Charles Ellson wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 22:34:15 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 13:21:29 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:



MIG wrote:
On 17 Sep, 10:15, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Sim" wrote



Some differences between Overground and Underground:
1. Third rail electrification rather than fourth, so not compatible
for through running.

The NLL is 25 kV OHLE between Acton and Camden Road, and between Dalston
Kingsland and Stratford, and will be all the way between Acton and Stratford
once the NLL refurbishment is complete. The WLL switches from 25 kV OHLE to
3rd rail between North Pole Junction and Shepherds Bush. Goblin remains
diesel worked (and if it is electrified it will be 25 kV OHLE.

BTW, the Broad Street to Dalston line, most of which is being incorporated
into the ELL, was originally 4th rail, but IIRC was converted to 3rd rail
before closure.

Peter

And all electrified parts of the current London Overground were four
rail at some point, weren't they? Ah, maybe not Dalston to Stratford.

I believe the stretch from Queens Park to Harrow & Wealdstone is still
four rail, otherwise Bakerloo passengers would have to get out and
push!

It is 3rd rail with the 4th rail bonded to the running rail which
carries the traction return current. The LU 4-rail system does not
have a deliberate electrical connection between the 3rd/4th rails and
the running rails and is only loosely connected to earth/0v to enable
control equipment to detect earthing of either electric rail. A
further consequence of this arrangement is that trains running over
such sections require higher-rated insulation than is necessarily on
LU (660v to earth rather than 420v to earth) although IMU all current
LU stock
... has been so equipped since the 1960s.

I'm afraid all that technical theory stuff just goes over my head.
I'm a straightforward, practical sort of person, and as far as I'm
concerned, if you count the rails and there are four of them, then
there are four rails. That's just common sense, and no amount of
fancy electrical theory is going to change that.

On 18 Sep, 07:17, "
wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 22:34:15 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 13:21:29 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

MIG wrote:
On 17 Sep, 10:15, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Sim" wrote

Some differences between Overground and Underground:
1. Third rail electrification rather than fourth, so not compatible
for through running.

The NLL is 25 kV OHLE between Acton and Camden Road, and between Dalston
Kingsland and Stratford, and will be all the way between Acton and Stratford
once the NLL refurbishment is complete. The WLL switches from 25 kV OHLE to
3rd rail between North Pole Junction and Shepherds Bush. Goblin remains
diesel worked (and if it is electrified it will be 25 kV OHLE.

BTW, the Broad Street to Dalston line, most of which is being incorporated
into the ELL, was originally 4th rail, but IIRC was converted to 3rd rail
before closure.

Peter

And all electrified parts of the current London Overground were four
rail at some point, weren't they? *Ah, maybe not Dalston to Stratford.

I believe the stretch from Queens Park to Harrow & Wealdstone is still
four rail, otherwise Bakerloo passengers would have to get out and
push!

It is 3rd rail with the 4th rail bonded to the running rail which
carries the traction return current. The LU 4-rail system does not
have a deliberate electrical connection between the 3rd/4th rails and
the running rails and is only loosely connected to earth/0v to enable
control equipment to detect earthing of either electric rail. A
further consequence of this arrangement is that trains running over
such sections require higher-rated insulation than is necessarily on
LU (660v to earth rather than 420v to earth) although IMU all current
LU stock
... has been so equipped since the 1960s.

I'm afraid all that technical theory stuff just goes over my head.
I'm a straightforward, practical sort of person, and as far as I'm
concerned, if you count the rails and there are four of them, then
there are four rails. *That's just common sense, and no amount of
fancy electrical theory is going to change that.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now let's be nice to each other! I did not know the details Charles
kindly provided, but it does make sense. Interestingly, not only does
fourth rail (however wired) exist as far north as Harrow, but the last
time I looked there was quite a lot left further on, although some of
it was lying rather dismally in the four foot rather than perched on
insulators. It was never formally removed, in other words, although
doubtless disconnected.

On the more general point on whether Overground is part of National
Rail, I suggest that it is, behind the scenes, a remarkable compromise/
fudge/whatever.

Consider: Overground is a TfL operation, and the concession was
awarded to LOROL by TfL. Other posters have already explained the
differences between a National Rail franchise and a concession like
Overground. Overground is funded and branded by TfL and included in
its operations for all public purposes. Overground is, of course,
Oyster compatible along with DLR and trams (and buses too, yes).
Station specs (staffing, equipment, appearance, branding) have been
officially described as comparable with the Underground (although not
all the upgrades are done yet).

On the other hand, most Overground trains run (or will run) over
Network Rail infrastructure, and on some sections they share the line
with freight traffic (or the true Underground ). South of New Cross at
least, Overground will presumably share its tracks with scheduled
National Rail passenger trains, too. One section, though (Dalston
Junction west curve to New Cross Gate/New Cross inclusive) is TfL
owned/maintained infrastructure.

The rolling stock was specified by TfL and is leased by TfL, but is
included in the NR Rolling Stock Library as Class 378/x, being yet
further variations of the Bombardier Electrostar series (and thus
thankfully built in Derby!).

Overground is also being treated by the Office of Rail Regulation as
part of National Rail: its statistics are included in National Rail
Trends just as if it was another franchise. The ORR does not report
the figures from other TfL rail systems, any more than it includes
Tyne & Wear Metro.

And another poster has also rightly pointed out the existence of 25kV
in various places, which is why dual-voltage roilling stock is needed.
To add a little savour, parts of the 25kV NLL route (Camden Road
area?) have third rail as well as OHLE -- a rare combination, I would
suggest.

If I came across such a compromise system in a foreign capital, I
would be intrigued.

As it is, it's in London. Hooray!

"Sim" wrote
Now let's be nice to each other! I did not know the details Charles
kindly provided, but it does make sense. Interestingly, not only does
fourth rail (however wired) exist as far north as Harrow, but the last
time I looked there was quite a lot left further on, although some of
it was lying rather dismally in the four foot rather than perched on
insulators. It was never formally removed, in other words, although
doubtless disconnected.

On the more general point on whether Overground is part of National
Rail, I suggest that it is, behind the scenes, a remarkable compromise/
fudge/whatever.

Consider: Overground is a TfL operation, and the concession was
awarded to LOROL by TfL. Other posters have already explained the
differences between a National Rail franchise and a concession like
Overground. Overground is funded and branded by TfL and included in
its operations for all public purposes. Overground is, of course,
Oyster compatible along with DLR and trams (and buses too, yes).
Station specs (staffing, equipment, appearance, branding) have been
officially described as comparable with the Underground (although not
all the upgrades are done yet).

On the other hand, most Overground trains run (or will run) over
Network Rail infrastructure, and on some sections they share the line
with freight traffic (or the true Underground ). South of New Cross at
least, Overground will presumably share its tracks with scheduled
National Rail passenger trains, too. One section, though (Dalston
Junction west curve to New Cross Gate/New Cross inclusive) is TfL
owned/maintained infrastructure.

The rolling stock was specified by TfL and is leased by TfL, but is
included in the NR Rolling Stock Library as Class 378/x, being yet
further variations of the Bombardier Electrostar series (and thus
thankfully built in Derby!).

Overground is also being treated by the Office of Rail Regulation as
part of National Rail: its statistics are included in National Rail
Trends just as if it was another franchise. The ORR does not report
the figures from other TfL rail systems, any more than it includes
Tyne & Wear Metro.

And another poster has also rightly pointed out the existence of 25kV
in various places, which is why dual-voltage roilling stock is needed.
To add a little savour, parts of the 25kV NLL route (Camden Road
area?) have third rail as well as OHLE -- a rare combination, I would
suggest.

If I came across such a compromise system in a foreign capital, I
would be intrigued.

As it is, it's in London. Hooray!

That seems like a reasonable summary. Now, can someone explain succinctly
why the smaller 'National Rail' stations between Queens Park and Harrow &
Wealdstone, used by LU and LO, which were previously Silverlink-branded, are
now signed as LU (rather than LO) stations?

"John Salmon" wrote in message
...
"Sim" wrote
Now let's be nice to each other! SNIP As it is, it's in London.
Hooray!

That seems like a reasonable summary. Now, can someone explain succinctly
why the smaller 'National Rail' stations between Queens Park and Harrow &
Wealdstone, used by LU and LO, which were previously Silverlink-branded,
are now signed as LU (rather than LO) stations?


The name Bakerloo might have something to do with it. AIUI, the TfL strategy
is to make the Bakerloo the primary service provider for this section, if
not the whole way to Watford Jn. This may be linked in some way with the
Metropolitan Line Watford branch extension to Watford Jn.

DW downunder

On 18 Sep, 09:52, "DW downunder" reply@newsgroup wrote:
"John Salmon" wrote in message

...

"Sim" wrote
Now let's be nice to each other! SNIP As it is, it's in London.
Hooray!

That seems like a reasonable summary. Now, can someone explain succinctly
why the smaller 'National Rail' stations between Queens Park and Harrow &
Wealdstone, used by LU and LO, which were previously Silverlink-branded,
are now signed as LU (rather than LO) stations?

The name Bakerloo might have something to do with it. AIUI, the TfL strategy
is to make the Bakerloo the primary service provider for this section, if
not the whole way to Watford Jn. This may be linked in some way with the
Metropolitan Line Watford branch extension to Watford Jn.

DW downunder

The decision was made to transfer these stations to Underground
management at the time Overground was being defined. The Bakerloo is
probably seen as the senior partner as far as Harrow now, and further
changes (already discussed) seem likely to make that even more so in
the future.

In the old days, Queen's Park was the last LT-managed station on the
route to Watford, which was firmly BR (and before that LMS) thereafter
all the way to Watford. The Bakerloo was the "guest".

From 1964 a decline set in as far as LT was concerned, until by the
1970s there was no Bakerloo north of Queen's Park except a handful in
the peaks. Then Stonebridge Park depot was built as part of the
splitting of the Bakerloo around the time the first part of the
Jubilee line opened (1979) and tube trains started running north of
Queen's Park more frequently again.

One thought: will Headstone Lane--Watford High Street inclusive also
be transferred to Underground management eventually, particularly
after Met trains start serving Watford HS on their way from Croxley to
Watford Junction?

Place your bets ...

On Sep 18, 10:17*am, Sim wrote:
On 18 Sep, 09:52, "DW downunder" reply@newsgroup wrote:





"John Salmon" wrote in message

...

"Sim" wrote
Now let's be nice to each other! SNIP As it is, it's in London.
Hooray!

That seems like a reasonable summary. Now, can someone explain succinctly
why the smaller 'National Rail' stations between Queens Park and Harrow &
Wealdstone, used by LU and LO, which were previously Silverlink-branded,
are now signed as LU (rather than LO) stations?

The name Bakerloo might have something to do with it. AIUI, the TfL strategy
is to make the Bakerloo the primary service provider for this section, if
not the whole way to Watford Jn. This may be linked in some way with the
Metropolitan Line Watford branch extension to Watford Jn.

DW downunder

The decision was made to transfer these stations to Underground
management at the time Overground was being defined. The Bakerloo is
probably seen as the senior partner as far as Harrow now, and further
changes (already discussed) seem likely to make that even more so in
the future.

In the old days, Queen's Park was the last LT-managed station on the
route to Watford, which was firmly BR (and before that LMS) thereafter
all the way to Watford. The Bakerloo was the "guest".

From 1964 a decline set in as far as LT was concerned, until by the
1970s there was no Bakerloo north of Queen's Park except a handful in
the peaks. Then Stonebridge Park depot was built as part of the
splitting of the Bakerloo around the time the first part of the
Jubilee line opened (1979) and tube trains started running north of
Queen's Park more frequently again.

One thought: will Headstone Lane--Watford High Street inclusive also
be transferred to Underground management eventually, particularly
after Met trains start serving Watford HS on their way from Croxley to
Watford Junction?

Why not go the whole hog and include a new LU ticket office in the
rebuilt Watford Junction station?
Plans already show a possible new direct access from buses/street to
platforms 1-4!

JohnG

On 18 Sep, 19:12, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 02:17:37 -0700 (PDT), Sim

wrote:
In the old days, Queen's Park was the last LT-managed station on the
route to Watford, which was firmly BR (and before that LMS) thereafter
all the way to Watford. The Bakerloo was the "guest".

When did LT ever manage Queens Park Station? *All the time I have been
with LT it was either a BR operated station and then post franchising it
passed to Silverlink. Only at the time when Silverlink ceased and LOROL
took over did it transfer to LU operation and even then things like
ticketing remain on NR equipment and NR ticketing rules (the same
applies all the way up to Harrow, barring Willesden Junction which is
LOROL operated).

Happy to be corrected if LT did run it back from 1933 or whenever and it
then later passed to BR. I'd be surprised that LT would have ceded
ownership (and the revenue) if it had had any choice.

--
Paul C

Absolutely right: thanks Paul. Too many late nights, I think.
Please delete Queen's Park in the original post and substitute Kilburn
Park.

Who owns the depot/reversing building at QP, though? I think it's the
only one on LU where service trains actually run through the middle of
it.

On Sep 19, 12:11*pm, Sim wrote:
On 18 Sep, 19:12, Paul Corfield wrote:





On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 02:17:37 -0700 (PDT), Sim

wrote:
In the old days, Queen's Park was the last LT-managed station on the
route to Watford, which was firmly BR (and before that LMS) thereafter
all the way to Watford. The Bakerloo was the "guest".

When did LT ever manage Queens Park Station? *All the time I have been
with LT it was either a BR operated station and then post franchising it
passed to Silverlink. Only at the time when Silverlink ceased and LOROL
took over did it transfer to LU operation and even then things like
ticketing remain on NR equipment and NR ticketing rules (the same
applies all the way up to Harrow, barring Willesden Junction which is
LOROL operated).

Happy to be corrected if LT did run it back from 1933 or whenever and it
then later passed to BR. I'd be surprised that LT would have ceded
ownership (and the revenue) if it had had any choice.

--
Paul C

Absolutely right: thanks Paul. Too many late nights, I think.
Please delete Queen's Park in the original post and substitute Kilburn
Park.

Who owns the depot/reversing building at QP, though? I think it's the
only one on LU where service trains actually run through the middle of
it.

The boundary between NR and LU is just outside the north end of the
shed at 3 miles 67 chains, the junction between the DC line and the
Bakerloo tracks is at 3 miles 71 chains.

In article , aooy65
@dsl.pipex.com says...
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 02:17:37 -0700 (PDT), Sim
wrote:

In the old days, Queen's Park was the last LT-managed station on the
route to Watford, which was firmly BR (and before that LMS) thereafter
all the way to Watford. The Bakerloo was the "guest".

When did LT ever manage Queens Park Station? All the time I have been
with LT it was either a BR operated station and then post franchising it
passed to Silverlink. Only at the time when Silverlink ceased and LOROL
took over did it transfer to LU operation and even then things like
ticketing remain on NR equipment and NR ticketing rules (the same
applies all the way up to Harrow, barring Willesden Junction which is
LOROL operated).

Happy to be corrected if LT did run it back from 1933 or whenever and it
then later passed to BR. I'd be surprised that LT would have ceded
ownership (and the revenue) if it had had any choice.



Queens Park certainly issued LTE tickets whereas the stations further on
had BR tickets.

On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 22:22:35 +0100, Jim Brittin
[wake up to reply] wrote:

In article , aooy65
says...
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 02:17:37 -0700 (PDT), Sim
wrote:

In the old days, Queen's Park was the last LT-managed station on the
route to Watford, which was firmly BR (and before that LMS) thereafter
all the way to Watford. The Bakerloo was the "guest".

When did LT ever manage Queens Park Station? All the time I have been
with LT it was either a BR operated station and then post franchising it
passed to Silverlink. Only at the time when Silverlink ceased and LOROL
took over did it transfer to LU operation and even then things like
ticketing remain on NR equipment and NR ticketing rules (the same
applies all the way up to Harrow, barring Willesden Junction which is
LOROL operated).

Happy to be corrected if LT did run it back from 1933 or whenever and it
then later passed to BR. I'd be surprised that LT would have ceded
ownership (and the revenue) if it had had any choice.


Queens Park certainly issued LTE tickets whereas the stations further on
had BR tickets.

ITYF Queens Park issued both BR and LT tickets. This appeared to cause
some adverse comment at my local BR station during a period when the
fare was a round number of shillings/5ps and some passengers were
occasionally issued with an LT station-of-origin ticket instead of the
correct Queens Park to destination ticket, presumably as the income
from the former was by default sent to LT.