GOSPEL Electrification
 

In article , d () wrote:

On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:42:03 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:34:52 on Mon, 20 Feb
2017, d remarked:
Both yesterday and today, and possibly earlier, two-car
DMUs have been travelling along the line, presumably for
driver training/route familiarisation purposes.

Presumably the line's own 172s? They've been parked at Willesden
during the closure.

I'm surprised TfL hasn't sold them

I think the lessor (Angel Trains) would have something to say if TfL
sold them!!

I didn't realised they were leased. Is that a choice TfL made or was
it forced upon them I wonder?

Almost all rolling stock is leased. And it's TfL imposing it on Arriva
Rail London (just as DfT does on its management contracts such as with
GTR).

AFAIK tube trains are all owned outright by LU. Is this not the case
with the 378s on LO then?

London Overground is quite different to LUL. It is operated as a concession,
not by a TfL operator directly.

In the case of the 172s there is a further reason why they are leased. They
will go to a TOC elsewhere once displaced by the GOBLIN electrification.
This is much easier to do using the standard ROSCO model of ownership and
leasing.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

GOSPEL Electrification
 

On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 14:58:50 -0600
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:
AFAIK tube trains are all owned outright by LU. Is this not the case
with the 378s on LO then?

London Overground is quite different to LUL. It is operated as a concession,
not by a TfL operator directly.

In that case I can't help wondering if the service would be better if TfL
ran it directly.

In the case of the 172s there is a further reason why they are leased. They
will go to a TOC elsewhere once displaced by the GOBLIN electrification.
This is much easier to do using the standard ROSCO model of ownership and
leasing.

Makes sense.

--
Spud

GOSPEL Electrification
 

In article , d () wrote:

On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 14:58:50 -0600
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:
AFAIK tube trains are all owned outright by LU. Is this not the
case with the 378s on LO then?

London Overground is quite different to LUL. It is operated as a
concession, not by a TfL operator directly.

In that case I can't help wondering if the service would be better if TfL
ran it directly.

The main reason is that in general TfL don't own the tracks which in some
cases are shared with TOCs. Another reason is that your Tory friends don;t
like state enterprise.

In the case of the 172s there is a further reason why they are leased.
They will go to a TOC elsewhere once displaced by the GOBLIN
electrification. This is much easier to do using the standard ROSCO
model of ownership and leasing.

Makes sense.

Thank you.Is this a first from you?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

GOSPEL Electrification
 

wrote:
In article , d () wrote:

On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 14:58:50 -0600
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:
AFAIK tube trains are all owned outright by LU. Is this not the
case with the 378s on LO then?

London Overground is quite different to LUL. It is operated as a
concession, not by a TfL operator directly.

In that case I can't help wondering if the service would be better if TfL
ran it directly.

The main reason is that in general TfL don't own the tracks which in some
cases are shared with TOCs. Another reason is that your Tory friends don;t
like state enterprise.

The main, reason, surely, is to keep the strike-prone LU unions away from
LO and the DLR?


In the case of the 172s there is a further reason why they are leased.
They will go to a TOC elsewhere once displaced by the GOBLIN
electrification. This is much easier to do using the standard ROSCO
model of ownership and leasing.

Makes sense.

Thank you.Is this a first from you?

GOSPEL Electrification
 

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 09:56:48 -0800 (PST)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Monday, 20 February 2017 13:15:34 UTC, wrote:
So in other words they didn't order enough 378s in the first place.

Oh for goodness sake. Of course they ordered enough trains. Things change. =

Really? So there was no expectation that the ELL from a major interchange like
highbury to canada water for a one stop to canary wharf would attract many
commuters? They should hire some new planners then.

hich doesn't need 5 car trains, to the ELL/NLL/WLL to allow *extra* peak se=
rvices to run because overcrowding is now so severe. This was not the case=

Overcrowding was severe back in 2014-15 when I used it which wasn't helped by
the incomprehensible decision to only have 2 doorways per car on the 378s
so it could literally take 1-2 minutes for people to unload at highbury and
canada water in the rush hour before anyone could get on.

It is also worth noting that the Class 710s come in two variants - AC only =
for West Anglia and Romford - Upminster servics and dual voltage for the GO=
BLIN and Watford routes. Therefore through services, if desired, will be p=
erfectly possible from the GOBLIN to NLL.

As you well know, you can't just run a train on a line without fully testing
and certifying it first. Are they planning on doing that with the 710s on
the NLL?

--
Spud

GOSPEL Electrification
 

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 18:36:28 -0600
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:

On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 14:58:50 -0600
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:
AFAIK tube trains are all owned outright by LU. Is this not the
case with the 378s on LO then?

London Overground is quite different to LUL. It is operated as a
concession, not by a TfL operator directly.

In that case I can't help wondering if the service would be better if TfL
ran it directly.

The main reason is that in general TfL don't own the tracks which in some
cases are shared with TOCs. Another reason is that your Tory friends don;t
like state enterprise.

I didn't vote for the tories in the last election. Right now I wouldn't vote
for anyone including ukip. They're all a bunch of useless dissembling pillocks.

In the case of the 172s there is a further reason why they are leased.
They will go to a TOC elsewhere once displaced by the GOBLIN
electrification. This is much easier to do using the standard ROSCO
model of ownership and leasing.

Makes sense.

Thank you.Is this a first from you?

Unlike you I don't bear grudges. If I think you're being a **** I'll let you
know, ditto if you make a sensible comment.

--
Spud

GOSPEL Electrification
 

In article ,
Recliner wrote:
The main reason is that in general TfL don't own the tracks which in some
cases are shared with TOCs. Another reason is that your Tory friends don;t
like state enterprise.

The main, reason, surely, is to keep the strike-prone LU unions away from
LO and the DLR?

Er, the RMT and ASLEF are the two main unions on LUL. And the main unions on
the overground would be the, er, RMT and ASLEF.

--
Mike Bristow

GOSPEL Electrification
 

Mike Bristow wrote:
In article
,
Recliner wrote:
The main reason is that in general TfL don't own the tracks which in some
cases are shared with TOCs. Another reason is that your Tory friends don;t
like state enterprise.

The main, reason, surely, is to keep the strike-prone LU unions away from
LO and the DLR?

Er, the RMT and ASLEF are the two main unions on LUL. And the main unions on
the overground would be the, er, RMT and ASLEF.


The LU RMT branch seems particularly militant. Not so on LO.

GOSPEL Electrification
 

wrote:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 09:56:48 -0800 (PST)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Monday, 20 February 2017 13:15:34 UTC, wrote:
So in other words they didn't order enough 378s in the first place.

Oh for goodness sake. Of course they ordered enough trains. Things change. =

Really? So there was no expectation that the ELL from a major interchange like
highbury to canada water for a one stop to canary wharf would attract many
commuters? They should hire some new planners then.

hich doesn't need 5 car trains, to the ELL/NLL/WLL to allow *extra* peak se=
rvices to run because overcrowding is now so severe. This was not the case=

Overcrowding was severe back in 2014-15 when I used it which wasn't helped by
the incomprehensible decision to only have 2 doorways per car on the 378s
so it could literally take 1-2 minutes for people to unload at highbury and
canada water in the rush hour before anyone could get on.

It is also worth noting that the Class 710s come in two variants - AC only =
for West Anglia and Romford - Upminster servics and dual voltage for the GO=
BLIN and Watford routes. Therefore through services, if desired, will be p=
erfectly possible from the GOBLIN to NLL.

As you well know, you can't just run a train on a line without fully testing
and certifying it first. Are they planning on doing that with the 710s on
the NLL?

The 710s will be running on the NLL every day to Willesden in any case.

GOSPEL Electrification
 

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:44:50 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
As you well know, you can't just run a train on a line without fully testing
and certifying it first. Are they planning on doing that with the 710s on
the NLL?

The 710s will be running on the NLL every day to Willesden in any case.

Thats not much help when the line goes all the way to richmond and stratford.

--
Spud