daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 12th, 2007, 09:01 PM   #2001
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
eventual (on current plans) frequencies are to be something like 4tph on (nb:unsure which northern termini will be what with the ELL):
Dalston - Whitechapel - West Croydon
Dalston - Whitechapel - Crystal Palace
Highbury & Islington - Whitechapel - New Cross
Highbury & Islington - Whitechapel - Clapham Junction
Stratford - Richmond
Stratford - Queens Park (probably Willesden Junction, unless Queens Park gets totally remodelled) via reopened station at Chalk Farm
Barking - Gospel Oak - Willesden Junction - Clapham Junction

these overlap to give 8tph Stratford-Camden Road, Willesden Junction-Gospel Oak, Highbury & Islington-Dalston and Surrey Quays-Sydenham. 16tph will run from Dalston to Surrey Quays.

Current services are
ELL (which is still London Underground, though will close for some time in December):
5tph New Cross-Whitechapel, 5tph New Cross Gate-Whitechapel
NLL: 4tph Richmond-Stratford
GOBLin: 2tph Gospel Oak-Barking
WLL: 2tph Clapham Junction-Willesden Junction

I'll let tubeman do the Bakerloo/DC lines, as he's far more informed than me on this.

Oh, and as for what makes Northwood people so special - they have it now and your are only just beginning to deny them the luxury that is A stock seating (compared to standing, or crappy longitudinal seating). If they didn't have it now, they wouldn't be complaining, but they do have the luxury of some of the most spacious trains in the UK, and by far the most comfortable seating on the underground network - high back, forward/backwards facing seats and they don't want to swap that for standing or crappy low back longitudinal seats. Seeing as the 7car and 8car S stock look likely to be completely different in terms of seating plan, the 8car design might as well just be A stock, but with better engine and more uniform parts, so as to allow easier maintenance. I know that it'll just be forced on the people of Northwood that they have to sit like that.

One also guesses that when the plans come to extend the Bakerloo to Watford, and stop the Euston services, there will be a similar seat quality outcry and a mass exodus to London Midland - the reason that they stopped the Bakerloo to Watford in the first place, was that no one used them, preferring either the slow DC line trains, or a change at Harrow or Wembley to the longer distance trains - they wanted comfort and Euston. When they reinstated services to Harrow, they worked out that it was the furthest place worth taking it as the people north of there wanted Euston far more than Paddington.
Well to be blunt if they don't like it in Northwood what are they going to do about it? Walk?

Watford Jcn DC lines run 3tph currently

To me it makes sense to scrap the DC service: there's no logic in having two crap slow services overlapping like the Watford DC and Bakerloo Harrow & Wealdstone services currently do. Just have the Bakerloo as the crappy slow service to Watford Jcn and enhance the Silverlink County services to give Watford Jcn, Harrow & Wealdstone and Queen's Park decent stopping services so that the two routes operate like the District and C2C between Fenchurch Street / Tower Hill and Upminster. In an ideal dreamworld there'd be cross-platform transfer at QPK and H&W, but obviously that's pushing it.

To be honest I'm not hung up on South Hampstead and Kilburn High Road stations either: The former is next to Swiss Cottage and the latter Kilburn Park... I know the plan is to run a service into Willesden Low Level bay platforms off the NLL from Camden Rd, but these are just going to be irritating trains getting in the way of a hopefully much enhanced Bakerloo service... and it's still not as if this new service will provide trains into Euston anyway.

Nah, I think a robust Bakerloo service to Watford Junction (at least 12 tph) combined with Silverlink County services stopping at Harrow & Wealdstone and Queen's Park with decent frequency and the closure of Kilburn High Rd and South Hampstead is the way forward.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 12th, 2007, 09:08 PM   #2002
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
Tubeman I have a few questions...

-Why is the Tube so expensive?
-I've noticed there are suicide pits on the JLE, what's the point if it has PEDs?
-Is Gants Hill a cut-and-cover or tunnelled station?
-Why, at St John's Wood did they install a pair of overbright ceiling lights on the escalator shafts when the uplighters provided enough light already, is it a desperate bid to make the stations appear 'airly' (think that awful blue lighting) which I find funny considering grotty stations like Holland Park have sufficient lighting but a dreadful atmosphere!
-What dictates what type of tunnel lining is used? I've noticed at Westminster on the Jubilee line the exposed tunnel lining on the opposite side to the platform is metal, whereas at Waterloo and Southwark it is concrete. I've also read stuff about the Victoria line having different tunnel linings as well.

Thank you!
1) No public contribution of any note to normal operating costs

2) Good question: I'd never noticed. Can't think of a decent answer

3) Gants Hill, Redbridge and Wanstead station boxes were all cut-and cover, but are linked by bored 'Tube' (hence stations very shallow for Tube). The area above was being built pretty much in conjunction with the Tube line, so avoiding existing buildings and roads wasn't a problem really.

4) Pass

5) It could be due to the ground tunnelled through: my guess is that Westminster being right on the Thames might be water-bearing alluvium for which 'shotcreting' might not be an appropriate technique.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2007, 09:12 PM   #2003
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Songoten2554 View Post
Tubeman i have some questions

1. is it true that electrifition of Railways have been stopped since privatalision or will they continue to electrify British railways?? alot??

2. is Network Rail in charge of the electrifition of British Railways and maintaining the infrustruce of the british rail

3. about Fenchurch Street railway station is it a great station or is not that good i hear only the C2C Railway goes there i think its a small station is liverpool street better then Fenchurch Street?
1) Effectively. Not an awful lot of electrification has taken place since privatisation: Heathrow Express and lines into Paddington and ???

2) Yes, but it's now been taken back into public hands after Railtrack collapsed

3) A very compact station: only 4 platforms so tiny for a London terminal. Liverpool St is much larger and has a real 'wow' factor in the concourse, but the trainshed is all roofed over and claustrophobic since the Broadgate Centre was built above.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 12:35 AM   #2004
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
tubeman, i haven't asked anything for abit but here goes!!

-what do you reckon is more important, tube to areas of london without it, aka the tube to south london and hackney, or an over inflated east-west line, to serve the city and doclands fat cats?
In a way the latter, because if you build new Tube lines out to un-served areas like Hackney, Clapton, Peckham, Battersea etc then you funnel even more Tube passengers into Central London and existing infrastructure wouldn't be able to cope.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
-london overground is here now, do you reckon ken should get control of the south london metro lines when the franchise expires in 2009, i reckon they should integrate the rest of southern with first capital connect, and on the south coast areas with SWT, then the metro services can be combined with london overground. what do you think, they could then simplfy south london rail so much and'd be on the map!!
TFL's stated aim is to ultimately assume control of all of London's suburban rail. Hence the clever 'London Overground' name: hints at the future, doesn't it? Very few bits of London have no rail link at all: the Tube-less areas are generally well served by mainline rail, they just need to have their services made more attractive and metro-like.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
-why can't they pull their finger out and open the northern heights all the way to moorgate as another overground line.then possibly extend it through to cannon street or something, linking with the south london metro lines, creating in essence a new north south line which could relieve the northern maybe??
Money I suppose. The Northern City line would never make a good basis for a heavily used Crossrail-type line as the platforms are short, but Moorgate to Cannon Street is a pretty obvious and very short route for a cross-London tunnel. It would mean that you'd have 4-car trains taking up valuable train paths through London Bridge however, which is wasteful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
-why does it take so long for us to plan and build transport infrastructure, it's pointless, if this was a foregn country we'd have the northern heights, the victoria would be inc roydon the bakerloo in ahyes, the northern wouldve been split and would probably be in extended from kennington to, chelney wouldve been built, crossrail wouldve been buil etc etc!!
I wouldn't be so sure... although we are spectacularly slow at getting these things going and even worse at actually completing projects as originally planned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
-with dlr extension to charing cross why don't they open a station under tower hill which i heard was possible, close tower gateway, and run the dlr alongthe old fleet line alignment to charing cross, keeping the bank spur as a separate branh, leaving two well connected central london lines.
It would probably be better to close Tower Gateway anyway and extend the Bank terminus. The abandoned Jubilee Line tunnels to Aldwych are useless for the DLR anyway, as they're Tube size bore.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
-and finally totally unrelated, do you think we'll win the league this season?

cheers
I have an awful feeling Man Utd will win again, but we can hope.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 12:38 AM   #2005
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
- oh yeah a couple more, i dont think TfL have carefully considered how busy the london overground will get, i think the proposed frequencies are pitful, i think the stratford- highbury and islington section will need more than 8 trains per hour 4 coach trains, i know they may be extended to 6, but when are they gonna realise people want more frequent trains not longer trains. they need to get it up to at least 12 trains an hour imho, what do you think??
It's more down to capacity: the Overground routes aren't signalled for particularly high frequencies, and parts are very heavily used by cross-London freight traffic. The only section which can be quadrupled is Camden Road to Dalston Western Junction (currently 3 or 4 tracks throughout, with the 3rd / 4th tracks being freight exclusively).
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 12:49 AM   #2006
Justme
Gotta lite?
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester (Forecast: Rain)
Posts: 4,952
Likes (Received): 781

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
Tubeman I have a few questions...

-Why is the Tube so expensive?
Actually, I don't personally find the Tube to be that expensive - at least with Oyster cards (cash fares are rediculous, but who needs to pay for those)


What I do find terribly expensive are the suburban and commuter services in London and the Southeast. These are just so far above anywhere else in the world it's almost unbelievable.
__________________
I'm doing my bit to save bandwidth by deleting my signature
Justme no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 12:58 AM   #2007
Justme
Gotta lite?
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester (Forecast: Rain)
Posts: 4,952
Likes (Received): 781

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
1) No public contribution of any note to normal operating costs
Now that Kens congestion charge has improved the buses, why is this money not spent on the Tube and other rail infrastructure now? I read that the congestion charge generates around £100million profit a year. This could surely go towards subsidising the Tube significantly.
__________________
I'm doing my bit to save bandwidth by deleting my signature
Justme no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 05:28 AM   #2008
Songoten2554
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami Florida
Posts: 1,063
Likes (Received): 87

so tubeman you mean to tell me that Railway Electrification in the UK is still happening its still contiuning thank you tubeman

is it going to grow in the future well at least it hasn't ended because i heard about it being a virtual stop

i mean if it has stopped then that means its a very sad thing but i am glad that that Railway Electrification is still continuing in the UK thank god it hasn't ended i hope it doesn't end
Songoten2554 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 02:11 PM   #2009
lasdun
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 364
Likes (Received): 7

low floor

Found some clearer answers: The foor height of the S stock will be 950mm http://districtdave.proboards39.com/...e=4#1159558674

So this is 'low floor' as in Level accsess with the standard height of SSL platform (950mm), rather than the 975mm height standard used previously to allow an over-flight of the platform for saftey. Though of course being London I'm sure there are exceptions around. I stand corrected. Tube standard remains 650mm I think - so even the small 700mm wheels will still protude into the saloon underneith the seats - rulling out nice ideas such as 3 double doors rather than the 1/2 - 1 - 1 - 1/2 arrangement.

The Wheels will be the same 700mm design used on the 09 stock. http://districtdave.proboards39.com/...e=6#1159999294

There's a mock-up due early in the new year so hopefully we'll know much more shortly.
lasdun no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 03:05 PM   #2010
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
It's more down to capacity: the Overground routes aren't signalled for particularly high frequencies, and parts are very heavily used by cross-London freight traffic. The only section which can be quadrupled is Camden Road to Dalston Western Junction (currently 3 or 4 tracks throughout, with the 3rd / 4th tracks being freight exclusively).

-yeah but tubeman you must realise that the trains are just gonna get so overcrowded, surely it wouldnt be that expensive to quadruple between dalston and stratford i swear there must be space to build one track on either side and it would be so beneficial,

-or would it be possible to build small passing loops at stations like hackney wick, where the freight can over take the stopping trains or something.

-how likely if ever would an m25 style railway be, for freight only which can funnel freight traffic around london?? that would then take away all the capacity issues.

-also if the tube can be signalled with out ato to operate 20+ trains an hour and network rail lines can get up to that frequency too especially into the big london terminus, surely they could resignal the north london line to operate i dunno 24 trains an hour with ever third train being a freight train, do you know exactly how many freight trains run along the north and west london lines an hour/day??

-also with regards to the west london line when it goes up to 4tph are they gonna remove the southern service to watford, i think they should, the problem with national rail is the non integrated nature of the network different companies operating on the smae tracks, i think they should try and self contain london overground as much as possible, then surely it could be more efficient??

-so tubeman do u reckon crossrail will remain crossrail or will it just come under the london overground umbrella, as the cross town railway or something along those lines

-with regards to chelney, you said the wimbledon branh of the district is over crowded, but the plans are if it becomes crossrail 2, to take over that branch and run trains further to take over some of SWTs services, wouldn't that just defeat the point of relieving that branch, and how exactly would it operate, would the wimbledon branch district trains just terminate at pasrsons green making a relaly pointless branch?? and i've read if its built to national rail specs it wouldnt call at piccadilly circus? is it specifically wimbledon that makes the wimbledon branch so busy, if so wouldnt it be beneficial to by pass the whole of that branch and run trains firect from that battersea park spur they are proposing via clapham junction and earlsfield??

-do you think thameslink 2000 has too many southern terminus'?



sorry for all the questions i have an enquiring mind and as your an expert why not take advantage.

PS did you not see how we demolished reading second half yesterday, the title is ours!!
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 03:19 PM   #2011
Martin S
Registered User
 
Martin S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,235
Likes (Received): 3156

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
Tubeman I have a few questions...

--What dictates what type of tunnel lining is used? I've noticed at Westminster on the Jubilee line the exposed tunnel lining on the opposite side to the platform is metal, whereas at Waterloo and Southwark it is concrete. I've also read stuff about the Victoria line having different tunnel linings as well.

Thank you!
Generally tunnel linings on the London Underground are of cast iron, precast or in-situ concrete. Brick is usually confined to the older lines such as the Metropolitan and District which were mainly constructed as cut and cover.

Cast iron segments were a standard for the lines built in the early 20c and are relatively light (so can be installed using manual labour) and form a strong, watertight lining that can be installed very quickly. This form of construction was first used on the Tower Subway, which is still in use as a cable tunnel under the Thames but which closed to passengers when Tower Bridge opened.

Precast concrete segments are generally used in connection with tunnel boring machines and are heavy so installed with hydraulic lifting devices. Sometimes these are bolted together as with cast-iron or sometimes form an expanding lining that is held in place with a wedge segment forced in place with hydraulic rams.

The Jubilee Line made considerable use of the New Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM), which is a widely used and flexible form of lining construction but which has been associated with a number of collapses - the most famous being the Heathrow Express tunnels, whose failure led to suspension of the method on the JLE and consequent increase in costs.

The idea of NATM is to dig out the tunnel using hand tools or a TBM and install an initial lining of shotcrete, reinforced with steel ribs. The lining so formed is then monitored for movement and, additional shotcrete is applied until the movement stops. Then, a secondary lining of reinforced concrete is installed to form the internal lining of the tunnel.

The Heathrow Express collapse was due to the results of the movement observation not being acted upon which led to excessive movement and consequent collapse.

Despite the well-publicised failures, NATM has proved very popular and the massive crossover caverns on the Channel Tunnel were made using this method.
__________________
Martin S no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 10:18 PM   #2012
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justme View Post
Now that Kens congestion charge has improved the buses, why is this money not spent on the Tube and other rail infrastructure now? I read that the congestion charge generates around £100million profit a year. This could surely go towards subsidising the Tube significantly.
It's being channelled back into the TFL pot which in turn is funding things like LOROL, so it is... The whole object of the exercise was to increase funding to public transport through the CC. As it looks like a dead cert that TFL will assume control of Metronet, then the Tube will be a direct beneficiary of CC money.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 10:22 PM   #2013
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Songoten2554 View Post
so tubeman you mean to tell me that Railway Electrification in the UK is still happening its still contiuning thank you tubeman

is it going to grow in the future well at least it hasn't ended because i heard about it being a virtual stop

i mean if it has stopped then that means its a very sad thing but i am glad that that Railway Electrification is still continuing in the UK thank god it hasn't ended i hope it doesn't end
I'm not aware of anything in the pipeline: we have seen some significant electrification projects in the past couple of decades with the Midland mainline as far as Luton (or Bedford, whicever is further... I forget), and of course the ECML. We'll never witness total electrification, but I think the GWR to Oxford, Swansea and Exeter and the Midland mainline to Sheffield / Derby / Nottingham should be priorities.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 10:24 PM   #2014
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by lasdun View Post
Found some clearer answers: The foor height of the S stock will be 950mm http://districtdave.proboards39.com/...e=4#1159558674

So this is 'low floor' as in Level accsess with the standard height of SSL platform (950mm), rather than the 975mm height standard used previously to allow an over-flight of the platform for saftey. Though of course being London I'm sure there are exceptions around. I stand corrected. Tube standard remains 650mm I think - so even the small 700mm wheels will still protude into the saloon underneith the seats - rulling out nice ideas such as 3 double doors rather than the 1/2 - 1 - 1 - 1/2 arrangement.

The Wheels will be the same 700mm design used on the 09 stock. http://districtdave.proboards39.com/...e=6#1159999294

There's a mock-up due early in the new year so hopefully we'll know much more shortly.
As I thought: lower in line with platform heights, but not Tube height. Less than a foot lower.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 10:52 PM   #2015
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
-yeah but tubeman you must realise that the trains are just gonna get so overcrowded, surely it wouldnt be that expensive to quadruple between dalston and stratford i swear there must be space to build one track on either side and it would be so beneficial,

-or would it be possible to build small passing loops at stations like hackney wick, where the freight can over take the stopping trains or something.
Well longer and more frequent trains is a good start, but I agree they will probably be at capacity quite soon after the ELL reopens in 2010. It's certainly not impossible to quadruple Dalston to Stratford, but it would be very expensive. Perhaps a third road for freight with passing loops is a better compromise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
-how likely if ever would an m25 style railway be, for freight only which can funnel freight traffic around london?? that would then take away all the capacity issues.
It was seriously looked at post-WW2, but the distances involved would be immense (hundreds of Km). There may well be scope to use some lightly-used and abandoned lines combined with new stretches to create a diversionary freight ring or near-ring around London: maybe the Oxford-Cambridge line combined with the North Downs line (i.e. Cambridge - Sandy - Bedford - Bletchley - Bicester - Oxford - Didcot - Reading - Guildford - Tonbridge - Ashford)... If junctions were remodelled and some sections doubled / quadrupled a freight route linking most of the main lines radiating out of London could be created, removing a lot of cross-London freight traffic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--also if the tube can be signalled with out ato to operate 20+ trains an hour and network rail lines can get up to that frequency too especially into the big london terminus, surely they could resignal the north london line to operate i dunno 24 trains an hour with ever third train being a freight train, do you know exactly how many freight trains run along the north and west london lines an hour/day??
The great length of freight trains and much longer braking distances greatly affect the frequencies, as signalling has to assume every train has the longest length and longest braking distance possible, this means trains need to be kept further apart than they would, say, on a standard Tube line where all trains are the same length and have the same (relatively short) braking distance. The passenger roads between Camden Road and Dalston could have a Tube-style signalling density as the freight can be segregated, but the double track sections between Dalston and Stratford and Camden Rd and South Acton would need to have a compromised signalling layout to cater for the mixed traffic, thus affecting the frequencies on the entire line.

The West London line suffers from the same problem.

As you can hopefully gather, it's not so much how many freights share the route, its the fact that they do at all which limits passenger train frequencies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--also with regards to the west london line when it goes up to 4tph are they gonna remove the southern service to watford, i think they should, the problem with national rail is the non integrated nature of the network different companies operating on the smae tracks, i think they should try and self contain london overground as much as possible, then surely it could be more efficient??
The Southern service is pretty well used, I think it would be a mistake to withdraw it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--so tubeman do u reckon crossrail will remain crossrail or will it just come under the london overground umbrella, as the cross town railway or something along those lines
I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up part of a far wider TFL Overground network in, say, 20 years time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--with regards to chelney, you said the wimbledon branh of the district is over crowded, but the plans are if it becomes crossrail 2, to take over that branch and run trains further to take over some of SWTs services, wouldn't that just defeat the point of relieving that branch, and how exactly would it operate, would the wimbledon branch district trains just terminate at pasrsons green making a relaly pointless branch?? and i've read if its built to national rail specs it wouldnt call at piccadilly circus? is it specifically wimbledon that makes the wimbledon branch so busy, if so wouldnt it be beneficial to by pass the whole of that branch and run trains firect from that battersea park spur they are proposing via clapham junction and earlsfield??
All stations on the Wimbledon branch are very busy with the exceptions perhaps of Wimbledon Park and West Brompton, which are still quite heavily used. Southfields has the most season ticket holders of any LU station. I think the original Chleney plan was for the District to terminate at P.G. and the rest of the Wimbledon branch to divert into a tunnel there. More contemporary Crossrail 2 proposals don't involve any use of the Wimbledon branch at all and have a southern portal at Wimbledon, which is preferable I think. Most passengers ex-Wimbledon branch use the Edgware Rd service to get into west-central London (as anyone wanting the West end or City would be more likely to use the mainline to Waterloo), so removing this direct service would be very unpopular.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--do you think thameslink 2000 has too many southern terminus'?
I'm not entirely sure what the final plan is, but with enhanced capacity through the central section I think 3 or 4 termini north and south is reasonable (e.g. maybe 5 or 6 tph on each).

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
-sorry for all the questions i have an enquiring mind and as your an expert why not take advantage.

PS did you not see how we demolished reading second half yesterday, the title is ours!!
No probs... And it's early days still! Reading were cack...
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 11:48 PM   #2016
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin S View Post
Generally tunnel linings on the London Underground are of cast iron, precast or in-situ concrete. Brick is usually confined to the older lines such as the Metropolitan and District which were mainly constructed as cut and cover.

Cast iron segments were a standard for the lines built in the early 20c and are relatively light (so can be installed using manual labour) and form a strong, watertight lining that can be installed very quickly. This form of construction was first used on the Tower Subway, which is still in use as a cable tunnel under the Thames but which closed to passengers when Tower Bridge opened.

Precast concrete segments are generally used in connection with tunnel boring machines and are heavy so installed with hydraulic lifting devices. Sometimes these are bolted together as with cast-iron or sometimes form an expanding lining that is held in place with a wedge segment forced in place with hydraulic rams.

The Jubilee Line made considerable use of the New Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM), which is a widely used and flexible form of lining construction but which has been associated with a number of collapses - the most famous being the Heathrow Express tunnels, whose failure led to suspension of the method on the JLE and consequent increase in costs.

The idea of NATM is to dig out the tunnel using hand tools or a TBM and install an initial lining of shotcrete, reinforced with steel ribs. The lining so formed is then monitored for movement and, additional shotcrete is applied until the movement stops. Then, a secondary lining of reinforced concrete is installed to form the internal lining of the tunnel.

The Heathrow Express collapse was due to the results of the movement observation not being acted upon which led to excessive movement and consequent collapse.

Despite the well-publicised failures, NATM has proved very popular and the massive crossover caverns on the Channel Tunnel were made using this method.
Thanks a bunch for the information Do you work in tunnelling, you seem to know a helluva lot more than your average layman.
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2007, 01:06 AM   #2017
micro
Registered User
 
micro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamburg, .de Home: everywhere
Posts: 1,260
Likes (Received): 107

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
I'm sorry if i'm nicking your questions Tubeman but...

No it won't be operated as a circle, that's mostly because trains from the east at Clapham Junction will face the same direction as trains from the north. ...
Thanks iampuking
micro no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2007, 01:18 AM   #2018
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Well longer and more frequent trains is a good start, but I agree they will probably be at capacity quite soon after the ELL reopens in 2010. It's certainly not impossible to quadruple Dalston to Stratford, but it would be very expensive. Perhaps a third road for freight with passing loops is a better compromise.



It was seriously looked at post-WW2, but the distances involved would be immense (hundreds of Km). There may well be scope to use some lightly-used and abandoned lines combined with new stretches to create a diversionary freight ring or near-ring around London: maybe the Oxford-Cambridge line combined with the North Downs line (i.e. Cambridge - Sandy - Bedford - Bletchley - Bicester - Oxford - Didcot - Reading - Guildford - Tonbridge - Ashford)... If junctions were remodelled and some sections doubled / quadrupled a freight route linking most of the main lines radiating out of London could be created, removing a lot of cross-London freight traffic.



The great length of freight trains and much longer braking distances greatly affect the frequencies, as signalling has to assume every train has the longest length and longest braking distance possible, this means trains need to be kept further apart than they would, say, on a standard Tube line where all trains are the same length and have the same (relatively short) braking distance. The passenger roads between Camden Road and Dalston could have a Tube-style signalling density as the freight can be segregated, but the double track sections between Dalston and Stratford and Camden Rd and South Acton would need to have a compromised signalling layout to cater for the mixed traffic, thus affecting the frequencies on the entire line.

The West London line suffers from the same problem.

As you can hopefully gather, it's not so much how many freights share the route, its the fact that they do at all which limits passenger train frequencies.



The Southern service is pretty well used, I think it would be a mistake to withdraw it.



I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up part of a far wider TFL Overground network in, say, 20 years time.



All stations on the Wimbledon branch are very busy with the exceptions perhaps of Wimbledon Park and West Brompton, which are still quite heavily used. Southfields has the most season ticket holders of any LU station. I think the original Chleney plan was for the District to terminate at P.G. and the rest of the Wimbledon branch to divert into a tunnel there. More contemporary Crossrail 2 proposals don't involve any use of the Wimbledon branch at all and have a southern portal at Wimbledon, which is preferable I think. Most passengers ex-Wimbledon branch use the Edgware Rd service to get into west-central London (as anyone wanting the West end or City would be more likely to use the mainline to Waterloo), so removing this direct service would be very unpopular.



I'm not entirely sure what the final plan is, but with enhanced capacity through the central section I think 3 or 4 termini north and south is reasonable (e.g. maybe 5 or 6 tph on each).



No probs... And it's early days still! Reading were cack...


-surely techno wizards can invent a signal system which can recognise do different train lenghts? is it that they can't or that it would be too expensive to implement?

-is there not a spur taking the east coast mainline onto the goblin and i'm also sure the is a spur taking the wcml onto the north london line then subsequently onto the goblin. surely they can just duert all freight up the goblin to get round the north london line? then the section between stratford and camden road can really be busy!

-where exactly are the freight paths in london is it only the orbirail they effect, i know freight runs through my local stations around woolwich, coz it used to hurtle pass my primary school when i was a nipper.

-if they can build a third road between dalston and stratford surely it would be possible to build a 5th one between camden road and dalston allowing the east london to run completely separate from the north london over that stretch. is this possible on the west london line, i know that alot of it is through wasteland and cuttings, so maybe, but would the snag be at the bridge over the thames. if it's possible they should seriously consider it!

-a major problem i have is with interchanges, i think at stations which are suppsoed to be interchanges but you walk out of the station they should build some sort of links which make it feel like it's the same station, like waterloo-waterloo east. if they re-open the stations near tufnell park and chalk farm, do you reckon they could build better interchange links, in the form of tunnels similar to the way they linked strand and traflagar square or the two elephant and castles? is the new shepherds bus station two separate stations or do they share a common entrance?

-i know i bang on about the northern heights alot, but you previously mentioned that the paltforms are short how hard and expensive would it be to lengthen the platforms on only 4 subterranian stations?? i just believe the benefits far away the costs of opening it as planned.

-do you know of any lesser known underground lines that were proposed or planned, and in the past was there ever any plans to heavily expand the underground southwards or was it always thought that overland rail could cope.

-do you reckon the dlr should expand more into south london? like for example after cutty sark having an additional spur towards the greenwich line of southeastern and running along that to abbey wood. then crossrail when built could run all the way to at least slade green. and it would free up more capacity into london bridge. people along that line will still have a central london link, and will have better links to canary wharf, be on the tube map and likely have more tph, coz surely the trains that terminate at canary wharf on the dlr could just be extended that way?

-i do hope they sort out the southern end of thameslink, the simpler it is the better it will be for customers.

-and finally (for now maybe, lol), what is the likely time frame of the bakerloo to hayes??

cheers tubeman!!
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2007, 01:30 AM   #2019
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by micro View Post
Thanks iampuking
re: Orbirail running as a circle the track is there once the ELL re-opens and the re-opened Surrey Quays to Queen's Road Peckham spur is built as part of the ELLE phase II: the North, East, South and West London lines will all be connected as a continuous circle.

The only reason why the circle is incomplete with two 'ends' terminating at Clapham Jcn is (I presume) to serve Clapham Jcn: otherwise trains would stop at Imperial Wharf and then pass under the SWT lines with no interchange and not stop again until Wandsworth Rd.

As I have already mentioned, running a circular service poses operational problems (no terminus to recoup lost time) so if the circle is going to be broken anywhere, then I'd say Clapham Jcn is ideal due to the sheer variety of destinations available from there. It is of far more use to have an Orbirail running into a terminus at Clapham Jcn than it is so have a 'perfect' complete circle which merrily misses the main lines out of Waterloo and Victoria and passes right under them with no interchange.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2007, 02:01 AM   #2020
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
-surely techno wizards can invent a signal system which can recognise do different train lenghts? is it that they can't or that it would be too expensive to implement?
It's perfectly possible to have an ATO system which calculates braking distances for each train depending on their speed, weight and braking capacity, but it would be very complex, expensive, and a freight train would still need a large envelope of empty track in front of it because it's braking distance is so much longer than an EMU.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
-is there not a spur taking the east coast mainline onto the goblin and i'm also sure the is a spur taking the wcml onto the north london line then subsequently onto the goblin. surely they can just duert all freight up the goblin to get round the north london line? then the section between stratford and camden road can really be busy!
There is a spur from Harringay to the GOBLIN but there is no direct route from the WCML to the GOBLIN via the NLL: the link is between the site of Primrose Hill station and Camden Rd, but the junction with the NLL faces east and the junction with the GOBLIN is further north and west-facing at Gospel Oak. The NLL is an important freight route all the way from South Acton (Bollo lane Jcn) to Stratford: there really isn't much in the way of alternative routes. The GOBLIN isn't very well connected: there is a direct link off the Midland mainline and NLL at the west end and a direct link to the LTSR (C2C) main line at Barking, but other than these there is only a single-track spur onto the ECML at Harringay, a single-track spur between South Tottenham and Seven Sisters, a spur from South Tottenham to the Lea valley Line toward Stratford, and the connection to the GER mainline at Woodgrange Park.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--where exactly are the freight paths in london is it only the orbirail they effect, i know freight runs through my local stations around woolwich, coz it used to hurtle pass my primary school when i was a nipper.
The potential orbirail routes are the main freight arteries across central London, there is generally no freight traffic anywhere more central than this ring. All of the main lines radiating out of west, north and east london have fairly heavy freight traffic, the southern region has less but there is a fair amount along the Windsor line and around the Hounslow loop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--if they can build a third road between dalston and stratford surely it would be possible to build a 5th one between camden road and dalston allowing the east london to run completely separate from the north london over that stretch. is this possible on the west london line, i know that alot of it is through wasteland and cuttings, so maybe, but would the snag be at the bridge over the thames. if it's possible they should seriously consider it!
The NLL between Dalston and and Camden goes from cutting at the eastern end to brick viaduct at the western end, the cutting section was already widened from double to quadruple in the 19th century and any further widening would result in huge property loss as it traverses very dense victorian housing in places like Highbury and Canonbury. I think a 5th track would be prohibitively expensive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--a major problem i have is with interchanges, i think at stations which are suppsoed to be interchanges but you walk out of the station they should build some sort of links which make it feel like it's the same station, like waterloo-waterloo east. if they re-open the stations near tufnell park and chalk farm, do you reckon they could build better interchange links, in the form of tunnels similar to the way they linked strand and traflagar square or the two elephant and castles? is the new shepherds bus station two separate stations or do they share a common entrance?
I believe the new Shepherd's Bush will have a common entrance. Some NLL interchanges are pretty good: Willesden Jcn, Highbury, Stratford... some are a bit crap like West Hampstead and others are totally non-existent like Central line at North Acton, Northern Line at Camden and Piccadilly Line at York Road. For orbirail to be really effective, some of these crap or non-existent interchanges need to be looked at (Brixton having no South London line station is another).

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--i know i bang on about the northern heights alot, but you previously mentioned that the paltforms are short how hard and expensive would it be to lengthen the platforms on only 4 subterranian stations?? i just believe the benefits far away the costs of opening it as planned.
Pretty grotesque I'd have thought. Maybe costs could be reduced by closing Old Street on the GN&CR so only Highbury & islington, Essex Rd and Moorgate would need to be extended: it could be justifiable if the line is linked with Cannon St as another Crossrail.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--do you know of any lesser known underground lines that were proposed or planned, and in the past was there ever any plans to heavily expand the underground southwards or was it always thought that overland rail could cope.
A few proposals have persisted: Aldwych to Waterloo, Elephant & Castle to Camberwell, Shepherd's Bush (Central) to Turnham Green (thence to Richmond). The Victoria Line was supposed to continue under the A23 to Croydon. South London has always been a bit of a no-no due to the ground: it's waterlogged gravel largely and therefore a ****** to bore through.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--do you reckon the dlr should expand more into south london? like for example after cutty sark having an additional spur towards the greenwich line of southeastern and running along that to abbey wood. then crossrail when built could run all the way to at least slade green. and it would free up more capacity into london bridge. people along that line will still have a central london link, and will have better links to canary wharf, be on the tube map and likely have more tph, coz surely the trains that terminate at canary wharf on the dlr could just be extended that way?
The DLR is only really effective as a local feeder line onto the Tube and NR network: I doubt anyone would seriously change onto it in SE London to travel into the City.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
--i do hope they sort out the southern end of thameslink, the simpler it is the better it will be for customers.

-and finally (for now maybe, lol), what is the likely time frame of the bakerloo to hayes??

cheers tubeman!!
Hayes is planned to be delivered in 2025: but don't hold me to this!
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
london, railways, tube

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium