock
would only be temporary.

tom

--
REMOVE AND DESTROY

In article , Tom
Anderson writes
Apart from having a fourth rail, what would need to be done to make the
line tube-friendly? I imagine NR signals would be fine, you'd just have
to train drivers to read those instead of LU signals (do they do this
already towards Richmond and Amersham?).

Richmond, yes, but Amersham has LU signals.

--
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:

On 13 Dec, 18:36, Tom Anderson wrote:


I smell circular reasoning! Why can't the ELL going to use A stock?

Because it's over forty years old, built to a larger loading gauge
than the NR surface lines, and can't cope with third rail power.

But apart from that, it's perfect...

On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, solar penguin wrote:

On 13 Dec, 18:36, Tom Anderson wrote:

I smell circular reasoning! Why can't the ELL going to use A stock?

Because it's over forty years old,

Still seems to work alright. We're only talking about carrying on for a
few years, until the extended ELL is ready to roll. ISTM that it's better
than no trains at all.

built to a larger loading gauge than the NR surface lines,

But evidently quite happily squeezes through the existing ELL route, which
is what i was demanding.

and can't cope with third rail power.

Earth^W Traction current return rail-bonded fourth rail, as at Richmond.

But apart from that, it's perfect...

Bit boxy for my personal taste, but commuters can't be choosers, eh?

tom

--
Linux is like a FreeBSD fork maintained by 10 year old retards. --
Encyclopedia Dramatica

On 13 Dec, 21:53, wrote:
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:13:54 -0000, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

You will only ever see NLL & WLL frequency increasing incrementally, up to
4, 6 or maybe 8 tph over overlapping sections of the line, because it is
also a goods line. When Ken talks about 'metro style frequencies' he seems
to mean better than 4 tph, which is when it is considered (by many) that
you
don't need to worry about the timetable.

Aren't they planning to eventually send the goods trains over a different
route?

As far as I remember, they wanted to send goods trains via the east
london thames crossing, and a new rail link (or, more accurately, the
resurrection of an old one) going from oxford to cambridge.

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Andy wrote:

On Dec 12, 6:21 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Andy wrote:

and there would be no connection back onto the LUL system for major
servicing anyway.

I hadn't realised that was happening. Is there a huge problem with
doing occasional stock transfers over NR lines? Apart from the fact
that the route would via Clapham Junction, some maneuvers out West,
and the Dudden Hill branch ...

And where would the connection onto National Rail be?

At New Cross or New Cross Gate.

UIVMM, there will be no connection at New Cross.

Less welcome is the fact that passengers on the Stratford branch now
have no trains beyond Canary Wharf after 10am in the morning. Thanks!

Also I'm amazed that new 5 minute service is only between 9:30 and
15:30 - which makes it totally useless since DLR Stratford service is
usually overloaded during 7:00-9:00, 17:00-19:00 peaks...


And still the only branch with no service to the city.

Well, considering that National Rail to Liverpool Street and Central
line to Liverpool Street and Bank is just a minute away via new
convenient footbridge - this is the least issue of all possible.

"alex_t" wrote in message
...

Less welcome is the fact that passengers on the Stratford branch now
have no trains beyond Canary Wharf after 10am in the morning. Thanks!

Also I'm amazed that new 5 minute service is only between 9:30 and
15:30 - which makes it totally useless since DLR Stratford service is
usually overloaded during 7:00-9:00, 17:00-19:00 peaks...


Is it possible that the timetable is temporary while awaiting additional
stock to be delivered?

Paul S

On 15 Dec, 11:11, "Paul Scott" wrote:
"alex_t" wrote:


Less welcome is the fact that passengers on the Stratford branch now
have no trains beyond Canary Wharf after 10am in the morning. Thanks!

Also I'm amazed that new 5 minute service is only between 9:30 and
15:30 - which makes it totally useless since DLR Stratford service is
usually overloaded during 7:00-9:00, 17:00-19:00 peaks...

Is it possible that the timetable is temporary while awaiting additional
stock to be delivered?

Paul S


I use the DLR fairly often, but I must admit I haven't followed the
timetable changes closely.

How long has the Stratford branch had this 10 minute frequency for?
The Jubilee line obviously took much of the DLR's Stratford - Canary
Wharf custom away, but given the long 'outerchange' between the
Jubilee and DLR at Canary Wharf I expect that many passengers from
Stratford heading for points south on the line to Lewisham would just
take the DLR all the way.

The Jubilee line obviously took much of the DLR's Stratford - Canary
Wharf custom away, but given the long 'outerchange' between the
Jubilee and DLR at Canary Wharf I expect that many passengers from
Stratford heading for points south on the line to Lewisham would just
take the DLR all the way.
Why did they build Canary Wharf station like that? Couldn't they have
put it on the western side of the dock instead of the eastern side, so
that they could have a more direct connection?