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 April 28th, 2010, 11:49 PM   #4061
Cherguevara
Registered User
 
Cherguevara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 9,887
Likes (Received): 3547

Quote:
Originally Posted by CairnsTony View Post
Tubeman certainly isn't exaggerating. I remember reading a few years ago how Hackney was in the bottom 5 most economically deprived areas in the entire UK. And that was before the recession.

Don't know what it's like now, but I'm willing to bet that the streets there are not paved with gold.

I grew up in South London (Clapham) before it became 'gentrified' and it was a pretty scary place in those days. London really is an extraordinary mixture of extremely wealthy suburbs and extremely poor ones with every sort in between. It certainly isn't a dull city by any means! Some people love it and others hate it. Approach it with an open mind and see what you think...
The parts of Homerton north of Victoria Park are nice though.
Cherguevara no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 29th, 2010, 12:40 AM   #4062
NCT
Not Cwite There
 
NCT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Shanghai, London, Nottingham
Posts: 6,215
Likes (Received): 1782

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidaiow View Post
Tubeman, that Oyster answer baffles me. I purchase a Monthly which costs me £70 a month (Student) yet One month when I didn't buy one I spent about £90?! Does the cap only apply for the weekly? It's quite interesting to know that though, and that's good to know about the extension too. I'll have to look into that, though you can get to Brighton for £6 (student) day return I think (at least you could!)

I'm looking at living in Hampstead from September, ideally near the overground station, would the best way to get into central be by walking to Hampstead on the Northern line? Or by getting the overground and interchanging? Also how frequent will they be? I've heard 4tph but it would be great to know for sure! (the tfl website can have a little too much information!)
Sorry quoting the same post again.

Responding to your second paragraph - bus routes 24 and 168 take you to town pretty quickly too. Hampstead Heath isn't at all far from central London as AFAIK there aren't any traffic hot spots on these routes into Central London (though TCR where the 24 passes through can be a bit bad). Sorry this is just me being biased towards the buses.
NCT no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2010, 02:00 AM   #4063
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

Sorry if this isn't relevant but I remembered someone mentioning using London Overground around Hackney and I should tell you that it is closed fully Stratford - Gospel Oak until June 2010.

Also, regarding the whole "capacity" thing. My original calculations were comparing trains in London to railways overall, by that I mean that "low capacity" would be a small rural line with 1tph and "high capacity" would be something like the Paris RER. On a city basis i'd say the "low end" would be the GOBLIN line and the "high end" would be Crossrail. With the DLR sitting somewhere in the middle.
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2010, 12:23 PM   #4064
davidaiow
Registered User
 
davidaiow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London E14/Isle of Wight
Posts: 544
Likes (Received): 5

Thanks for the responses guys! The Northern seems like the best bet, but it's certainly good to know about the bus.

Also, shame they don't auto calculate the season tickets!
davidaiow no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 2nd, 2010, 07:16 PM   #4065
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

Tubeman, is there any chance you could copy the post 325 (here) to the front of that thread? I think it'd be a better place for it.
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 2nd, 2010, 08:27 PM   #4066
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Done, a bit more 'all over the place' now but hey...
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2010, 04:54 AM   #4067
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

thanks a lot!
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 4th, 2010, 05:40 AM   #4068
allurban
All Urban
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Toronto, Kuala Lumpur
Posts: 4,348
Likes (Received): 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Oyster pre-pay should always calculate the cheapest ticket for you so you don't need to worry... e.g. as soon as daily usage has exceeded the value of a day travelcard, it'll just deduct that value and no more, likewise once you reach the value of a week travelcard, you won't have any more money deducted for the remainder of that 7 days no matter how much you use it.

Your journeys to Chatham, Dover, Windsor and Brighton are more complicated because they're outside the TfL zones. I assume all routes are partly covered by Oyster prepay (i.e. to the edge of zone 6), so each of these trips I think you need to buy and extension on your Oyster travelcard from the edge of zone 6 to your destination (this should be cheaper than the fare all the way to / from central London).

Please check, because I'm not a ticketing expert (not having had to but one for 13 years! )
Thanks for the information, Tubeman.

Cheers, m
__________________
Follow TRANSIT - the Association for the Improvement of Mass-Transit

w. http://transitmy.org
e. [email protected]
tw. http://twitter.com/transitmy
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/TRANSI...12392362108880
allurban no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2010, 12:21 AM   #4069
Northridge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Oslo
Posts: 640
Likes (Received): 72

Hi.

I Have heard that one of the reason for the low roof inside the train, is because of back in the day people was smaller.. Is it some truth in this? I myself find it a little odd.
Northridge no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2010, 01:04 AM   #4070
WatcherZero
Registered User
 
WatcherZero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,602

Well the average UK male height has gone from 5'5'' when the Underground was built to 5'10'' today.
WatcherZero no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2010, 01:28 AM   #4071
Northridge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Oslo
Posts: 640
Likes (Received): 72

Quote:
Originally Posted by WatcherZero View Post
Well the average UK male height has gone from 5'5'' when the Underground was built to 5'10'' today.
Ok.
What I ment was that I found it strange that is the reason for the low roof, not that the people was smaller. Sorry for my poor english..
Northridge no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2010, 02:51 AM   #4072
streetquark
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 744
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northridge View Post
Ok.
What I ment was that I found it strange that is the reason for the low roof, not that the people was smaller. Sorry for my poor english..
The smaller underground train profile (on the 'tube' lines only, not the Metropolitan line, Hammersmith & Circle lines or district line) is to do with the size of the tunnels. Smaller bored tunnels are much cheaper to build than larger ones.
streetquark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2010, 05:26 AM   #4073
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

Also the technology was experimental and only a few small private companies risked it to build deep level lines. Hence why they cut the costs.
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2010, 11:49 AM   #4074
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by streetquark View Post
The smaller underground train profile (on the 'tube' lines only, not the Metropolitan line, Hammersmith & Circle lines or district line) is to do with the size of the tunnels. Smaller bored tunnels are much cheaper to build than larger ones.
I sort of see what he's getting at; it's more the suggestion that peoples' height was deemed a factor when designing Tube cars (and therefore the tunnels)... I guess it goes without saying that it was... Obviously if it was purely about saving money then we'd have built Post Office Railway bore tunnels fit only for people with extreme dwarfism, likewise if money were no object then tunnels would have been built large enough for surface stock trains (like the Great Northern & City Line).

As it is, a compromise was reached between cost and comfort; even today the vast majority of adults have no issues being 'too tall' for Tube trains, I think you need to be over about 6'2" to need to duck when boarding / alighting and taller than maybe 6'5" not to be able to stand in the middle of a car without stooping.

It follows that when cost v comfort was weighed up, bearing in mind it was over 120 years ago that the City & South London was in planning, the distribution of adult heights was taken into consideration, and the fact that people were significantly shorter 120 years ago would have made the space allowance within the cars pretty generous to the average Londoner.

Whereas today the builders of public transport are obliged by law to be as inclusive and risk averse as possible (step-free access, straight platforms, emergency walkways in tunnels, digitised announcements, dot matrix displays, doors and grab-rails of contrasting colours to car exterior / interior etc), 120 years ago when London started building its Tube lines, they were all purely commercial ventures designed to make money for investors. It would have been poor business sense to propose to build surface stock diameter tunnels and spend twice as much on construction when scaling back tunnel size and compacting car design met the needs for all but a handful of very tall people whilst saving huge amounts in construction cost and time.

The GN&CR was the exception as it was specifically designed and promoted to connect with the GNR at Finsbury Park and take their trains into The City (in reality this was not achieved until 72 years after opening, in 1976, because the lines promoters and the GNR board fell out).
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2010, 05:29 PM   #4075
Pansori
planquadrat
 
Pansori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London - Vilnius
Posts: 9,973
Likes (Received): 6911

I have already asked this elsewhere and received some answers but I will do it here again


1. There was a small discussion in Shanghai metro topic about platform doors. They are used in the Jubilee line in London. Do they add extra time for the train to stop/depart or open/close the doors? Personally I have noticed that it DOES take longer for the doors to open in Jubilee line with glass walls at platforms than elsewhere. If so, wouldn't it be better not to use a glass wall with doors but something like safety fences near the platform edge? It would still improve safety without causing side effects. Why such an option was chosen in Jubilee line? Are there any clear benefits?

2. I have noticed that doors in some trains (e.g. District line) sometimes open very early or even before the train has come to a complete halt. While some other trains (e.g. Central line) usually open doors after a short time lag (let's say, 1-2 s.) after the train has come to a complete halt. That, of course, may look trivial but when looking at the big picture those seconds add up. Is there any technical reason why some trains/lines can open doors earlier than others?

3. In some stretches the DLR trains start to shake... can't remember the precise location but even on a completely straight path it just starts shaking to the sides like crazy. Why is that happening? DLR was built fairly recently and shaking is something one wouldn't expect from a new system. Even the oldest LU lines do not shake like that.
Pansori no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2010, 02:46 PM   #4076
ChrisH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 351
Likes (Received): 12

The reason that DLR trains ‘shake’ from side to side is that the system was built with several very sharp curves, especially around Canary Wharf. To get around these curves, the trains are built with wheels angled at a greater rate than normal. This makes them inherently more unstable (not dangerous though) on straight track. It is a bit difficult when trying to read a newspaper!
ChrisH no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2010, 10:22 PM   #4077
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pansori View Post
I have already asked this elsewhere and received some answers but I will do it here again


1. There was a small discussion in Shanghai metro topic about platform doors. They are used in the Jubilee line in London. Do they add extra time for the train to stop/depart or open/close the doors? Personally I have noticed that it DOES take longer for the doors to open in Jubilee line with glass walls at platforms than elsewhere. If so, wouldn't it be better not to use a glass wall with doors but something like safety fences near the platform edge? It would still improve safety without causing side effects. Why such an option was chosen in Jubilee line? Are there any clear benefits?
Yes, it does take a fraction longer. There's also the risk on the still-manually driven Jubilee of over-running the alignment with the PEDs which leads to either having to be authorised to 'set back' (i.e. drive backwards a short distance), or just carrying on to the next station without opening the doors. Without PEDs the driver can cut out the leading doors if they've over-run a bit, so more margin for error and less chance of delay.

Regarding 'safety fences', they either have gaps aligning with doors and therefore do nothing to prevent anything but some purely accidental falls onto the track, or they too have doors which open in unison with train doors, and as such would be prone to the same delay.

PEDS are basically a 'nice to have'... Unless every platform on an entire network has them they do nothing to prevent suicide (because people just go to wherever there aren't any), but where they are present they of course prevent any customers accidentally falling onto the track. Another benefit is preventing litter from blowing off platforms and down tunnels, causing track fires. I certainly don't think they're 'worth it'; the Jubilee Line extension was built to a very high spec unlikely ever to be repeated again... Crossrail is being cheapened by the day... For all the expense and added risk of technical failure, they don't add too much in terms of risk prevention.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pansori View Post
2. I have noticed that doors in some trains (e.g. District line) sometimes open very early or even before the train has come to a complete halt. While some other trains (e.g. Central line) usually open doors after a short time lag (let's say, 1-2 s.) after the train has come to a complete halt. That, of course, may look trivial but when looking at the big picture those seconds add up. Is there any technical reason why some trains/lines can open doors earlier than others?
Yes... Once upon a time there was nothing preventing train doors from being opened at any time... When I was a Guard on the Northern Line 1959 stocks 13 years ago, you could merrily open your doors anytime, anywhere... clearly potentially not very safe! The only nod to health & safety was the fact you needed to depress 2 'open' buttons on the Guard's panel simultaneously, and they were protected by 'collars' so you certainly couldn't open the doors by accident. Until the Mid-1980's generally all LU trains were 'crew operated' (i.e. a driver [= 'Motorman'] + a Guard), and when lines started 'going OPO' (One Person Operated) a stipulation was that there would be some mechanism to prevent drivers from inadvertently opening the doors, recognition of the fact that while you could get away with it with guards, as that was their sole job, it was too risky once drivers were doing 2 people's jobs.

The answer was ultimately threefold:

1) The 'Forward wire' being linked to the 'Doors closed circuit' ('Pilot Light'), this basically prevented the driver from motoring with the doors open

2) An induction loop near the stopping mark on every platform and a corresponding sensor on the train, preventing the doors from being opened if the train was not 'fully berthed' in the platform, stationary between stations, or on the wrong side of the train. This is called 'CSDE' (Correct side door enable).

3) The 'doors open' buttons being linked to 'Speed sensing'... 'Speed sensing' was introduced to prevent a driver from exceeding a slow speed (7mph) for three minutes after the train has been 'tripped', usually caused by passing a red signal. This is designed to reduce the risk of a crash after a signal is passed at danger; named 'SCAT' (Speed control after tripping). A side benefit was the ability to link the door open buttons to 'Speed sensing', meaning the doors cannot be opened if the train is travelling at more than 7mph.

The above were all modifications to existing rolling stock, bolt-ons to existing circuits to improve safety, and as such a little quirk is that on older stocks where the door open buttons are linked to the 7mph 'Speed sensing' associated with 'SCAT', the driver can open the doors while the train is still in motion, albeit not going very fast. Referring back to 'CSDE' however, the train must also be within the limits of the induction loop on the platform and travelling at less than 7mph for the driver to be able to open the doors. You will therefore sometimes find the doors opening while the train comes to a halt on the Subsurface, Piccadilly, Victoria, and Bakerloo Lines if the driver's a bit 'keen'.

The three newer stocks (Central, Northern & Jubilee) Might be set up differently and the train must be stationary for the doors to be opened, but I'm not 100% on that... It would seem odd if this wasn't a design feature.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pansori View Post
3. In some stretches the DLR trains start to shake... can't remember the precise location but even on a completely straight path it just starts shaking to the sides like crazy. Why is that happening? DLR was built fairly recently and shaking is something one wouldn't expect from a new system. Even the oldest LU lines do not shake like that.
Chris H has already given you the Wikipedia answer which if I'm honest I don't fully understand. The sensation you're referring to is called 'sideplay', and is an oscillation which materialises on faster stretches of straight track.

I'd speculate it's because the two axles on each bogey are not rigidly parallel, but capable of some degree of movement in relation to one another to more easily negotiate tight curves. I guess a natural gentle rocking of the car bodies as the train picks up speed along straight track is transferred to the bogey, which are able to mimic and exaggerate this lateral motion because the slight articulation of each bogey allows the bogeys to similarly move very slightly laterally. This in turn causes the car bodies above to sway more violently, which in turn causes the bogeys to move more violently laterally... so it's a vicious circle. To make matters worse, as each train will enter the same pattern of oscillation in the same manner because they are being driven automatically so will almost invariably be travelling at the same speed, the railhead itself can begin to be warped by each train's sideplay. This can lead to 'corrugated' railhead which can actually guide the bogeys into lateral motion and make matters even worse. The only remedy is to periodically grind the railhead smooth, but the corrugation will invariably return.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2010, 10:35 PM   #4078
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Chris H has already given you the Wikipedia answer which if I'm honest I don't fully understand. The sensation you're referring to is called 'sideplay', and is an oscillation which materialises on faster stretches of straight track.

I'd speculate it's because the two axles on each bogey are not rigidly parallel, but capable of some degree of movement in relation to one another to more easily negotiate tight curves. I guess a natural gentle rocking of the car bodies as the train picks up speed along straight track is transferred to the bogey, which are able to mimic and exaggerate this lateral motion because the slight articulation of each bogey allows the bogeys to similarly move very slightly laterally. This in turn causes the car bodies above to sway more violently, which in turn causes the bogeys to move more violently laterally... so it's a vicious circle. To make matters worse, as each train will enter the same pattern of oscillation in the same manner because they are being driven automatically so will almost invariably be travelling at the same speed, the railhead itself can begin to be warped by each train's sideplay. This can lead to 'corrugated' railhead which can actually guide the bogeys into lateral motion and make matters even worse. The only remedy is to periodically grind the railhead smooth, but the corrugation will invariably return.
That is most correct tubeman. It is also something that can be experienced on tram/light rail systems operating at higher speeds for the very same reason. The C class in Melbourne on the 109 line being a prime example.
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2010, 11:47 PM   #4079
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajw373 View Post
That is most correct tubeman. It is also something that can be experienced on tram/light rail systems operating at higher speeds for the very same reason. The C class in Melbourne on the 109 line being a prime example.
Glad I wasn't talking out of my a***
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 18th, 2010, 04:26 AM   #4080
particlez
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 106

psst, remember the discussion around PSDs?

..

Last edited by particlez; May 18th, 2010 at 04:27 AM. Reason: wrong thread
particlez está en línea ahora   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 06:36 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