[x-posted to utl]

puffernutter wrote:
OK, so they've been the preferred bidder for a while, now it's official!

http://www.bombardier.com/en/corpora...01260d80181411

[or via http://preview.tinyurl.com/5uqy6h9]

Also, TfL press release:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/20253.aspx

From a passengers perspective, the following is welcome news:

---quote---
London Underground has been working with and learning from other
metros around the world in order to identify innovative ways to
upgrade the Tube while minimising disruption.

As a result, Bombardier Transportation, who recently upgraded the
signalling on the Madrid Metro, has committed to installing and
testing the new signalling system without any need for weekend
closures.
Moving millions

There will still be a need for weekend closures to upgrade track and
platforms, however these will not be the full line closures that have
been experienced during previous upgrade work on other lines under the
Public Private Partnership (PPP).
---/quote---


Shame that the SSR resignalling project had to be reversed out of the
blind alley that the PPP had led it up, but hopefully things should
now work out for the best.

On Jun 14, 7:10*pm, Mizter T wrote:
[x-posted to utl]

puffernutter wrote:
OK, so they've been the preferred bidder for a while, now it's official!

http://www.bombardier.com/en/corpora...ss-releases/de...

[or via http://preview.tinyurl.com/5uqy6h9]

Also, TfL press release:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/20253.aspx

From a passengers perspective, the following is welcome news:

---quote---
London Underground has been working with and learning from other
metros around the world in order to identify innovative ways to
upgrade the Tube while minimising disruption.

As a result, Bombardier Transportation, who recently upgraded the
signalling on the Madrid Metro, has committed to installing and
testing the new signalling system without any need for weekend
closures.
Moving millions

There will still be a need for weekend closures to upgrade track and
platforms, however these will not be the full line closures that have
been experienced during previous upgrade work on other lines under the
Public Private Partnership (PPP).
---/quote---

Shame that the SSR resignalling project had to be reversed out of the
blind alley that the PPP had led it up, but hopefully things should
now work out for the best.

Will this increase capacity? i.e increase train frequency?

On 15/06/2011 05:37, 1506 wrote:
On Jun 14, 7:10 pm, Mizter wrote:
[x-posted to utl]

puffernutter wrote:
OK, so they've been the preferred bidder for a while, now it's official!

http://www.bombardier.com/en/corpora...ss-releases/de...

[or viahttp://preview.tinyurl.com/5uqy6h9]

Also, TfL press release:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/20253.aspx

From a passengers perspective, the following is welcome news:

---quote---
London Underground has been working with and learning from other
metros around the world in order to identify innovative ways to
upgrade the Tube while minimising disruption.

As a result, Bombardier Transportation, who recently upgraded the
signalling on the Madrid Metro, has committed to installing and
testing the new signalling system without any need for weekend
closures.
Moving millions

There will still be a need for weekend closures to upgrade track and
platforms, however these will not be the full line closures that have
been experienced during previous upgrade work on other lines under the
Public Private Partnership (PPP).
---/quote---

Shame that the SSR resignalling project had to be reversed out of the
blind alley that the PPP had led it up, but hopefully things should
now work out for the best.

Will this increase capacity? i.e increase train frequency?

It is a moving block system, so it should do. I haven't seen the
requirements specification, so I have no idea what Bombardier have
committed to on trains per hour on each line.

Cheers

Puffernutter

On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:16:36 +0100
puffernutter wrote:
It is a moving block system, so it should do. I haven't seen the
requirements specification, so I have no idea what Bombardier have
committed to on trains per hour on each line.

In the rush hour the main issue on most lines seems to be long dwell times at
platforms in the centre of town causing trains to back up. Unless there
are enough trains to hoover up enough people to prevent the usual scrum to
get on and off then I suspect all moving block will do is cause even more
trains to sit in tunnels going nowhere.

B2003

On Jun 15, 10:02*am, wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:16:36 +0100

puffernutter wrote:
It is a moving block system, so it should do. I haven't seen the
requirements specification, so I have no idea what Bombardier have
committed to on trains per hour on each line.

In the rush hour the main issue on most lines seems to be long dwell times at
platforms in the centre of town causing trains to back up. Unless there
are enough trains to hoover up enough people to prevent the usual scrum to
get on and off then I suspect all moving block will do is cause even more
trains to sit in tunnels going nowhere.

B2003

More trains is what moving block will provide.

Preventing passengers trying to jam themselves on an already full
train, obstructing the doors and causing excessive dwell times is what
causes trains to back up.

In a perfect world, if people could be assured, through a consistent
period of reliable operation that the next train will turn up in 90
seconds, then maybe they wont cram themselves in the train in the
platform. But I suspect that behaviour will take a long time to
change.

Cheers

Puffernutter

On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:08:40 -0700 (PDT)
puffernutter wrote:
More trains is what moving block will provide.

The piccadilly line tried to increase the number of trains a few years ago
and it was an unmitigated disaster. Trains taking 30 mins to go from
finsbury to arnos grove (personal experience). It took about a year for
the arrogant ****s to realise their mistake so I won't hold my breath
for moving block to improve things significantly. All it needs is one
train to take longer than it should at a station and the knock on effect
will kick off.

In a perfect world, if people could be assured, through a consistent
period of reliable operation that the next train will turn up in 90
seconds, then maybe they wont cram themselves in the train in the
platform. But I suspect that behaviour will take a long time to
change.

While people don't trust for the next train to actually show up when the
board says it will this behaviour will never change.

B2003

"1506" wrote in message
...

Will this increase capacity? i.e increase train frequency?

The figures in the TfL press release linked earlier combine the capacity
increase of the new S stock and the increased train frequencies allowed by
the intended signalling improvements.

The Met/Circle/H&C/District combined frequency (ie on the top and bottom of
the Circle IYSWIM) increases from the current 28 tph to 32 tph. The much
discussed change to the Circle line, extending it to Hammersmith, was an
early prerequisite for the eventual 2018 set up.

An explanation is available on the TfL website he

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...ce-Changes.pdf

Paul

In article , d ()
wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:08:40 -0700 (PDT)
puffernutter wrote:
More trains is what moving block will provide.

The piccadilly line tried to increase the number of trains a few years
ago and it was an unmitigated disaster. Trains taking 30 mins to go from
finsbury to arnos grove (personal experience). It took about a year for
the arrogant ****s to realise their mistake so I won't hold my breath
for moving block to improve things significantly. All it needs is one
train to take longer than it should at a station and the knock on
effect will kick off.

Does the Piccadilly have moving block signalling? I don't think so.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 18:14:52 -0500
wrote:
The piccadilly line tried to increase the number of trains a few years
ago and it was an unmitigated disaster. Trains taking 30 mins to go from
finsbury to arnos grove (personal experience). It took about a year for
the arrogant ****s to realise their mistake so I won't hold my breath
for moving block to improve things significantly. All it needs is one
train to take longer than it should at a station and the knock on
effect will kick off.

Does the Piccadilly have moving block signalling? I don't think so.

I think you're missing the point - a stopped train is a stopped train. It
doesn't matter what form of signalling you have , if its stopped for long
enough it will cause the trains behind to get stuck. And since the
genuises running the picc also decided that it would be a good idea to
reverse 50% of the trains at arnos grove - which usually takes a good 5
minutes due to lazy staff - the whole thing ground to a halt. Moving
block signalling would have made no difference.

B2003