On 2 June, 19:13, "Dr. Sunil" wrote:
On 2 June, 17:40, "Dr. Sunil" wrote:





On 2 June, 17:06, E27002 wrote:

On Jun 2, 6:56*am, "Dr. Sunil" wrote:

On 1 June, 20:28, Paul Corfield wrote:

Photos are still loading up but most of them are there at

http://www.flickr.com/photos/24759744@N02/

Paul Corfield

You beat me to it! I was waiting for better weather - did your camera
get wet? LOL

Still very nice images indeed. I took some this morning, still
uploading them to Wikimedia Commons. Here are my shots of Canonbury
(feed will be updated with Highbury and Caledonian Road some time
today!):

http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSe...ifam=commons.w...

Thank you for the link to your pictures Dr. *They help give a feel for
the changes. *When I first travelled on the NLL in the 1960s I never
thought to live to see this sort of renewal. *Canonbury is especially
striking.

West Croydon Station does not appear to have an Overground Roundel
outside.

You're welcome! I will try and get the H & I and Caledonian pictures
up this evening. I guess Paul's cloudy day pictures might be better
due to lack of shadows/glare but it was such a nice day today!

Actually W Croydon does have a roundel around the side entrance,
fronting the Sutton platform:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...t_Croydon_stn_....

Highbury pics now uploaded - I didn't take a shot of the exit, I
actually spent a full 15 minutes taking the other pics and the next
westbound train arrived just as I was entered the concourse! Has the
exit signage changed at all?

http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSe...commons.w....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Caledonian Road and Barnsbury pics finally uploaded - manually as
usual!:

http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSe...xt=Sunil060902

On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 06:56:48 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. Sunil"
wrote:

On 2 June, 06:22, Neil Williams wrote:
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 21:39:05 +0000 (UTC), Martin Petrov

wrote:
One final point, why do they still have "Temporary Sign" all over
EVERY
sign? What's the point? Why have they done this?

Not DDA compliant? As someone with no sight issues (other than a need
for glasses) I find those black on orange ones hard to read, assuming
they are that type.

Failing that maybe a planning permission issue - but isn't the
railway usually exempt?

Signs that can't be seen from the street don't usually significantly
affect the external appearance so yes in that respect and yes again if
external signs do not significantly (or "materially" ?) falter the
external appearance.


The signs have been up for the best part of two years!

So IIRC not "temporary" for planning purposes.

On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 20:07:49 +0100, "Peter Masson"
wrote:



"E27002" wrote

IIRC the current return issue is more serious on the deep level tubes
built of iron (?) segements.

It is signalling cables, cable armour and air pipes which are most at
risk from stray currents. IIRC because of more modern materials most
of the Underground could now survive on 3rd-rail if it wasn't for the
relatively few wet bits.

The Brunel tunnel on the ELL is
brickwork.

Could there be issues with current return between Highbury & Islington and
Dalston Junction, because of the proximity of the 25 kV NLL?

If the 4th rail is still plumbed in then maybe it has been left to
take traction current (via bonds to the running rail) and avoid
increasing the resistance by otherwise using only the running rail as
a return. WRT to stray currents it would if still bonded provide a
more certain return path.

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 02:43:16 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:
It is signalling cables, cable armour and air pipes which are most
at
risk from stray currents. IIRC because of more modern materials most
of the Underground could now survive on 3rd-rail if it wasn't for
the
relatively few wet bits.

Merseyrail does, though it has serious rail corrosion issues on the
wet bits, which may be connected.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 14:13:43 -0700 (PDT), Stephen Furley
wrote:
It was only last Saturday that I noticed the small blue
priority seating notices above each one.

I think these are less important with side facing seats as all have
the same legroom and are not much different in accessibility. But I
suppose they do set an important expectation in those using them so
should probably be more prominent - unless you use a general "all
seats..." notice, I suppose.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 02:31:08 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:
So IIRC not "temporary" for planning purposes.

Must just be an "it looks scruffy now but we will sort later"
statement, then, I guess.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 07:41:44 +0200, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 02:43:16 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:
It is signalling cables, cable armour and air pipes which are most
at
risk from stray currents. IIRC because of more modern materials most
of the Underground could now survive on 3rd-rail if it wasn't for
the
relatively few wet bits.

Merseyrail does, though it has serious rail corrosion issues on the
wet bits, which may be connected.

The wrong type of water ?

In article ,
(Charles Ellson) wrote:

Could there be issues with current return between Highbury & Islington
and Dalston Junction, because of the proximity of the 25 kV NLL?

If the 4th rail is still plumbed in then maybe it has been left to
take traction current (via bonds to the running rail) and avoid
increasing the resistance by otherwise using only the running rail as
a return. WRT to stray currents it would if still bonded provide a
more certain return path.

There was no sign of any fourth rail between Canada Water and Dalston
Junction when I rode the line. All new track and sleepers.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 2 June, 19:57, E27002 wrote:
On Jun 2, 11:46*am, "Dr. Sunil" wrote:





On 2 June, 19:36, E27002 wrote:

On Jun 2, 11:13*am, "Dr. Sunil" wrote:

On 2 June, 17:40, "Dr. Sunil" wrote:

On 2 June, 17:06, E27002 wrote:

On Jun 2, 6:56*am, "Dr. Sunil" wrote:

On 1 June, 20:28, Paul Corfield wrote:

Photos are still loading up but most of them are there at

http://www.flickr.com/photos/24759744@N02/

Paul Corfield

You beat me to it! I was waiting for better weather - did your camera
get wet? LOL

Still very nice images indeed. I took some this morning, still
uploading them to Wikimedia Commons. Here are my shots of Canonbury
(feed will be updated with Highbury and Caledonian Road some time
today!):

http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSe...ifam=commons.w...

Thank you for the link to your pictures Dr. *They help give a feel for
the changes. *When I first travelled on the NLL in the 1960s I never
thought to live to see this sort of renewal. *Canonbury is especially
striking.

West Croydon Station does not appear to have an Overground Roundel
outside.

You're welcome! I will try and get the H & I and Caledonian pictures
up this evening. I guess Paul's cloudy day pictures might be better
due to lack of shadows/glare but it was such a nice day today!

Actually W Croydon does have a roundel around the side entrance,
fronting the Sutton platform:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...t_Croydon_stn_...

Highbury pics now uploaded - I didn't take a shot of the exit, I
actually spent a full 15 minutes taking the other pics and the next
westbound train arrived just as I was entered the concourse! Has the
exit signage changed at all?

http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSe...ifam=commons.w...

Thanks again Dr. *I notice the presence of a fourth rail, sans
conductors, on the ELL tracks.

I thought so too, but it could just be spare track lying around. There
is no ELL fourth track (ie. the elevated section and former LU
section), which point against that. Incidentally, is the current
return thing a problem on the LU section?

IIRC the current return issue is more serious on the deep level tubes
built of iron (?) segements. *The Brunel tunnel on the ELL is
brickwork.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I managed to get a few pictures of the new stations before they
opened..
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22077007@N04/
Dazz285

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 02:31:08 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:

The signs have been up for the best part of two years!

So IIRC not "temporary" for planning purposes.

I thought the Kings Cross frontage was "temporary" and that's been
around 30 years!