East London Line

[iands]

Interesting use of a Standard Route Indicator with a Ground Position Light, I haven't seen that before, it's technically banned under standards.

 

Would you happen to know why this was used?

 

Simon

Hi Simon,

 

To be honest, no I don't. But you have set me a challenge and I'll find out the reason why and I'll let you know in due course.

 

Regards, Ian.

[jim.snowdon]

Interesting use of a Standard Route Indicator with a Ground Position Light, I haven't seen that before, it's technically banned under standards.

 

Would you happen to know why this was used?

 

Simon

Banned under NR or Railway Group standards? If the signal is on TfL infrastructure, then NR standards are not mandatory, and theatre type route indicators on shunt signals are quite common on LU infrastructure.

 

Given that the important part is to convey the information to the driver as to the route for which the signal has been cleared, I would have said that clarity is the most important element in deciding on the type of indicator.

 

It will be interesting to see what Ian turns up.

 

Jim

[ess1uk]

What a great idea for a thread.

I worked on the ELL Comms when the TETRA and Airwave were being installed and walked under the Thames several times.

 

Hi All,

 

As suggested by "4630" from a post in the "Third-Rail EMU Photo" thread, I've started a new topic on the East London Line that may be of interest. Most of the photos will be of the infrastructure, but a few shots of rolling stock (mostly Class 378s) will also be included.

 

First, a little bit of the background as to how I came to be involved with the ELL.

 

I'll start by saying that I was made redundant from Network Rail in November 2003 (after 30 years with BR, Railtrack then NR), I specialise in railway Telecoms. In the January of 2004 I started in the railway division with my current employer, which is essentially a "design house" for just about anything related to railways (e.g. Civils, P.Way, Signalling, Telecoms, Traction Power, Non-Traction Power, etc.). Things were going a bit "slow" for me for the first 18 months or so, some very interesting little projects but nothing that required much more than 2 or 3 weeks input from me. Because of this I was a little apprehensive when my manager came to see me, I thought I was going to be "let go" because there wasn't a huge amount for me to do. Not so, he asked if I would be interested in a 6-month secondment to help with the preliminary designs for the proposed new East London Line. Needless to say I said yes! I started in July 2005 - just one week after the terrible London Tube bombings.

 

We completed the preliminary designs (for all disciplines) by the end of December 2005. in early 2006 the design team were then required to assist TfL (the Client) with the review process of the designs. Basically this involved answering lots of questions and assisting with the production of a "Requirements" document and tweaking our designs to make them more suitable for inclusion in an ITT document.

 

The upshot of this was that the TfL ELL Project at the time didn't have an in-house Telecoms Engineer (the previous incumbent had left). I was asked if I would like to cover the post of Telecoms Project Engineer for the foreseeable future - Yes please I said! So I effectively moved (still under secondment) from the "contractors" side to the "client" side.

 

WARNING: Beware of 6-month secondments - it is now 2017 and I'm still undertaking Telecoms Project Engineering roles for TfL London Overground!

 

In all seriousness, I've thoroughly enjoyed every minute of it. To be able to see a project through from concept to revenue earning services (and subsequent additional routes and enhancements) is amazing and I consider myself very fortunate in this respect.

 

Enough of me rabbiting on, time for some photos. There is no chronological or location specific order to any of the photos, I'll just pick them at random - it will stop you guessing what's coming next!

 

A major part of the ELL is the Thames Tunnel section in the middle. After the old LU 4th-rail track had been ripped out and some structural work undertaken, the new 3rd-rail track was laid in the tunnel section - slab track to be precise. I was fortunate enough to have walked though the tunnel section (Surrey Quays to Whitechapel) on three separate occasions.

 

From Wapping station looking into Brunel's original tunnel under the River Thames towards Rotherhithe.

 

De189.JPG

 

New slab track in place (with drainage channels), new GRP cable troughing fixed to tunnel wall, but no third-rail yet.

 

De197.JPG

 

Miniature signal EL244 (Up ELL) with TPWS 'Stop Sensor' (in the four-foot). The signal is not yet powered. The "white" lights that seem to be lit are just the LEDs reflecting the flash from the camera. The yellow square-ish box on a short post in the left middle distance is what is known as a "mushroom", it is  for Axle Counter equipment. The station in the far distance is Shadwell.

 

De200.JPG

 

This is a photo of a wooden 3/4 mile post on the Down side between Whitechapel and Shadwell. I don't know if it is an original form the "steam" days or from when the LU took over operations of the line (I suspect the former). I took some tools with me on the next walkout with the intentions of recovering it and placing it into "safe custody", but sadly it had already gone. I suspect it was removed by the contractors and scrapped (a real pity). However, the photo is at least an historical record of its former existence.

 

De216.JPG

 

Finally for today, a bit of a departure. As the project progressed towards the installation of the Comms systems, we were required to ascertain some "usage requirements" for station staff using handheld mobiles on the GSMR system (User Groups, Calling Groups, Lone Worker etc., etc.). Anyway, this involved an away day to Didcot to meet with NR (that is where one of the main GSMR sites is located), so we went along to the museum and I took a photo of a Pannier Tank. Those in the know will no doubt provide all its history, I'm sorry I can't.

 

PICT0025.JPG

 

Hope you enjoy this topic and you find it of some interest. I'll post more during the coming week and with more emphasis on the photos and less of my prattle (but I will provide explanations where required but I'll try and keep them brief).

 

Regards, Ian.

[iands]

Banned under NR or Railway Group standards? If the signal is on TfL infrastructure, then NR standards are not mandatory, and theatre type route indicators on shunt signals are quite common on LU infrastructure.

Given that the important part is to convey the information to the driver as to the route for which the signal has been cleared, I would have said that clarity is the most important element in deciding on the type of indicator.

It will be interesting to see what Ian turns up.

Jim

Hi Jim,

 

The decision was taken very early on in the project that Railway Group and Network Rail standards would be adopted for all ELL operational railway "infrastructure", with a handfull of LU standards adopted for the stations only (as an enhancement to the NR ststions standards). But I agree with your point that clarity to the driver is most important. Still digging through the information I have available here, but the answer may be back in the office - or someone else's "memory bank". I'll let you know a.s.a.p.

 

Regards, Ian.

[iands]

What a great idea for a thread.

I worked on the ELL Comms when the TETRA and Airwave were being installed and walked under the Thames several times.

Hi "ess",

 

Ah, TERTRA and Airwave - I've personally not had much involvement with TETRA (but more with Airwave), and only then with what was required for the ELL project. I've had a number of years working on the NRN/ORN, CSR, GSMR, UHF Spot schemes and even Marine radio in my railway career "playing radio" - happy days!

 

Regards, Ian.

[jim.snowdon]

Hi Jim,

The decision was taken very early on in the project that Railway Group and Network Rail standards would be adopted for all ELL operational railway "infrastructure", with a handfull of LU standards adopted for the stations only (as an enhancement to the NR ststions standards). But I agree with your point that clarity to the driver is most important. Still digging through the information I have available here, but the answer may be back in the office - or someone else's "memory bank". I'll let you know a.s.a.p.

Regards, Ian.

Thanks, Ian.

 

I appreciate that there has to be a level of discipline in railway signalling so that train driver gets a clear and unambiguous instruction, but there are times when over-prescriptive standards (and there are more than a few of these) lead to less than ideal solutions.

 

Jim

[ess1uk]

Hi "ess",

Ah, TERTRA and Airwave - I've personally not had much involvement with TETRA (but more with Airwave), and only then with what was required for the ELL project. I've had a number of years working on the NRN/ORN, CSR, GSMR, UHF Spot schemes and even Marine radio in my railway career "playing radio" - happy days!

Regards, Ian.

A varied career you’ve had.

I also got to go into the OBC during build to Commision the Dicora FTS for ELL.

[iands]

Banned under NR or Railway Group standards? If the signal is on TfL infrastructure, then NR standards are not mandatory, and theatre type route indicators on shunt signals are quite common on LU infrastructure.

 

Given that the important part is to convey the information to the driver as to the route for which the signal has been cleared, I would have said that clarity is the most important element in deciding on the type of indicator.

 

It will be interesting to see what Ian turns up.

 

Jim

 

Hi Jim and Simon,

 

The best I can do at the moment regarding the question about the route indicator on signal EL3005, is to offer as an explanation via couple of things directly from the Signalling Scheme Plan. On the SSP there is a TPWS Table and against 3005 it says "Fitted" (I think this is also evident in the photo). On the SSP next to 3005 is "#54", and note 54 simply says "Bespoke RI Required". I can't offer any further explanation at this time as to why a bespoke RI would be required, but I'll try and track down some former colleagues from the ELL Project who will have more knowledge in this area in an effort to provide a more definitive answer.

 

Regards, Ian.

[iands]

A varied career you’ve had.

I also got to go into the OBC during build to Commision the Dicora FTS for ELL.

 

In that case, we may well have met each other at the OBC!

[timbowilts]

Hi Jim and Simon,

 

The best I can do at the moment regarding the question about the route indicator on signal EL3005, is to offer as an explanation via couple of things directly from the Signalling Scheme Plan. On the SSP there is a TPWS Table and against 3005 it says "Fitted" (I think this is also evident in the photo). On the SSP next to 3005 is "#54", and note 54 simply says "Bespoke RI Required". I can't offer any further explanation at this time as to why a bespoke RI would be required, but I'll try and track down some former colleagues from the ELL Project who will have more knowledge in this area in an effort to provide a more definitive answer.

 

Regards, Ian.

The answer may be in the number of indications that are to be displayed. If I recall correctly from my just-finished 43 year career a miniature or “stencil” RI is limited to three indications?

 

HTH, Tim T

[iands]

Thanks, Ian.

 

I appreciate that there has to be a level of discipline in railway signalling so that train driver gets a clear and unambiguous instruction, but there are times when over-prescriptive standards (and there are more than a few of these) lead to less than ideal solutions.

 

Jim

 

Hi Jim,

 

I agree with you regarding the "over-prescriptive" standards. As someone that was given the task of producing some Telecoms related "Regional Standards" back in BR days, I know from first-hand experience, what seems to be a quite straightforward exercise, soon becomes quite a task in giving clear and unambiguous instructions via a piece of paper! What initially starts outs as half a page of A4 very soon becomes a 10 page document for even the simplest of tasks!

 

Regards, Ian.

[iands]

The answer may be in the number of indications that are to be displayed. If I recall correctly from my just-finished 43 year career a miniature or “stencil” RI is limited to three indications?

 

HTH, Tim T

 

Hi Tim,

 

That could be a possibility, although all the other route indicators on ELL are "fibre optic" and I would have thought that with modern technology the requirement for individual lit stencils would have been superseded by now. I'm not an expert (I hate that word - "ex" is something that has been, and "spurt" is a drip under pressure! ha ha) in this field so I'll do a bit more digging.

 

Regards, Ian.

[St. Simon]

Hi Jim and Simon,

 

The best I can do at the moment regarding the question about the route indicator on signal EL3005, is to offer as an explanation via couple of things directly from the Signalling Scheme Plan. On the SSP there is a TPWS Table and against 3005 it says "Fitted" (I think this is also evident in the photo). On the SSP next to 3005 is "#54", and note 54 simply says "Bespoke RI Required". I can't offer any further explanation at this time as to why a bespoke RI would be required, but I'll try and track down some former colleagues from the ELL Project who will have more knowledge in this area in an effort to provide a more definitive answer.

 

Regards, Ian.

 Hi Ian,

 

Thanks for the finding out the information, that certainly is interesting, I would imagine that it was something to do with sighting, as a miniature route indicator is slightly more flexible than a standard size route indicator, as the miniatures can display multiple characters and can display up to 10 routes (although more can be displayed with a VMS version), where as a Standard can only show up to 6 separate single characters.

 

Simon

[iands]

 Hi Ian,

 

Thanks for the finding out the information, that certainly is interesting, I would imagine that it was something to do with sighting, as a miniature route indicator is slightly more flexible than a standard size route indicator, as the miniatures can display multiple characters and can display up to 10 routes (although more can be displayed with a VMS version), where as a Standard can only show up to 6 separate single characters.

 

Simon

 

Hi Simon,

 

I've provided an extract from the SSP which hopefully you can access. It shows 3005, and in the top box of the signal symbol is "14". I assume that this relates to the total number of routes available from this signal that can be displayed, be they a combination of letters or numbers. I have been in the cab in a unit passing this signal for a shunt move back into the depot and I think at the time what was displayed was the siding number. It's times like this you wish you had a camera with you permanently and took a 1000 photos every day!

 

3005 extract.docx

 

Regards, Ian.

[iands]

Hi Simon,

 

I've provided an extract from the SSP which hopefully you can access. It shows 3005, and in the top box of the signal symbol is "14". I assume that this relates to the total number of routes available from this signal that can be displayed, be they a combination of letters or numbers. I have been in the cab in a unit passing this signal for a shunt move back into the depot and I think at the time what was displayed was the siding number. It's times like this you wish you had a camera with you permanently and took a 1000 photos every day!

 

3005 extract.docx

 

Regards, Ian.

 

Hi Simon,

 

Further to my previous reply, I've managed to track down the original Signal Sighting Form (from 2008). It states "MRI" which I assume stands for "Miniature Route Indicator". I assume at some point this was changed/upgraded to a standard route indicator, as you say possibly for 'sighting' reasons (and Jim's comment about "clarity of indication" to drivers - which I suppose amounts to the same thing). 

 

Attached is an extract from the SSF listing the route "indications" capable of being displayed.

 

SSF extract.docx

 

Regards, Ian.

[St. Simon]

Hi Simon,

 

I've provided an extract from the SSP which hopefully you can access. It shows 3005, and in the top box of the signal symbol is "14". I assume that this relates to the total number of routes available from this signal that can be displayed, be they a combination of letters or numbers. I have been in the cab in a unit passing this signal for a shunt move back into the depot and I think at the time what was displayed was the siding number. It's times like this you wish you had a camera with you permanently and took a 1000 photos every day!

 

3005 extract.docx

 

Regards, Ian.

 

 

Hi Simon,

 

Further to my previous reply, I've managed to track down the original Signal Sighting Form (from 2008). It states "MRI" which I assume stands for "Miniature Route Indicator". I assume at some point this was changed/upgraded to a standard route indicator, as you say possibly for 'sighting' reasons (and Jim's comment about "clarity of indication" to drivers - which I suppose amounts to the same thing). 

 

Attached is an extract from the SSF listing the route "indications" capable of being displayed.

 

SSF extract.docx

 

Regards, Ian.

 

Hi Ian,

 

Hmm, those are useful, I would say that although it looks like a standard route indicator in your photo, I would say that it is in fact two miniature route indicators mounted on top of one another and fitted within a standard route indicator housing. 

 

The fact that the SSF states a MARI with 14 indications says to me that a pair of MARIs are needed, and I assume that space there is at a premium, so you can't get two seperate MARI's in the lower structure gauge, therefore a bespoke one (two MARIs in a single SARI) is required, shown by #54 one the scheme plan. Also, looking at the picture, two cables are going into the route indicator, which says to me that there are two route indicators in there (if it was a single SARI, then only one cable would be needed). The scheme plan only shows a single MARI, but as the Scheme Plan only shows what is needed rather than what is actually installed (as long as it carries out the same function), then I think this makes sense.

 

However, the scheme plan extracts has thrown up another question. It seems to show that 3005 can show a flashing PoSA route aspect as well?

 

Simon 

[iands]

Hi Ian,

 

Hmm, those are useful, I would say that although it looks like a standard route indicator in your photo, I would say that it is in fact two miniature route indicators mounted on top of one another and fitted within a standard route indicator housing. 

 

The fact that the SSF states a MARI with 14 indications says to me that a pair of MARIs are needed, and I assume that space there is at a premium, so you can't get two seperate MARI's in the lower structure gauge, therefore a bespoke one (two MARIs in a single SARI) is required, shown by #54 one the scheme plan. Also, looking at the picture, two cables are going into the route indicator, which says to me that there are two route indicators in there (if it was a single SARI, then only one cable would be needed). The scheme plan only shows a single MARI, but as the Scheme Plan only shows what is needed rather than what is actually installed (as long as it carries out the same function), then I think this makes sense.

 

However, the scheme plan extracts has thrown up another question. It seems to show that 3005 can show a flashing PoSA route aspect as well?

 

Simon

 

Hi Simon,

 

Re the RI, it may well be as you describe, I wasn't involved with the signalling to that level of detail (I just took a general interest as it isn't my "disipline"). That said, in response to your PoSA comment, I do know that PoSA functionality was implemented on ELL.

 

Regards, Ian.

[iands]

After completing Phase 2 (to Clapham), we set about modifying station platforms, NXG depot and creating new stabling sidings at Silwood to accommodate 5-car stock. To create Silwood sidings a bit of 'enabling works' were required. For my part (Telecoms), one of the things to do was to modify the fibre cable provision. This required a couple of new joints to provide a fibre loop into/out of the sidings area. A couple of shots from the rear cab were enhanced to show where the joints were to go as per the two following photos.

 

 

The next photo shows the contractors actually working on one of the joints.

 

Jumping back to the original ELL project, during all the various design stages a number of presentations/consultations were undertaken with the local residents. As per usual at such events a number of drawings were displayed showing what was being proposed. Drawings can only provide something of an idea as to what things will look like. To enhance this for both the project teams and local residents alike, CGI was used to provide an image of what, in this case, the New Cross Gate depot would look like when completed - at first glance it could almost pass as an actual model layout!

 

This shot is of the actual depot once completed from the opposite angle.

 

To finish off for today, three more general shots of NXG depot.

 

Regards, Ian.

[iands]

As 2017 draws to a close, so I must draw a close to the ELL thread as I have just about used up the most interesting photos (there are plenty more that I haven't posted but they are very similar to the ones I already have, so I feel they would be of little added value and it would get a bit boring). Thanks for all your feedback, comments and encouragement, especially to '4630' for suggesting in the first place to start the thread. I've enjoyed looking back through the photos and the development of the project through to revenue earing services. It truly was a great project to work on and I feel privileged to have been a part of it. It is still hard to believe it all started for me back in 2005.

 

Anyway, here are today's final offering.

 

Although quite a bit of the ELL route is slab track, there is still a fair amount of standard ballasted track. However, some of it was a bit wobbly before the tamper/line got to work

 

Some setting-out at NXG depot 

 

Some more shots of the setting-out of the slab track - on the approach to Shoreditch High Street station (from the north)

 

... from within Shoreditch High Street station (looking north)

 

Between Surrey Quays station and the tunnel portal towards Canada Water

 

Despite implementing GSMR on the whole route, there was still a requirement to provide lineside/platform telephones

 

As part of the LOCIP element of the project, and in addition to the Silwood Stabling Sidings, we were required to provide some stabling sidings in the Willesden area for the North London Line service stock (Willesden TMD not having sufficient space, although we did provide some improved facilities there). After looking at 2 or 3 sites, Willesden C Sidings were chosen as the preferred option. Originally 5 sidings, we reduced them down to 3 with wide walkway/access areas between the sidings for maintenance access. Although there were 4 Signal Boxes/Signalling Centres already in less than a mile of railway in the area, we had to create a new "signalling panel" for the C Sidings. This is located on the first floor of the former EWS building.

 

These are general shots of the sidings themselves

 

During the LOCIP phase I was also involved with the Crossrail project for a year (on the RfL side), looking at the telecoms elements for the "central" section (Paddington to Stratford/Abbey Wood). Once the LOCIP work was completed, I then had a year as Telecoms Project Engineer (Network Rail) for the Northern Hub project on the Electrification/Resignalling section on the Preston-Blackpool route, as well as continuing my TPE role with London Overground on the Barking Riverside Extension project - until I fell ill in March of this year. However, I hope to be back at work sometime in March 2018 if all goes well, and who knows I might take a few photos of the BRE and start another thread (that is if they'll have me back!).

 

Thank you all for the opportunity to share the photos with you, and I hope you have found it an enjoyable and/or informative thread and seeing some of the "angles" of a railway you perhaps don't get a chance to normally see - again I feel privileged that my job allows me to do this on an almost daily basis.

 

So I'll sign off by wishing you all happiness, prosperity and good health for 2018.

 

Regards, Ian.

 

 

[Siberian Snooper]

An excellent insight to the refurbishment, upgrading and extensions to the ELL.

 

Many Thanks.

 

A happy and heathy new year too you.

[5BarVT]

Interesting use of a Standard Route Indicator with a Ground Position Light, I haven't seen that before, it's technically banned under standards.

Bit behind in my reading as I don't always frequent this area of the forum. Sort of hinted at in some of the following posts: it's not the size of the tin box that matters, it's what shines out of it. So an SI sized box displaying MI sized indications is fully compliant with NR standards and that can only be known if a photo of the signal off is available. Number of displays required may have driven a larger box but still with MIs.

Paul.

[iands]

Bit behind in my reading as I don't always frequent this area of the forum. Sort of hinted at in some of the following posts: it's not the size of the tin box that matters, it's what shines out of it. So an SI sized box displaying MI sized indications is fully compliant with NR standards and that can only be known if a photo of the signal off is available. Number of displays required may have driven a larger box but still with MIs.

Paul.

Hi Paul,

 

I've not been on a unit going back along the Up ELL (wrong direction) into the depot to see what was displayed on the indicator, so unfortunately I can't help you there. However, just out of satisfying curiosity, I'll try to find out - but it might take a while.

 

Regards, Ian.

[unravelled]

This is a quick copy from my Flickr albums page, with the latest albums. These are a repackaging of existing pictures with some additions. this may have resulted in a few duplicates...

 

First some taken South of New Cross Gate on Brockley Bank

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/unravelled/albums/72157668170008999

 

 

Next mainly north of New Cross Gate Station

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/unravelled/albums/72157664377309168/with/39525663051/

 

 

And New Cross station itself

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/unravelled/albums/72157691177079904

 

 

Finally the phase 2 route to Clapham Junction

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/unravelled/albums/72157662420310277

 

This includes some pictures on the old trackbed leading to Old Kent road, when it was still accessible.

 

Thanks

 

Dave