Piccadilly line 36tph rolling stock requirements

[Crithylum]

LU is replacing 86(.5) 73 stock trains with 94 24 stock trains, a 9.3% (or 8.7%) increase.
There is also a planned upgrade from 24 to 27tph pre signalling upgrades, a 12.5% increase.

Given that the new trains will likely be slightly faster when driven manually, the increase in frequency should be covered by the increase in the number of trains.

However, the planned increase from 27 to 36 with further upgrades is a 33% increase. Will this require more trains to be ordered? Or will track improvements and ATO allow the trains to be fast enough for the currently ordered fleet size?
Another thing to possibly factor in is the effective short turning at Ealing Broadway if it is taken over from the District line

 

[Dstock7080]

7 extra trains are required to lift from 27tph to 33-36tph:

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/pic-20180516-item08-deep-tube-update.pdf

The new trains will accelerate faster but will be constrained by existing signalling regarding maximum speed for 27tph.

 

[Snow1964]

There was a detailed description in one of the TfL Board papers 2 or 3 years ago (not going to search for it now).

The new trains have a capacity uplift of about 11% (forgotten exact number), so even a straight one for one replacement increases capacity. Add on increasing from from 24 to 27tph and get to about 25% overall compared to 24th with existing stock.

If full resignalling of central area, and extra trains for 36tph are ever achieved, will be 60% capacity increase. This required fleet of 109 trains

 

[joshTikeeti]

I really looking forward to how this will play out.

 

[Mawkie]

If I recall correctly, the 73 stock has the capacity for faster acceleration, but is restricted (does the RPA miss out some steps?)

In any case, if we accept faster acceleration, and the signalling improvements* (which so far seem to be 600 co-acting signals and a few being repositioned) surely the elephant in the room is the driver element? The number one discussion in mess rooms is 'slow drivers'** and the impact they have on the line.

Without ATO (the last estimation I saw for total resignalling of the line was circa £1bn) then surely 27 trains an hour seems like a pipe dream?

*The creaking infrastructure and decrepit (and constantly failing) signalling system isn't being addressed in the same way that shiny new depots are. We'll still be trundling around South Ken bends in a 15mpn temporary speed restriction (with temporary being 5 years so far), and still be subject to TSRs across the east of the line as the track hasn't been gone over by the track recording train for many moons.

**The Piccadilly line is essentially a training line for the whole combine and (for various reasons) has a very high turnover of Train Operators. This means it has a high amount of trainees at any one time, but also a high amount of newly qualified drivers.

 

[xtmw]

The TRV still hasn't done the Picc?

 

[AlbertBeale]

The TRV still hasn't done the Picc?

TRV?

 

[507020]

fleet size?
Another thing to possibly factor in is the effective short turning at Ealing Broadway if it is taken over from the District line

This is a genuine question. If the service pattern is swapped so the District line runs to Uxbridge and the Piccadilly runs to Ealing Broadway, something it’s said “has” to be done to standardise platform heights with the Met and Central, but more 24 stock is ordered to increase the service to 36tph with some to Uxbridge, what happens to the redundant stock?

Surely a decision has to be taken regarding Uxbridge/Ealing Broadway since this will allow 36tph with less 24 stock needing to be built.

 

[Snow1964]

This is a genuine question. If the service pattern is swapped so the District line runs to Uxbridge and the Piccadilly runs to Ealing Broadway, something it’s said “has” to be done to standardise platform heights with the Met and Central, but more 24 stock is ordered to increase the service to 36tph with some to Uxbridge, what happens to the redundant stock?

Surely a decision has to be taken regarding Uxbridge/Ealing Broadway since this will allow 36tph with less 24 stock needing to be built.

What has happened over time, with potential swapping of District and Piccadilly explains the variation between extra 7 trains (from 94 to 101), and some of the earlier documents which said 109 trains for full 36tph

As for S stock, once the signal migration areas (SMA) are all done, there was plan of increasing service to Wimbledon to 16tph plus other service changes. The new signalling allows some speeding up and some frequency increases in certain locations.

Obviously higher frequency requires more trains. Currently the SMA on District western branches are on indefinite hold (to save money), the existing signalling will have to cope for longer. The remaining Metropolitan SMA (north of Neasden) are due in 3 phases over next 3 years, and that includes full resignalling of Uxbridge line.

 

[notverydeep]

TRV?

Track Recording Vehicle. Two 1960 stock motor cars with a converted 1973 stock trailer car fitted with equipment that monitors Track geometry across the network.

 

[DanNCL]

This is a genuine question. If the service pattern is swapped so the District line runs to Uxbridge and the Piccadilly runs to Ealing Broadway, something it’s said “has” to be done to standardise platform heights with the Met and Central, but more 24 stock is ordered to increase the service to 36tph with some to Uxbridge, what happens to the redundant stock?

Surely a decision has to be taken regarding Uxbridge/Ealing Broadway since this will allow 36tph with less 24 stock needing to be built.

The ‘redundant’ 24 stock would presumably go to the Bakerloo and fewer extra 24 stock units ordered for the Bakerloo as a result.

Another issue is if there’s enough slack in the S Stock fleet for the District to run to Uxbridge. Suspect ordering more S Stock is probably out of the question by now.

 

[swt_passenger]

The ‘redundant’ 24 stock would presumably go to the Bakerloo and fewer extra 24 stock units ordered for the Bakerloo as a result.

Another issue is if there’s enough slack in the S Stock fleet for the District to run to Uxbridge. Suspect ordering more S Stock is probably out of the question by now.

It’s not intended for the District to run to Uxbridge, is it?

 

[DanNCL]

It’s not intended for the District to run to Uxbridge, is it?

The post I replied to was suggesting otherwise.

 

[swt_passenger]

The post I replied to was suggesting otherwise.

It does keep being suggested but other threads always get back to it not being TFL’s idea. What the board papers do report on is extra Picadilly trains to Ealing Broadway, then diverting the District line to Wimbledon and Richmond.

 

[DanNCL]

It does keep being suggested but other threads always get back to it not being TFL’s idea. What the board papers do report on is extra Picadilly trains to Ealing Broadway, then diverting the District line to Wimbledon and Richmond.

The current track layout does not allow Piccadilly Line trains to stop at Chiswick Park. For the Piccadilly line to run to Ealing Broadway, the two options are either to run District line trains to Uxbridge (or Northfields), or to install crossovers just west of Turnham Green to allow Piccadilly Line trains to stop at Chiswick Park.

 

[BayPaul]

The current track layout does not allow Piccadilly Line trains to stop at Chiswick Park. For the Piccadilly line to run to Ealing Broadway, the two options are either to run District line trains to Uxbridge (or Northfields), or to install crossovers just west of Turnham Green to allow Piccadilly Line trains to stop at Chiswick Park.

I believe the TfL plan is to move the Chiswick park platforms to the Richmond branch, though that sounds very complicated. Crossovers sounds like a fairly simple plan.

 

[bramling]

The current track layout does not allow Piccadilly Line trains to stop at Chiswick Park. For the Piccadilly line to run to Ealing Broadway, the two options are either to run District line trains to Uxbridge (or Northfields), or to install crossovers just west of Turnham Green to allow Piccadilly Line trains to stop at Chiswick Park.

Whilst there is an element of logic to running the District Line towards Uxbridge in that it solves some of the inter-running issues, where do the trains come from?

I can’t see more S stock being ordered at this point, so this in itself essentially renders it a non-starter until such time as the S stock is replaced, which by all rights isn’t until about 2045-2050.

Operationally I’m not sure District to Uxbridge is a great idea. The line is already complex enough, and the Piccadilly service to Uxbridge is already unreliable enough at times. The only way to make it robust enough would probably be complete segregation from the Met involving dedicated terminal platforms at Rayners Lane, which then defeats the whole purpose as you might as well keep the Piccadilly Line.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Track Recording Vehicle. Two 1960 stock motor cars with a converted 1973 stock trailer car fitted with equipment that monitors Track geometry across the network.

Aha - thanks.

 

[bluegoblin7]

I believe the TfL plan is to move the Chiswick park platforms to the Richmond branch, though that sounds very complicated. Crossovers sounds like a fairly simple plan.

Moving the Chiswick Park platforms onto the Richmond branch is both the plan and the simple plan. Building a couple of platforms is far simpler than adding in crossovers and all of the resulting signalling work. It also ignores (and would make much harder) the requirement to still allow S stock to access Ealing Common depot, and the fact that a plethora of crossovers for every comprehensible move already exists at Acton.

 

[Mawkie]

The TRV still hasn't done the Picc?

I think it must have been through there over the last few days as the TSRs have been removed between Arnos and Southgate when I travelled through there today.

 

[bramling]

Moving the Chiswick Park platforms onto the Richmond branch is both the plan and the simple plan. Building a couple of platforms is far simpler than adding in crossovers and all of the resulting signalling work. It also ignores (and would make much harder) the requirement to still allow S stock to access Ealing Common depot, and the fact that a plethora of crossovers for every comprehensible move already exists at Acton.

Must admit I’m not entirely convinced adding an extra stop to the Richmond service is a great outcome. Gunnersbury, Kew Gardens and Richmond are already busy stations (compared the four stations west of Turnham Green on the Ealing branch which are comparatively lightly used for District Line journeys), and they don’t have the option of a faster journey by way of the Piccadilly Line.

The journey into London from somewhere like Kew Gardens is already quite torturous, an extra stop would make it more so.

 

[BayPaul]

Must admit I’m not entirely convinced adding an extra stop to the Richmond service is a great outcome. Gunnersbury, Kew Gardens and Richmond are already busy stations (compared the four stations west of Turnham Green on the Ealing branch which are comparatively lightly used for District Line journeys), and they don’t have the option of a faster journey by way of the Piccadilly Line.

The journey into London from somewhere like Kew Gardens is already quite torturous, an extra stop would make it more so.

Remember that this plan gives around a 50% increase to number of services to Richmond. Capacity shouldn't be a problem, and journey time including average time waiting for the train will also go down

 

[boiledbeans2]

I can’t see more S stock being ordered at this point, so this in itself essentially renders it a non-starter until such time as the S stock is replaced, which by all rights isn’t until about 2045-2050.

I guess there's no need to order new S stock? If there is sufficient quantity, a new type of train could be ordered. E.g., the Northern used to run with 59 and 72 stock.

 

[bramling]

I guess there's no need to order new S stock? If there is sufficient quantity, a new type of train could be ordered. E.g., the Northern used to run with 59 and 72 stock.

It’s possible, but there’s big costs that come with it, especially in terms of the need to train staff on two types of stock. You’ve also got to find a manufacturer who is prepared and able to design and built a small production run.

One way you could free up a few S stocks would be to see if there’s parts of the network which could be ditched. Transferring Moor Park - Amersham / Chesham to Chiltern would free up a few trains, go some way to resolving the issue of how to electrify Chiltern, and also tidy up the issue of LU running significantly outside the mayoral boundary. I’d imagine this would go some way to providing some S stock to operate as far as Rayners Lane on a service frequency similar to what the branch sees today. It wouldn’t provide enough to reach Uxbridge though.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

One way you could free up a few S stocks would be to see if there’s parts of the network which could be ditched. Transferring Moor Park - Amersham / Chesham to Chiltern would free up a few trains, go some way to resolving the issue of how to electrify Chiltern, and also tidy up the issue of LU running significantly outside the mayoral boundary. I’d imagine this would go some way to providing some S stock to operate as far as Rayners Lane on a service frequency similar to what the branch sees today. It wouldn’t provide enough to reach Uxbridge though.

Wouldn't that free up the wrong type of S stock - Metropolitan trains being somewhat different from the District/etc. trains?

It would also require extra capacity at Marylebone, which I'm guessing doesn't exist, although I can see what you're suggesting would otherwise make sense.

 

[Dstock7080]

Wouldn't that free up the wrong type of S stock - Metropolitan trains being somewhat different from the District/etc. trains?

S Stock are adaptable for having a car removed/inserted, initial S8s were delivered as 7-car for testing and there were initially 3 8-car S7s running on the MET (now just a single one).
A 4-car S8 was sent to Germany for exhibition.

 

[Mgameing123]

Are they actually considering sending the District Line to Uxbridge? Because I don’t think anyone who lives on that branch would love an increased journey time. The current situation with District to Ealing Broadway is fine. Perhaps let the Piccadilly run some extra trains to Ealing Broadway with the 36 tph plan.

 

[Crithylum]

Are they actually considering sending the District Line to Uxbridge? Because I don’t think anyone who lives on that branch would love an increased journey time. The current situation with District to Ealing Broadway is fine. Perhaps let the Piccadilly run some extra trains to Ealing Broadway with the 36 tph plan.

I believe the plan was to use the increased frequency in the Piccadilly line core to send some trains to EB, and send more District to Richmond/Wimbledon. District to Uxbridge seems to have been some rumour which appears to not be the current plan https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/piccadilly-line-uxbridge-branch-future-improvements.266301/