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 28th, 2007, 03:23 PM   #2101
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

And there isn't a steep gradient between Farringdon and City Thameslink, there's one just north of Farringdon, and one just north of Blackfriars too, though.
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 28th, 2007, 03:59 PM   #2102
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
I really don't like how the idea of District to Uxbridge/Rayner's Lane keeps coming up. The along that branch already long with the Piccadilly, and letting the District take it over would lead to even longer journey times on this already quite unpopular line.
actually, it wouldn't. Also the bigger trains would make the extra minute or two getting to Earl's Court more bearable. With S stock, this will be even better.

Anyway, unless they find more trains for the Piccadilly, it's going to end up happening (with the Piccadilly going to Ealing Broadway).
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 04:43 PM   #2103
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
actually, it wouldn't. Also the bigger trains would make the extra minute or two getting to Earl's Court more bearable. With S stock, this will be even better.

Anyway, unless they find more trains for the Piccadilly, it's going to end up happening (with the Piccadilly going to Ealing Broadway).
I really hope this won't happen!
The Piccadilly takes these people straight into the West End, while the district doesn't really take them anywhere useful. Plus it'd add an extra 4 minutes. I really don't see why anyone would like to take a District line all the way from Uxbridge or Rayners Lane to the city.
The Piccadilly line is getting new trains in a few years and the Met frequency on the Uxbridge branch is being upgraded when the S-stock comes. I think it may be more likely to have all Picc. trains terminate at Rayners Lane instead of 3tph going further to Uxbridge.

It makes sense to have the longest branch run express trains to speed up these trains. Do you think they'd ever run the Jubilee non-stop from Wembley Park to Baker Street and let the Metroplitan handle all those stops? Or stopping trains to/from Heathrow instead of Richmond/Ealing?
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 05:39 PM   #2104
cle
Registered User
 
cle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,096
Likes (Received): 524

This is a tricky part of the network. The passenger traffic isn't likely to increase massively on this line - I think a lot of people in these areas use other means to get to employment, which often out there isn't in Central London.

On the other hand, there are so many more people working at Chiswick Park business park, Gunnersbury is rammed at peak hours. Turnham Green is also very busy.

One way this would work would be to carry out the Central/Piccadilly interchange at Park Royal - anyone from Alperton/Sudburys/South Harrow could change there. Much quicker into West End, City and also White City Westfield - which will be a big employer as well as customer attraction.

I think the Richmond branch requires more attention than the Ealing, due to increasing traffic and Ealing having the Central Line already.

The above plans only leave North Ealing (tiny ridership and close to other stations) with a poor service, as Chiswick Park would have both lines of District.

A Bollo Lane interchange with the Picc/Dist and Overground would be very useful too - but I also strongly believe in a Turnham Green Picc stop. Both would add a few minutes on to LHR journeys, but I think would be worth it.
cle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 06:15 PM   #2105
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

An interchange with the Central at Park Royal would be very useful, but wouldn't it overcrowd a busy line even further, like adding an interchange with the Overground at Shoreditch would too?
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 07:40 PM   #2106
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
An interchange with the Central at Park Royal would be very useful, but wouldn't it overcrowd a busy line even further, like adding an interchange with the Overground at Shoreditch would too?
Post-Crossrail the Central Line should be able to handle those two extra interchanges, I think.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 09:24 PM   #2107
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by ADCS View Post
I've got a quick one, might be a rehash, but anyway... have you ever gotten stuck in a tunnel and had to evacuate the train? If so, what was it like? How did the passengers react?
I never had the pleasure as either a driver or an incident manager... It's not very common to be honest. I've been involved in detrainments through trains before, e.g. if the train in front isn't going anywhere and is in a platform then the train behind is instructed to trip past the signals at danger and draw up to the train in front. Passengers can then just walk through the cabs and use the train in front as a walking route to the next station: far safer.

Detrainment down the track requires lots of staff to count passengers off the train and onto the platform, and has lots of hazards... It's a real last resort. Generally when it does happen, passengers are pretty excited and usually simply glad to be off the train they had no doubt been stuck on for at least half an hour.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 09:45 PM   #2108
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
That's a much better idea than mine! They should also throw in a station on the London Overground for interchange with the Piccadilly, passengers could get to Heathrow and avoid Central London.
A flying junction could be created using the diveunder abandoned in the 1960's which used to take freight trains ex-North London Line / Acton Curve onto the District line to serve goods yards at West kensington and High Street Kensington. Using this existing (albeit overgrown) infrastructure the Richmond Branch of the Piccadilly Line could diverge between the existing Piccadilly tracks and dive under the westbound District and Picc roads before joining the current District Line alignment to Gunnersbury.

It will make the well-used Richmond branch more attractive with faster trains into London.

I think a LOROL interchange would be a bit tricky: the LU and LOROL lines cross in the middle of an industrial estate and so you'd probably have to sacrifice a better-located station at Chiswick Park for a new station in the middle of nowhere for the sake of an interchange.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
What are they? And why can't LU simply add signals to increase capacity, why do they need all the malarky of installing ATO and bringing new stock etc.
They are running signals with an associated timing section approaching them: they will not clear unless the train checks its speed down to a prescribed level. This reduces its braking distance and therefore allows it to be closer to the train in front. It's almost the same principle as 'Draw-up' signals which are fairly common across LU: anywhere where tracks converge just beyond the platform (e.g. Earl's Court, Edgware Road, Whitechapel, Baker Street etc) there is a 'Draw-up' signal halfway down the platform road which ensures the driver checks their speed down on approach to the station 'Starter' signal at the end of the platform. If there was no draw-up then a train could potentially run through the platform at full speed and crash into a train on a converging route beyond the platform.

The approach / speed controlled signals were installed in groups approaching stations in the 1930's and allowed trains to crawl right up to the rear of a train in front dwelling in a platform, just like ATO. The only remaining example I can personally vouch for is approaching Kennington Bank southbound where three or four speed controlled 'home' signals allow you to draw up to what feels like touching distance away from the train ahead in the platform.

As I said, they were removed due to lack of necessity (at the time) and the fact that having so many signals increased the chances of signal failures and cost more in maintenance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
Also: Do you think Thameslink will ever get rebranded as Crossrail 2?
Not while those charlatans 'First' are running them... possibly 'First capital Crossrail First 2... First'
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 09:50 PM   #2109
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
I really don't like how the idea of District to Uxbridge/Rayner's Lane keeps coming up. The along that branch already long with the Piccadilly, and letting the District take it over would lead to even longer journey times on this already quite unpopular line.
They could get a more frequent and reliable service with cross-platform interchange with the Picc at Acton, Turnham Green and Hammersmith (assuming my Picc diversion to Richmond in exchange for the District diversion to Uxbridge took place). Plus roomier air conditioned S Stocks, plus the platforms could be made the same height as the trains.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 09:52 PM   #2110
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by kegan View Post
I think Thameslink is going to upgraded for 12 car trains. I seem to remember something about platform extensions at Farringdon being the reason that the Thameslink Moorgate branch will close (platform extended over junction site).
Correct

Quote:
Originally Posted by kegan View Post
Anyway, Tubeman I've got a question:

- Now that the Watford DC line is part of the Overground, will TfL move the stations north of Hatch End in to zone A to be consistent with the Metropolitan line?
Sweek just answered that question far better than I could have done!
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 10:01 PM   #2111
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, sorry, but another question! How come the Piccadilly and Northern lines both have full size central halls with the escalators at grade with the platforms, even though they were both built before escalators even existed? And C&SLR and Yerkes stations all used lifts and had a twin-tube station design?
A lot of them have been significantly rebuilt to accommodate escalators. All of the lesser-used (and even some pretty busy) stations such as Holloway and Caledonian Road, Hyde park Corner, Chalk farm, Tufnell Park, Borough, Elephant & Castle, Covent Garden, Goodge Street etc all retain their original layout with lifts.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 10:11 PM   #2112
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
I really hope this won't happen!
The Piccadilly takes these people straight into the West End, while the district doesn't really take them anywhere useful.
Apart from direct to Victoria, Embankment and The City?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
Plus it'd add an extra 4 minutes. I really don't see why anyone would like to take a District line all the way from Uxbridge or Rayners Lane to the city.
Anyone living between Uxbridge and Rayners Lane would no doubt take the Met line if they were travelling to The City. Someone living in, say, Alperton or Sudbury would be able to take a direct District service to The City instead of having to change at Holborn for the Central Line (for example).

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
The Piccadilly line is getting new trains in a few years and the Met frequency on the Uxbridge branch is being upgraded when the S-stock comes. I think it may be more likely to have all Picc. trains terminate at Rayners Lane instead of 3tph going further to Uxbridge.
My main motivation for diverting the District to Uxbridge and Piccadilly to Richmond is to allow complete segregation between the lines and remove the last example of stocks with vastly different floor heights calling at the same platforms routinely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
It makes sense to have the longest branch run express trains to speed up these trains. Do you think they'd ever run the Jubilee non-stop from Wembley Park to Baker Street and let the Metroplitan handle all those stops? Or stopping trains to/from Heathrow instead of Richmond/Ealing?
In general you're right, but if the longer branch is lightly used and the shorter branch heavily used I think the opposite is the case, especially if there decent cross-platform interchanges between fast and slow (as there are between District and Picc).
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2007, 11:28 PM   #2113
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Thanks for the reply, Tubeman. I agree with most of it, and can see the good reasons for segregating these two lines entirely. My basic point here is this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Anyone living between Uxbridge and Rayners Lane would no doubt take the Met line if they were travelling to The City. Someone living in, say, Alperton or Sudbury would be able to take a direct District service to The City instead of having to change at Holborn for the Central Line (for example).
If the District (formerly Picc) trains along the Uxbridge branch would be slower to the City and not go to the West End anymore, how much use is there left for trains running between Rayners Lane and Uxbridge alongside the Met?
I used to live in this area and hardly ever used the Piccadilly in the first place. The only times it would be useful was if you wanted to go to the West End and were a little bit too lazy (or drunk) to change trains. If these trains became District Line trains, stopped at more stops, and the only important destinations along the route were Victoria station and maybe Hammersmith, I think no one west of Rayners Lane would use the service anymore.

About trains from - say Sudbury - straight to the City. Many of the suburbs in this area are also close to Central Line stations along the West Ruislip branch, and if it's possible these people would probably go to a Central Line station nearby for fast trains to the City if that was their destination. Even more so if the Park Royal Cenrral/Picc. interchange would be built.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 29th, 2007, 12:23 AM   #2114
PresidentBjork
In the bog.
 
PresidentBjork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,863
Likes (Received): 3422

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Probably a 'Sandite' train for leaf fall season: the outer stretches of the Met are bad for leaf pulp and 'Sandite' trains are usually old multiple units converted for the task. They spreas a sand mixture on the railhead to improve adhesion.
Much appreciated.
__________________
💩
PresidentBjork no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 29th, 2007, 01:09 AM   #2115
Acemcbuller
Lifelong Londoner
 
Acemcbuller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London
Posts: 204
Likes (Received): 0

Hi Tubeman

I hate looking out train windows and seeing so much material laying at the side of the track. Could it not be collected and sold for scrap or reused?
I suppose its not economical, but it would be nice to see less going to waste and not so much rubbish.
Any thoughts?

James
Acemcbuller no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 29th, 2007, 12:10 PM   #2116
cle
Registered User
 
cle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,096
Likes (Received): 524

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
Thanks for the reply, Tubeman. I agree with most of it, and can see the good reasons for segregating these two lines entirely. My basic point here is this:


If the District (formerly Picc) trains along the Uxbridge branch would be slower to the City and not go to the West End anymore, how much use is there left for trains running between Rayners Lane and Uxbridge alongside the Met?
I used to live in this area and hardly ever used the Piccadilly in the first place. The only times it would be useful was if you wanted to go to the West End and were a little bit too lazy (or drunk) to change trains. If these trains became District Line trains, stopped at more stops, and the only important destinations along the route were Victoria station and maybe Hammersmith, I think no one west of Rayners Lane would use the service anymore.

About trains from - say Sudbury - straight to the City. Many of the suburbs in this area are also close to Central Line stations along the West Ruislip branch, and if it's possible these people would probably go to a Central Line station nearby for fast trains to the City if that was their destination. Even more so if the Park Royal Cenrral/Picc. interchange would be built.
I think it would be a good idea to terminate all trains at Rayners Lane outside of peak hours - it could provide more units on the core bits (extra services to High St Ken and back?) and as you've said, no-one beyond South Harrow would use this except for local journeys.

Better interchanges with the Chiltern lines (and better service), and the Park Royal interchange would maybe attract more customers.
cle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 29th, 2007, 05:52 PM   #2117
Brilliant
Hmmmm Bacon
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 1,758
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Hi Tubeman

I hate looking out train windows and seeing so much material laying at the side of the track. Could it not be collected and sold for scrap or reused?
I suppose its not economical, but it would be nice to see less going to waste and not so much rubbish.
Any thoughts?
Exactly my feelings too, it is a real nuisance. I understand if the railways have more important things on their mind, but I could imagine, cleaning up the land next to the tracks would give it a better image.
Brilliant no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 30th, 2007, 11:59 AM   #2118
sarflonlad
Registered User
 
sarflonlad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,086
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
Just because I happen to know this; TfL is getting rid of zones A-D and transferring them to 7, 8 and 9.

Carpenders Park is in 7
Bushey and Watford High St. are in 8
Watford Junction may still be outside the zones.
Amersham and Chesham are in zone 9
Chalfont and Latimer is in 8
Chorleywood to Moor Park are in 7 (Moor Park in 6/7)
Will there be zones 7, 8 and 9 south of the river?
sarflonlad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 30th, 2007, 03:18 PM   #2119
Martin S
Registered User
 
Martin S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,235
Likes (Received): 3156

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brilliant View Post
Exactly my feelings too, it is a real nuisance. I understand if the railways have more important things on their mind, but I could imagine, cleaning up the land next to the tracks would give it a better image.
Back in the 80s this was seen as a very important matter following an accident caused by vandals placing a section of rail across the track. There was an operation to pick up materials such as concrete sleepers or rail offcuts and contractors were advised to bale all materials and store them in secure areas or well away from the lineside.

Unfortunately, it seems like the lesson will have to be learned again.
__________________
Martin S no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 30th, 2007, 09:56 PM   #2120
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acemcbuller View Post
Hi Tubeman

I hate looking out train windows and seeing so much material laying at the side of the track. Could it not be collected and sold for scrap or reused?
I suppose its not economical, but it would be nice to see less going to waste and not so much rubbish.
Any thoughts?

James
Yeah there's a lot of scrap lying about, but a lot of it is good rail waiting to be installed, at least it is on LU. It can be left in situ for sometimes years waiting to be used for re-railing. It looks shitty and old because its rusty, but once installed the railhead becomes smooth and shiny.

There is far too much general railway detritus left about though... Fact is it costs nothing for it to just sit there rusting, but it costs to have it removed so it generally just sits there.
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 06:38 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