OK, I'm having this discussion on another forum. Can someone tell me what the purpose of the screens is (is it to stop people getting onto the tracks), and also what is the reason they weren't installed at the surface level stations on the extension?
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Jubilee line platform edge doors (formerly: platforms screens)
- Thread starter Bungle73
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 34,303
Ventilation reasons is definitely the primary purpose - I assume it is to avoid the platform and station aircon having to try and cool the tunnels, and prevent the piston effect of the trains pushing hot air into the stations.
As the previous poster says, the safety benefits are a bonus. I'm sure there was much debate about this at the time it was built but it isn't easy to find background info online, however someone did an FOI request about their accident record and one of the replies included this:
As the previous poster says, the safety benefits are a bonus. I'm sure there was much debate about this at the time it was built but it isn't easy to find background info online, however someone did an FOI request about their accident record and one of the replies included this:
fairysdad
Member
Similar related question (My apologies; I seem to be doing this a lot recently...): does the presence of the PEDs mean that every subsequent tube stock used on the Jubilee Line will have the same door layout, or would it be (relatively) easy to change the doors on the platforms?
Every new stock will have to have the same door layout also if the main reason for them being there was safety then the doors would be on all platforms. To save someone from asking, T5 hasn't got them because the 73's can't talk to the doors and tell them when to open/close.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
The Jubilee screen doors don't have a major function in smoke management or ventilation, as the platform tunnel is open to the running tunnel above the top of the doors. Crossrail doors will however have screens that go up to the roof, so they segregate the running and platform tunnels.
Which raises the question of what the Jubilee doors are actually for... possibly the argument goes that the tunnel stations are busier so need the doors for crowd control, but I think some of the JLE surface stations can get pretty busy too. They may reduce draughts a bit.
Which raises the question of what the Jubilee doors are actually for... possibly the argument goes that the tunnel stations are busier so need the doors for crowd control, but I think some of the JLE surface stations can get pretty busy too. They may reduce draughts a bit.
The Jubilee Line doors do help ventilation in respect of reducing the pressure wave as the trains enter and leave the larger platform bore. In a normal station the draught can be felt in the cross passages and even up the escalator shafts, (with disastrous contributory effect on the Kings Cross fire in 1989). They also reduce the amount of combustible materials (human hair, clothes fibres etc.) drawn into the running tunnels.
telstarbox
Established Member
PEDs also speed up boarding when it's busy as passengers wait in the right place!
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Although this could be done much more cheaply with a tin of paint or some reels of coloured tape.
NotATrainspott
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 3,304
Crowd control is one of the reasons there is an aspiration to fit PEDs to the Glasgow Subway when the rolling stock is made driverless. Some of the island platforms are perilously narrow, and so having PEDs would make people more confident in using more of the space available.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
There seems to be a presumption that PEDs are required for routes that operate unstaffed trains, but not if there is a staff member on each train as with DLR.
Although overall they increase dwell times due to the delay between stopping and both sets of doors opening caused by the current technology.
Busaholic
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2014
- Messages
- 14,671
Did I hear a suggestion that they'll be fitted at Camden Town if/when the two branches of the Northern become two separate lines?
theageofthetra
Established Member
Will they be fitted to the Thameslink core and is the new stock designed to operate this type of door?
Nym
Established Member
Yeah, they tried that for the 09TS and the Victoria Line...
It quietly disappeared when they realised that it wouldn't work on the budget they had in mind.
It quietly disappeared when they realised that it wouldn't work on the budget they had in mind.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 34,303
No plans AFAIAA. But two different length trains, 8 car and 12 car, would not be compatible with PEDs anyway, because a PED opening failure without a carriage alongside it would be too much of a risk.
When the Jubilee line trains were extended it had to be done as a coordinated 'big bang' with a line closure, because those risks of having trains shorter than the PED system were considered and found too high.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
PEDs could be made to work safely with two different train lengths. A PED opening with no train present would be less serious than a train door opening when not alongside a platform, and could be prevented by something similar to a SDO system but working "inside out". Crossrail will have to do this if they ever lengthen their trains to the 240m of the platform tunnels, because the Heathrow platforms can't be lengthened so some trains will have to remain at the existing lengths.
I guess the Jubilee situation was to do with the PEDs not being designed to cope with different train lengths. Modifying the design just to prevent a big closure during the transition period would have cost a lot of money, and commissioning the modification would probably have caused more service disruption than what they actually did.
telstarbox
Established Member
If this was introduced, would all trains stop at the front end of the platform with 'unused' doors always at the rear end of the platform for extra safety?
they've been trying some odd system in Japan:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzrz4lH0DVc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzrz4lH0DVc
edwin_m
Veteran Member
They wouldn't have to do that, but it would simplify the design if they did.
That's a good system for where different types of train stop, but unless everyone can get on and leave the platform totally free, we'd just have the 'gates' unable to fall back down as there would be people/luggage underneath.
Madame Guillotine!
simple simon
Member
Whilst its underground stations were fitted with these from new, partially to help keep the air-conditioning in the station (rather than leaking out into the tunnels) Singapore later retrofitted these to all the open air stations on its mass rapid transit system. For these stations they installed half height gates. Why? To keep passengers away from the tracks. Its not just the idiots who wish to go walk-a-bout on the tracks but also to increase safety on crowded platforms.
In Paris they retrofitted these to stations on metro lines as part of the conversion to full automation with trains that do not have a member of staff at the front. Their method of working was very passenger focussed - stations were closed during the works and then reopened, but the trains kept running at all times. I bet in this country they would close the line for months on end...
Simon
In Paris they retrofitted these to stations on metro lines as part of the conversion to full automation with trains that do not have a member of staff at the front. Their method of working was very passenger focussed - stations were closed during the works and then reopened, but the trains kept running at all times. I bet in this country they would close the line for months on end...
Simon
Last edited:
Whilst I don't think there's any plans to fit more of these in London there's many recent station refurbishments where the station has been closed without closing the line - or even just part of a station so not all lies were available.
TheNewNo2
Member
I think that LU are planning, long-term, to fit PEDs to the Piccadilly Line when it undergoes an upgrade, but it's a long way in the future, and might require the platform tunnels to be expanded.
Regarding a change of stock on the Jubilee Line, the door placement is fairly standard - I think that only the subsurface stock doesn't use the 1-2-2-1 door formation, although car lengths probably vary somewhat. I suppose that the New Tube For London might end up using a different pattern as it's meant to be interconnecting like an S Stock, but NTfL isn't planned to be used on the Jubilee Line anyway.
Regarding a change of stock on the Jubilee Line, the door placement is fairly standard - I think that only the subsurface stock doesn't use the 1-2-2-1 door formation, although car lengths probably vary somewhat. I suppose that the New Tube For London might end up using a different pattern as it's meant to be interconnecting like an S Stock, but NTfL isn't planned to be used on the Jubilee Line anyway.
The 2009 stock is over a metre shorter per car than the 1995/1996 stock, the 1973 stock is somehwere in between and the 1972 is much shorter. Just because the door arrangements are the same doesn't mean the spacing is, and NTfL may be very different.
Of course S-Stock isn't planned for the Jubilee, that would require rather larger tunnels!
Of course S-Stock isn't planned for the Jubilee, that would require rather larger tunnels!
- Status