Walter Briscoe wrote in
:


I phoned LU CSC after reading Colin's posting. The clerk got back to
me the next day to say the data would be loaded this week. The good
news is that there is now data reflecting the increased H&C frequency
on stations west of Paddington. The bad news is that about 5 minutes
journey time has been added between Royal Oak and Moorgate.

http://journeyplanner.tfl.gov.uk/use...?language=en&s
e
ssionID=0&ptOptionsActive=-1&type_destination=stop&name_destination=MOO
R
GATE&type_origin=stop&name_origin=royal%20oak&itdD ate=20091118&itdTime=
9 54&itdTripDateTimeDepArr=arr

uses the current data on 20091118 and shows 8-9 minute headways and
journeys of 19-20 minutes.
http://journeyplanner.tfl.gov.uk/use...?language=en&s
e
ssionID=0&ptOptionsActive=-1&type_destination=stop&name_destination=MOO
R
GATE&type_origin=stop&name_origin=royal%20oak&itdD ate=20091218&itdTime=
9 54&itdTripDateTimeDepArr=arr

is the same enquiry on 20091218 and shows 5 minute headways and
journeys of 26-27 minutes.
Both are weekday enquiries at the same time.
YMMV. I have sometimes found journey planner enquiries are not
repeatable. I say nothing about the service.


It seems the journey time has been padded for the peaks. Off peak is shown
as 20 minutes, as now. Given the chaotic nature of the service currently
during the peak hour this is unfortunate but not unreasonable.

(A minimum change Bayswater - Baker Street journey on 20091218 shows
as costing 56 minutes.

50 minutes off peak.

Richard J. wrote:
Basil Jet wrote on 15
November 2009 15:35:17 ...
Richard J. wrote:
Basil Jet wrote on 14
November 2009 14:37:48 ...
Richard J. wrote:
Basil Jet wrote on 13
November 2009 10:46:44 ...
Richard J. wrote:
Basil Jet wrote on 13
November 2009 03:21:14 ...

But if you take David's plan and extend the Edgware Road
terminators back to Hammersmith (i.e. Hamm - KX - Vic - Edg
Road - Hammersmith, running in both directions) then you have
...

... confusion! Since your "extension" is actually a reversal,
you effectively have (a) a Hammersmith - Edgware Road shuttle,
(b) Hammersmith - KX - Vic - Edgware Road in both directions. You
now have two services terminating at Edgware Road, which is
what David's plan was trying to avoid.

No, you would have 12-16 trains an hour reversing without
waiting.

Ha ha, very funny. :-)

baffled

Oh, I thought it was a competition to find the most impracticable
alternative to LU's plan. But if you're serious ...

"Reversing without waiting" implies stepping back, otherwise you'd
have to wait for the driver to walk the length of the train.
Stepping back two different services at one station would be
seriously challenging, especially if you're trying to do it within a
normal dwell time, or in practice probably 1½ minutes. LU aren't
very successful with driver changes in mid-route, e.g. Acton Town.

[At this point my previous post got careless, as you've pointed out.
Sorry.]
The point is that the recovery time would not be at Edgware Road
but at Hammersmith, Wimbledon and Barking etc.

Yes, that's the problem! If you don't provide any recovery time at
Edgware Road, any delay in one direction will automatically disrupt
the other direction too, partly because a late arrival at Edgware
Road will become a late departure, but also because conflicting
moves at the crossovers at Edgware Road and at Praed Street Junction
will
worsen the delays. In other words, the reliability of the Circle
Line will suffer from the same problems that occur today.

No - The Circle's problem is that the whole circle only has
something like 3 minutes recovery time, so a ten minute delay would take
three whole
circuits to catch up, even without missing slots at flat junctions.

Yes, I know that, but reversing without a layover doesn't help - see
my comments above.

(Am I right in thinking Circle trains have priority at flat
junctions? If they don't, then that would help a lot without
changing any lines.)

Should an outer rail Circle train at Gloucester Road get priority over
an eastbound District? I would have thought the delay to the latter
would affect more passengers. Neither service appears to get priority
at that location at present.

Ensuring step-free changes at Edgware Road would probably become
more difficult too.

No-one would need to change at Edgware Road, unless services were
disrupted.

I assume you mean that people could change at another station and/or
wait for a through train. I suppose it's no worse that the current
situation.

Do you mean worse than the situation which is ending or the situation which
is starting?

As for flat junctions, a solution would be to give the Hammersmith branch to
Crossrail (6tph but 12 carriage trains), with H&C trains only using it for
depot access. Also give Crossrail a branch from Mitre Bridge via the barely
used track to Park Royal and then take over the Picc to Uxbridge - again
only 6tph but 12-carriage trains - this would allow Met services from
Uxbridge to go no further than Baker Street. In combination with the virtual
removal of Praed Street Junction, this would allow (in 2018) 20tph between
Moorgate - Edgware Road - HSK. Give the Acton Town to Park Royal section
back to the District. This would allow platforms from Uxbridge to Rayners
Lane to be rebuilt level with the Met/Crossrail trains, and Ealing Common
platforms to be rebuilt level with the District. The Picc branch from Acton
Town to Uxbridge would be abolished, allowing more Piccs to go to Heathrow.
This would avoid the planned situation of approx 12tph Crossrail trains from
the east terminating at Paddington, while approx 12tph Circle and Wimbleware
trains from the southwest terminate at Edgware Road.

So comparing with the 2018 service in
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...ce-Changes.pdf
we would have
8tph Barking - Victoria - Edgware Road - Barking (yellow)
8tph Wimbledon - Victoria - Edgware Road - Wimbledon (yellow)
8tph Upminster - Victoria - Turnham Green - Richmond (green)
8tph Upminster - Victoria - Turnham Green - Ealing Broadway (green)
4tph Aldgate - Edgware Road - Turnham Green - Park Royal (pink - goes
through Hammersmith and the City, can't think what to call it)
12tp Aldate - Metropolitan Line (magenta)

This is, of course, more expensive than previous proposals in this thread
(maybe I should make that sentence my signature?)

--
We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile.

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009, Basil Jet wrote:

As for flat junctions, a solution would be to give the Hammersmith
branch to Crossrail (6tph but 12 carriage trains), with H&C trains only
using it for depot access.

Yes.

Also give Crossrail a branch from Mitre Bridge via the barely used track
to Park Royal and then take over the Picc to Uxbridge

Are there four tracks on the GW/Central alignment all the way from Old Oak
to Park Royal? And how do you envisage linking the Crossrail tracks to the
Piccadilly tracks there - taking land from the ornamental borders of the
business park?

- again only 6tph but 12-carriage trains - this would allow Met services
from Uxbridge to go no further than Baker Street.

Thus cutting off West Harrow and its 1.15 million passengers a year from
the City.

In combination with the virtual
removal of Praed Street Junction, this would allow (in 2018) 20tph between
Moorgate - Edgware Road - HSK. Give the Acton Town to Park Royal section
back to the District.

Or even just dump it. Park Royal would have Crossrail, and the 0.870
million passengers a year who use North Ealing could walk to there, Ealing
Broadway or West Acton instead. Not ideal, but adding yet another branch
to the District seems like madness to me. If yet more money can be found,
a new station on the District (and perhaps Central and Great Western)
tracks just to the west of Hangar Lane could replace North Ealing,
although arranging road access to it would be tricky.

This would allow platforms from Uxbridge to Rayners Lane to be rebuilt
level with the Met/Crossrail trains, and Ealing Common platforms to be
rebuilt level with the District. The Picc branch from Acton Town to
Uxbridge would be abolished, allowing more Piccs to go to Heathrow. This
would avoid the planned situation of approx 12tph Crossrail trains from
the east terminating at Paddington, while approx 12tph Circle and
Wimbleware trains from the southwest terminate at Edgware Road.

So comparing with the 2018 service in
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...ce-Changes.pdf
we would have
8tph Barking - Victoria - Edgware Road - Barking (yellow)
8tph Wimbledon - Victoria - Edgware Road - Wimbledon (yellow)
8tph Upminster - Victoria - Turnham Green - Richmond (green)
8tph Upminster - Victoria - Turnham Green - Ealing Broadway (green)
4tph Aldgate - Edgware Road - Turnham Green - Park Royal (pink - goes
through Hammersmith and the City, can't think what to call it)
12tp Aldate - Metropolitan Line (magenta)

This is, of course, more expensive than previous proposals in this thread
(maybe I should make that sentence my signature?)

Isn't it already the group motto?

tom

--
A hypothesis or theory is clear, decisive, and positive, but it is
believed by no one but the man who created it. Experimental findings,
on the other hand, are messy, inexact things, which are believed by
everyone except the man who did that work. -- Harlow Shapley

Tom Anderson wrote:

Are there four tracks on the GW/Central alignment all the way from
Old Oak to Park Royal?

I'm not sure about the new road bridge near Coronation Road, but apart from
that it should be okay.

And how do you envisage linking the Crossrail
tracks to the Piccadilly tracks there - taking land from the
ornamental borders of the business park?

- again only 6tph but 12-carriage trains - this would allow Met
services from Uxbridge to go no further than Baker Street.

Thus cutting off West Harrow and its 1.15 million passengers a year
from the City.

Hardly, they'd just have to cross-platform interchange at HOTH.

In combination with the virtual
removal of Praed Street Junction, this would allow (in 2018) 20tph
between Moorgate - Edgware Road - HSK. Give the Acton Town to Park
Royal section back to the District.

Or even just dump it. Park Royal would have Crossrail, and the 0.870
million passengers a year who use North Ealing could walk to there,
Ealing Broadway or West Acton instead. Not ideal, but adding yet
another branch to the District seems like madness to me.

The issue is not that one station, but the connections. With no service from
Park Royal to Acton Town, all sorts of journeys like Alperton to Northfields
would shift to the buses or cars. Which , I suppose, might be the best place
for them, because that's the way most of these sorts of journeys would be
performed in the rest of London. So the 4tph from Moorgate can go to Olympia
instead, but should still be pink, or maybe magenta!

--
We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile.

In article . 145,
pleasereplytogroup (David Jackman) wrote:

(A minimum change Bayswater - Baker Street journey on 20091218 shows
as costing 56 minutes.

50 minutes off peak.

?Que? That's just three stations, maybe 6 minutes, now.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote in news:V9udndo40fcH-
:

In article . 145,
pleasereplytogroup (David Jackman) wrote:

(A minimum change Bayswater - Baker Street journey on 20091218 shows
as costing 56 minutes.

50 minutes off peak.

?Que? That's just three stations, maybe 6 minutes, now.


Indeed, but in the new world it's a good indication of how long it takes to
do a complete Circle - which I belive is 56 minutes off peak currently - so
50 minutes Bayswater to Baker Street with no changes suggests am Edgware
Road to Edgware Road running time only a little slower than now.

In message of Tue, 17 Nov 2009
23:33:23 in uk.transport.london, Walter Briscoe
writes

[snipped a description that the Journey Planner shows slower services on
the extended Circle line than those which apply now.]

I guess I shall be back on the phone, tomorrow.
(LUCSC staffs its phones 08.00-20.00)

I now have a good reply from LUCSC which I show below:

For some time we’ve had the problem that our timetables assume it takes
trains the same amount of time to make a journey at all times day. In
fact, of course, trains travel more slowly at peak times, as it takes
people longer to get on and off at stations. The increased weight
caused by fuller loadings also has an effect.



New technology has enabled us accurately to measure this variation for
the first time, and we’ve taken it into account when planning the
December Circle line timetable.



The figures provided for 13 December onwards more accurately reflect
differing actual journey times across the day and will therefore
provide a better indication to customers of how much time to allow when
planning their journeys. Conversely, the journey time figures provided
at the moment are broadly reliable at off-peak times, but may vary
considerably from customers’ experience during the rush hour.



So new sample journey times for a Royal Oak – Moorgate journey a



AM peak (0830) – 25-26 minutes

Inter-peak (1300) – 20 minutes

PM peak (1730) – 23-24 minutes

Evening (2130) – 20 minutes

Weekend (Sat, 1100) – 20 minutes



We have recently introduced the same measure on the Northern and
Piccadilly lines, and have seen an improvement in reliability of the
information provided as a result. It should be noted that this measure
is separate to the Circle line route change – it is merely coincidence
that the two are being introduced at the same time.
--
Walter Briscoe

In message , at 15:46:28 on Tue, 24
Nov 2009, Walter Briscoe remarked:
For some time we’ve had the problem that our timetables assume it takes
trains the same amount of time to make a journey at all times day. In
fact, of course, trains travel more slowly at peak times, as it takes
people longer to get on and off at stations. The increased weight
caused by fuller loadings also has an effect.

New technology has enabled us accurately to measure this variation for
the first time,

They've thrown away the sundial and bought a stopwatch?

and we’ve taken it into account when planning the December Circle
line timetable.

Hooray!
--
Roland Perry

On 10 Nov, 22:20, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 21:00:58 -0000, "Paul Scott"

wrote:
They just show "CIRCLE LINE" normally. *Are the blinds to be redone?

Yes, according to posts some months ago in District Dave's forum, at the
time of the early trials...

Interesting - the blind boxes are quite small, so unless they plan on
cutting a bigger hole the font will be very small to fit a via in as
well.

Today I noticed "Hammersmith via Paddington" on the front, which I
don't remember seeing before.

Presumably this is meant to be relevant east of Liverpool Street, and
I don't know what it offers over "via Kings Cross" except maybe it's
to discourage anyone from heading for Paddington via the lower bit of
the Circle, which won't have changed ...

Inside I noticed that the smaller diagrams above the windows already
show the teacup route, while the larger ones above the doors show the
not-much-longer existing Circle route. Maybe this is so that either
side of the change all vehicles will show the correct pattern
(somewhere) without having to change the whole lot overnight.

MIG wrote:

Today I noticed "Hammersmith via Paddington" on the front, which I
don't remember seeing before.

Presumably this is meant to be relevant east of Liverpool Street, and
I don't know what it offers over "via Kings Cross" except maybe it's
to discourage anyone from heading for Paddington via the lower bit of
the Circle, which won't have changed ...


Allegedly Circle Line trains leaving Hammersmith are supposed
to display 'Circle Line via Aldgate' until Liverpool St
followed by 'Circle Line to Edgware Rd.'

On the return they are supposed to display
'Circle Line via Aldgate' again until Tower Hill
followed by 'Circle Line to Hammersmith'

Hammersmith via Paddington is provided for H&C use apparently. District
Dave's forum has a post with the full new blind listing, and various
comments suggestng that LU haven't actually told the staff what they want
them to do yet.

Cynic mode: I wonder if the drivers will ask for extra pay for changing the
blinds?

Paul S