Elizabeth Line / Crossrail Updates.

[4630]

Some might say that, amongst other potential causes, a rise in health spending is a mark of a civilised society that wishes to provide the best* level of care for the well-being of the population.  

 

* I’ll leave others to define ‘best’ in this context. 

[Zomboid]

1 hour ago, St. Simon said:

Another consideration is how SDO systems are configured. Only one of the SDO systems in use in the UK (that used by Class 800’s, and possibly the Class 700s / 707s / 717s, based on ETCS packet 44 data) is capable of using train stopping positions that require SDO that are aligned centrally, i.e. both ends of a train hang over the platform. All the others require all train stopping positions requiring SDO to be aligned at one end or the other.

I don't know how it all works, but from memory of last time I went on the circle line, S stock can have an overhang at both ends.

[St. Simon]

3 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

I don't know how it all works, but from memory of last time I went on the circle line, S stock can have an overhang at both ends.

Hi,

 

I did initially think that, but I don’t think the version of Tracklink they use allows that.

 

However, if it does allow it, then the point still stands for above ground network.

 

Simon

[Paul.Uni]

As it is December, it's time for a updated Tube map. IMHO it needs a redesign, urgently.

 

[DY444]

19 hours ago, jim.snowdon said:

For the 345s, there is only a 9-car stop marker, so even though the units are currently only 7 cars (I wonder how soon after December 15th we start to get the full length 9-car units?) they are not stopping short of that. Even the 8-car GWR 387 units are now drawing up to the 9-car markers. It's something of a change that the guidance provided by the original SR markers has turned into the all but mandatory instruction of the present day markers.

Jim

 

The 7 car 345s stopping at the 9 car marker may be related to the in cab CCTV.  The 345s use the same system as the tube with cab monitors but cameras mounted on the platform rather than on the train.  On the tube the trains have to stop at or in advance of a specific point and if they stop short the images are not received.  *If* the same applies to the 345s then that could be one reason why they are compelled to stop at the 9 car marker.

 

On a more general note the whole issue of stop markers has got ridiculous.  The simple SR system worked brilliantly for decades and I don't recall anywhere on the SR where 4 car trains stopped miles away from where the passengers generally waited.    

[The Stationmaster]

18 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

My impression, formed from unplanned trips at different times and on different days of the week (though not weekday morning peaks when I am at work) suggests most passengers changing between the GWR / TfL Rail services and the UndergrounD (also TfL but thankfully not branded TfL rail) at Ealing Broadway are making relatively local journeys via the Central Line between the likes of Hayes / Southall and Shepherd's Bush or the Acton area.  Yes a few trains stop at Acton Main Line but that isn't ideally situated for many parts of Acton no the vast Park Royal business park / hospital area which is a major trip generator.  

 

In my experience few passengers interchange to or from the District Line; those using that route more typically transfer to or from local buses if Ealing Broadway is not their destination.  

 

We all await the change in travel patterns which TfL and no doubt computerised modelling has suggested will occur once the Crossrail core is open.  It will ease some of the burden at Paddington but in both the cause and effect sense because many of the stopping trains will no longer use the main station anyway.  Ditto Liverpool Street at the other side of Town.  To what extent any other trips change will be interesting to observe.   Some users will find it more convenient to ride through to the new central area stations (from both east and west) while others might even find it less convenient if their trip already requires, for example, a change to the Bakerloo at Paddington.  

 

Short trains stopping at the platform ends seems to be a recent and particularly frustrating development not confined to Crossrail / TfL nor the 345s.  It is at least in part related to the introduction of DOO since it is unreasonably costly to have a set of driver's mirrors / CCTV at every potential stopping point when many different train lengths are possible.  SWR extended many platforms to accommodate 10-car suburban trains but at the same time moved the stopping markers for 8-car trains to the platform ends.  The result is that there are now locations similar to West Drayton where the only shelter is at one extreme end but many trains stop with the rear of the last carriage some 120-130 feet farther down the platform.  This in turn affects dwell time and network punctuality as passengers chase their train and all pile into the back door.  The dynamics of human interaction with the railway seem to dictate that one cannot successfully cattle-prod passengers to board in similar numbers at each doorway nor will they take any notice of the information systems which now often indicate the length of the train.  Though not always reliably.   

 

The interesting thing about stopping points is that many passengers positions themselves to be in the correct place for alighting - very noticeable on 387s running into Reading in the Down direction.  Hence they stand in the right place to board the train at the station where they join unless the weather puts then off standing right out in the open!  But it is very noticeable at Twyford when a Down 387 comes in that the more savvy (or in a hurry?) passengers get in where they will be next to the escalator when they reach Reading.

 

So if  'somebody' starts moving stopping markers - and I agree there is a veritable forest of them at some stations - they are going to upset the best laid plans of quite a number of passengers.  The other problem is that where trains unnecessarily draw up to the end of the platform you get the situation 'Gwiwer' has outlined where the shelter is in a place where the passengers congregate and that tends to be at or towards one end of the train hence you get dwell time delays.   It doesn't matter if 387 and 345 stop markers are in different places because they are driven by different Drivers who only need to know where they are supposed to come to a stand and once they've learnt the road they will brake accordingly and stop in the correct place depending on the type of train they are driving and how many vehicles it has.   E.G. from my observations Drivers working 387s clearly have no difficulty at all stopping at the relevant marker at Twyford whether they be working a 4, 8, or 12 car train.  That's no different from decades of running different length DMU formations or loco hauled stock in different formations.  if you know the road, know your train, and - not so much nowadays - know its brake performance, once you know where you have to come to a stand that is where - all other things being being consistent - you will bring your train to a stand.

 

PS Perhaps amusingly on our branch passengers really do know where to stand for either a 2 car or a 3 car formation, and that means two different places.

[The Stationmaster]

2 hours ago, DY444 said:

 

The 7 car 345s stopping at the 9 car marker may be related to the in cab CCTV.  The 345s use the same system as the tube with cab monitors but cameras mounted on the platform rather than on the train.  On the tube the trains have to stop at or in advance of a specific point and if they stop short the images are not received.  *If* the same applies to the 345s then that could be one reason why they are compelled to stop at the 9 car marker.

 

On a more general note the whole issue of stop markers has got ridiculous.  The simple SR system worked brilliantly for decades and I don't recall anywhere on the SR where 4 car trains stopped miles away from where the passengers generally waited.    

I think GWR have tried to be fairly sensible about for the 387s and IETs although it does mean a lot of markers in order to keep trains of varying length roughly centred on the area which has a canopy or waiting shelter - provided the platfiorm is long enough.

[caradoc]

The best (or worst) example of stopping places confusing passengers that I know of is Birmingham New St, where the Newcastle-Reading services often reverse in Platform 10a. Passengers arrive on the platform and stand, near the steps/escalator, where the signs do indeed say 10a. However there is a signal just about a Voyager length into the platform (from the east), and (as it always seems to be at danger) that is where the train stops - A fair way away from nearly all the passengers !

 

[Siberian Snooper]

51 minutes ago, caradoc said:

The best (or worst) example of stopping places confusing passengers that I know of is Birmingham New St, where the Newcastle-Reading services often reverse in Platform 10a. Passengers arrive on the platform and stand, near the steps/escalator, where the signs do indeed say 10a. However there is a signal just about a Voyager length into the platform (from the east), and (as it always seems to be at danger) that is where the train stops - A fair way away from nearly all the passengers !

 

Having travelled quite a few times between Reading and Brum over the last couple of years, it didn't take too many trips to sus that out. I now manage to be about half way down the set of a 4 car unit, the only variable is which way the set is lettered. 

 

 

[nigel newling]

Another nonsense is the move of the platform 9 / 10 boundary at Temple Meads. Trains coming into platform 9 in order to reverse have to go all the way to the stop light in order for their arrival in the platform to be detected, a full 3 car length beyond the platform 10 staircase up from the subway. Many passengers using the platform 9 staircase, as directed, are completely unaware that their train is actually standing at the platform until they see it pass them as it departs off to the east.

[Gwiwer]

21 hours ago, Paul.Uni said:

As it is December, it's time for a updated Tube map. IMHO it needs a redesign, urgently.

 

The tube map, imho, needs to be just that.  A map of the tube.  De-clutter it and revert it to something like Mr. Beck intended.  Then produce your all-systems map alongside it as has been done in London for many years now.   The tube map and the map formerly known as "London Connections" but more recently showing the various TOCs in different colours are two different products often posted adjacent to each other.  The tube map is now becoming ridiculously complex not least because the plethora of TfL Rail and Overground routes are all shown as a single colour.  Blue or orange respectively.  

[Bernard Lamb]

10 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

The tube map, imho, needs to be just that.  A map of the tube.  De-clutter it and revert it to something like Mr. Beck intended.  

A very good idea in theory. But who would benefit from it? What market would it be aimed at?

TfL Journey Planner incorporates all methods of travel and tends to route you on and off various tube lines.

The alternative routes in London have become so complex that a simple tube map has declined greatly in value.

There will be an even greater change when the new line does eventually open.

Even my daughter, who is from the Uber generation, has noticed certain possibilities that Crossrail will through up.

Bernard 

 

[Fenman]

10 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

The tube map, imho, needs to be just that.  A map of the tube.  De-clutter it and revert it to something like Mr. Beck intended.  Then produce your all-systems map alongside it as has been done in London for many years now.   The tube map and the map formerly known as "London Connections" but more recently showing the various TOCs in different colours are two different products often posted adjacent to each other.  The tube map is now becoming ridiculously complex not least because the plethora of TfL Rail and Overground routes are all shown as a single colour.  Blue or orange respectively.  

 

I disagree. While some of the content on the map is pretty much clutter (Emirates airline, anyone?), its utility would be exponentially increased if it showed at least the central sections of both Thameslink and (when opened) Elizabeth line.

 

If you are unfamiliar with London, let's say you're in King's Cross and want to go to Tate Modern - a not uncommon route for visitors, I'd suggest. Look at the Tube map to try to work out a route. Far and away the easiest route is Thameslink from St Pancras direct to Blackfriars, exiting on the South Bank side of the station. But that route is invisible to Tube Map users (presumably because TfL doesn't get any revenue from it?), and the alternative routes shown on the map are frankly dismal. 

 

My memory tells me Thameslink was, at one time, shown on the map, and I'm not sure when/why it was removed (possibly for similar reasons to the short-lived removal of the Thames from the map - logical in theory since it's not a "tube", but in practice tremendously unhelpful to users)?

 

Paul

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

11 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

The tube map, imho, needs to be just that.  A map of the tube. .......

 

At one time that would be a valid argument, but these days I would disagree with you.

 

 

35 minutes ago, Fenman said:

 

I disagree. While some of the content on the map is pretty much clutter (Emirates airline, anyone?), its utility would be exponentially increased if it showed at least the central sections of both Thameslink and (when opened) Elizabeth line.......

 

Totally 100% with Fenman here.

The Elizabeth Line, Overground and the central section of Thameslink (although not a TfL service) are very much metro services and serve the same purpose as the Underground as parts of an integrated metro network.

 

 

 

.

Edited December 5, 2019 by Ron Ron Ron

[caradoc]

I recall when the Tube map was exactly that, a map of the Tube and nothing else. IIRC the rot set in, or rather the map started to be far more useful (IMHO), when the North London Line was added. It will become utterly bizarre when the east/west main line through London, Crossrail, is shown on the map, but the north/south equivalent, Thameslink, is not (especially as there will be really useful connections between the two at Farringdon !)

 

[royaloak]

On 03/12/2019 at 21:19, lmsforever said:

Over the last sixty years the amount of money spent on the NHS has consistently risen upwards and it will continue after Dec 12th  but has it been spent  wisely.

After my recent incident at work (5 and a half hours in A&E on a Sunday evening) plus issues around seeing my GP for a follow up (been off work 3 weeks and still cant get an appointment), and the ridiculous online system for getting a sicknote (I filled the form in on Sunday, they should have contacted me by Tuesday evening but still nothing, so it didnt work), then when I managed to see the triage nurse (on hold for 2 hours before anyone answered the phone despite being number 1 in the queue) and then not backdating the sicknote (ref online system above) so there is a 2 day gap between the old one and the new one, I am going to say not very well.

 

TBH the way things are at the moment I think privatising the bloody thing would be a good idea.

[KeithMacdonald]

3 hours ago, Fenman said:

 

I disagree. While some of the content on the map is pretty much clutter (Emirates airline, anyone?), its utility would be exponentially increased if it showed at least the central sections of both Thameslink and (when opened) Elizabeth line.

 

If you are unfamiliar with London, let's say you're in King's Cross and want to go to Tate Modern - a not uncommon route for visitors, I'd suggest. Look at the Tube map to try to work out a route. Far and away the easiest route is Thameslink from St Pancras direct to Blackfriars, exiting on the South Bank side of the station. But that route is invisible to Tube Map users (presumably because TfL doesn't get any revenue from it?), and the alternative routes shown on the map are frankly dismal. 

 

My memory tells me Thameslink was, at one time, shown on the map, and I'm not sure when/why it was removed (possibly for similar reasons to the short-lived removal of the Thames from the map - logical in theory since it's not a "tube", but in practice tremendously unhelpful to users)?

 

Paul

 

 

I concur.

 

For example, the combined Tube + Rail map here : https://tfl.gov.uk/maps/track?intcmp=40400

 

It does have the Thameslink route as a pink-and-white dashed line. It's the most informative, with perhaps all(?) the routes, but it's not the "normal" map. And I can't find a way to download it like the seperate tube or overground maps.  Anyone got any clues how to do that?

[billbedford]

Press the button the says:

 

'London rail and Tube services

PDF 287 KB'

 

and download the PDF

 

 

[The Stationmaster]

7 minutes ago, billbedford said:

Press the button the says:

 

'London rail and Tube services

PDF 287 KB'

 

and download the PDF

 

 

I'm blowed if I can find that button on this page.  Where is it please? -

 

[billbedford]

On this page

[The Stationmaster]

2 minutes ago, billbedford said:

On this page

Ah, so it's on a different page.  So to answer Keith's question from the original page which he linked first click on 'National Rail' then you get a download option.  Thanks

[KeithMacdonald]

Thanks. :-)

 

I've seen there's already a newer version floating elsewhere round t'interweb that includes TFL extended as far as Reading. Seeing Reading on a "London Tube map" is a little strange (at first).

 

[Suzie]

[KeithMacdonald]

[Gwiwer]

I would agree that there is benefit in showing all rail routes within the core TfL zones 1-6.  Those tube and the parallel NR routes which extend to zones 7-9, plus Shenfield and Watford Junction which are logical and are TfL route  terminals also need to be included on a "tube" map.

 

This therefore includes the Thameslink and Lizzie Line cores but not the outer limits.  Reading is no more "London" than Peterborough, Cambridge, Rainham or Littlehampton.  Oyster is valid to Gatwick Airport by commercial arrangement but on a point-to-point fare basis rather than zonal therefore this too does not need, of necessity, to be included.  

 

A map of rail routes in the south-east of England similar in coverage to the erstwhile NSE area but including tube lines can stand alone as a different product aimed at differing needs.  The tourist in Leicester Square wants clarity of information in seeking a route to the Tower of London.  They don't need to unscramble a maze of lines extending from the Sussex coast to Cambs/Herts in which the central London tube network is represented artificially large in scale in order to be seen at all.  The newly-landed arrival at Gatwick Airport may seek a route to Wapping or Peckham (both popular with Airbnb users) but doesn't - at this stage - need to be aware of the TfL travel zones nor the fact that Park Royal to Hanger Lane is "Less than ten minutes walk".  And a thoroughly unpleasant walk it is, too.