The service didn't stop between East Croydon and Brighton which for those
passengers makes it about as useful as an ash tray on a motorcycle.

Useless ****ing cretins.

Hmm, so it was running 30 late by East Croydon on a route where FCC
run 2 semi-fast and 2 slow trains per hour, as well as the Southern
services (i.e. there would be another train close behind for
intermediate stations). What is the problem in recovering some time so
that the next northbound service in the diagram is a few mins late?
The alternative, stopping the southbound service short of Brighton
would cause more inconvenience to passengers overall.





Better no screw up in the first place, but as far as I'm concerned, if I'm
going to Gatwick Airport, Haywards Heath, or Three Bridges, I expect the
bloody train to stop, not skip my stop.

wrote:

I also noticed a 321 in FCC livery at Hornsey this morning.

The first one was finished a couple of weeks ago (321 404 IIRC), the
remainder of the small sub-batch for FCC should be following shortly.

It still seems a ridiculous solution to me, introducing another fleet for
Hornsey to maintain. Why all of the 321/4s are not being transferred to NXEA
in return for a handful of their 317s returning to FCC, where they would be
(relatively) common with the home fleet, still escapes me!

wrote in message
...

Remember they current thinking is that the driver is too stupid to
know when he's in a station so the computer has to ok the door opening
using GPS. If it doesn't then they won't. I'm waiting for the first
hacker to hang around some major station with a GPS jammer to see what
happens.

Can they not override the GPS, however?

"Paul Rigg" wrote in message
...

How on earth can GPS be used at St Pancras LL or for that matter City
Thameslink.

You need to have a clear view of the sky - I would also have though
Farringdon (or any other station with a roof) would have been difficult.,

Repeaters? Leaky wires?

wrote in message
...
On 18 Mar, 13:59, EE507 wrote:
On Mar 18, 1:20 pm, John B wrote:

Indeed, 90s sounds like a fault to me, especially at open-air stations
south of London Bridge where the southern 377s' GPS should already
know where it is (from use on the Brighton - Watford Junction and
Charing Cross - Caterham etc. services)

Would not wheel revolutions help?

On Mar 18, 10:57*pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...
On 18 Mar, 13:59, EE507 wrote: On Mar 18, 1:20 pm, John B wrote:

Indeed, 90s sounds like a fault to me, especially at open-air stations

south of London Bridge where the southern 377s' GPS should already
know where it is (from use on the Brighton - Watford Junction and
Charing Cross - Caterham etc. services)

Would not wheel revolutions help?

No, because the wheels are not a fixed diameter, but get gradually
smaller as they are turned on lathes to remove flats and
imperfections. A small difference in diameter will lead to a large
cummulative error, if no corrections are made. There are other systems
which measure distance travelled (for example radar), but I don't know
how they are affected by different track formations etc.

In article , (Jack
Taylor) wrote:

wrote:

I also noticed a 321 in FCC livery at Hornsey this morning.

The first one was finished a couple of weeks ago (321 404 IIRC),
the remainder of the small sub-batch for FCC should be following
shortly.

It still seems a ridiculous solution to me, introducing another
fleet for Hornsey to maintain. Why all of the 321/4s are not being
transferred to NXEA in return for a handful of their 317s returning
to FCC, where they would be (relatively) common with the home
fleet, still escapes me!

Hear, hear! There has to be a reason why my spelling checker suggests
"Daft" when I write "DfT".

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 16:17:22 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

No, because the wheels are not a fixed diameter, but get gradually
smaller as they are turned on lathes to remove flats and
imperfections. A small difference in diameter will lead to a large
cummulative error, if no corrections are made. There are other systems
which measure distance travelled (for example radar), but I don't know
how they are affected by different track formations etc.

A more clever system could use the GPS data to derive how far the
train travels on one revolution on that day and use it later when the
GPS was not available.

OTOH, the Mk1 eyeball would also do the job, though I hear that there
was an incident of it failing to do so at Bletchley last week.
Fortunately, the Mk1 eyeball of the passengers prevailed, and (as one
would expect) nobody fell out.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Mar 18, 10:55*pm, wrote:
"Paul Rigg" wrote in message

...



How on earth can GPS be used at St Pancras LL or for that matter City
Thameslink.

You need to have a clear view of the sky - I would also have though
Farringdon (or any other station with a roof) would have been difficult..,

Repeaters? Leaky wires?

Wouldn't work with GPS because it relies on specific delays from the
satellites to work out where it is. If you rebroadcast a GPS signal
your position will be shown as where the initial receiver is , not
where you are. In theory you could retime the signals or broadcast
your own fake signals but I imagine that sort tech wouldn't come cheap
though maybe I'm wrong and its available in Maplins these days!

B2003

On Mar 18, 5:40*pm, wrote:
Quite. This is why SN 377s still take a silly amount of time to open
the doors in the low-level platforms at Victoria (and why they took a /
really/ silly amount of time before whatever solution they currently
follow was added).

Of course one would think that they'd have thought of this before they
rolled out the system and would have had some fullproof alternative
system in place to start with. But then this is Britain so who am I
kidding...

B2003