On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 10:37:43 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote:

On 10 Dec, 18:26, MIG wrote:
On 10 Dec, 15:50, Mizter T wrote:

On 10 Dec, 15:00, "John Rowland"

wrote:
Langdon Park station
http://pressroom.dlr.co.uk/news/details.asp?id=152

U Thant's blog suggests that it actually opened for business yesterday
(sunday):

http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...openings-today....

That's plausible. The King George V extension opened a day or two
before it officially did.


When I said his blog "suggests" it was in operation yesterday that was
really just a turn of phrase as opposed to me casting doubt on the
veracity of what he wrote!

Just thought it was worth recording for posterity when trains actually
began stopping at the station. Do the "official opening dates" of
stations exist merely to confuse people?!

To confuse Clive, anyway!

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007, Mizter T wrote:

On 10 Dec, 19:11, Tom Anderson wrote:

Someone remind me - why is the ELL closing for three years?

Tis two years - the plan is to have the ELLX open in December 2009
(i.e. when the railway timetables change).

Aha. This leaflet, in which, allegedly, "information is correct at time of
going to print - November 2007":

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...re-leaflet.pdf

says "The East London line will close on 22 December 2007 for major
extension work and will reopen by summer 2010 as part of the London
Overground network.". Summer 2010 is public works code for winter 2010,
from which i calculated three years. But if it only takes two, that's much
better.

I have thought this too - sure, there are big works to be done (flyover
at New Cross Gate, station and bridge at Shoreditch High St, ramp -
already half-built - up from Whitechapel, etc etc), but on the face of
it they don't need the existing ELL to close...

Right. The work connected with the ramp from Whitechapel, perhaps, but
Shoreditch High Street is nowhere near the current line, and the NXG
flyover surely just involves closing the NXG branch!

However I think the plan might involves materials being transported by
rail from the Silwood Triangle works site, and perhaps from restored
link(s) with the main lines at either New Cross or New Cross Gate or
both - of course the latter will have a permanent connection when
through ELLX services start running, though perhaps the former is an
easier place for works trains to access from the rest of the network.

This sounds plausible, but an appallingly bad excuse.

I've also heard that there's to be large-scale changes to power and
signals to change them to NR standards. Still hard to see how this'll take
2-3 years.

On a related note, Liverpool Street is closed for a week over christmas
"as a result of major engineering work on the approach lines to the
station, in connection with the extension of TfLs East London line". I
don't know if that's the ramp or a new track connection or preparatory
works or what.

tom

--
The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right. -- Lord Hailsham

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
.li...

On a related note, Liverpool Street is closed for a week over christmas
"as a result of major engineering work on the approach lines to the
station, in connection with the extension of TfLs East London line". I
don't know if that's the ramp or a new track connection or preparatory
works or what.


I believe its for removal of the existing girder work that used to support
the lines into the Bishopsgate goods station, I think becusue they are not
in the correct vertical alignment for the new ELLX bridge, which will be
installed at a later date.

Google Earth currently shows a massive amount of structure/material in the
line of route, if you have access to it.

Paul S

On 10 Dec, 18:26, MIG wrote:

That's plausible. The King George V extension opened a day or two
before it officially did.

As did Lewisham; one day before, I think.

Tom Anderson wrote:

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007, Mizter T wrote:

On 10 Dec, 19:11, Tom Anderson wrote:

Someone remind me - why is the ELL closing for three years?

Tis two years - the plan is to have the ELLX open in December 2009
(i.e. when the railway timetables change).

Aha. This leaflet, in which, allegedly, "information is correct at time of
going to print - November 2007":

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...re-leaflet.pdf

says "The East London line will close on 22 December 2007 for major
extension work and will reopen by summer 2010 as part of the London
Overground network.". Summer 2010 is public works code for winter 2010,
from which i calculated three years. But if it only takes two, that's much
better.

Errm, I'm not sure where I picked up December 2009 from - as the LU
"Track closures Six Month Look Ahead" PDF agrees with you in saying
June 2010 (in fact it specifically says Wed 30 Jun 10 - not sure that
can be right though):
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/livetra...k-closures.pdf

So two and a half years. I'm not sure that the public works code will
apply to this tightly managed TfL-run project, we shall see!


I have thought this too - sure, there are big works to be done (flyover
at New Cross Gate, station and bridge at Shoreditch High St, ramp -
already half-built - up from Whitechapel, etc etc), but on the face of
it they don't need the existing ELL to close...

Right. The work connected with the ramp from Whitechapel, perhaps, but
Shoreditch High Street is nowhere near the current line, and the NXG
flyover surely just involves closing the NXG branch!

....and closing the National Rail/ Network Rail lines there as well, so
they can swing it in to place.

The work on the ramp to bring the line up from Whitechapel has been
proceeding apace for a good while now.


However I think the plan might involves materials being transported by
rail from the Silwood Triangle works site, and perhaps from restored
link(s) with the main lines at either New Cross or New Cross Gate or
both - of course the latter will have a permanent connection when
through ELLX services start running, though perhaps the former is an
easier place for works trains to access from the rest of the network.

This sounds plausible, but an appallingly bad excuse.

I think I remember reading things about minimising the impact of
construction traffic on the surrounding areas and roads. I don't know
the details. I do however know that tracks have been laid at the
Silwood Triangle works site on an alignment that will connect with the
existing line - the connection isn't in place yet and I wouldn't
expect it to go in until the ELL closes.


I've also heard that there's to be large-scale changes to power and
signals to change them to NR standards. Still hard to see how this'll take
2-3 years.

I agree - if someone could explain it all that'd be great!


On a related note, Liverpool Street is closed for a week over christmas
"as a result of major engineering work on the approach lines to the
station, in connection with the extension of TfLs East London line". I
don't know if that's the ramp or a new track connection or preparatory
works or what.

Removal of Bridge GE19, which needs to go so it can be replaced by a
new bridge to carry the ELLX over the Liverpool Street lines, which
will itself be put in place in spring 2008 (I suspect that'll be a
simpler operation than the removal of the old bridge).

I think bridge GE19 isn't on the right alignment. See two of U Thant's
helpful weblog entries:

http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...-route-at.html
http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...idge-date.html


I'm all for the ELLX, as I'm sure you know, but I'm also all for
keeping the closure to as short a period as possible. The ELL might
not be anything like as heavily used as other LU lines are, but it is
still a crucial cross river connection for many.

That said, it will become a far more critical bit of London's
transport infrastructure when it becomes part of the ELLX, so I guess
it's worth getting everything right first time round during this
closure and making sure all the works are done to a very high standard.

On 10 Dec, 20:21, Tom Anderson wrote:
says "The East London line will close on 22 December 2007 for major
extension work and will reopen by summer 2010 as part of the London
Overground network.". Summer 2010 is public works code for winter 2010,
from which i calculated three years. But if it only takes two, that's much
better.

TfL's latest documents list a forecast completion time (even with
testing etc) of November 7th 2009.

eg Page 81 here.
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...tober_2007.pdf

I've also heard that there's to be large-scale changes to power and
signals to change them to NR standards. Still hard to see how this'll take
2-3 years.

Yes, basically everything's going to be ripped out and they'll start
again. They're also doing some major refurbishment/rebuilding of the
stations, though I don't have details handy.

The timetable above has London Underground not handing over the line
to the builders until March, and the work will be complete and ready
for testing by June the next year. 15 months seems pretty good to me.

On a related note, Liverpool Street is closed for a week over christmas
"as a result of major engineering work on the approach lines to the
station, in connection with the extension of TfLs East London line". I
don't know if that's the ramp or a new track connection or preparatory
works or what.

Demolishing the enormous brick viaduct over the Great Eastern Main
Line on the east side of Brick Lane. It's in the way of the ELL's own
bridge over the line. Apparently it weighs 12,000 tonnes:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...ntre/6798.aspx

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
.li
However I think the plan might involves materials being transported
by rail from the Silwood Triangle works site, and perhaps from
restored link(s) with the main lines at either New Cross or New
Cross Gate or both - of course the latter will have a permanent
connection when through ELLX services start running, though perhaps
the former is an easier place for works trains to access from the
rest of the network.

This sounds plausible, but an appallingly bad excuse.

I've also heard that there's to be large-scale changes to power and
signals to change them to NR standards. Still hard to see how this'll
take 2-3 years.

Yes, I was wondering why it's going to take so long. The existing line
was almost re-built not so long ago and it can't take all that long to
install new power supplies and signalling. Connecting it up to the
extension shouldn't take more than a few weeks.

Tim Roll-Pickering wrote

John Rowland wrote:

Langdon Park station.
http://pressroom.dlr.co.uk/news/details.asp?id=152

When is the tube map going to stand still long enough for everyone to
have
an up to date copy?

It's shown as open on the "Tube map" at the centre of the London
Overground (December) timetable booklet which I expect all the London
Transport geeks have got.

But for those who rely on the tube map in their pocket diaries, not in
the foreseeable future ;-)

What was the longest 'no change' period in recent history ?

Same question, but adding/removing the North London Line not to count,
nor splitting off the H&C, only actual changes in service on LU, W&C,
and DLR.

--
Mike D

Tom Anderson wrote:
Incidentally, i noticed the Overground shade of orange seems to be
different to the ELL one. I assumed they'd be the same. Oh well, only
matters for a couple of weeks now!

They are indeed different according to the TfL Colour Standard at
http://tinyurl.com/32y8t2

ELL: Underground orange
NCS S 0585-Y30R; RGB 236,158,0; Web FF 99 00

LO: Overground orange
NCS S 0585-Y50R; RGB 232,106,16; Web FF 66 00.

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

Richard J. wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote:
Incidentally, i noticed the Overground shade of orange seems to be
different to the ELL one. I assumed they'd be the same. Oh well, only
matters for a couple of weeks now!

They are indeed different according to the TfL Colour Standard at
http://tinyurl.com/32y8t2

ELL: Underground orange
NCS S 0585-Y30R; RGB 236,158,0; Web FF 99 00

LO: Overground orange
NCS S 0585-Y50R; RGB 232,106,16; Web FF 66 00.

Is there a good reason for them to be different? Won't various signs and
conduit friezes have to be replaced as a result of the colour change which
could otherwise have been left alone?