Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
1928 equipment causing commuter misery at Edgware Road Tube
On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 22:45:02 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote: On Sun, 6 Jun 2010, David Hansen wrote: On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 15:58:44 +0100 someone who may be john wright wrote this:- "When there was only one line for the whole of London" What can that refer to? Neither telephones nor rail lines makes much sense in this context. Indeed. The whole sentence is "At its nerve centre is a signal box first fitted in 1928 ? a relic from the first days of the network when there was only one line for the whole of London." I suspect that it is just bad journalism, mixing up things the journalist was told. As background the journalist may have been told that at one time Edgware Road was on the only underground railway line [1] not just in London but in the world. However, that was a long time before 1928. The photograph shows a miniature lever frame box typical of the era, particularly in London and SE England. Hang on, so that levery pipe-organ thing the guy in the photo is playing is from 1928? I assumed the story meant the signal box was built in 1928, not necessarily that all the equipment in it was still original. But i know nothing of these things. Hold on, i've just looked at the link Nick posted. It's not from 1928 - it's from 1926! Yikes! The lever frame might be from the 1920s but there has been no confirmation yet whether the faults lie in there or in the electrical gubbins elsewhere into which it is plumbed and which could be of rather more recent origin. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
1928 equipment causing commuter misery at Edgware Road Tube
On Jun 7, 6:22*am, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 22:45:02 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote: On Sun, 6 Jun 2010, David Hansen wrote: On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 15:58:44 +0100 someone who may be john wright wrote this:- "When there was only one line for the whole of London" What can that refer to? Neither telephones nor rail lines makes much sense in this context. Indeed. The whole sentence is "At its nerve centre is a signal box first fitted in 1928 ? a relic from the first days of the network when there was only one line for the whole of London." I suspect that it is just bad journalism, mixing up things the journalist was told. As background the journalist may have been told that at one time Edgware Road was on the only underground railway line [1] not just in London but in the world. However, that was a long time before 1928. The photograph shows a miniature lever frame box typical of the era, particularly in London and SE England. Hang on, so that levery pipe-organ thing the guy in the photo is playing is from 1928? I assumed the story meant the signal box was built in 1928, not necessarily that all the equipment in it was still original. But i know nothing of these things. Hold on, i've just looked at the link Nick posted. It's not from 1928 - it's from 1926! Yikes! The lever frame might be from the 1920s but there has been no confirmation yet whether the faults lie in there or in the electrical gubbins elsewhere into which it is plumbed and which could be of rather more recent origin. The only other work that has been done is rewiring and the electrical kit such as relays. Many of these are refurbished by LU REW. Then there's things like speed control relays that were put in after Moorgate crash (mostly), but I don't know of any big failures there/ What has failed a fair few times is the new electric points at Praed Street! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
1928 equipment causing commuter misery at Edgware Road Tube
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 02:29:14 -0700 (PDT) someone who may be dave
wrote this:- What has failed a fair few times is the new electric points at Praed Street! Interesting to know. An earlier poster said that it may be new equipment which is more prone to failure. I am reminded of the axle counters around the Severn Tunnel which couldn't cope with sunshine, leading to repeated failures and eventually a crash which appears to have been caused by the axle counters being reset without proper precautions (though this cannot be concluded as the witch-hunt atmosphere of the time (lessened but not totally gone these days I gather) meant that people are not likely to admit to mistakes). Obviously old signalling equipment could and can be affected by the sun too, but rodding runs have ways of dealing with this and wire adjusters are provided for signals. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000...#pt3-pb3-l1g54 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
1928 equipment causing commuter misery at Edgware Road Tube
On 07/06/2010 10:45, David Hansen wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 02:29:14 -0700 (PDT) someone who may be dave wrote this:- What has failed a fair few times is the new electric points at Praed Street! Interesting to know. An earlier poster said that it may be new equipment which is more prone to failure. I am reminded of the axle counters around the Severn Tunnel which couldn't cope with sunshine, leading to repeated failures and eventually a crash which appears to have been caused by the axle counters being reset without proper precautions (though this cannot be concluded as the witch-hunt atmosphere of the time (lessened but not totally gone these days I gather) meant that people are not likely to admit to mistakes). Obviously old signalling equipment could and can be affected by the sun too, but rodding runs have ways of dealing with this and wire adjusters are provided for signals. New equipment may very well be more prone to failure because there tends to be far more to go wrong. There was (in some places still is!) the old Victorian technology of someone pulling levers connected to wires connected to signals, also simple telegraph instruments and single stroke bells to communicate. Compare this with the "black art" of the modern electronic signalling systems with a maze of processors, communication links and detection systems which can be the devil's own game to "troubleshoot". Add to this the likelihood that any problems may be less obvious to the users - the old technology could largely be "seen". This is why many people will go to things like the mechanical organ museum in Norfolk - you can see the exhibits working and in many cases how they work. In future years, who is going to go to a museum to watch a board of integrated circuits sit there? Don't get me wrong - technology is great and the job I do is so much better now than with the antiquated kit we used to have to use. But discretion is required - it is a general rule that the simplest solution that does the job is also the best one. New technology should not automatically replace the old - it should give us more choice. Where the old way is reliable and does the job safely and efficiently, why throw it away? I have often thought that some of the older signalling technologies might actually serve the railway better than going too far down the fancy computer systems road, precisely because the modern stuff can be too complex and too vulnerable. Axle counters are a very good example. They are replacing track circuits because axle counters are allegedly more reliable. But when someone has on overnight possession [for engineering work], the track circuits are normally still working in the morning but the axle counters invariably have to be re-set. This requires either the first train or two being "talked past" signals to restore the settings, or the whole system being reset which means nothing moves for a few minutes. And its not just sunlight - track workers in the Bournemouth area were given strict instructions not to use mobile phones near the new axle counter heads because that also confused the signalling. I'm all for progress - but progress means that the new kit must work *better* than the old stuff did. If it is harder to use, more difficult to fault find, breaks down more, and exhibits its own new ways of going wrong, I'm afraid that's not "progress". I know of more than one modern system which has been introduced mostly to save on (staff) costs, and if it actually works better than before (in the case of Network Rail's new timetable system, if it works at all!), that seems to be a bonus. -- - Yokel - Yokel posts via a spam-trap account which is not read |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
1928 equipment causing commuter misery at Edgware Road Tube
In message
Yokel wrote: [snip] Add to this the likelihood that any problems may be less obvious to the users - the old technology could largely be "seen". This is why many people will go to things like the mechanical organ museum in Norfolk - you can see the exhibits working and in many cases how they work. In future years, who is going to go to a museum to watch a board of integrated circuits sit there? [snip] www.bletchleypark.org.uk/calendar/event_detail.rhtm?cat=special&recID=594620 -- Graeme Wall This address not read, substitute trains for rail Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net/ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
1928 equipment causing commuter misery at Edgware Road Tube
On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 10:51:45 +0100 someone who may be Yokel
wrote this:- In future years, who is going to go to a museum to watch a board of integrated circuits sit there? While I agree with much of your post, there are already examples of old computer equipment on display in museums. It is often a non-working exhibit, but there are examples of working exhibits, Bletchley Park being the best known example. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000...#pt3-pb3-l1g54 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
1928 equipment causing commuter misery at Edgware Road Tube
On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 11:58:16 +0100
David Hansen wrote: On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 10:51:45 +0100 someone who may be Yokel wrote this:- In future years, who is going to go to a museum to watch a board of integrated circuits sit there? How is that any different to looking at a load of baked clay? While I agree with much of your post, there are already examples of old computer equipment on display in museums. It is often a non-working exhibit, but there are examples of working exhibits, Bletchley Park being the best known example. Theres some in the science museum but its a pretty half hearted effort. The difference engine replica is worth seeing though. B2003 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
1928 equipment causing commuter misery at Edgware Road Tube
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
1928 equipment causing commuter misery at Edgware Road Tube
On Jun 7, 10:29*am, dave wrote:
Then there's things like speed control relays that were put in after Moorgate crash (mostly), Errr that is misleading. Speed control relays have been around on LT / LU for eons, they are nothing new introduced post Moorgate. Moorgate introduced TETS or whatever its called - Train Entering Terminal Station - which simply adds more timing relays and more train stops as any passenger train approach any buffers stops. -- Nick |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
1928 equipment causing commuter misery at Edgware Road Tube
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 04:56:16 -0700 (PDT) someone who may be D7666
wrote this:- Speed control relays have been around on LT / LU for eons, they are nothing new introduced post Moorgate. Holding a signal and/or train stop at danger and only releasing it if a train operates track circuit(s) in more than a specified time, thus proving the train is going slowly enough, was certainly done before the crash at Moorgate. Sharp curves and approaching signals with a short overlap are examples. Presumably the way the front of trains used to enter platforms while the rear of the previous train was leaving [1] is another example. However, this was greatly extended after Moorgate to cover dead end tunnels. The original posting was not so much misleading as incomplete. [1] IIRC the equipment was fitted as part of 1930s schemes and removed during the "managing decline" era of the 1970s when it was thought trains would not need to be run close together again. There still seems to be some of this, but not as extensive as it once was. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000...#pt3-pb3-l1g54 |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|