Jarle Hammen Knudsen wrote:
On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 11:45:17 +0100, Recliner
wrote:

On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:42:03 GMT, d wrote:

On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 11:01:47 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:

It is reported on the District Dave blog that an engineering hours
move of the preserved Cravens unit (back from the EOR) resulted in

Thats interesting. Did it get hauled from Ongar all the way by rail? I
thought some track north of Epping had been lifted to seperate the 2
railways.

Apparently not. The unit was successfully moved to the EOR from
Ruislip depot.

From IanVisits:

" Incidentally, as the railway link between Epping and the EOR railway
has been severed, that means three tube trains and two locomotives
will be traveling by road to get to the heritage line. "

http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2014...sed-tube-line/

But previous posts here have said that it was moved entirely by rail, with
stop blocks removed and points clipped at Epping. I wonder which is
correct?

Recliner wrote:
Jarle Hammen Knudsen wrote:
On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 11:45:17 +0100, Recliner
wrote:

On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:42:03 GMT, d wrote:

On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 11:01:47 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:

It is reported on the District Dave blog that an engineering hours
move of the preserved Cravens unit (back from the EOR) resulted in

Thats interesting. Did it get hauled from Ongar all the way by rail? I
thought some track north of Epping had been lifted to seperate the 2
railways.

Apparently not. The unit was successfully moved to the EOR from
Ruislip depot.

From IanVisits:

" Incidentally, as the railway link between Epping and the EOR railway
has been severed, that means three tube trains and two locomotives
will be traveling by road to get to the heritage line. "

http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2014...sed-tube-line/

But previous posts here have said that it was moved entirely by rail, with
stop blocks removed and points clipped at Epping. I wonder which is
correct?

Actually, thinking about it, it must have been entirely by rail. Had it
been moved by road, it would have obviously gone straight from Ruislip to
the EOR, with no need to traverse the Central Line tunnels through London.

On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 06:29:02 -0500
Recliner wrote:
But previous posts here have said that it was moved entirely by rail, with
stop blocks removed and points clipped at Epping. I wonder which is
correct?

I don't quite understand the point of having those stop lights in the middle
of the track at epping. Do they think the drivers will switch to manual mode
and try and carry on north if they weren't there?

--
Spud

In message of Thu, 2 Oct
2014 11:01:47 in uk.transport.london, Paul Corfield
writes
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 08:52:31 +0100, Walter Briscoe
wrote:

Wednesday, 1 October was not a good day for London Underground.
Paddington signal failure about 0700 and "a person on the line" to
Hammersmith (Hammersmith & City) about 1100. Does that mean "one under"?

A train failure at Tottenham Court Road before 0700 resulted in no
Central Line service between Liverpool Street and Marble Arch until
about noon.
Alternative reports of emergency engineering works made me guess the
failed train hit something. Loss of the Central line seemed to overload
the westbound Jubilee. I boarded the fourth arriving train at London
Bridge about 0830. ;(

I suppose the day continued in kind.

The failure rate seems much lower than it was about 5 years ago. Double
failures are now rare. 40% delay improvement claims seem pessimistic.

It is reported on the District Dave blog that an engineering hours
move of the preserved Cravens unit (back from the EOR) resulted in
damage to the conductor rail. The first service train had several of
its shoes knocked off by the misaligned track. That train was then
stranded. Getting the train out of the way and then repairing the
conductor rail is what took the time. Not the first time this sort of
thing has happened (i.e. damaged conductor rail knocking current shoes
off trains).


Thanks, Paul. I did not think of District Dave.
http://districtdavesforum.co.uk/thread/24376/suspended-service
is the thread's URL.
It confused me by referring to CHL for Chancery Lane. I have CYL for
Chancery Lane.
Given the Cravens unit destroyed the track at Chancery Lane, I don't
understand why Service Status announcements referred to a train failure
at TCR (Tottenham Court Road) as the cause of the Part Suspension.
It should be fascinating (eventually) to read about the risk analysis of
moving the Cravens unit over the Central line from the EOR. (Epping
Ongar Railway)

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...-central-line-
platforms-as-police-are-called-to-deal-with-unsafe-overcrowding-
9766603.html
reports consequential chaos at LYS. (Leytonstone)

I am reminded of a northbound grinding unit coming loose and becoming
unmanned and southbound on the Northern line on 13 August 2010.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct...eb&cd=2&ved=0C
CsQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.raib.gov.uk%2Fcms_res ources.cfm%3Ffile%3D%2
F110615_r092011_highgate.pdf&ei=qkEtVK7JK7Ld7QaK4o GoDQ&usg=AFQjCNGjVpTcu
fDB48CHOD9P0rcUceRtNQ&sig2=ho8urTQJ0t2AMr0uqA5Ipg& bvm=bv.76477589,d.ZGU&
cad=rja
contains the full story of that incident.

Neither incident killed anybody and four years seems a respectable
failure interval between those failures. (Touches wood
--
Walter Briscoe

In message , at 13:31:49 on Thu, 2
Oct 2014, Walter Briscoe remarked:
Given the Cravens unit destroyed the track at Chancery Lane, I don't
understand why Service Status announcements referred to a train failure
at TCR (Tottenham Court Road) as the cause of the Part Suspension.

Perhaps it limped as far as TCR before giving up?
--
Roland Perry