London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old February 24th 17, 10:33 AM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,385
Default GOSPEL Electrification

On 2017\02\24 11:01, David Walters wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 20:26:04 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:51:38 -0600
wrote:
I'm sure that clearance issues were very much on TfL's minds. Rightly so as
things are turning out with the 700s for Thameslink. Both initial trips
north of Hitchin, to Peterborough and Cambridge, came to grief with lost
shoes AIUI due to high ballast shoulders, in the Cambridge case at Foxton on
the return journey.


Why would Thameslink trains be sent up the ECML and cambridge line? Weren't
there enough free slots to test on the MML?


Part of the Thameslink Project includes direct services on the ECML
through Thameslink such as between Cambridge and Brighton and Peterborough
and Horsham.

The (closed) timetable consultation is at
http://www.thameslinkrailway.com/you...e-consultation


I believe the junction is not functional yet, so they will have been
sent via WLL and North London Incline (the Gospel Oak Harringay route
being unelectrified).

Seems a bit premature to me... did they need to know the Foxton ballast
is a bit high so long before the services run? Wouldn't a diesel-hauled
gauging train with polystyrene shoes be better at this stage?
  #2   Report Post  
Old February 25th 17, 01:29 AM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,877
Default GOSPEL Electrification

In article , (Basil Jet)
wrote:

On 2017\02\24 11:01, David Walters wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 20:26:04 +0000 (UTC),
d wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:51:38 -0600
wrote:
I'm sure that clearance issues were very much on TfL's minds. Rightly
so as things are turning out with the 700s for Thameslink. Both
initial trips north of Hitchin, to Peterborough and Cambridge, came to
grief with lost shoes AIUI due to high ballast shoulders, in the
Cambridge case at Foxton on the return journey.

Why would Thameslink trains be sent up the ECML and cambridge line?
Weren't there enough free slots to test on the MML?


Part of the Thameslink Project includes direct services on the ECML
through Thameslink such as between Cambridge and Brighton and
Peterborough and Horsham.

The (closed) timetable consultation is at
http://www.thameslinkrailway.com/you...e-consultation


I believe the junction is not functional yet, so they will have been
sent via WLL and North London Incline (the Gospel Oak Harringay route
being unelectrified).

Seems a bit premature to me... did they need to know the Foxton
ballast is a bit high so long before the services run? Wouldn't a
diesel-hauled gauging train with polystyrene shoes be better at this
stage?


My understanding is that the Canal Tunnel route between Belle Isle and SPILL
is now open.

--
Colin Rosenstiel
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GOSPEL Electrification [email protected] London Transport 0 February 22nd 17 11:08 PM
GOSPEL Electrification [email protected] London Transport 0 February 21st 17 11:36 PM
Gospel Oak-Barking Andrea London Transport 16 March 8th 07 07:37 PM
SPECS installation in Gospel Oak? John Rowland London Transport 1 April 15th 06 09:52 AM
Gospel Oak - Barking Slim London Transport 1 July 21st 04 12:26 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:56 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017