| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
[posted to uk.transport.london and uk.railway]
(Apols to anyone on uk.railway who couldn't care less about such Metropolitan matters - in which case there's no need to read on!) Just as a (rather late in the day) heads up to anyone who may either have forgotten or been unaware that London Underground's East London Line (ELL) is closing tonight (that's Saturday 22 December - though AFAICS the last trains will still run as normal just past midnight on sunday)... though it isn't closing for good, it is in fact headed for bigger and better things when reopen in summer 2010, as a quasi- National Rail (or heavy-rail) line, with trains operating on 'Metro' frequencies serving a much longer route stretching from Croydon in the south to Dalston in the north. The project was officially known as the East London Line Extension (ELLX), though the official title is now the East London Railway, and it is being run by Transport for London. Thus tomorrow (saturday) is the last day the East London Line will see London Underground operation, and hence the last day that the 4-car A stock trains of LU will be in passenger service down this line - which remains LU's furthest foray from the river into south-east London. In the interim period the ELL will be replaced by several rail replacement bus services, although none will provide the crucial cross- river link previously provided by the ELL through the Thames Tunnel, which was the first tunnel under the Thames and was designed by Marc Brunel (father of Isambard Kingdom) and opened in 1843. The replacement buses cannot traverse the only sensible route through the nearby Rotherhithe Tunnel, so passengers looking to cross the river are thus advised to consider making use of a combination of the Jubilee line and the Dockland Light Railway, or alternatively travel via London Bridge (though there won't be any zonal/fares easements on routes via central London - so tickets valid for zone 1 will be required for any journeys made via zone 1). The new ELLX will form part of TfL's new London Overground network (and will be operated by TfL's chosen rail concessionaire, LOROL, rather than London Underground - hence the talk of the line being 'privatised'), with through trains from West Croydon and Crystal Palace joining the course of the existing ELL at New Cross Gate, travelling up to Whitechapel then on and up over a new line across the Great Eastern lines out of Liverpool Street station to join the course of the Broad Street to Dalston Junction line (part of the original North London Line/Railway), with new stations up to and including Dalston. Some trains will continue alongside the existing North London Line to Highbury & Islington. New Cross will continue to be served as a branch, with trains terminating there as before. The following TfL leaflet provides the official, albeit brief, low- down on the plans, plus lots of detailed info on the replacement buses (PDF): http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/ell-closure-leaflet.pdf The East London Railway (as was) has a most interesting past, originally serving Liverpool Street station it also provided a wide range of destinations to the south, including Croydon and even Brighton. Thus one can see the ELLX project as fulfilling the potential of the line as a new cross-London link. It won't however be available as a freight route, as it used to be - the climb up from the cutting north of Whitechapel to the level of a viaduct at Bishopsgate will be too much of an incline for freight trains. An as yet unfunded phase 2 of the ELLX would provide a link between the existing line and the South London Line north of Old Kent Road and would allow for through services via Peckham Rye to Clapham Junction. This is likely to go ahead an an enabling work for the Thameslink 2015 project, as it would 'solve' the issue of the existing South London Line (Victoria - London Bridge) service's occupancy of valuable platform space at London Bridge by replacing the service with ELLX trains (plus a separate replacement service to Victoria). As ever Clive Feather's ever excellent CULG provides a plethora of information on the ELL, including a good outline of the history of the ELL: http://www.davros.org/rail/culg/eastlondon.html Whilst undoubtedly the current ELL doesn't carry anything as near as many passengers as other LU lines it is nonetheless an important link, with nearly 35,000 passengers on weekdays or over ten and a half million journeys each year. The ELL has in fact actually had a relatively recent extended closure - it closed for what was supposed to be a period of 6 months in 1995, but the closure actually ended up lasting three years because of wrangles about the way the historic Thames Tunnel was being treated. However since then ridership of the ELL has been substantially boosted by the arrival of the extended Jubilee line at the new station at Canada Water, which allows for easy interchange onto the Tube network to access the West End and, crucially, Canary Wharf and points further east. In addition the burgeoning Goldsmiths' College in New Cross, with an expanding number of students, will have provided the line with additional patronage - hence the closure will have a bigger impact this time around (though the 1999 arrival nearby of the DLR south of the river will provide an alternative cross-river route this time around compared to the previous period of). But much of what I have written concerns the future - today is the end of Underground operation on the line, and (notwithstanding the somewhat more adventurous earlier history of the line) it is also the end of the self-contained East London Line as we know it (or indeed the "Metropolitan Line - East London Section", as it was known up until the 1980's). ~~~ P.S. It's a bit difficult finding out the times of the last train on the web - the TfL Journey Planner has had a Stalinist turn and seemingly has wiped from its memory any knowledge of the East London Line... however, Google has a long memory, so the PDF converted by Google into HTML can be seen, for a short while at least, by following this link (though it takes a bit of deciphering): http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache...ast-london.pdf or via http://tinyurl.com/2embko (If anyone has a proper copy of this file I'd much appreciate it if you could email it to me - when the ELLX opens, it'll be interesting to see how the first and last train times compare to what's currently on offer.) I presume that East London Line trains will be stabled in the small New Cross depot on saturday night at the least, before returning at some point to Neasden (via St. Mary's curve, a connection between the ELL and the District line in the vicinity of Whitechapel). I don't know the fate of the small New Cross depot - i.e. whether it will be used by ELLX trains - as there is a big new purpose built depot being built for them outside New Cross Gate. However all the Underground staff are being relocated elsewhere on the network. STOP PRESS... STOP PRESS... I've just this morning read a thread on District Dave's internet forum about the closure of the ELL - it looks like a 'special' train of some sort was on the cards and was due to run this afternoon, but this has seemingly been called off for reasons unknown (as is explained on page 2 of the thread)... http://districtdave.proboards39.com/...d=11972028 43 |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On 22 Dec, 07:34, Mizter T wrote:
sunday)... though it isn't closing for good, it is in fact headed for bigger and better things when reopen in summer 2010, as a quasi- Quote why it needs 3 years to be converted to 3rd rail when the 3rd rail is already there is anyones guess. Usual lazy british contractors who take 2 weeks to change a lightbulb no doubt. The extensions to the line shouldn't effect the bit in the middle so I can't see a good reason to close it. Any materials for the extension that need to be moved by rail could be done at night. National Rail (or heavy-rail) line, with trains operating on 'Metro' frequencies serving a much longer route stretching from Croydon in the It already is heavy rail (A stock is large and heavy) with metro frequencies. If anything the service will be less frequent and far more prone to delays caused by the rest of the south london network. The new ELLX will form part of TfL's new London Overground network (and will be operated by TfL's chosen rail concessionaire, LOROL, rather than London Underground - hence the talk of the line being Probably a sensible decision. LUL would have trouble running a bath without a delay. B2003 |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
Boltar wrote:
sunday)... though it isn't closing for good, it is in fact headed for bigger and better things when reopen in summer 2010, as a quasi- Quote why it needs 3 years to be converted to 3rd rail when the 3rd rail is already there is anyones guess. Usual lazy british contractors who take 2 weeks to change a lightbulb no doubt. The extensions to the line shouldn't effect the bit in the middle so I can't see a good reason to close it. Any materials for the extension that need to be moved by rail could be done at night. It does seem a long time, especially considering it was closed for several years not that long ago. It can't be in that much of a bad state |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
"Stuart" wrote in message ... Boltar wrote: sunday)... though it isn't closing for good, it is in fact headed for bigger and better things when reopen in summer 2010, as a quasi- Quote why it needs 3 years to be converted to 3rd rail when the 3rd rail is already there is anyones guess. Usual lazy british contractors who take 2 weeks to change a lightbulb no doubt. The extensions to the line shouldn't effect the bit in the middle so I can't see a good reason to close it. Any materials for the extension that need to be moved by rail could be done at night. It does seem a long time, especially considering it was closed for several years not that long ago. It can't be in that much of a bad state I noticed on Clive's line guides, that after the last closure, the power supply was made switchable between third or fourth rail mode. Which seems to be another reason to question the length of closure. Paul S |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On 22 Dec, 13:30, Boltar wrote:
Quote why it needs 3 years to be converted to 3rd rail when the 3rd rail is already there is anyones guess. Usual lazy british contractors who take 2 weeks to change a lightbulb no doubt. The extensions to the line shouldn't effect the bit in the middle so I can't see a good reason to close it. As I mentioned recently, the work isn't taking 3 years. London Underground are being given 3 months to pack up their things and leave, and it's expected to be ready for test running by June 2009. So that's a little over one year of construction. Plus their optimistic projection is currently November 2009, which would make it closed for less than two years. U -- http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On Dec 22, 2:35*pm, Mr Thant
wrote: On 22 Dec, 13:30, Boltar wrote: Quote why it needs 3 years to be converted to 3rd rail when the 3rd rail is already there is anyones guess. Usual lazy british contractors who take 2 weeks to change a lightbulb no doubt. The extensions to the line shouldn't effect the bit in the middle so I can't see a good reason to close it. As I mentioned recently, the work isn't taking 3 years. London Underground are being given 3 months to pack up their things and leave, and it's expected to be ready for test running by June 2009. So that's a little over one year of construction. Plus their optimistic projection is currently November 2009, which would make it closed for less than two years. U --http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London Bear in mind also that the existing stations (except Canada Water, which is of recent construction) will require to be upgraded to be DDA compliant, which at Shadwell, Wapping and Rotherhithe, for example, will require new lifts and cross-passageways. (Surrey Quays is a surface station in a cutting, but this will probably require lifts as there is little space for ramps.) I also suspect that the narrow platforms at Wapping will have to be widened, which will involve widening the tunnel - a major civil engineering task in its own right. In addition, platforms will require to be lengthend, which at Rotherhithe and Wapping will require opening out the tunnels (the new class 378s will, I presume, be 20m vehicles whereas the A stock is noticeably shorter). In the case of the power supply, there will be a requirement to ensure that stray traction return currents do not cause corrosion of running rails, buried services etc; this will require significant work in its own right. In addition, what is happening to the power system? Does it transfer to NR ownership or does it remain in the ownership of the consortium that owns the rest of the LU power supply system? Does it need upgrading to cope with longer, heavier and more frequent trains? If nothing else, new substations and feeder cables will be required on the northern extension; the additional loadings resulting from this may require upgrading of the power supply elsewhere, and possible negotiations with the public electricity suppliers. Then there is resignalling; I presume the line will be resignalled to NR standards to achieve compatibility with the lines to its north and south and to avoid the 378s having to be fitted with LUL train stops as well as TPWS. Does anyone know what has been specified for the signalling? Finally, a new flyover is to be built at New Cross Gate to allow northbound trains from the Brighton Line to gain access to the ELL. This will require significant works in its own right. As you can see, there is a lot more to it than meets the eye - HTH! |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On Dec 22, 3:34*pm, wrote:
On Dec 22, 2:35*pm, Mr Thant wrote: On 22 Dec, 13:30, Boltar wrote: Quote why it needs 3 years to be converted to 3rd rail when the 3rd rail is already there is anyones guess. Usual lazy british contractors who take 2 weeks to change a lightbulb no doubt. The extensions to the line shouldn't effect the bit in the middle so I can't see a good reason to close it. As I mentioned recently, the work isn't taking 3 years. London Underground are being given 3 months to pack up their things and leave, and it's expected to be ready for test running by June 2009. So that's a little over one year of construction. Plus their optimistic projection is currently November 2009, which would make it closed for less than two years. U --http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London Bear in mind also that the existing stations (except Canada Water, which is of recent construction) will require to be upgraded to be DDA compliant, which at Shadwell, Wapping and Rotherhithe, for example, will require new lifts and cross-passageways. (Surrey Quays is a surface station in a cutting, but this will probably require lifts as there is little space for ramps.) I also suspect that the narrow platforms at Wapping will have to be widened, which will involve widening the tunnel - a major civil engineering task in its own right. In addition, platforms will require to be lengthend, which at Rotherhithe and Wapping will require opening out the tunnels (the new class 378s will, I presume, be 20m vehicles whereas the A stock is noticeably shorter). In the case of the power supply, there will be a requirement to ensure that stray traction return currents do not cause corrosion of running rails, buried services etc; this will require significant work in its own right. In addition, what is happening to the power system? Does it transfer to NR ownership or does it remain in the ownership of the consortium that owns the rest of the LU power supply system? Does it need upgrading to cope with longer, heavier and more frequent trains? If nothing else, new substations and feeder cables will be required on the northern extension; the additional loadings resulting from this may require upgrading of the power supply elsewhere, and possible negotiations with the public electricity suppliers. Then there is resignalling; I presume the line will be resignalled to NR standards to achieve compatibility with the lines to its north and south and to avoid the 378s having to be fitted with LUL train stops as well as TPWS. Does anyone know what has been specified for the signalling? Finally, a new flyover is to be built at New Cross Gate to allow northbound trains from the Brighton Line to gain access to the ELL. This will require significant works in its own right. As you can see, there is a lot more to it than meets the eye - HTH!- My objection would not be how long it takes, but that it's the wrong project. I don't understand why an orbital railway is such an important goal. Well, I do. It's a way for a politician to make his mark an a more obvious way than any general improvement in transport. An orbital route might be a nice to have, but only in addition to the radial routes, not replacing them. I've mentioned many times that the trains from the Forest Hill direction are appallingly overcrowded. I can't see how it improves things to shorten them to fit the ELL and divert them to Hackney. Even if changing at Canada Water is not perceived as an extra burden, it doesn't resolve the issue of the short trains. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
MIG wrote:
My objection would not be how long it takes, but that it's the wrong project. I don't understand why an orbital railway is such an important goal. Well, I do. It's a way for a politician to make his mark an a more obvious way than any general improvement in transport. An orbital route might be a nice to have, but only in addition to the radial routes, not replacing them. An orbital route is a very good thing to have. London is teaming with radial transport, there's very little that goes round! The North London Line as it is at the moment is too infrequent and passes too many radial tube lines without connecting to them |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On 22 Dec, 15:34, wrote:
which is of recent construction) will require to be upgraded to be DDA compliant, Why? And why does installing a lift require the whole station to close anyway? In addition, platforms will require to be lengthend, which at Rotherhithe and Wapping will require opening out the tunnels (the new class 378s will, I presume, be 20m vehicles whereas the A stock is noticeably shorter). You might have a point there. In the case of the power supply, there will be a requirement to ensure that stray traction return currents do not cause corrosion of running rails, buried services etc; this will require significant work in its Surely that was sorted when the line was closed last time? Then there is resignalling; I presume the line will be resignalled to NR standards to achieve compatibility with the lines to its north and south and to avoid the 378s having to be fitted with LUL train stops as well as TPWS. Does anyone know what has been specified for the signalling? Again ,. I don't see why the line would have to close for that. They could just install the new system piece by piece until its ready to be used. Finally, a new flyover is to be built at New Cross Gate to allow northbound trains from the Brighton Line to gain access to the ELL. This will require significant works in its own right. Again , I don't see why this would require closure of the line for 2 years. As you can see, there is a lot more to it than meets the eye - HTH! Seems to me they're just making their own life easier than actually trying to accomodate the travelling public, who are after all, the whole raison d'etre of the line in the first place! B2003 |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
Bear in mind also that the existing stations (except Canada Water, which is of recent construction) will require to be upgraded to be DDA compliant, which at Shadwell, Wapping and Rotherhithe, for example, will require new lifts and cross-passageways. (Surrey Quays is a surface station in a cutting, but this will probably require lifts as there is little space for ramps.) I also suspect that the narrow platforms at Wapping will have to be widened, which will involve widening the tunnel - a major civil engineering task in its own right. In addition, platforms will require to be lengthend, which at Rotherhithe and Wapping will require opening out the tunnels (the new class 378s will, I presume, be 20m vehicles whereas the A stock is noticeably shorter). Are lifts going in at these stations as you indicate? I was not aware of such a plan. I also wasn't aware of any widening work, although again I may be wrong. Tom |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
"Tom Page" wrote in message ... Bear in mind also that the existing stations (except Canada Water, which is of recent construction) will require to be upgraded to be DDA compliant, which at Shadwell, Wapping and Rotherhithe, for example, will require new lifts and cross-passageways. (Surrey Quays is a surface station in a cutting, but this will probably require lifts as there is little space for ramps.) I also suspect that the narrow platforms at Wapping will have to be widened, which will involve widening the tunnel - a major civil engineering task in its own right. In addition, platforms will require to be lengthend, which at Rotherhithe and Wapping will require opening out the tunnels (the new class 378s will, I presume, be 20m vehicles whereas the A stock is noticeably shorter). Are lifts going in at these stations as you indicate? I was not aware of such a plan. I also wasn't aware of any widening work, although again I may be wrong. I don't think the improvements are that major either, indeed for a long time a couple of the stations were expected to close as they couldn't be easily made DDA compliant, and at least one station was reported to need SDO... Paul S |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:46:51 -0000, "Paul Scott"
wrote: "Stuart" wrote in message k... Boltar wrote: sunday)... though it isn't closing for good, it is in fact headed for bigger and better things when reopen in summer 2010, as a quasi- Quote why it needs 3 years to be converted to 3rd rail when the 3rd rail is already there is anyones guess. Usual lazy british contractors who take 2 weeks to change a lightbulb no doubt. The extensions to the line shouldn't effect the bit in the middle so I can't see a good reason to close it. Any materials for the extension that need to be moved by rail could be done at night. It does seem a long time, especially considering it was closed for several years not that long ago. It can't be in that much of a bad state I noticed on Clive's line guides, that after the last closure, the power supply was made switchable between third or fourth rail mode. Which seems to be another reason to question the length of closure. The NL and DC lines were converted from 4-rail to 3-rail with no special closure period, presumably being done during succeeding Sundays on one sub-station at a time. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On 22 Dec, 07:34, Mizter T wrote:
Just as a (rather late in the day) heads up to anyone who may either have forgotten or been unaware that London Underground's East London Line (ELL) is closing tonight Had my last ride on the East London line around midday today. Took some photos (without flash for the most part!) and got very nostalgic. It will be missed :( |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On Dec 22, 5:15*pm, Tom Page wrote:
Bear in mind also that the existing stations (except Canada Water, which is of recent construction) will require to be upgraded to be DDA compliant, which at Shadwell, Wapping and Rotherhithe, for example, will require new lifts and cross-passageways. (Surrey Quays is a surface station in a cutting, but this will probably require lifts as there is little space for ramps.) I also suspect that the narrow platforms at Wapping will have to be widened, which will involve widening the tunnel - a major civil engineering task in its own right. In addition, platforms will require to be lengthend, which at Rotherhithe and Wapping will require opening out the tunnels (the new class 378s will, I presume, be 20m vehicles whereas the A stock is noticeably shorter). Are lifts going in at these stations as you indicate? I was not aware of such a plan. I also wasn't aware of any widening work, although again I may be wrong. Tom It is a legal requirement that new works and any sort of upgrade must be DDA compliant (hence, for example, the tendency not to "refurbish" rolling stock, which would require DDA compliance, but to "refresh"), so something will have to be done to make the stations DDA compliant, which with the exception of New Cross and Canada Water, they are presently not. And Wapping, in particular, is very, very cramped, so it would be very difficult to carry out these sorts of works and maintain access to the station. On the subject of the power supplies, and in particular the conversion to 3rd rail, since the conversion of the New Line and NLL in the 1970s, the legal situation has changed considerably. The use of the running rails for traction return does lead to stray currents, which can and do corrode anything metallic, especially in damp areas like tunnels. Under the EMC (Electro-magnetic compatibility) regulations 1992, the railway must demonstrate that following the conversion, the EM emissions from it are no greater than those pertaining at present. This will probably require the installation of additional conductors in parallel with the running rails in order to reduce the resistance of the return circuit (cf Farringdon, where an additional "fourth" rail is laid in the four-foot and bonded to the running rails for this purpose) and to "encourage" the return currents to flow via the rails and not via earth. This can also be achieved by the replacement of jointed bullhead rail (which is largely still used on the ELL) with CWR using heavier flat bottom rail, which will have a significantly lower resistance in its own right. |
Does anyone know of any plans for a walk through the original Brunel tunnel while it is closed?
|
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On 22 Dec, 19:50, wrote:
It is a legal requirement that new works and any sort of upgrade must be DDA compliant (hence, for example, the tendency not to "refurbish" rolling stock, which would require DDA compliance, but to "refresh"), so something will have to be done to make the stations DDA compliant, which with the exception of New Cross and Canada Water, they are presently not. And Wapping, in particular, is very, very cramped, so it would be very difficult to carry out these sorts of works and maintain access to the station. My understanding is the works planned fall under "refreshment" type rules and hence no new lifts etc will be provided at existing stations. The various future maps consistently show them as remaining non-accessible: http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/pdf/tube_map2010.pdf http://www.campaignforcrossrail.com/...fL_trnsprt.pdf U -- http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
SamB wrote:
On 22 Dec, 07:34, Mizter T wrote: Just as a (rather late in the day) heads up to anyone who may either have forgotten or been unaware that London Underground's East London Line (ELL) is closing tonight Had my last ride on the East London line around midday today. Took some photos (without flash for the most part!) and got very nostalgic. It will be missed :( Well I am sorry to see it pass having been a regular passenger for the last 30 years, but I am glad to see the pace at which things are happening at the site of the new depot, the foundations for the flyover are in a pretty advanced state, the site has been totally transformed from the old car pound and wasteland that it previously was. So here's hoping we all around in 3 years time for the grand re-opening. -- Martin |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On 22 Dec, 20:16, Mr Thant
wrote: On 22 Dec, 19:50, wrote: It is a legal requirement that new works and any sort of upgrade must be DDA compliant (hence, for example, the tendency not to "refurbish" rolling stock, which would require DDA compliance, but to "refresh"), so something will have to be done to make the stations DDA compliant, which with the exception of New Cross and Canada Water, they are presently not. And Wapping, in particular, is very, very cramped, so it would be very difficult to carry out these sorts of works and maintain access to the station. My understanding is the works planned fall under "refreshment" type rules and hence no new lifts etc will be provided at existing stations. The various future maps consistently show them as remaining non-accessible: http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/pdf/tube...ve_tfL_trnsprt... U --http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London I'm not even sure that it's true that major works do need to be lift- accessible. I thought the requirement was that a company had to make reasonable efforts - if the cost was grossly disproportionate to the benefits I thought a full-accessibility scheme was not required. Anyway, as Mr Thant says, I don't think there's much work at all happening at either Wapping or Rotherhithe stations - the bricks and mortar of the stations (so I thought) will remain completely unchanged. I'm sure signage will be replaced, and I imagine things will be cleaned, but neither of these changes would be sufficient to count as a refurb. Tom |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
wrote in message
On Dec 22, 2:35 pm, Mr Thant wrote: On 22 Dec, 13:30, Boltar wrote: Quote why it needs 3 years to be converted to 3rd rail when the 3rd rail is already there is anyones guess. Usual lazy british contractors who take 2 weeks to change a lightbulb no doubt. The extensions to the line shouldn't effect the bit in the middle so I can't see a good reason to close it. As I mentioned recently, the work isn't taking 3 years. London Underground are being given 3 months to pack up their things and leave, and it's expected to be ready for test running by June 2009. So that's a little over one year of construction. Plus their optimistic projection is currently November 2009, which would make it closed for less than two years. U --http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London Bear in mind also that the existing stations (except Canada Water, which is of recent construction) will require to be upgraded to be DDA compliant, which at Shadwell, Wapping and Rotherhithe, for example, will require new lifts and cross-passageways. (Surrey Quays is a surface station in a cutting, but this will probably require lifts as there is little space for ramps.) I also suspect that the narrow platforms at Wapping will have to be widened, which will involve widening the tunnel - a major civil engineering task in its own right. In addition, platforms will require to be lengthend, which at Rotherhithe and Wapping will require opening out the tunnels (the new class 378s will, I presume, be 20m vehicles whereas the A stock is noticeably shorter). Yes, the A stock cars are only 16.2m long, but I doubt that any platform extensions are planned. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
STOP PRESS... STOP PRESS... I've just this morning read a thread on District Dave's internet forum about the closure of the ELL - it looks like a 'special' train of some sort was on the cards and was due to run this afternoon, but this has seemingly been called off for reasons unknown (as is explained on page 2 of the thread)... http://districtdave.proboards39.com/...d=11972028 43 I believe the original plan was to run the 4-car 1938TS in public service, but the unions refused to allow it and LU was unable to persuade them. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
"Spyke" wrote in message
STOP PRESS... STOP PRESS... I've just this morning read a thread on District Dave's internet forum about the closure of the ELL - it looks like a 'special' train of some sort was on the cards and was due to run this afternoon, but this has seemingly been called off for reasons unknown (as is explained on page 2 of the thread)... http://districtdave.proboards39.com/...d=11972028 43 I believe the original plan was to run the 4-car 1938TS in public service, but the unions refused to allow it and LU was unable to persuade them. Why did they object? Was it to be driven by a non-union member? |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On 22 Dec, 21:29, Tom Page wrote:
On 22 Dec, 20:16, Mr Thant wrote: On 22 Dec, 19:50, wrote: It is a legal requirement that new works and any sort of upgrade must be DDA compliant (hence, for example, the tendency not to "refurbish" rolling stock, which would require DDA compliance, but to "refresh"), so something will have to be done to make the stations DDA compliant, which with the exception of New Cross and Canada Water, they are presently not. And Wapping, in particular, is very, very cramped, so it would be very difficult to carry out these sorts of works and maintain access to the station. My understanding is the works planned fall under "refreshment" type rules and hence no new lifts etc will be provided at existing stations. The various future maps consistently show them as remaining non-accessible: http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/pdf/tube...www.campaignfo...... U --http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London I'm not even sure that it's true that major works do need to be lift- accessible. I thought the requirement was that a company had to make reasonable efforts - if the cost was grossly disproportionate to the benefits I thought a full-accessibility scheme was not required. Anyway, as Mr Thant says, I don't think there's much work at all happening at either Wapping or Rotherhithe stations - the bricks and mortar of the stations (so I thought) will remain completely unchanged. I'm sure signage will be replaced, and I imagine things will be cleaned, but neither of these changes would be sufficient to count as a refurb. Tom That's certainly my understanding. All this talk of the DDA is, I think, a complete red-herring. AIUI the issue at Rotherhithe and Wapping has been with safety as opposed to accessibility (that's accessibility in the DDA sense, i.e. for those whose mobility is impaired). Both stations operated with a derogation order (or some such similar bureaucratic device) from the Railway Inspectorate as they fell short of the normal safety standards for underground stations. I believe the specific issue was that there was no secondary exit or means of escape from these stations (perhaps a particularly important issue given that the existing starircases were a bit steep). This derogation order could be revoked at any time should the Inspectorate have felt the situation was dangerous enough to merit doing so. So Wapping and Rotherhithe were originally not confirmed to be stations on the new extended ELL. Then interestingly there was an announcement that they would be included in ELLX phase 1, but their future under ELLX phase 2 was uncertain. I don't quite understand the logic behind this. Perhaps this was because the number of people using these stations, or (and maybe this makes more sense) the number of passengers aboard the ELLX trains that past through these stations, was predicted to rise once phase 2 was completed (an bear in mind that at this time the extension through to Highbury & Islington was part of phase 2). Then in August 2004 the Mayor announced that both Wapping and Rotherhithe were to remain open: http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_...releaseid=4162 I'm sure I read somewhere of talk that keeping these stations open was possible because new emergency exits (i.e. alternative staircases) will be constructed at them both. I think I can see how this could be done at Rotherhithe - by adding some stairs at the far end of the platforms that would exit onto the pavement of the Rotherhithe tunnel approach road, but I'm less sure of how it might be done at Wapping. Perhaps my my understanding of the situation is a bit wonky - but I am very certain that the DDA doesn't require TfL to install lifts at these stations. Remember - when the ELLX opens, they will not be new stations, they will simply be old stations that were temporarily closed for a period. Legally as well as practically speaking, the East London Line has not been permanently closed, it is temprarily closed whilst it is extended. The only part of it that has been permanently closed is Shoreditch station, and that happened last year. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
Recliner wrote: wrote: On Dec 22, 2:35 pm, Mr Thant wrote: On 22 Dec, 13:30, Boltar wrote: Quote why it needs 3 years to be converted to 3rd rail when the 3rd rail is already there is anyones guess. Usual lazy british contractors who take 2 weeks to change a lightbulb no doubt. The extensions to the line shouldn't effect the bit in the middle so I can't see a good reason to close it. As I mentioned recently, the work isn't taking 3 years. London Underground are being given 3 months to pack up their things and leave, and it's expected to be ready for test running by June 2009. So that's a little over one year of construction. Plus their optimistic projection is currently November 2009, which would make it closed for less than two years. U --http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London Bear in mind also that the existing stations (except Canada Water, which is of recent construction) will require to be upgraded to be DDA compliant, which at Shadwell, Wapping and Rotherhithe, for example, will require new lifts and cross-passageways. (Surrey Quays is a surface station in a cutting, but this will probably require lifts as there is little space for ramps.) I also suspect that the narrow platforms at Wapping will have to be widened, which will involve widening the tunnel - a major civil engineering task in its own right. In addition, platforms will require to be lengthend, which at Rotherhithe and Wapping will require opening out the tunnels (the new class 378s will, I presume, be 20m vehicles whereas the A stock is noticeably shorter). Yes, the A stock cars are only 16.2m long, but I doubt that any platform extensions are planned. My understanding is that none of the existing ELL platforms are going to be widened or lengthened. (And as I described elsewhere nor are any of the stations subject to the DDA requirements as they ain't new stations, not do I believe there is any plans to make them accessible - though note that Shadwell was already accessible.) I don't know what the deal is with regards to whether the new trains will fit on the existing platforms - I think this might not be an issue as the existing platforms are (from memory) a bit longer that a 4-car A stock train. However for arguments sake let's say the new 4- car Electrostars won't fit on the existing ELL platforms - this could be dealt with by stopping the leading and trailing cab-ends still in the tunnel, and if that still doesn't solve the issue then selective door opening (SDO) can be bought into play - and suddenly the problem is no more. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On 23 Dec, 13:16, "Recliner" wrote:
"Spyke" wrote: STOP PRESS... STOP PRESS... I've just this morning read a thread on District Dave's internet forum about the closure of the ELL - it looks like a 'special' train of some sort was on the cards and was due to run this afternoon, but this has seemingly been called off for reasons unknown (as is explained on page 2 of the thread)... http://districtdave.proboards39.com/...&action=displa... I believe the original plan was to run the 4-car 1938TS in public service, but the unions refused to allow it and LU was unable to persuade them. Why did they object? Was it to be driven by a non-union member? If you look elsewhere on that District Dave forum thread then you'll read reports of how some 'enthusiasts' on the recent 1938TS tour of the ELL behaved in what sounds like a pretty appallingly bad fashion. Maybe some of the drivers didn't want to turn the last day into a circus with such individuals clowning about. I hasten to add that I'm not denigrating all transport enthusiasts by any stretch. It is merely that several times I've read various tales of the trouble that a significant (?) minority bring along to various events, with behaviour that doesn't sound much different to a bunch of unruly and overexcited nursery school children. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
wrote: (snip) In the case of the power supply, there will be a requirement to ensure that stray traction return currents do not cause corrosion of running rails, buried services etc; this will require significant work in its own right. In addition, what is happening to the power system? Does it transfer to NR ownership or does it remain in the ownership of the consortium that owns the rest of the LU power supply system? Does it need upgrading to cope with longer, heavier and more frequent trains? If nothing else, new substations and feeder cables will be required on the northern extension; the additional loadings resulting from this may require upgrading of the power supply elsewhere, and possible negotiations with the public electricity suppliers. I understand that the existing power supply needs to be significantly upgraded/uprated, but I don't know the details. Nor do I know the details of whom will be responsible for provide the power supply. However, the power supply won't be transferring to Network Rail ownership, for the simple reason that the line isn't transferring to Network Rail ownership. Legally speaking I understand the infrastructure controller and owner of the existing line plus the new northern extension up to Dalston will be London Underground Limited (LUL). However in practice it will be the responsibility of TfL's London Rail division, who will in turn have to appoint maintenance contractor(s) and make some arrangements for day-to-day operation of the running line (signalling, power etc). They could of course bring in Network Rail as a contractor to do some of these tasks. The situation would thus appear to leave the possibility that EDF Powerlink (the consortium of EDF, ABB and Balfour Beatty that provides LUL with its electricity) will continue to provide the power for at least the existing part of the ELL. Indeed LUL might be contractually obliged, under the PFI deal, to continue taking electricity from EDF Powerlink for the existing section at least. Then there is resignalling; I presume the line will be resignalled to NR standards to achieve compatibility with the lines to its north and south and to avoid the 378s having to be fitted with LUL train stops as well as TPWS. Does anyone know what has been specified for the signalling? Full National Rail standard signalling. All LUL signalling, including train stops, will be no more. Finally, a new flyover is to be built at New Cross Gate to allow northbound trains from the Brighton Line to gain access to the ELL. This will require significant works in its own right. And these works have been commencing apace for some while. The mound of earth that will form the ramp on the east side is already in existence (though not finished) whilst on the west side of the line there is a works site and preparatory work is ongoing, having cleared the site of much detritus (including a rotting old railway wagon). |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On Dec 23, 2:36*pm, Mizter T wrote:
Recliner wrote: wrote: On Dec 22, 2:35 pm, Mr Thant wrote: On 22 Dec, 13:30, Boltar wrote: Quote why it needs 3 years to be converted to 3rd rail when the 3rd rail is already there is anyones guess. Usual lazy british contractors who take 2 weeks to change a lightbulb no doubt. The extensions to the line shouldn't effect the bit in the middle so I can't see a good reason to close it. As I mentioned recently, the work isn't taking 3 years. London Underground are being given 3 months to pack up their things and leave, and it's expected to be ready for test running by June 2009. So that's a little over one year of construction. Plus their optimistic projection is currently November 2009, which would make it closed for less than two years. U --http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London Bear in mind also that the existing stations (except Canada Water, which is of recent construction) will require to be upgraded to be DDA compliant, which at Shadwell, Wapping and Rotherhithe, for example, will require new lifts and cross-passageways. (Surrey Quays is a surface station in a cutting, but this will probably require lifts as there is little space for ramps.) I also suspect that the narrow platforms at Wapping will have to be widened, which will involve widening the tunnel - a major civil engineering task in its own right. In addition, platforms will require to be lengthend, which at Rotherhithe and Wapping will require opening out the tunnels (the new class 378s will, I presume, be 20m vehicles whereas the A stock is noticeably shorter). Yes, the A stock cars are only 16.2m long, but I doubt that any platform extensions are planned. My understanding is that none of the existing ELL platforms are going to be widened or lengthened. (And as I described elsewhere nor are any of the stations subject to the DDA requirements as they ain't new stations, not do I believe there is any plans to make them accessible - though note that Shadwell was already accessible.) I don't know what the deal is with regards to whether the new trains will fit on the existing platforms - I think this might not be an issue as the existing platforms are (from memory) a bit longer that a 4-car A stock train. However for arguments sake let's say the new 4- car Electrostars won't fit on the existing ELL platforms - this could be dealt with by stopping the leading and trailing cab-ends still in the tunnel, and if that still doesn't solve the issue then selective door opening (SDO) can be bought into play - and suddenly the problem is no more A lot of the stations, if not all, have an unused section of platform beyond the current signals and stop signs at one end. I can't remember if that's the case at Wapping though. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On Dec 23, 2:51*pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 23 Dec, 13:16, "Recliner" wrote: "Spyke" wrote: STOP PRESS... STOP PRESS... I've just this morning read a thread on District Dave's internet forum about the closure of the ELL - it looks like a 'special' train of some sort was on the cards and was due to run this afternoon, but this has seemingly been called off for reasons unknown (as is explained on page 2 of the thread)... http://districtdave.proboards39.com/...&action=displa... I believe the original plan was to run the 4-car 1938TS in public service, but the unions refused to allow it and LU was unable to persuade them. Why did they object? *Was it to be driven by a non-union member? I wonder if the union actually asked the drivers... If you look elsewhere on that District Dave forum thread then you'll read reports of how some 'enthusiasts' on the recent 1938TS tour of the ELL behaved in what sounds like a pretty appallingly bad fashion. Some people went past the platform barriers at Whitechapel, whilst others used flash photography. Sadly, some of these were LUL/NR/TOC staff. Clearly there should have been station staff and/or BTP there from the start, to either prevent this or escort a couple of cranks at a time past the barriers. Still, hardly 'appalling' by mainline railtour standards e.g. a train full of loudmouth yobs with a poor grasp of the concept of personal hygiene, who start drinking from 07:00. Maybe some of the drivers didn't want to turn the last day into a circus with such individuals clowning about. I spotted an average of 1 well-behaved crank per station at about 17:00 last night, with a few more there for haulage. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
EE507 wrote: On Dec 23, 2:51�pm, Mizter T wrote: On 23 Dec, 13:16, "Recliner" wrote: "Spyke" wrote: STOP PRESS... STOP PRESS... I've just this morning read a thread on District Dave's internet forum about the closure of the ELL - it looks like a 'special' train of some sort was on the cards and was due to run this afternoon, but this has seemingly been called off for reasons unknown (as is explained on page 2 of the thread)... http://districtdave.proboards39.com/...&action=displa... I believe the original plan was to run the 4-car 1938TS in public service, but the unions refused to allow it and LU was unable to persuade them. Why did they object? Was it to be driven by a non-union member? I wonder if the union actually asked the drivers... If you look elsewhere on that District Dave forum thread then you'll read reports of how some 'enthusiasts' on the recent 1938TS tour of the ELL behaved in what sounds like a pretty appallingly bad fashion. Some people went past the platform barriers at Whitechapel, whilst others used flash photography. Sadly, some of these were LUL/NR/TOC staff. Clearly there should have been station staff and/or BTP there from the start, to either prevent this or escort a couple of cranks at a time past the barriers. Still, hardly 'appalling' by mainline railtour standards e.g. a train full of loudmouth yobs with a poor grasp of the concept of personal hygiene, who start drinking from 07:00. I'm probably guilty of employing a bit of hyperbole by using the word "appalling" - apols. Truth is that I don't have much first-hand experience of such antics, as I've never been on a railtour plus I've don't really go in for 'last days', it's more stuff that I've read on the internet. The problem is that in a way I'd quite like to go on a railtour or two, but I'm not sure I'd like to do it in the company of a few of these bods. I went on an old style furnished Routemaster on the last day of the 12 (one of the specials brought in for the day), and there was a couple of guys on that who were total loonies - it was a real eye opener to the sometimes bizarre world of the transport enthusiast. I ended up getting off that bus and back on a regular 12 behind that was populated by normal people. Of course I am a transport enthusiast of sorts already, but some of the stuff I've seen and heard about does make me think it's a somewhat odd world out there that I'm not sure I really want to be part of! Anyway, I wasn't planning on going along yesterday, but because my plans for the day changed I did in fact have some time to make a detour in the afternoon whilst on my normal travels to take a last ride on the ELL (in part because I actually wanted to make a note of the first and last ELL train times - by way of taking a photo of the relevant posters - so that when the ELLX opens I'll be able to compare them). Maybe some of the drivers didn't want to turn the last day into a circus with such individuals clowning about. I spotted an average of 1 well-behaved crank per station at about 17:00 last night, with a few more there for haulage. Yes, when I was there around then there wasn't anyone being stupid, the only issue being the one guy who left the train having stunk the whole carriage out with his general stinkiness - I felt sad for him to be honest. There was a gregarious bunch at the north end of the platform at Whitechapel who were having fun (were they the District Dave forum mob I wonder?). |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
MIG wrote: On Dec 23, 2:36pm, Mizter T wrote: Recliner wrote: wrote: On Dec 22, 2:35 pm, Mr Thant wrote: On 22 Dec, 13:30, Boltar wrote: Quote why it needs 3 years to be converted to 3rd rail when the 3rd rail is already there is anyones guess. Usual lazy british contractors who take 2 weeks to change a lightbulb no doubt. The extensions to the line shouldn't effect the bit in the middle so I can't see a good reason to close it. As I mentioned recently, the work isn't taking 3 years. London Underground are being given 3 months to pack up their things and leave, and it's expected to be ready for test running by June 2009. So that's a little over one year of construction. Plus their optimistic projection is currently November 2009, which would make it closed for less than two years. U --http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London Bear in mind also that the existing stations (except Canada Water, which is of recent construction) will require to be upgraded to be DDA compliant, which at Shadwell, Wapping and Rotherhithe, for example, will require new lifts and cross-passageways. (Surrey Quays is a surface station in a cutting, but this will probably require lifts as there is little space for ramps.) I also suspect that the narrow platforms at Wapping will have to be widened, which will involve widening the tunnel - a major civil engineering task in its own right. In addition, platforms will require to be lengthend, which at Rotherhithe and Wapping will require opening out the tunnels (the new class 378s will, I presume, be 20m vehicles whereas the A stock is noticeably shorter). Yes, the A stock cars are only 16.2m long, but I doubt that any platform extensions are planned. My understanding is that none of the existing ELL platforms are going to be widened or lengthened. (And as I described elsewhere nor are any of the stations subject to the DDA requirements as they ain't new stations, not do I believe there is any plans to make them accessible - though note that Shadwell was already accessible.) I don't know what the deal is with regards to whether the new trains will fit on the existing platforms - I think this might not be an issue as the existing platforms are (from memory) a bit longer that a 4-car A stock train. However for arguments sake let's say the new 4- car Electrostars won't fit on the existing ELL platforms - this could be dealt with by stopping the leading and trailing cab-ends still in the tunnel, and if that still doesn't solve the issue then selective door opening (SDO) can be bought into play - and suddenly the problem is no more A lot of the stations, if not all, have an unused section of platform beyond the current signals and stop signs at one end. I can't remember if that's the case at Wapping though. Indeed. When I actually think about it I know that this is the case - I used the ELL quite often, but perhaps I wasn't as observant as I could have been! But likewise I'm not sure about Wapping. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On 22 Dec, 13:46, "Paul Scott" wrote:
I noticed on Clive's line guides, that after the last closure, the power supply was made switchable between third or fourth rail mode. Which seems to be another reason to question the length of closure. I'm somewhat surprised at that; AFAIK (and I used to draw the power supply diagrams which the controller used) the ELL was no different from any other tube line. It wouldn't be the first inaccuracy from Clive when it comes to detail (and in the rail industry, the devil really is the detail). Certainly the signalling was not compatible with a third rail power supply. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On 23 Dec, 13:16, "Recliner" wrote:
"Spyke" wrote in message I believe the original plan was to run the 4-car 1938TS in public service, but the unions refused to allow it and LU was unable to persuade them. Why did they object? Was it to be driven by a non-union member? It wasn't union objections (though they were looking closely at running the '38 last week), but more that it couldn't stop at Canada Water because of the floor height differences. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007, MIG wrote:
An orbital route might be a nice to have, but only in addition to the radial routes, not replacing them. I've mentioned many times that the trains from the Forest Hill direction are appallingly overcrowded. I can't see how it improves things to shorten them to fit the ELL and divert them to Hackney. Because if they go to Hackney, no bugger'll get on them. SOLVED! tom -- Ten years on, and there is still nothing like this bizarre tale of biomechanical space madness. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
|
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007, Stuart wrote:
MIG wrote: My objection would not be how long it takes, but that it's the wrong project. I don't understand why an orbital railway is such an important goal. Well, I do. It's a way for a politician to make his mark an a more obvious way than any general improvement in transport. An orbital route might be a nice to have, but only in addition to the radial routes, not replacing them. An orbital route is a very good thing to have. London is teaming with radial transport, Yes, but there *still* *isn't* *enough*! Look at where the most overcrowded lines go - they're all radial! there's very little that goes round! Because there are very few people who go round. I'm not saying there's no use for orbital services - quite clearly, there is, and i look forward to the NLL having a frequency and last train time which make it a viable option for me to travel between my friends in Kilburn and Camden and my house in Islington instead of taking a tube via the middle of town. But the simple fact is that the vast majority of the demand is for radial travel, not orbital. We could, and in fact we will, argue about how much the demand follows the existing provision until the cows come home, but that's the situation now, and the situation that needs addressing. I should declare, to fend off counter-anti-orbitalist outrage, that i'm in favour of the ELL and its X. It's pretty cheap, and the station at Shoreditch High Street is close enough to the City that it functions as a semi-radial line, so it will be a very useful commuting link for the inner suburbs, as well as being a handy way to dodge between north- and south-eastern suburbs. Indeed, when it opens up, i may even ask out that nice girl who lives in Bexleyheath ... The North London Line as it is at the moment is too infrequent and passes too many radial tube lines without connecting to them Agreed, but i'm not aware of any plans to do anything about the latter. tom -- Ten years on, and there is still nothing like this bizarre tale of biomechanical space madness. |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
|
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On Dec 23, 5:02*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007, MIG wrote: An orbital route might be a nice to have, but only in addition to the radial routes, not replacing them. I've mentioned many times that the trains from the Forest Hill direction are appallingly overcrowded. *I can't see how it improves things to shorten them to fit the ELL and divert them to Hackney. Because if they go to Hackney, no bugger'll get on them. SOLVED! Sadly not quite true if the supposed alternative route to London Bridge is to change to the Jubilee at Canada Water. So instead of overcrowded trains going direct to London Bridge, there will be trains of half the length, and double the crowding, requiring a longer journey and a change. Nice and empty after Canada Water if one did go to Hackney though, because anyone whose normal journey is from Surrey Quays to Whitechapel won't be able to get on. (Before anyone mentions it, I know that some people change to the Jubilee anyway, so won't need an extra change, but certainly won't be helped.) |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
On 23 Dec, 17:02, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007, MIG wrote: An orbital route might be a nice to have, but only in addition to the radial routes, not replacing them. I've mentioned many times that the trains from the Forest Hill direction are appallingly overcrowded. I can't see how it improves things to shorten them to fit the ELL and divert them to Hackney. Because if they go to Hackney, no bugger'll get on them. SOLVED! tom I'm going to be revisiting this post later to set things straight! |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
In message
, Mizter T writes If you look elsewhere on that District Dave forum thread then you'll read reports of how some 'enthusiasts' on the recent 1938TS tour of the ELL behaved in what sounds like a pretty appallingly bad fashion. Maybe some of the drivers didn't want to turn the last day into a circus with such individuals clowning about. In the short time I was about yesterday, I noted one individual who just wandered through the barriers at Whitechapel to try to get his picture. When told to get back on the platform his response was that it *is* the last day - as if that should matter. Later at New Cross Gate, another (I assume different, although I wouldn't swear to it) was sat right on the edge of the platform trying to take a picture of an approaching train. He exclaimed surprise that the driver was sat outside the platform whistling. He only moved when others pointed out that the driver was waiting to get in. He was so close that had the train come in to the platform there was a good chance of him getting hit. We gave up and went to the pub at this point. With this type of attitude to safety, I'm not surprised that staff get annoyed. I've had similar things happen myself and we (LUL staff) all know someone who has had a fatal one-under, which is frequently due to stupidity. -- 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) |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
In message
, EE507 writes I believe the original plan was to run the 4-car 1938TS in public service, but the unions refused to allow it and LU was unable to persuade them. Why did they object? *Was it to be driven by a non-union member? I wonder if the union actually asked the drivers... All this talk about unions is a red herring. It was nothing to do with them and they haven't objected to anything to my knowledge. The 38 stock couldn't be used in normal passenger service as it wouldn't be able to stop at Canada Water due to the platform heights. As this would have caused service problems, it was decided not to try to run it. There was talk on the day of an un-refurbished 3 car D stock making an appearance. I have no information if this was a serious consideration, but I would doubt very much that the unions would care too much if it did. Had any of these trains actually run, they would have had to have been driven by Test Train Operators as nobody else would have the stock knowledge and line knowledge together to drive them. It may well be that these operators are not licensed to drive trains in passenger service. I don't know the answer to this, but I will attempt to find out when I go back to work (on Boxing Day!). If so, that would be a very good reason. -- 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) |
The East London Line is dead... Long live the East London Line
MIG wrote in
: An orbital route might be a nice to have, but only in addition to the radial routes, not replacing them. I've mentioned many times that the trains from the Forest Hill direction are appallingly overcrowded. I can't see how it improves things to shorten them to fit the ELL and divert them to Hackney. Even if changing at Canada Water is not perceived as an extra burden, it doesn't resolve the issue of the short trains. Isn't the intention that these are extra trains south of New Cross Gate, and not replacing the existing service? David |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:42 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk