On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 14:17:23 +0000
Paul Corfield wrote:
The signalling contract was put out to competitive tender. I assume
Thales bid with the same system as the JNP lines but did not win. We

This tender business is a right load of nonsense. Surely consistency is
more important than saving a few quid? If they'd done all this idiocy
100 years ago we'd have some lines with red meaning danger, others with green
or blue or polkadot meaning danger. And there won't be any room to move in
the cabs of the maintenance locos with seperate systems for the jubilee,
victoria, central and SSL and whatever other pick-n-mix installations they
dream up for the bakerloo and northern eventually.

B2003

" wrote:
On 31/12/2012 14:17, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 11:05:38 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

In this months Modern Railways it says the Met is going to get Citiflo 650
moving block signalling in the next few years which does away with lineside
signals. Which raises a couple of questions - why didn't they just use the
same system as on the jubilee line given that the 2 lines run side by side
for a long distance, and what will happen on the uxbridge branch which is
shared with the piccadilly? Will the latter be terminated at Rayners Lane?

The signalling contract was put out to competitive tender. I assume
Thales bid with the same system as the JNP lines but did not win. We
therefore have the Cityflo system. I think one of the reasons
Bombardier won with Cityflo was the promise of minimal closures to
install the system. I think Cityflo is installed in Madrid which was
one of the places LU visited to see resignalling was done without lots
of closures.

The last I heard the 73 stock was to fitted with the necessary kit to
allow the trains to "talk" to the Cityflo system. This is essential
not just for the Uxbridge service but to be able to get through Acton
Town which is all sub surface signalling over the shared tracks. I am
not sure whether the Picc Line tracks from Acton to just east of
Barons Ct are to be equipped with Cityflo or will remain with
conventional signalling. Of course fiddling about with the 73 stock is
not without its risks if you need to touch any wires or cables.

Will that really be necessary for 73ts in revenue service, considering
that LT plans to have the EVO running in revenue service by that time?

I don't think it'll be in revenue service that soon.

On 31/12/2012 20:00, d wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 04:28:48 -0800 (PST)
77002 wrote:
On 31 Dec, 11:05, wrote:
In this months Modern Railways it says the Met is going to get Citiflo 650
moving block signalling in the next few years which does away with lineside
signals. Which raises a couple of questions - why didn't they just use the
same system as on the jubilee line given that the 2 lines run side by side
for a long distance, and what will happen on the uxbridge branch which is
shared with the piccadilly? Will the latter be terminated at Rayners Lane?

My Modern Railways is still awaited. This also raises the question of
the section, north of Harrow-on-the-Hill, utilized by Chiltern. One
more reason to withdraw to Moor Park I guess.

The article says the S stock will be fitted with the ATP system used by
Chiltern.


No it doesn't:

"Wayside signals will, however, be retained on the stretch of the Met
south of Amersham that is used by Chiltern services. Included in the
contract [with Bombardier for the installation of Cityflo 650
signalling] is a requirement to make this section fit for the Selcab
Automatic Train Protection used on Chiltern DMUs. Selcab is the 20-year
old ATP system fitted as a trial on Chiltern in the wake of the 1988
Clapham accident; it has not been used on the Met infrastructure up
until now."

All trains will have ATP: On the S stock it will be provided by the
Cityflo 650 system. On Chiltern DMUs it will be provided by Selcab
equipment via some form of compatibility layer with the wider Cityflo
650 system.

Philip.

On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 20:12:10 +0000
Paul Corfield wrote:
to the market to get a better value deal. I'm sure you would support a
more affordable solution rather than continuing with one which was
considered to be poor value for money.

I would if I didn't suspect it'll end up costing a lot more in the long run
trying to maintain umpteen different systems. What happens in 20 years time
when experts are needed for all of them and probably half the companies who
developed them have gone bust or been taken over and the new owners have
little incentive to spend money developing upgrades? At least with just one
system you could mitigate against that by creating your own in house team
but with 3 or 4? Unlikely.

applies to railways. It is perhaps why the EU have tried to push for
ERTMS which, in theory, offers a single system that is compatible
across borders and which can be supplied by a range of suppliers
without the "lock in" risk. Hasn't quite turned out like that though!!

Someone should have told them it involved non standard bananas. They'd have
had it all sorted in no time.

B2003

wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 20:12:10 +0000
Paul Corfield wrote:
to the market to get a better value deal. I'm sure you would support a
more affordable solution rather than continuing with one which was
considered to be poor value for money.

I would if I didn't suspect it'll end up costing a lot more in the long run
trying to maintain umpteen different systems. What happens in 20 years time
when experts are needed for all of them and probably half the companies who
developed them have gone bust or been taken over and the new owners have
little incentive to spend money developing upgrades? At least with just one
system you could mitigate against that by creating your own in house team
but with 3 or 4? Unlikely.

Perhaps the Jubilee resignalling is an experience to be avoided?

On 31/12/2012 20:03, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 18:26:01 +0000, "
wrote:

On 31/12/2012 14:17, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 11:05:38 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

In this months Modern Railways it says the Met is going to get Citiflo 650
moving block signalling in the next few years which does away with lineside
signals. Which raises a couple of questions - why didn't they just use the
same system as on the jubilee line given that the 2 lines run side by side
for a long distance, and what will happen on the uxbridge branch which is
shared with the piccadilly? Will the latter be terminated at Rayners Lane?

The signalling contract was put out to competitive tender. I assume
Thales bid with the same system as the JNP lines but did not win. We
therefore have the Cityflo system. I think one of the reasons
Bombardier won with Cityflo was the promise of minimal closures to
install the system. I think Cityflo is installed in Madrid which was
one of the places LU visited to see resignalling was done without lots
of closures.

The last I heard the 73 stock was to fitted with the necessary kit to
allow the trains to "talk" to the Cityflo system. This is essential
not just for the Uxbridge service but to be able to get through Acton
Town which is all sub surface signalling over the shared tracks. I am
not sure whether the Picc Line tracks from Acton to just east of
Barons Ct are to be equipped with Cityflo or will remain with
conventional signalling. Of course fiddling about with the 73 stock is
not without its risks if you need to touch any wires or cables.

Will that really be necessary for 73ts in revenue service, considering
that LT plans to have the EVO running in revenue service by that time?

You'll be very lucky to have any EVO trains in service before 2022 if
that. We haven't even got the prototype yet nor is the scope of any
line upgrade anywhere near being defined. There was a recent board
paper asking for more feasibility monies and it is evident from GLA
webcasts that I have watched that there was very considerable debate
inside TfL about whether the money was worth spending. The IIPAG team
apparently were very critical of the approach being taken and this
prompted more discussion at the Rail and Underground Panel and then
the TfL Board. I think there is a load of work to do to specify
exactly what the scope of each upgrade will be and turning that into
specs and procurement strategies / tendering documentation takes even
longer. The Bakerloo Line upgrade is, I suspect, creating a load of
challenges.

It is also worth bearing in mind that TfL has no approved funding *for
anything* beyond 2015 and there will be a lot of lobbying and debate
necessary to prise the money for more line upgrades out of Mr
Osborne's hands. I will be amazed if the current Mayor is in any sort
of position to place a bulk order for new tube rolling stock before
the next Mayoral election in 2016.

It is really not at all tenable to leave the Picc Line trains
untouched and unable to interface with the Cityflo signalling. Acton
Town is absolutely key to how the Picc runs and it is a sub surface
signalled area according to the asset delineation plans. Ditto it
would be unacceptable to curtail the Picc at South Harrow (limit of
the old signalling) and break the connection to the Met. Services
interwork and passengers use the services so they have to be
maintained.


I have noticed, looking in the past at the driver's console on a 73ts
that there is something that looks like what I would describe as cab
signals. Perhaps that can be either ripped out and replaced with
something new or the existing equipment modified to interface with Cityflo?

Does anybody have any photos of a Cityflo display, BTW?

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 31/12/2012 20:04, Recliner wrote:
" wrote:
On 31/12/2012 14:17, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 11:05:38 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

In this months Modern Railways it says the Met is going to get Citiflo 650
moving block signalling in the next few years which does away with lineside
signals. Which raises a couple of questions - why didn't they just use the
same system as on the jubilee line given that the 2 lines run side by side
for a long distance, and what will happen on the uxbridge branch which is
shared with the piccadilly? Will the latter be terminated at Rayners Lane?

The signalling contract was put out to competitive tender. I assume
Thales bid with the same system as the JNP lines but did not win. We
therefore have the Cityflo system. I think one of the reasons
Bombardier won with Cityflo was the promise of minimal closures to
install the system. I think Cityflo is installed in Madrid which was
one of the places LU visited to see resignalling was done without lots
of closures.

The last I heard the 73 stock was to fitted with the necessary kit to
allow the trains to "talk" to the Cityflo system. This is essential
not just for the Uxbridge service but to be able to get through Acton
Town which is all sub surface signalling over the shared tracks. I am
not sure whether the Picc Line tracks from Acton to just east of
Barons Ct are to be equipped with Cityflo or will remain with
conventional signalling. Of course fiddling about with the 73 stock is
not without its risks if you need to touch any wires or cables.

Will that really be necessary for 73ts in revenue service, considering
that LT plans to have the EVO running in revenue service by that time?

I don't think it'll be in revenue service that soon.


Fair enough. I thought a couple of years ago that they had a concept and
were looking at 2015-2016 for revenue service.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

" wrote:
On 31/12/2012 20:04, Recliner wrote:
" wrote:
On 31/12/2012 14:17, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 11:05:38 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

In this months Modern Railways it says the Met is going to get Citiflo 650
moving block signalling in the next few years which does away with lineside
signals. Which raises a couple of questions - why didn't they just use the
same system as on the jubilee line given that the 2 lines run side by side
for a long distance, and what will happen on the uxbridge branch which is
shared with the piccadilly? Will the latter be terminated at Rayners Lane?

The signalling contract was put out to competitive tender. I assume
Thales bid with the same system as the JNP lines but did not win. We
therefore have the Cityflo system. I think one of the reasons
Bombardier won with Cityflo was the promise of minimal closures to
install the system. I think Cityflo is installed in Madrid which was
one of the places LU visited to see resignalling was done without lots
of closures.

The last I heard the 73 stock was to fitted with the necessary kit to
allow the trains to "talk" to the Cityflo system. This is essential
not just for the Uxbridge service but to be able to get through Acton
Town which is all sub surface signalling over the shared tracks. I am
not sure whether the Picc Line tracks from Acton to just east of
Barons Ct are to be equipped with Cityflo or will remain with
conventional signalling. Of course fiddling about with the 73 stock is
not without its risks if you need to touch any wires or cables.

Will that really be necessary for 73ts in revenue service, considering
that LT plans to have the EVO running in revenue service by that time?

I don't think it'll be in revenue service that soon.


Fair enough. I thought a couple of years ago that they had a concept and
were looking at 2015-2016 for revenue service.

The concept has been around in model/paper form for about a decade (it's
based on ideas for the Victoria line that didn't happen, thanks to the
PPP), but that's a long way from an actual engineering design, let alone a
prototype.

On 31 Dec 2012, 20:20, Andy wrote:
On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:00:22 PM UTC, wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 04:28:48 -0800 (PST)

77002 wrote:

On 31 Dec, 11:05, wrote:

In this months Modern Railways it says the Met is going to get Citiflo 650

moving block signalling in the next few years which does away with lineside

signals. Which raises a couple of questions - why didn't they just use the

same system as on the jubilee line given that the 2 lines run side by side

for a long distance, and what will happen on the uxbridge branch which is

shared with the piccadilly? Will the latter be terminated at Rayners Lane?

My Modern Railways is still awaited. *This also raises the question of

the section, north of Harrow-on-the-Hill, utilized by Chiltern. *One

more reason to withdraw to Moor Park I guess.

The article says the S stock will be fitted with the ATP system used by

Chiltern.

No it doesn't, it says that the CityFlo infrastructure will also talk to the
Selcab ATP system fitted to Chiltern units and that line side signals will be
retained for the section from Harrow to Amersham. Both systems will be operable.

The S stock will only be fitted with the new CityFlo hardware.- Hide quoted text -

So TfL are continuing to install non-standard equipment. This is to
be expected I suppose.

Despite a strong dislike the UK's involvement with the EU; standards
are never a bad thing.

On 31 Dec 2012, 20:30, wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 20:12:10 +0000

Paul Corfield wrote:
to the market to get a better value deal. I'm sure you would support a
more affordable solution rather than continuing with one which was
considered to be poor value for money.

I would if I didn't suspect it'll end up costing a lot more in the long run
trying to maintain umpteen different systems. What happens in 20 years time
when experts are needed for all of them and probably half the companies who
developed them have gone bust or been taken over and the new owners have
little incentive to spend money developing upgrades? At least with just one
system you could mitigate against that by creating your own in house team
but with 3 or 4? Unlikely.

applies to railways. It is perhaps why the EU have tried to push for
ERTMS which, in theory, offers a single system that is compatible
across borders and which can be supplied by a range of suppliers
without the "lock in" risk. Hasn't quite turned out like that though!!

Someone should have told them it involved non standard bananas. They'd have
had it all sorted in no time.

LOL!