Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Apart from moving block signalling of course!
Though some omissions will be because the whole network was designed with the assumption of 30per hour services (was it 36 per hour at one point?) Personally I think they should have been a bit more infrastructure to isolate failed trains and be able to run more of a service on parts of the line while other bits were suspended |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() On 13 Feb, 13:47, kytelly wrote: Apart from moving block signalling of course! Though some omissions will be because the whole network was designed with the assumption of 30per hour services (was it 36 per hour at one point?) Personally I think they should have been a bit more infrastructure to isolate failed trains and be able to run more of a service on parts of the line while other bits were suspended I suppose avoiding trains or signalling failing in the first place would be preferable. The whole Jubilee line should be using Automatic Train Operation by September 2011, though ATO will be introduced incrementally on different sections of the line - this is according to the February TfL board papers, see this entry on Mr Thant's blog (or indeed click through via the links provided there and read the actual papers themselves): http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...ellaneous.html The other thing that would have been useful would have been if the East London line platforms at Canada Water had been built to accommodate 6 or 8 car trains, or at least if some kind of passive provision had been made for this. As things stand, the short platform there places a limitation on the length on the new ELLX* trains of 4 cars. I'm not sure whether SDO* could be made to work with regards to a 5 or 6 car ELLX train at Canada Water, given that it will be a major interchange station. All that said, I understand that during the JLE planning stages it was never all that certain that the ELL would stop at Canada Water at all, so I suppose we must be thankful of small (or should that be short) mercies. ----- * ELLX = East London Line eXtension * SDO = Selective Door Opening |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 13 Feb, 16:22, Mizter T wrote:
The other thing that would have been useful would have been if the East London line platforms at Canada Water had been built to accommodate 6 or 8 car trains, or at least if some kind of passive provision had been made for this. As things stand, the short platform there places a limitation on the length on the new ELLX* trains of 4 cars. I'm not sure whether SDO* could be made to work with regards to a 5 or 6 car ELLX train at Canada Water, given that it will be a major interchange station. Yes I forgotten about that; and while they were at it they could have closed Rotherhithe and Surrey Quays, put a couple of travelaters in and centred it all Canada water. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "kytelly" wrote in message ... On 13 Feb, 16:22, Mizter T wrote: The other thing that would have been useful would have been if the East London line platforms at Canada Water had been built to accommodate 6 or 8 car trains, or at least if some kind of passive provision had been made for this. As things stand, the short platform there places a limitation on the length on the new ELLX* trains of 4 cars. I'm not sure whether SDO* could be made to work with regards to a 5 or 6 car ELLX train at Canada Water, given that it will be a major interchange station. Yes I forgotten about that; and while they were at it they could have closed Rotherhithe and Surrey Quays, put a couple of travelaters in and centred it all Canada water. I'd still be fairly sceptical about Rotherhithe ever reopening. BTN |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Mizter T" wrote in message ... On 13 Feb, 13:47, kytelly wrote: Apart from moving block signalling of course! Though some omissions will be because the whole network was designed with the assumption of 30per hour services (was it 36 per hour at one point?) Personally I think they should have been a bit more infrastructure to isolate failed trains and be able to run more of a service on parts of the line while other bits were suspended I suppose avoiding trains or signalling failing in the first place would be preferable. The whole Jubilee line should be using Automatic Train Operation by September 2011, though ATO will be introduced incrementally on different sections of the line - this is according to the February TfL board papers, see this entry on Mr Thant's blog (or indeed click through via the links provided there and read the actual papers themselves): http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...ellaneous.html Automatic train operation on the Jubilee Line, and starting June this year. If the BBC said that there would be hundreds of train spotters posting here to say that the BBC was talking ********. Kevin |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 16 Feb, 22:12, "Zen83237" wrote:
Automatic train operation on the Jubilee Line, and starting June this year. If the BBC said that there would be hundreds of train spotters posting here to say that the BBC was talking ********. Thanks for the correction (?) Kevin. The difference is I linked to the original document, so you're not reliant on my interpretation. I've reread that section and fixed my summary. U -- http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
New 'London Connections' map with added LO and new family member,TfL Rail | London Transport | |||
JLE site in Southwark Street | London Transport | |||
This may not count for anything | London Transport | |||
Northern Line extensions - anything to see? | London Transport | |||
Rail and tube workers to strike - They have done it again! | London Transport |