Elizabeth Line / Crossrail Updates.

[jamie92208]

Mike,

 

The underlying point is that computer software is only as good as the support for the operating system on which it runs and the supply of hardware components. There are many software packages out there that were designed to run on, for example, Windows XP and cannot be migrated to current versions of Windows now that XP is no longer supported. On top of that, there comes a point where manufacturers would rather you bought a new system than attempt to keep an old one going. They are, after all, in business to sell product, not provide the customer with a product that will last decades without replacement.

 

Jim

This is not a new problem though. I believe that the basis of TOPS is an ancient operating system from the 60's and that maintainers have to be specially trained to work on it. The same is true in other industries. One system we used in the police was only kept going because the same machines were involved in running the first generation magnox nuclear power stations.

 

 

Jamie

[Mike Storey]

Mike,

 

The underlying point is that computer software is only as good as the support for the operating system on which it runs and the supply of hardware components. There are many software packages out there that were designed to run on, for example, Windows XP and cannot be migrated to current versions of Windows now that XP is no longer supported. On top of that, there comes a point where manufacturers would rather you bought a new system than attempt to keep an old one going. They are, after all, in business to sell product, not provide the customer with a product that will last decades without replacement.

 

Jim

 

Fair enough Jim

 

But the suppliers are in the business of making money, and most profit comes from support functions, post-sale. The issue then becomes whether it is cheaper for "the railway" to buy off-the-shelf software as available at the the time, and take the hit in later years with new software, or to specify the Holy Grail of ever-lasting (open architecture), continuously supported and thus unique software. BR tried the latter, and got caught both by the extraordinary advances in computing, but also by very expensive support contracts that proved increasingly difficult to staff, let alone maintain and renew. (I got stuffed when in BR InterCity, in trying to maintain the unique APTIS system, which is why we started to develop the PC-based Tribute). I really think it is a no-brainer these days.

 

So I agree that life spans of software and some associated hardware, are as short as in any other industry that relies on computers these days, but I suggest that most of the hardware supplied over the past 15 or so years, can outlive most of the highly maintenance intensive, rust-ridden, bulb-changing, relay-blowing, copper-wired junk of the 1970's. 

[david.hill64]

A couple of observations.

 

Railway signalling is deemed by the European Commission to be a European competence. Therefore all EU countries are mandated to use ETCS on new projects. This is implemented by an EU directive and has to be implemented nationally as-is (no parliamentary scrutiny etc). There is no need for a UK regulation to do it as we are already bound (at least for the moment) by the directive. The exceptions are for maintenance works, so if some bit of BR, SNCF or DB kit has worn out, it can be replaced like for like. Implementation date was 2016.

 

Although UK will from whenever Brexit becomes effective no longer be obligated to use ETCS, it would be monumentally stupid not to adopt it as a British Standard. The idea behind ETCS is that railways can be supplied with interchangeable kit from different suppliers. (Though it seems ETCS is in practice not as interchangeable as hoped).

 

TPWS was intended as a short term solution until ATP was cost effective and has already far outlived its estimated life. Although it has been shown to deliver about 80% of the benefits of ATP (greater than the project's design assumption of 68%), it doesn't mitigate the very low probability high consequence accidents. Nobody should be thinking about TPWS as a replacement for the out of date GW ATP system. In 1994 Railtrack's base assumption was that ETCS level 3 would be available as a tested product by 2000. I think that the technical specification for level 3 has just been approved (or is about to be). ETCS is the commercially attractive option as well as giving the best operations (moving block) functionality, reliability and safety.

 

Having until recently worked for a supplier of signalling systems, I can assure you that designing-in obsolescence is definitely not on the agenda. It is very expensive to get a safety case approved for safety critical hardware. Signalling suppliers hang on to the hardware platforms for as long as they can, and will buy in large stocks of soon-to-be-out-of-date processors when the manufacturers of these components issue their 'last call for orders' notices.

[Ron Ron Ron]

London Reconnections have some insight into the reasons behind the announced delay in opening phase 1.

 

https://www.londonreconnections.com/2018/crossrail-a-hole-new-world/

 

 

 

.

[The Stationmaster]

No no no - naughty  

 

You know the "slow" lines on the GWR are actually the relief lines.  Slow lines are such a northern invention. 

 

 

Ah, but did the LSWR just copy the GNR and/or LNWR practice? 

Spot on.  The GWR initially copied the LNWR nomenclature when it added the additional pair of running lines in the 1870s but on1 January 1880 they were retitled Main and Relief (Lines) - so the GWR use of the terms 'Fast' and 'Slow' Lines lasted only a month or so over four years as the first additional running line had not opened to traffic until November 1875 and was in any case purely for use by freight trains..  It is pure surmise but one wonders if the use of the terms Fast and Slow might have arise just as much from the fact that the additional running lines were narrow gauge only. (Although it is should be noted that following their introduction  two goods train had to use the 'Fast Lines' because they were formed with broad gauge vehicles.)

[Ron Ron Ron]

YouTube transport Vlogger, Geoff Marshall talks to Gareth Edwards (a.k.a. John Bull) of London Reconnections, about the delay to the opening of Crossrail/Elizabeth Line and other related issues.

 

A bit of banter and messing about at the start, but it gets going after 2min 40secs in.

There's some interesting information in there.

 

Warning, it's 27mins long.

 

 

 

[ess1uk]

Warnings over probable delays, despite official "spokespeople" saying otherwise, existed as far back as February.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-42921305

when they cant recruit RF/Radio Engineers it doesn't surprise me things are running late

[bigP]

--

Edited January 31, 2021 by bigP
Deleted

[Ron Ron Ron]

A photo taken at the Old Oak Common Crossrail depot.

A line of Class 345's waiting to be put into service........

 

 

https://www.railforums.co.uk/attachments/71d308d3-146b-4226-ad7d-3243db4e35df-jpeg.55100/

 

 

 

.

[lyneux]

Hurry up and run them to Hanwell please. I'm sick to death of squashing into a 360 every morning.

[St. Simon]

Hurry up and run them to Hanwell please. I'm sick to death of squashing into a 360 every morning.

 

I thought the Paddington to Hayes Stoppers (formed by Class 345s) stopped at Hanwell?

 

Simon

[lyneux]

I thought the Paddington to Hayes Stoppers (formed by Class 345s) stopped at Hanwell?

 

Simon

Sadly not. The only station they don't (despite much lauded performance). The promised 6tph will make a massive difference if it ever arrives.

 

Guy

[Mike Storey]

A photo taken at the Old Oak Common Crossrail depot.

A line of Class 345's waiting to be put into service........

 

 

https://www.railforums.co.uk/attachments/71d308d3-146b-4226-ad7d-3243db4e35df-jpeg.55100/

 

 

 

.

 

Seems to require membership to see this pic Ron?

[Ron Ron Ron]

Seems to require membership to see this pic Ron?

 

 

Ah, yes. Sorry.

You have log in and be a member of Rail UK Forums.

 

It's on this page (in post #218), if able to log in.

 

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/crossrail-opening-delayed-until-autumn-2019.169160/page-8

 

 

 

.

[The Stationmaster]

The latest bit of entertainment - new PI screens going in at Burnham, and no doubt elsewhere under the control of TfL refer to Eastbound and Westbound trains.  Obviously this may well make more sense to many intending passengers than 'Up' and 'Down' (although plenty of passengers do understand those terms) but I do hope that TfL's  newly recruited Drivers are not being taught to use that terminology and will actually know in which direction they are travelling on the railway should an incident occur.

[jim.snowdon]

The latest bit of entertainment - new PI screens going in at Burnham, and no doubt elsewhere under the control of TfL refer to Eastbound and Westbound trains.  Obviously this may well make more sense to many intending passengers than 'Up' and 'Down' (although plenty of passengers do understand those terms) but I do hope that TfL's  newly recruited Drivers are not being taught to use that terminology and will actually know in which direction they are travelling on the railway should an incident occur.

I'm sure there must be some in TfL who would like to think of the relief lines as theirs, with GWR and freight services being an unfortunate complication.

 

Jim

[ess1uk]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46414477

Sacking?

[Mark Saunders]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46414477

Sacking?

 

What would have happened to Marc Brunel over the delays to the original Thames Tunnel ?

 

Mark Saunders

[royaloak]

I'm sure there must be some in TfL who would like to think of the relief lines as theirs, with GWR and freight services being an unfortunate complication.

 

Jim

I did hear a rumour (yeah I know) that Cross Rail wanted sole use of the relief lines, they were told rather impolitely what they could do with that idea!

[royaloak]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46414477

Sacking?

With a healthy wedge in his back pocket no doubt!

[The Stationmaster]

I did hear a rumour (yeah I know) that Cross Rail wanted sole use of the relief lines, they were told rather impolitely what they could do with that idea!

 

That seemed to be quite widely known as they stated at one stage that 'they wanted to takeover the slow lines' - if iId been in charge I'd have told them they were welcome to the Slow Lines but I'd be keeping the Relief Lines, and then watched their confused looks.  I'm left with an overwhelming impression that unlike the previous (1990s) iteration of Crossrail TfL have been keeping themselves very much to themselves and keep on saying what they intend rather than asking the rest of the railway what is available.

 

Back in the '90s there was a joint BR/LUL timetable and working development team for the various sections of BR over which the trains were intended to run plus a timetable development liaison group (for each route over BR lines) which involved all the business sectors operating on that particular route.  One thing which was always made clear at meetings was the needs of other business sectors and the way in which that could, or at various times definitely would, constrain the Crossrail timetable on the GWML side of the central tunnel and agreements were made between us, as business sector reps, and Crossrail about sharing of capacity. (I was the Freight representative on the GWML timetable/capacity working group for more than two years so am well aware of what took place in respect of capacity discussions and in fact the 'two freight paths per hour off peak' agreement which has been quoted on the London Reconnections website was the capacity I wanted and secured secured for the freight businesses through that series of meetings.)

[Mike Storey]

That seemed to be quite widely known as they stated at one stage that 'they wanted to takeover the slow lines' - if iId been in charge I'd have told them they were welcome to the Slow Lines but I'd be keeping the Relief Lines, and then watched their confused looks.  I'm left with an overwhelming impression that unlike the previous (1990s) iteration of Crossrail TfL have been keeping themselves very much to themselves and keep on saying what they intend rather than asking the rest of the railway what is available.

 

Back in the '90s there was a joint BR/LUL timetable and working development team for the various sections of BR over which the trains were intended to run plus a timetable development liaison group (for each route over BR lines) which involved all the business sectors operating on that particular route.  One thing which was always made clear at meetings was the needs of other business sectors and the way in which that could, or at various times definitely would, constrain the Crossrail timetable on the GWML side of the central tunnel and agreements were made between us, as business sector reps, and Crossrail about sharing of capacity. (I was the Freight representative on the GWML timetable/capacity working group for more than two years so am well aware of what took place in respect of capacity discussions and in fact the 'two freight paths per hour off peak' agreement which has been quoted on the London Reconnections website was the capacity I wanted and secured secured for the freight businesses through that series of meetings.)

 

Those joint groups were still definitely in place in 2011, at least for the NLL, ELL/Southern and GE. I had to make presentations to them at various stages, regarding the capacity of new infrastructure likely to be available by key dates.

[caradoc]

You can understand TfL getting confused about line designations though; East of their shiny new tunnel they use the Electric Lines, West of it the Relief Lines, and in other parts of London they use the DC and the Slow Lines. It's a lot simpler on the Underground !

[Titan]

 It's a lot simpler on the Underground !

 

Clockwise and anticlockwise?

[jim.snowdon]

Clockwise and anticlockwise?

East and westbound on the Piccadilly if you are west of Holborn, and North and Southbound if you are, well, north of Holborn, and if you go by the platforms at Holborn, its westbound and northbound. All down to history.

 

Jim