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 May 22nd, 2011, 05:36 AM   #4541
leverarch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 67
Likes (Received): 9

Hi Tubeman

My question is about Oyster charging...

I live close to Highbury & Islington and used to work at Moorfields. To add some variety to my daily journey, I'd alternate between getting the 43/271 buses from Highbury Corner to Old Street or taking the Victoria Line to King's Cross and then the Northern Line to Old Street, or getting the FCC service directly from H&I to Old Street (if anyone is wondering, the 271 usually works out the fastest but all of these routes take ~15 mins on a good day!).

What I can't work out is how the Oyster system distinguishes between the H&I-KX-Old Street journey and the FCC journey since both involve touching in at H&I and touching out at Old Street! The only way I can imagine is basing it on the journey time... although since the FCC trains are every 5 mins or so and often late, its sometimes quicker to go via King's Cross, especially if you get on the front carriage of the Victoria Line train, exit straight out of the KX platform and leg it down the escalators to the Northern line platform! Occasionally I would be charged the extortionate £4 for the five min FCC journey, but usually it'd cost the normal zone 2-1 fare (£1.50ish back then) if I was using PAYG. It always seemed quite random, so usually I took the bus to avoid incurring a small fortune! This was a few years ago now, before National Rail stations started using Oyster. Looking at the TFL website it seems that both journeys would cost £2.50/£1.90 peak/off-peak so they might not care about this little anomaly!

Are there any other examples where a National Rail journey and a tube journey start/end at the same stations and take a similar time, and do you know how Oyster works out which you have done? One possible example I can think of is Kentish Town to Farringdon, although I've never done this so have no idea if you'd use the same barriers for the tube and thameslink trains!

Last edited by leverarch; May 22nd, 2011 at 06:04 AM.
leverarch no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 22nd, 2011, 11:26 AM   #4542
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by leverarch View Post
Hi Tubeman

My question is about Oyster charging...

I live close to Highbury & Islington and used to work at Moorfields. To add some variety to my daily journey, I'd alternate between getting the 43/271 buses from Highbury Corner to Old Street or taking the Victoria Line to King's Cross and then the Northern Line to Old Street, or getting the FCC service directly from H&I to Old Street (if anyone is wondering, the 271 usually works out the fastest but all of these routes take ~15 mins on a good day!).

What I can't work out is how the Oyster system distinguishes between the H&I-KX-Old Street journey and the FCC journey since both involve touching in at H&I and touching out at Old Street! The only way I can imagine is basing it on the journey time... although since the FCC trains are every 5 mins or so and often late, its sometimes quicker to go via King's Cross, especially if you get on the front carriage of the Victoria Line train, exit straight out of the KX platform and leg it down the escalators to the Northern line platform! Occasionally I would be charged the extortionate £4 for the five min FCC journey, but usually it'd cost the normal zone 2-1 fare (£1.50ish back then) if I was using PAYG. It always seemed quite random, so usually I took the bus to avoid incurring a small fortune! This was a few years ago now, before National Rail stations started using Oyster. Looking at the TFL website it seems that both journeys would cost £2.50/£1.90 peak/off-peak so they might not care about this little anomaly!

Are there any other examples where a National Rail journey and a tube journey start/end at the same stations and take a similar time, and do you know how Oyster works out which you have done? One possible example I can think of is Kentish Town to Farringdon, although I've never done this so have no idea if you'd use the same barriers for the tube and thameslink trains!
Interesting question... Truthful answer is, I don't know.

It certainly isn't the case that bean-counters somewhere are totalling up every single journey to decide how much LU owes the NR TOCs on these ambiguous journeys, there'd simply be an agreement between the two. A simple example would be Barking - Upminster, where LU and NR are parallel. I guess there's a presumption that most journeys are by C2C as it's quicker, but some are by LU, so there would be an agreement of maybe 3:1 revenue split for this journey. I expect any journey that can be reasonably be made by either LU, NR, or a combination of both, will have to have a similar agreement (like yours).

Deciding on the split of revenue would be informed by surveys of customer behaviour... Oytser data isn't sophisticated enough, so it would be through actual surveys.

Kentish Town to Farringdon is a good example, although the last time I passed through Kentish Town even though there was one station entrance, the Oyster gateline guarded LU revenue only. I don;t know if this has since changed, or if there's just an Oyster validator for NR customers... In this case the distinction could be made whether a customer boarded NR or LU.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2011, 11:43 AM   #4543
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by mayflower232 View Post
Why is this not the case on the central line?
What makes you say that? I don't know the 1992 Stock very well, but I'd be certain they have batteries which power emergency lighting in the event of loss of current... this would be a basic requirement.

To expand slightly on my comment about car lights going out passing over (current) rail gaps / pointwork, depending on the equipment on that train stock and its location on the train, you'll witness different effects.

I'll pick out the District D Stock, as it's the stock I know the most intimately. Each 6 car train is made of 2 x 3 car units coupled together... each 3 car unit can be nominally worked as a separate train, but the majority of units don't have a middle drivers cab, just a cabinet with shunting controls in the middle.

Each 3 car unit has a motor car at each end with a trailer car in the middle. The motor cars have current collection shoes and traction motors, whereas the trailer car does not. In addition to traction motors, the motor cars also have MAs, or 'Motor Alternators'... These transform and rectify the 630V DC traction current into 110V AC for the strip lights and 50V DC for the power & control circuits... You can hear them running, they make the high-pitched whining / humming noise.

To stop all the lights going out over rail gaps, rather than the MA at one end supplying all of that car's lights, and the one at the other all of the other car's lights, each MA instead supplies the lights of one side of that 3-car unit. So what you'd observe, sitting in a motor car, as the train passes over a simple rail gap is firstly the lights down one side of the car going out (except the two or so backed up by battery power), followed 3 car lengths later by the lights down the other side going out (again except for the 2 or so with battery back up). As the car you're sat in passes over the gap, assuming it's a motor car, you'll also hear the whine of the MAs tail off then pick up again, in tandem with half the lights blinking off then back on.

This, or variations thereof, would be common to all DC EMUs let alone all LU stocks I presume.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2011, 08:17 PM   #4544
ill tonkso
Portsmouths Finest, Maybe
 
ill tonkso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St. Neots
Posts: 16,444
Likes (Received): 2057

It is noticible on my commute into work when my train joins the Southwest Mainline from the Portsmouth Direct Line at Woking.
ill tonkso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2011, 08:36 PM   #4545
mr_jrt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,529
Likes (Received): 98

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Hmmm... The Canonbury Curve was recently lifted then restored to renew the track, not really analogous with the 3rd rail being ripped up on the NLL which was supposed to be permanent.
Ah, fair point. Bad example then. Still feel that it's no big deal to restore the removed DC equipment though.

Quote:
The current configuration between H&I and Camden Rd sees a pair of 'up' and a pair of 'down' roads, not goods to the north and passenger to the south like before (up/down/up/down). The two middle roads are passenger, the two outer roads are effectively very long goods loops (hence Caledonian Rd & Barnsbury was recently reconfigured from having side platforms flanking the southern tracks to a single island platform between the central passenger roads).
Again, my bad. I must've misread the planned layout and just stuck with the wrong idea. Given that layout though, it seems a waste to have not built a diveunder at Dalston West Junction to either bring the ELL up between the NLL tracks or if they were the outer pair, to take the eastbound ELL under the NLL. You might also then have an argument for rebuilding the platforms at each station as a pair of islands, greatly reducing the confusion passengers have about which platform the next train will leave from.

Given there is no scope for a flyover or diveunder at Camden Road though, that would have to be the limit of the ELL (unless you accept the flat junctions and pinch points), so I still believe segregating the two as an extension of the alignments at H&I and Canonbury would be far preferable.

Thanks for the corrections
mr_jrt está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2011, 10:11 PM   #4546
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

I guess the biggest drawback at present is interchange between the NLL and ELL at H&I or Canonbury... Unless you're going from the westbound NLL to the southbound ELL (e.g. Hackney to Hoxton), it involves stairs.

That being said, it's not like the 'Extended Circle' line where a journey from Notting Hill Gate to Baker Street involves a change that never used to be necessary... With the ELLE, passengers living on the NLL now have far more journey options thanks to the ELL interchange, so I guess no-one's complaining.

As you surmise, without flyovers / diveunders at each end, you'll never achieve the ideal layout of up/up/down/down... but the stations aren't configured to facilitate this anyway, as they were all originally built with platforms to the north and south of the four tracks, with a central island... for cross-platform interchange you'd need two islands (e.g. like Hammersmith, Finchley Road, etc).

The entire quadruple-track section of the NLL (once Camden Road West Junction all the way to Broad Street) was laid out with the original southern (No.2) lines and later northern (No.1) lines as two independent parallel double track routes (i.e. up/down/up/down). The No.2 lines were electrified and carried the DC passenger trains to Watford Junction, Croxley Green, Rickmansworth Church Street, Richmond, Kew Bridge, while the No.1 lines were unelectrified and carried predominantly goods between Camden Road and Canonbury, where diesel suburban services ex-ECML and the Hertford Loop joined via the Canonbury Curve, and then over the No.1 lines to Broad Street. The latter services were electrified and diverted down the GNCR at Finsbury Park after 1976, leading to the No.1 lines between Canonbury and Broad Street being abandoned.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2011, 04:59 PM   #4547
MiaM
Registered User
 
MiaM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 280
Likes (Received): 85

Regarding the question about lights going out or not at current gaps:

I don't know any technical details about LU stock, but I assume that Central Line 92 stock is modern enough to have electronic converters instead of motor alternators. When doing such stuf with solid state electronics it's probably not any easier/better to generate AC at the converter for lights. I assume that instead all lights are powered at battery voltage, thus the lights won't go out at current gaps. There is probably some automatic stuff that switches off all but a few lights if power to the train is lost for a longer period, and there is probably also a way for the driver to turn off most of the lights directly if he/she is told that the traction current is going to be switched off for a relaitve long time.

Comparision:
On mainline stock in Sweden there haven't been any coaches buildt without battery backup for all lights since the 1950's. I'm not sure how it was on old underground stock in Stockholm. On the trams in Gothenburg atleast those buildt in the early 60's had battery power for all lights. (Side note: We still have trams from late 60's and early 70's in service, many of those has been upgraded with strip lights, earlier they had regular lights bulbs that looked like those you have in a household, but 24V instead of 220-240V. People who worked at the tramway told stories that sometimes somebody had stolen a light bulb, and they were probably rather surprised when they found out the hard way that the bulb didn't work in their lamps at home )...

Timelime comparision, sort of:
The oldes tram stock in service in Gothenburg is buildt mid-late 60's and have motor alternators. The second olders stock in service is buildt in early 70's and have electronic converters to feed the 24V DC system.
MiaM no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2011, 08:01 PM   #4548
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by MiaM View Post
Regarding the question about lights going out or not at current gaps:

I don't know any technical details about LU stock, but I assume that Central Line 92 stock is modern enough to have electronic converters instead of motor alternators. When doing such stuf with solid state electronics it's probably not any easier/better to generate AC at the converter for lights. I assume that instead all lights are powered at battery voltage, thus the lights won't go out at current gaps. There is probably some automatic stuff that switches off all but a few lights if power to the train is lost for a longer period, and there is probably also a way for the driver to turn off most of the lights directly if he/she is told that the traction current is going to be switched off for a relaitve long time.

Comparision:
On mainline stock in Sweden there haven't been any coaches buildt without battery backup for all lights since the 1950's. I'm not sure how it was on old underground stock in Stockholm. On the trams in Gothenburg atleast those buildt in the early 60's had battery power for all lights. (Side note: We still have trams from late 60's and early 70's in service, many of those has been upgraded with strip lights, earlier they had regular lights bulbs that looked like those you have in a household, but 24V instead of 220-240V. People who worked at the tramway told stories that sometimes somebody had stolen a light bulb, and they were probably rather surprised when they found out the hard way that the bulb didn't work in their lamps at home )...

Timelime comparision, sort of:
The oldes tram stock in service in Gothenburg is buildt mid-late 60's and have motor alternators. The second olders stock in service is buildt in early 70's and have electronic converters to feed the 24V DC system.
But what happens when the traction current goes off?!

There must be a back-up independent of traction current, otherwise in the event of a power failure you could have a train stuck in a tunnel between stations deep underground with no lights, no public address from the driver, no radio communication with control... I simply cannot see how any EMU could be built without a battery back-up power supply.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2011, 02:22 AM   #4549
MiaM
Registered User
 
MiaM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 280
Likes (Received): 85

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
But what happens when the traction current goes off?!

There must be a back-up independent of traction current, otherwise in the event of a power failure you could have a train stuck in a tunnel between stations deep underground with no lights, no public address from the driver, no radio communication with control... I simply cannot see how any EMU could be built without a battery back-up power supply.
In this case everything except traction motors are powered from battery voltage/power, and of course the batteries are constantly held at maximum charge as long as traction power is available. Sorry if I were unclear in my previous post.

(Think of it like if you would have a car battery charger, a car battery and 12V lamps at home, sort of).

Sidenote:
Now I'm on thin ice but AFAIK some wehicles can even run the traction motors (at a very low speed/power) from the batteries. I believe this is the case for the underground EMU type C20 in Stockholm, but I may be wrong. I also believe that this is the case for some trolley buses, that way you don't have to install trolley power wires for everey possible driving path in the depot e.t.c..
MiaM no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2011, 09:25 AM   #4550
mayflower232
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 296
Likes (Received): 25

After the 7/7 bombings, what happen to the trains which were damaged?
mayflower232 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2011, 08:13 PM   #4551
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by mayflower232 View Post
After the 7/7 bombings, what happen to the trains which were damaged?
All three were repaired and returned to service as far as I'm aware, bear in mind the damage was pretty much localised to one portion of one car of each train.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2011, 08:31 PM   #4552
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by MiaM View Post
In this case everything except traction motors are powered from battery voltage/power, and of course the batteries are constantly held at maximum charge as long as traction power is available. Sorry if I were unclear in my previous post.

(Think of it like if you would have a car battery charger, a car battery and 12V lamps at home, sort of).

Sidenote:
Now I'm on thin ice but AFAIK some wehicles can even run the traction motors (at a very low speed/power) from the batteries. I believe this is the case for the underground EMU type C20 in Stockholm, but I may be wrong. I also believe that this is the case for some trolley buses, that way you don't have to install trolley power wires for everey possible driving path in the depot e.t.c..
We have battery locos for engineering works which can run off battery power at low speed for short periods, so I guess that isn't beyond the realms of possibility, but our battery locos are pretty much batteries and nothing else, and are still very limited in terms of running off battery power. The cost/benefit can't be compelling for a standard EMU as you're constantly carrying a huge weight around on the off chance the current goes off for a significant period of time.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2011, 04:03 PM   #4553
Tyson
Registered User
 
Tyson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,617
Likes (Received): 463

New to London so this question might have been asked/answered before:

On the Northern Line I have noticed that some (all?) of the cars in the train have wipers on the windows between the cars. Why is this? Especially since I have never seen them operating even when it's raining.
__________________
"History will be kind to me for I intend to write it."
- Winston Churchill
Tyson está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2011, 02:34 PM   #4554
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyson View Post
New to London so this question might have been asked/answered before:

On the Northern Line I have noticed that some (all?) of the cars in the train have wipers on the windows between the cars. Why is this? Especially since I have never seen them operating even when it's raining.
That is because the Jubile line trains are made up of either 3 or 4 car units. (originally all were 3 car). So where the separate units join you will find wipers and inside a set of controls behind a panel. This allows the train to split and be driven from this point. Clearly this is only done in the depot and not in service.
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 30th, 2011, 06:36 PM   #4555
MiaM
Registered User
 
MiaM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 280
Likes (Received): 85

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
We have battery locos for engineering works which can run off battery power at low speed for short periods, so I guess that isn't beyond the realms of possibility, but our battery locos are pretty much batteries and nothing else, and are still very limited in terms of running off battery power. The cost/benefit can't be compelling for a standard EMU as you're constantly carrying a huge weight around on the off chance the current goes off for a significant period of time.
You need the batteries anyway to be able to have some lights, PA, radio/communication e.t.c. working for a while if the traction power is lost.

In this case it's more of making a choice between having all that for an hour or two, or be able to run the EMU a few hundred meters to reach a working 3rd rail just before the batteries are flat. Of course this is seldom used and it's not up to the driver to make the decision.
MiaM no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 1st, 2011, 11:46 PM   #4556
mayflower232
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 296
Likes (Received): 25

Today there was a theft on the Central Line around Snares. It made me wonder, once a signal goes down during a theft how do they troubleshoot the problem? Do they send a team to the scene to have a hands on look or can they tell from the control room that a cable has been removed? If they do send a team, is it via van or do they use the tube network if they can?
mayflower232 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 2nd, 2011, 10:22 AM   #4557
siamu maharaj
樂豪酒店
 
siamu maharaj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 12,189
Likes (Received): 4982

Hey Tubeman!

Can you please tell me why do fully automated subways have light signalling? I've noticed it in Singapore. Without a driver what's the point in red/green lights?
__________________
ho ho to pa ki ho
siamu maharaj no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2011, 11:00 AM   #4558
mayflower232
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 296
Likes (Received): 25

Was heading East on the Central Line yesterday and as we pulled into Woodford I noticed that we passed what looked like a previous generation rolling stock on the other platform, it was only about 2/3 cars long and was painted white and red. Any idea what this was and why it could have been there? It was at about 1pm so just before rush hour.... very odd.
mayflower232 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2011, 04:02 PM   #4559
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by mayflower232 View Post
Was heading East on the Central Line yesterday and as we pulled into Woodford I noticed that we passed what looked like a previous generation rolling stock on the other platform, it was only about 2/3 cars long and was painted white and red. Any idea what this was and why it could have been there? It was at about 1pm so just before rush hour.... very odd.
It's the Track Recording Train, it is a 1973 Stock trailer between two Cravens 1960 Tube Stock motor cars (all heavily adapted), it roves around the system on a continual program to detect flaws in rails and therefore identify necessary rail replacement.

By Steve Thoroughgood on Flickr

image hosted on flickr
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2011, 04:05 PM   #4560
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by mayflower232 View Post
Today there was a theft on the Central Line around Snares. It made me wonder, once a signal goes down during a theft how do they troubleshoot the problem? Do they send a team to the scene to have a hands on look or can they tell from the control room that a cable has been removed? If they do send a team, is it via van or do they use the tube network if they can?
The manifestation of the fault will give a good indication of which cable has been stolen and therefore where the team need to look. They'd be despatched by road for this sort of issue, partly because there'd likely be no train service, but also as they need to take tools to a site which may be remote from any station.

Sadly a big and very disruptive problem thanks to the high price of copper.
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 02:06 PM.


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