Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

Recliner wrote on 04 December 2013 20:27:55 ...
John Levine wrote:
They won't have less than one member of staff on a train, so no savings
there.

Hmmn. What does the Paris Metro know that TfL doesn't?

How to build tunnels with walkways?

I think only line 14 in Paris has walkways, but generally all Paris
Métro tunnels are double-track, except for a few short lenths of
single-track tunnel. This means that it's easy to gain access to a
failed train by ladders/steps from the adjacent track, or by driving a
train on that track, stopping opposite the failed train, and using
boards to bridge the gap between the trains.

On LU deep tubes, any evacuation has to take place via the front or rear
end of the train (the 'M' door), and external help can only reach
passengers via those doors. In theory, that could all be done without a
staff member being on the train, but I guess it's felt that in such a
constrained environment there is value in having someone on the train.

There was an interesting report in Le Parisien newspaper last month that
said that dwell times had reduced on line 1 since it became driverless,
as passengers had become more disciplined because they knew there wasn't
a driver to hold the doors open for a bit longer if they were slow in
boarding.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

Recliner wrote on 04 December 2013 20:27:55 ...
John Levine wrote:
They won't have less than one member of staff on a train, so no savings
there.

Hmmn. What does the Paris Metro know that TfL doesn't?

How to build tunnels with walkways?

I think only line 14 in Paris has walkways, but generally all Paris
Métro tunnels are double-track, except for a few short lenths of
single-track tunnel. This means that it's easy to gain access to a
failed train by ladders/steps from the adjacent track, or by driving a
train on that track, stopping opposite the failed train, and using
boards to bridge the gap between the trains.

On LU deep tubes, any evacuation has to take place via the front or rear
end of the train (the 'M' door), and external help can only reach
passengers via those doors. In theory, that could all be done without a
staff member being on the train, but I guess it's felt that in such a
constrained environment there is value in having someone on the train.

There was an interesting report in Le Parisien newspaper last month that
said that dwell times had reduced on line 1 since it became driverless,
as passengers had become more disciplined because they knew there wasn't
a driver to hold the doors open for a bit longer if they were slow in
boarding.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 22:34:30 +0000
"Richard J." wrote:
There was an interesting report in Le Parisien newspaper last month that
said that dwell times had reduced on line 1 since it became driverless,
as passengers had become more disciplined because they knew there wasn't
a driver to hold the doors open for a bit longer if they were slow in
boarding.

Some drivers on LU seem to be rather slow to close the doors even when
there's no one left on the platform. They waste a good 5 - 10 seconds at
each stop which probably buggers up the timetable nicely by the time they've
got to the other end of the line.

--
Spud

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Wed, 4 Dec 2013 05:46:23 -0800 (PST), ian batten
wrote:

On Tuesday, 3 December 2013 15:15:07 UTC, 77002 wrote:


sub-surface, stations. There needs to be a manned passimeter

Hardly. To cite one example I use regularly, Totteridge and Whetstone has the gates locked open most afternoons and evening.

How frequent are the trains at Totteridge and Whetstone? What I had
in mind are stations in the outer reaches of the Central and
Metropolitan Lines. At those there can be a wait fora train.

To give an example outwith TfL: Thirty years back my (UK) local
station was an uninviting pair of platforms. Years into the black and
white signage era the unloved station buildings had peeling green
pain.

It was the sort of station where after dark, passengers, especially
lady passengers, walked briskly to the taxi rank, or the parking lot.

Today the station is regularly painted in SWT colors. The booking
hall is staffed. These folks are helpful. One character is
particularly chirpy and jovial. There is an occasional staff presence
on the platforms. Elevators for the disabled have also been added.

Both platforms now have refreshment facilities that also sell
newspapers and magazines. The station no longer has an edge. Indeed
it is a pleasure to utilize it.

--

http://www.991fmtalk.com/ The DMZ in Reno

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Thu, 5 Dec 2013, Aurora wrote:

To give an example outwith TfL: Thirty years back my (UK) local
station was an uninviting pair of platforms.

Today the station is regularly painted in SWT colors. The booking
hall is staffed. Both platforms now have refreshment facilities that
also sell newspapers and magazines. The station no longer has an
edge.

Talking from another country ...

I was always puzzled by the fact in London tube stations had dedicated
staff selling tickets, and dedicated staff collecting tickets on exit
on lifts (a civilized device though !) or excess fares (another
civilized institution !), and bus had conductors ...

.... here in Milan conductors on trams and buses were eliminated in 1970
(to save money), and tickets in metro stations have always been sold by
newsagents (i.e. not ATM staff - despite the fact stations had and still
have an ATM agent in a box doing essentially nothing). Only the newer M5
is totally unmanned (also the trains are driverless).

.... instead the trend to have unmanned rural or suburban *railway*
stations, without a ticket office, is relatively recent in Italy (and
also motivated to save money, as the disappearance of left luggage
facilities in medium-sized stations), but has contributed to make
stations dirtier and less pleasant.

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 16:17:14 +0100, Giovanni Drogo
wrote:

On Thu, 5 Dec 2013, Aurora wrote:

To give an example outwith TfL: Thirty years back my (UK) local
station was an uninviting pair of platforms.

Today the station is regularly painted in SWT colors. The booking
hall is staffed. Both platforms now have refreshment facilities that
also sell newspapers and magazines. The station no longer has an
edge.

Talking from another country ...

snip

... here in Milan conductors on trams and buses were eliminated in 1970
(to save money), and tickets in metro stations have always been sold by
newsagents (i.e. not ATM staff - despite the fact stations had and still
have an ATM agent in a box doing essentially nothing). Only the newer M5
is totally unmanned (also the trains are driverless).

... instead the trend to have unmanned rural or suburban *railway*
stations, without a ticket office, is relatively recent in Italy (and
also motivated to save money, as the disappearance of left luggage
facilities in medium-sized stations), but has contributed to make
stations dirtier and less pleasant.

Exactly, and, over time, that does not discourage criiminals. Clean
bright stations, with ample human presence make for a pleasant safe
environment.
--

http://www.991fmtalk.com/ The DMZ in Reno

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 21:15:31 +0000, "Richard J."
wrote:

wrote on 05 December 2013 09:27:42 ...
On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 22:34:30 +0000
"Richard J." wrote:
There was an interesting report in Le Parisien newspaper last month that
said that dwell times had reduced on line 1 since it became driverless,
as passengers had become more disciplined because they knew there wasn't
a driver to hold the doors open for a bit longer if they were slow in
boarding.

Some drivers on LU seem to be rather slow to close the doors even when
there's no one left on the platform. They waste a good 5 - 10 seconds at
each stop which probably buggers up the timetable nicely by the time they've
got to the other end of the line.

If it's the Piccadilly line, that sort of thing will ensure they don't
run early against the leisurely timetable. I guess they think it's
better to waste a few seconds here and there instead of being held at a
station further down the line for a couple of minutes "to regulate the
service".

If the timings are the same for peak and non-peak periods, then the
stops will be longer than needed off-peak or the trains will run
slower between stops.

Clark Morris

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 18:46:13 +0100, "tim......"
wrote:


"Graham Nye" wrote in message
...
On 05/12/2013 10:46, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 05/12/2013 10:16, Sam Wilson wrote:

I had to look up "passimeter"...

In LT/TfL's case they were electrically operated but the principal was
the same.

http://mikes.railhistory.railfan.net/r152.html has a description of
the system.

Thanks for the link.

"The "Rapid" machine ... prints, cuts and delivers the ticket, and can
issue four a second."

A trick that modern TVMs seem to have forgotten.

I'm sure that they can manage a 4 second delivery time


That would be four tickets in one second, not four seconds to deliver
one ticket. Which is about what the TVMs take in SWT territory. To
buy and print a return pair with a receipt takes a while. The
cheerful chappy at the window does much better. :-)
--

http://www.991fmtalk.com/ The DMZ in Reno

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Thu, 5 Dec 2013, wrote:

Mentioning Milan isn't it one of the very few places where at least
one line was electrified on a four rail system like London?don't know
if it still is or has been changed.

Correct. M1 (1964) is still like that. There should be a part of M1 with
overhead wire (I really do not usually look up) because originally M2
trains were hosted in the same depot used by M1 (between Precotto and
Villa SG), so they had to run Precotto to Pasteur and then through a
connecting tunnel to Caiazzo on M2 (now M2 has its own depot). M2 (1969)
did not use the four rail system, because a part of it runs in open air,
and I believe it is forbidden for safety reasons.

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 22:06:24 -0800, Aurora wrote:
That would be four tickets in one second, not four seconds to
deliver
one ticket. Which is about what the TVMs take in SWT territory. To
buy and print a return pair with a receipt takes a while. The
cheerful chappy at the window does much better. :-)

It would speed things up if they stopped issuing card receipts by
default. Most people just bin them these days. Could still be a
selectable option.

Neil

--
Neil Williams. Use neil before the at to reply.

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 21:19:10 +0000
"Richard J." wrote:
wrote on 05 December 2013 09:27:42 ...
Some drivers on LU seem to be rather slow to close the doors even when
there's no one left on the platform. They waste a good 5 - 10 seconds at
each stop which probably buggers up the timetable nicely by the time they've
got to the other end of the line.

If it's the Piccadilly line, that sort of thing will ensure they don't
run early against the leisurely timetable. I guess they think it's
better to waste a few seconds here and there instead of being held at a
station further down the line for a couple of minutes "to regulate the
service".

They do that anyway even if there hasn't been a train througn for 10 minutes.
I don't think I've ever been on another metro system that has to "regulate"
itself. The trains just run. If you have trains every 2 minutes why do you
need a timetable anyway? They just run up and down the line and stop at the
end of the day. The drivers obviously need a roster but what difference does
it make if they pick up train A, B, C or D? They're all the bloody same.

--
Spud

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

In message , at 16:16:07 on Fri, 6 Dec
2013, d remarked:
Some drivers on LU seem to be rather slow to close the doors even when
there's no one left on the platform. They waste a good 5 - 10 seconds at
each stop which probably buggers up the timetable nicely by the time they've
got to the other end of the line.

If it's the Piccadilly line, that sort of thing will ensure they don't
run early against the leisurely timetable. I guess they think it's
better to waste a few seconds here and there instead of being held at a
station further down the line for a couple of minutes "to regulate the
service".

They do that anyway even if there hasn't been a train througn for 10 minutes.
I don't think I've ever been on another metro system that has to "regulate"
itself. The trains just run. If you have trains every 2 minutes why do you
need a timetable anyway?

They are trying to avoid the "three buses come at once" scenario. It's
in the nature of public transport that the first to arrive picks up most
of the passengers, which slows it down. The one behind has fewer
passengers to pick up and gradually gains on the one in front.
Eventually they end up running in convoy.
--
Roland Perry

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 06/12/2013 09:11, Neil Williams wrote:
On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 22:06:24 -0800, Aurora wrote:
That would be four tickets in one second, not four seconds to
deliver
one ticket. Which is about what the TVMs take in SWT territory. To
buy and print a return pair with a receipt takes a while. The
cheerful chappy at the window does much better. :-)

It would speed things up if they stopped issuing card receipts by
default. Most people just bin them these days. Could still be a
selectable option.


May be a legal or commercial requirement.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 16:21:30 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:16:07 on Fri, 6 Dec
They do that anyway even if there hasn't been a train througn for 10 minutes.
I don't think I've ever been on another metro system that has to "regulate"
itself. The trains just run. If you have trains every 2 minutes why do you
need a timetable anyway?

They are trying to avoid the "three buses come at once" scenario. It's
in the nature of public transport that the first to arrive picks up most
of the passengers, which slows it down. The one behind has fewer
passengers to pick up and gradually gains on the one in front.
Eventually they end up running in convoy.

Thats true, but unlike buses which can come up right behind and pass each
other , with trains the signalling will keep them a certain distance apart
anyway. And since there's no other traffic unlike on the roads there's no
reason for any one train to have many more passengers than another if they
come at frequent regular intervals. The amount of people waiting at 8am is
going to be pretty much the same as at 8.05 since any people the train picks
up will be replace by those entering the station.

--
Spud

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 06/12/2013 16:16, d wrote:
On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 21:19:10 +0000
"Richard J." wrote:
d wrote on 05 December 2013 09:27:42 ...
Some drivers on LU seem to be rather slow to close the doors even when
there's no one left on the platform. They waste a good 5 - 10 seconds at
each stop which probably buggers up the timetable nicely by the time they've
got to the other end of the line.

If it's the Piccadilly line, that sort of thing will ensure they don't
run early against the leisurely timetable. I guess they think it's
better to waste a few seconds here and there instead of being held at a
station further down the line for a couple of minutes "to regulate the
service".

They do that anyway even if there hasn't been a train througn for 10 minutes.
I don't think I've ever been on another metro system that has to "regulate"
itself. The trains just run. If you have trains every 2 minutes why do you
need a timetable anyway? They just run up and down the line and stop at the
end of the day. The drivers obviously need a roster but what difference does
it make if they pick up train A, B, C or D? They're all the bloody same.


The diagrams are different, not all trains go right to the end of the
line, then you have all the different branches. Many metro systems are
just a collection of there and back lines which will be much simpler to
operate.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

In message , at 16:46:45 on Fri, 6 Dec
2013, d remarked:
They do that anyway even if there hasn't been a train througn for 10 minutes.
I don't think I've ever been on another metro system that has to "regulate"
itself. The trains just run. If you have trains every 2 minutes why do you
need a timetable anyway?

They are trying to avoid the "three buses come at once" scenario. It's
in the nature of public transport that the first to arrive picks up most
of the passengers, which slows it down. The one behind has fewer
passengers to pick up and gradually gains on the one in front.
Eventually they end up running in convoy.

Thats true, but unlike buses which can come up right behind and pass each
other , with trains the signalling will keep them a certain distance apart
anyway. And since there's no other traffic unlike on the roads there's no
reason for any one train to have many more passengers than another if they
come at frequent regular intervals. The amount of people waiting at 8am is
going to be pretty much the same as at 8.05 since any people the train picks
up will be replace by those entering the station.

The trains are further apart than the line capacity, and the situation
is inherently unstable, resulting in the "regulate" waits.
--
Roland Perry

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Fri, 06 Dec 2013 16:44:15 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:
May be a legal or commercial requirement.

I did wonder, though my local Co-op asks if you want a card receipt
and doesn't print one if not. An option might be to add a cheap till
receipt printer.

Neil

--
Neil Williams. Use neil before the at to reply.

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 16:54:26 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 16:46:45 on Fri, 6 Dec
2013, d remarked:
They do that anyway even if there hasn't been a train througn for 10 minutes.
I don't think I've ever been on another metro system that has to "regulate"
itself. The trains just run. If you have trains every 2 minutes why do you
need a timetable anyway?

They are trying to avoid the "three buses come at once" scenario. It's
in the nature of public transport that the first to arrive picks up most
of the passengers, which slows it down. The one behind has fewer
passengers to pick up and gradually gains on the one in front.
Eventually they end up running in convoy.

Thats true, but unlike buses which can come up right behind and pass each
other , with trains the signalling will keep them a certain distance apart
anyway. And since there's no other traffic unlike on the roads there's no
reason for any one train to have many more passengers than another if they
come at frequent regular intervals. The amount of people waiting at 8am is
going to be pretty much the same as at 8.05 since any people the train picks
up will be replace by those entering the station.

The trains are further apart than the line capacity, and the situation
is inherently unstable, resulting in the "regulate" waits.

Few of the Underground lines run a self-contained service thus
departing from the timetable will in most cases also mess up another
line's (or the same line in the other direction for the self-contained
lines) service if trains are allowed to run in a random manner. Even
where there isn't actual track sharing, bunching of trains will also
lead to a similar effect with passengers at various interchanges;
where there is track sharing (e.g. District + NLL, Bakerloo + DC
line), random running of LU services has IME been a long term cause of
screwing up the published timetables for the NR services.

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Fri, 06 Dec 2013 16:50:28 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 06/12/2013 16:16, d wrote:
They do that anyway even if there hasn't been a train througn for 10 minutes.
I don't think I've ever been on another metro system that has to "regulate"
itself. The trains just run. If you have trains every 2 minutes why do you
need a timetable anyway? They just run up and down the line and stop at the
end of the day. The drivers obviously need a roster but what difference does
it make if they pick up train A, B, C or D? They're all the bloody same.


The diagrams are different, not all trains go right to the end of the
line, then you have all the different branches. Many metro systems are
just a collection of there and back lines which will be much simpler to
operate.

Well there is that. But the jubilee, bakerloo, victoria & W&C are just there
and back lines so why do they need a timetable? Even on more complicated
lines you could have some sort of train recognition system whereby the driver
types in his route at the start of his trip and the signalling sets the
route according to the trains id when it gets to certain junctions. No need
for a timetable.

--
Spud

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

wrote:
On Fri, 06 Dec 2013 16:50:28 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 06/12/2013 16:16, d wrote:
They do that anyway even if there hasn't been a train througn for 10 minutes.
I don't think I've ever been on another metro system that has to "regulate"
itself. The trains just run. If you have trains every 2 minutes why do you
need a timetable anyway? They just run up and down the line and stop at the
end of the day. The drivers obviously need a roster but what difference does
it make if they pick up train A, B, C or D? They're all the bloody same.


The diagrams are different, not all trains go right to the end of the
line, then you have all the different branches. Many metro systems are
just a collection of there and back lines which will be much simpler to
operate.

Well there is that. But the jubilee, bakerloo, victoria & W&C are just there
and back lines so why do they need a timetable? Even on more complicated
lines you could have some sort of train recognition system whereby the driver
types in his route at the start of his trip and the signalling sets the
route according to the trains id when it gets to certain junctions. No need
for a timetable.

Many of these trains don't travel the full length of the line (apart from
the Drain, of course), and Bakerloo trains have to mix with scheduled
Overground services. But the reason to regulate the services is not just to
maintain the timetable, but to stop trains bunching after one has been held
up for any reason.

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:
On Fri, 06 Dec 2013 16:50:28 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 06/12/2013 16:16, d wrote:
They do that anyway even if there hasn't been a train througn for 10 minutes.
I don't think I've ever been on another metro system that has to "regulate"
itself. The trains just run. If you have trains every 2 minutes why do you
need a timetable anyway? They just run up and down the line and stop at the
end of the day. The drivers obviously need a roster but what difference does
it make if they pick up train A, B, C or D? They're all the bloody same.


The diagrams are different, not all trains go right to the end of the
line, then you have all the different branches. Many metro systems are
just a collection of there and back lines which will be much simpler to
operate.

Well there is that. But the jubilee, bakerloo, victoria & W&C are just there
and back lines

They aren't completely. Not all trains go all the way every trip and the
H&C has to dovetail into the Met, District and Circle lines.

so why do they need a timetable? Even on more complicated
lines you could have some sort of train recognition system whereby the driver
types in his route at the start of his trip and the signalling sets the
route according to the trains id when it gets to certain junctions. No need
for a timetable.


Reinventing the wheel. I suggest you read up on TfL's regulatory system.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 10:59:09 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:
so why do they need a timetable? Even on more complicated
lines you could have some sort of train recognition system whereby the driver
types in his route at the start of his trip and the signalling sets the
route according to the trains id when it gets to certain junctions. No need
for a timetable.


Reinventing the wheel. I suggest you read up on TfL's regulatory system.

AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.

--
Spud

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 07/12/2013 10:59, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:

Well there is that. But the jubilee, bakerloo, victoria & W&C are just
there
and back lines

They aren't completely. Not all trains go all the way every trip and the
H&C has to dovetail into the Met, District and Circle lines.

Last time I checked the W&C and the H&C were different beasties.

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 06/12/2013 17:13, Neil Williams wrote:
On Fri, 06 Dec 2013 16:44:15 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:
May be a legal or commercial requirement.

I did wonder, though my local Co-op asks if you want a card receipt and
doesn't print one if not. An option might be to add a cheap till receipt
printer.

Not sure how that would help, adds complication to the machinery and as
sure as eggs is eggs someone on here will moan that they should do it
all with one machine as they do in
Switzerland/France/Japan/Germany/Middlesbrough.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 07/12/2013 11:26, d wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 10:59:09 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:
so why do they need a timetable? Even on more complicated
lines you could have some sort of train recognition system whereby the driver
types in his route at the start of his trip and the signalling sets the
route according to the trains id when it gets to certain junctions. No need
for a timetable.


Reinventing the wheel. I suggest you read up on TfL's regulatory system.

AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.



Back in the 1960s the Northern Line was using automatic route setting
equipment. Used a giant pianola type roll with punched holes.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 07/12/2013 11:31, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:59, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:

Well there is that. But the jubilee, bakerloo, victoria & W&C are just
there
and back lines

They aren't completely. Not all trains go all the way every trip and the
H&C has to dovetail into the Met, District and Circle lines.

Last time I checked the W&C and the H&C were different beasties.

So they are but then pausing at intermediate stops doesn't happen on the
W&C.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 12:20:30 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 07/12/2013 11:26, d wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 10:59:09 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:
so why do they need a timetable? Even on more complicated
lines you could have some sort of train recognition system whereby the driver
types in his route at the start of his trip and the signalling sets the
route according to the trains id when it gets to certain junctions. No need
for a timetable.


Reinventing the wheel. I suggest you read up on TfL's regulatory system.

AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.



Back in the 1960s the Northern Line was using automatic route setting
equipment. Used a giant pianola type roll with punched holes.

The first LU Programme Machines went into service in 1955 and I
believe that a few remain in use even today:
http://www.squarewheels.org.uk/rly/programme-machine/
and
http://www.districtdavesforum.co.uk/...crollTo=377993

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 07/12/2013 15:09, Recliner wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 12:20:30 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 07/12/2013 11:26, d wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 10:59:09 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:
so why do they need a timetable? Even on more complicated
lines you could have some sort of train recognition system whereby the driver
types in his route at the start of his trip and the signalling sets the
route according to the trains id when it gets to certain junctions. No need
for a timetable.


Reinventing the wheel. I suggest you read up on TfL's regulatory system.

AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.



Back in the 1960s the Northern Line was using automatic route setting
equipment. Used a giant pianola type roll with punched holes.

The first LU Programme Machines went into service in 1955

cough 1958 at Kennington, though it wasn't patented till 1960.

and I
believe that a few remain in use even today:
http://www.squarewheels.org.uk/rly/programme-machine/
and
http://www.districtdavesforum.co.uk/...crollTo=377993


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 15:09, Recliner wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 12:20:30 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 07/12/2013 11:26, d wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 10:59:09 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:
so why do they need a timetable? Even on more complicated
lines you could have some sort of train recognition system whereby the driver
types in his route at the start of his trip and the signalling sets the
route according to the trains id when it gets to certain junctions. No need
for a timetable.


Reinventing the wheel. I suggest you read up on TfL's regulatory system.

AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.



Back in the 1960s the Northern Line was using automatic route setting
equipment. Used a giant pianola type roll with punched holes.

The first LU Programme Machines went into service in 1955

cough 1958 at Kennington, though it wasn't patented till 1960.

I was going by this official timeline:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...-transport.pdf
"1955 First system of programme machine signalling introduced at Camden
Town"

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 07/12/2013 15:35, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 15:09, Recliner wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 12:20:30 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 07/12/2013 11:26, d wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 10:59:09 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:
so why do they need a timetable? Even on more complicated
lines you could have some sort of train recognition system whereby the driver
types in his route at the start of his trip and the signalling sets the
route according to the trains id when it gets to certain junctions. No need
for a timetable.


Reinventing the wheel. I suggest you read up on TfL's regulatory system.

AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.



Back in the 1960s the Northern Line was using automatic route setting
equipment. Used a giant pianola type roll with punched holes.

The first LU Programme Machines went into service in 1955

cough 1958 at Kennington, though it wasn't patented till 1960.

I was going by this official timeline:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...-transport.pdf
"1955 First system of programme machine signalling introduced at Camden
Town"


Well TfL ought to know :-) I think that only worked at Camden Town
According to "How the Underground Works" full programme machine
operating on the Northern Line was introduced progressively from 1958
till about 1968. District line installation commenced in 1960.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 15:35, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 15:09, Recliner wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 12:20:30 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 07/12/2013 11:26, d wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 10:59:09 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:
so why do they need a timetable? Even on more complicated
lines you could have some sort of train recognition system whereby the driver
types in his route at the start of his trip and the signalling sets the
route according to the trains id when it gets to certain junctions. No need
for a timetable.


Reinventing the wheel. I suggest you read up on TfL's regulatory system.

AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.



Back in the 1960s the Northern Line was using automatic route setting
equipment. Used a giant pianola type roll with punched holes.

The first LU Programme Machines went into service in 1955

cough 1958 at Kennington, though it wasn't patented till 1960.

I was going by this official timeline:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...-transport.pdf
"1955 First system of programme machine signalling introduced at Camden
Town"


Well TfL ought to know :-) I think that only worked at Camden Town
According to "How the Underground Works" full programme machine operating
on the Northern Line was introduced progressively from 1958 till about
1968. District line installation commenced in 1960.

What I found harder to ascertain is how many of the original mechanical
programme machines are still in use (and for how much longer)?

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 07/12/2013 16:11, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 15:35, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 15:09, Recliner wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 12:20:30 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 07/12/2013 11:26, d wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 10:59:09 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:
so why do they need a timetable? Even on more complicated
lines you could have some sort of train recognition system whereby the driver
types in his route at the start of his trip and the signalling sets the
route according to the trains id when it gets to certain junctions. No need
for a timetable.


Reinventing the wheel. I suggest you read up on TfL's regulatory system.

AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.



Back in the 1960s the Northern Line was using automatic route setting
equipment. Used a giant pianola type roll with punched holes.

The first LU Programme Machines went into service in 1955

cough 1958 at Kennington, though it wasn't patented till 1960.

I was going by this official timeline:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...-transport.pdf
"1955 First system of programme machine signalling introduced at Camden
Town"


Well TfL ought to know :-) I think that only worked at Camden Town
According to "How the Underground Works" full programme machine operating
on the Northern Line was introduced progressively from 1958 till about
1968. District line installation commenced in 1960.

What I found harder to ascertain is how many of the original mechanical
programme machines are still in use (and for how much longer)?


Just says "some" are still in use!

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 12:20:30 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 11:26, d wrote:
AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.



Back in the 1960s the Northern Line was using automatic route setting
equipment. Used a giant pianola type roll with punched holes.

Thats nice. And that is the same as picking up the id from a train on the
track, how exactly?

The way I see it if the giant piano wants to send train A to Barnet and train
B to edgware but the trains arrive in the order B - A , then its screwed.

--
Spud

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 07/12/2013 17:07, d wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 12:20:30 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 11:26, d wrote:
AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.



Back in the 1960s the Northern Line was using automatic route setting
equipment. Used a giant pianola type roll with punched holes.

Thats nice. And that is the same as picking up the id from a train on the
track, how exactly?

The way I see it if the giant piano wants to send train A to Barnet and train
B to edgware but the trains arrive in the order B - A , then its screwed.


That's why you work to a timetable.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

In article , (Graeme
Wall) wrote:

On 07/12/2013 11:31, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:59, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 10:46, d wrote:

Well there is that. But the jubilee, bakerloo, victoria & W&C are just
there and back lines

They aren't completely. Not all trains go all the way every trip and
the H&C has to dovetail into the Met, District and Circle lines.

Last time I checked the W&C and the H&C were different beasties.

So they are but then pausing at intermediate stops doesn't happen on
the W&C.

A pity really. It could do with a station at Blackfriars.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 18:57:47 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 17:07, d wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 12:20:30 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 11:26, d wrote:
AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.



Back in the 1960s the Northern Line was using automatic route setting
equipment. Used a giant pianola type roll with punched holes.

Thats nice. And that is the same as picking up the id from a train on the
track, how exactly?

The way I see it if the giant piano wants to send train A to Barnet and train
B to edgware but the trains arrive in the order B - A , then its screwed.


That's why you work to a timetable.

Face - palm.

We're going in circles here. Never mind.

--
Spud

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On 07/12/2013 19:25, d wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 18:57:47 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 17:07, d wrote:
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 12:20:30 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/12/2013 11:26, d wrote:
AFAIK its done by a timetable system - not by simply picking up a train id
at the trackside and setting the route accordingly.



Back in the 1960s the Northern Line was using automatic route setting
equipment. Used a giant pianola type roll with punched holes.

Thats nice. And that is the same as picking up the id from a train on the
track, how exactly?

The way I see it if the giant piano wants to send train A to Barnet and train
B to edgware but the trains arrive in the order B - A , then its screwed.


That's why you work to a timetable.

Face - palm.

We're going in circles here. Never mind.


You wanted to know why they worked to a timetable.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Proposal - every Tube ticket office to close by 2015
 

On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 12:18:52 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:
Not sure how that would help

By being able to print at the same time as the tickets.

Switzerland/France/Japan/Germany/Middlesbrough.

SBB's machines are *very* slow. They seem to use multiple paper rolls
and one printer, switching the rolls mechanically from tickets to
receipts, taking several seconds.

Neil

--
Neil Williams. Use neil before the at to reply.