Crossrail bits and bobs

[61653 HTAFC]

I just wonder how systems like the Moscow Metro, very deeply tunneled, which has not been that well endowed financially in recent decades, manage to afford to install a scissors every couple of stations, even on recent extensions, which on the (notably few compared to London) occasions when the service is disrupted manages to handle reversals straightforwardly, using both platforms alternately.

One thing the Soviet Union did have in abundance was cheap or even free labour...

 

[Bald Rick]

But I feel it does answer my question, which is that the minimalist designs of nowadays are not fit for purpose, where a disruption out at one end affects the entire core service because inadequate provision is made for irregular operations. Which I am afraid will come along In Spades with Crossrail hiccups.

We'll have to disagree.

If there's a problem west of the Paddington turnbacks, the service will run from the east to Paddington only.

If there's a problem on the Shenfield Line, most of the service can run to Abbey Wood without a problem.

Vice versa if there's a problem on the Abbey Wood line (that's what the new Chadwell Heath turnback is for).

Problems in the core have been engineered out as far as possible, but if there is an issue then Paddington / Liverpool Street will get used.

 

[edwin_m]

Switches and crossings are themselves sources of unreliability, so if more are added then at some stage service reliability will start to reduce. That's before taking account of the considerable cost implications of underground S&C and also the practicality issues of needing the tunnels to be straight and at the same level.

 

[Taunton]

I am sure that Crossrail will be a great success, in fact its principal risk is being too much of a success and being full from day one (I understand Sir Peter Hendy has the same premonition). I would just hope that its resilience is adequate, and that additional rolling stock can be readily procured if required by demand (and if the substantial demand is there, the associated revenue ought to make the provision a financial no-brainer).

 

[hwl]

Switches and crossings are themselves sources of unreliability, so if more are added then at some stage service reliability will start to reduce. That's before taking account of the considerable cost implications of underground S&C and also the practicality issues of needing the tunnels to be straight and at the same level.

Indeed but I think the cross-over caverns will have gantry cranes and spare parts to hand so maintenance shouldn't be too hard.

 

[rebmcr]

Indeed but I think the cross-over caverns will have gantry cranes and spare parts to hand so maintenance should be too hard.

You think one thing, but the £15bn project professionals know the other.

 

[edwin_m]

The most likely failure mode of points is loss of detection, either because of a fault in the detection circuit or because the switches have not gone fully home. Having a gantry crane doesn't make any difference to that.

 

[class ep-09]

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C53719/2016/05/13/advanced

It was supposed to go to the bay platform at West Ealing today (13.18 from Reading TCD) as a test train.
Driver from my depot was to drive it but it was cancelled ( apparently no one was available to conduct him from NR).

 

[Busaholic]

One of the poor design issues of Crossrail is the lack of proper reversing facilities right across the core to handle any disruption to the service. Emergency crossovers seem to be seen as optional extras nowadays, and in any event the old ability to reverse any service efficiently seems to be a lost skill, despite innumerable emergency planning meetings taking up one's diary for months ahead.

Was reminded of this only yesterday when a police incident (actually on the Marylebone line) at Willesden Green apparently led to the suspension of the Jubilee Line for the entire length through to Stratford, it being "too difficult" to arrange a short working point. It really is inappropriate for all the Jubilee's central London usefulness, and the cross-river connections in East London, to be entirely lost because of something that has happened over in Willesden, and surely the same is going to apply to Crossrail.

It's one of the ironies of the Jubilee Line extension that resilience is either not built in to the system or, more accurately, it is too complicated/time-consuming/ much sweat to operate. If the problem had been at Westminster, then a service from Stanmore could operate through Green Park to the two neglected, but useable, platforms at Charing Cross : the problem then would be the Stratford-based drivers and their shifts, I do realise.

The proposition that because an underground line is well-used, then at the slightest hint of problems you throw your hands up and cry 'shut down! shut down!' and let some other line, or, more likely in many cases, some overcrowded series of bus routes, attempt to solve your problem is lamentable

Actually, the problem can be quantified precisely. You have Charing Cross, you have North Greenwich, so turning ser
vices from the west is fine. It's when you need to turn services from the east you have problems (Waterloo, in theory, I believe, but only one train in a blue moon), yet the majority of the trains are crewed from Stratford (?)

Speaking of Moscow, back in the day when I worked for the organisation LT were still being asked to go to Paris and Moscow to give advice to them on their metro systems, which have both been in an almost continuous state of development since the 1950s at least. Maybe TfL should swallow their pride and go ask them for advice now.

 

[hassaanhc]

Updates from Southall of the work that took place on the previous bank holiday:
The track through Platform 3 (Down Relief) was replaced and realigned. The edge of the whole platform was rebuilt and towards the London end the platform was built out to take into account the realigned track. Stop mark was also moved back slightly. About 4 weeks earlier the P4 (Up Relief) had been realigned and platform altered accordingly.

At West Ealing there are uprights for a new canopy along what is now the Greenford bay/Up Relief island.

Earlier I went Liverpool Street > Shenfield > Stratford. There is still almost no mast and OHLE replacement between Manor Park and Seven Kings, but east of there there are replacement masts in many places, even if there are still pockets of old SPS and green catenary. Platform extensions are also progressing well at most stations.

 

[Tio Terry]

We'll have to disagree.

If there's a problem west of the Paddington turnbacks, the service will run from the east to Paddington only.

Have you considered the problems that would cause at Paddington? All those people leaving the Crossrail station and piling in to the Mainline station and attempting to enter the tube network. It would probably result in the tube being closed because of over crowding. Much more likely that trains would just be cancelled between Reading and Paddington to restrict the flow.

 

[swt_passenger]

Have you considered the problems that would cause at Paddington? All those people leaving the Crossrail station and piling in to the Mainline station and attempting to enter the tube network. It would probably result in the tube being closed because of over crowding. Much more likely that trains would just be cancelled between Reading and Paddington to restrict the flow.

Bald Rick's example problem here was west of Paddington though. You seem to have east and west mixed up - in this scenario surely people will be trying to get to the GWML inner stations via the remainder GW main line service?

 

[AM9]

Bald Rick's example problem here was west of Paddington though. You seem to have east and west mixed up - in this scenario surely people will be trying to get to the GWML inner stations via the remainder GW main line service?

... and those who were heading to Heathrow who were alert enough to reject HEX prices would have already transferred to the Piccadilly line via TCR or Bond St..

 

[Bald Rick]

Terminating at Paddington from the east is what will happen initially when the core section opens anyway!

 

[Tio Terry]

Bald Rick's example problem here was west of Paddington though. You seem to have east and west mixed up - in this scenario surely people will be trying to get to the GWML inner stations via the remainder GW main line service?

Yes, you are right. I was thinking of services from the West being turned back at Paddington because of problems within the centre section.

 

[Julia]

Actually, the problem can be quantified precisely. You have Charing Cross, you have North Greenwich, so turning ser
vices from the west is fine. It's when you need to turn services from the east you have problems (Waterloo, in theory, I believe, but only one train in a blue moon), yet the majority of the trains are crewed from Stratford

I vaguely remember reading recently that Charing Cross could no longer be used (unless tipping out at Green Park is possible without massive overcrowding) because the escalators to the platforms had been neglected for too long?

 

[DasLunatic]

I vaguely remember reading recently that Charing Cross could no longer be used (unless tipping out at Green Park is possible without massive overcrowding) because the escalators to the platforms had been neglected for too long?

Can people not walk up a disabled escalator?

 

[AM9]

Can people not walk up a disabled escalator?

Not really safe as a planned exercise. The steps are too large and not compliant with best practice.

 

[rebmcr]

It can be used (and occasionally is) to turn a train during disruption or to park a faulty unit off the running lines, but not in passenger service.

The disruption on the morning discussed on this thread was resolved within 30 minutes, whereupon the drivers and stock were perfectly positioned to immediately resume a 100% service.

30 minutes of shutdown followed by zero problems is far more desirable than 30 minutes of partial service followed by hours of knock-on delays. It was a very good regulating decision on the part of the Jubilee line control room. I'm sure in the face of a lengthier blockage, a partial service would make more sense and would be made to work.

 

[Taunton]

Sadiq Khan, new Mayor of London, on the radio this morning was expressing concern for HS2's impact on Euston, Camden and the surrounding area, and looking at the plans one can understand the concerns in the area. He was saying he favours terminating (not just stopping) at Old Oak Common, which will be "more convenient for Crossrail and for Heathrow".

In theory, but one of the issues with Crossrail, which even Sir Peter Hendy has discussed, is a perception that it is going to be full from day 1, both with transfer from current slower routes and from additional induced demand, because it offers such a better route for such a range of travel options. It really can't sustain a large load of HS2 passengers, not in the current planning, being distributed as well, can it?

What scope is there for increased service or (I presume not possible) train lengthening?

 

[Domh245]

What scope is there for increased service or (I presume not possible) train lengthening?

IIRC, the trains can be extended from 200m by 40m (which would make them 11 cars long) before running out of platform in the central section, but I would expect that it'd require SDO outside of the tunnels (or platform extensions but that might not be the most practical option)

 

[NotATrainspott]

Sadiq Khan, new Mayor of London, on the radio this morning was expressing concern for HS2's impact on Euston, Camden and the surrounding area, and looking at the plans one can understand the concerns in the area. He was saying he favours terminating (not just stopping) at Old Oak Common, which will be "more convenient for Crossrail and for Heathrow".

In theory, but one of the issues with Crossrail, which even Sir Peter Hendy has discussed, is a perception that it is going to be full from day 1, both with transfer from current slower routes and from additional induced demand, because it offers such a better route for such a range of travel options. It really can't sustain a large load of HS2 passengers, not in the current planning, being distributed as well, can it?

What scope is there for increased service or (I presume not possible) train lengthening?

He can say all he likes but HS2 will never, ever terminate at Old Oak Common. It doesn't matter if various London politicians don't like it.

 

[edwin_m]

IIRC, the trains can be extended from 200m by 40m (which would make them 11 cars long) before running out of platform in the central section, but I would expect that it'd require SDO outside of the tunnels (or platform extensions but that might not be the most practical option)

The trains have SDO and will use it at several of the stations on Network Rail.

 

[Taunton]

It doesn't matter if various London politicians don't like it.

It does if they prevent the construction work at Euston.

 

[swt_passenger]

It does if they prevent the construction work at Euston.

They have already tried and failed in the Bill petition process though, how can Khan go round again on this question?

 

[phoenixcronin]

Sadiq Khan, new Mayor of London, on the radio this morning was expressing concern for HS2's impact on Euston, Camden and the surrounding area, and looking at the plans one can understand the concerns in the area. He was saying he favours terminating (not just stopping) at Old Oak Common, which will be "more convenient for Crossrail and for Heathrow".

In theory, but one of the issues with Crossrail, which even Sir Peter Hendy has discussed, is a perception that it is going to be full from day 1, both with transfer from current slower routes and from additional induced demand, because it offers such a better route for such a range of travel options. It really can't sustain a large load of HS2 passengers, not in the current planning, being distributed as well, can it?

What scope is there for increased service or (I presume not possible) train lengthening?

I'm pretty sure he's just saying this either because he's grossly uninformed about the impacts of terminating at OOC, or just saying it as a sop to the electorate, much like his opposition to the 3rd runway at Heathrow.

With HS2, as with Heathrow, he is luckily in no position to stop either, which is great as it means vital infrastructure is not held back by pandering to voters.

 

[AM9]

I'm pretty sure he's just saying this either because he's grossly uninformed about the impacts of terminating at OOC, or just saying it as a sop to the electorate, much like his opposition to the 3rd runway at Heathrow.

With HS2, as with Heathrow, he is luckily in no position to stop either, which is great as it means vital infrastructure is not held back by pandering to voters.

And he can then complain that the national government doesn't listen to those who objected so no problem for him.

 

[coppercapped]

I'm pretty sure he's just saying this either because he's grossly uninformed about the impacts of terminating at OOC, or just saying it as a sop to the electorate, much like his opposition to the 3rd runway at Heathrow.

With HS2, as with Heathrow, he is luckily in no position to stop either, which is great as it means vital infrastructure is not held back by pandering to voters.

If you are suggesting that the voters aren't worth worrying about - then you haven't learnt anything from history.

Let me be clear. Infrastructure is meant to serve the voters, not that the voters have to serve the infrastructure.

 

[phoenixcronin]

If you are suggesting that the voters aren't worth worrying about - then you haven't learnt anything from history.

Let me be clear. Infrastructure is meant to serve the voters, not that the voters have to serve the infrastructure.

Of course the voters should be listened to, but the unfortunate fact is that the vast majority of voters are uninformed on such matters, and this, coupled with politicians trying to pander to the lack of knowledge of voters with cheap soundbites, means bad decisions can be made.

 

[coppercapped]

Of course the voters should be listened to, but the unfortunate fact is that the vast majority of voters are uninformed on such matters, and this, coupled with politicians trying to pander to the lack of knowledge of voters with cheap soundbites, means bad decisions can be made.

On any particular topic, the vast majority of voters are uninformed. And, yes, poor decisions are made - but that can't always be laid at the feet of the voters being uninformed. And poor decisions are not always due to soundbites rather than full blown speeches.

Also, a decision which you find to be poor, someone else can find excellent.