|
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed untilDecember 2019
Promise of 24 Thameslink trains running through central London each
hour will not be fulfilled until another £900m of work is carried out https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-december-2019 |
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed until December 2019
In message , at 09:41:29 on
Thu, 23 Nov 2017, David Walters remarked: Promise of 24 Thameslink trains running through central London each hour will not be fulfilled until another £900m of work is carried out https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...ameslink-rail- completion-delayed-london-december-2019 "Network Rail, whose engineering budget for the project overran by 10% to £5.5bn, now says another £900m of work must be carried out on the wider network around the core Thameslink route to ensure a reliable service." Is there no limit to the number of "surprises" lurking out there for Network Rail to trip over? They've only been planning this project for, what, the whole of their corporate life. -- Roland Perry |
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed untilDecember 2019
On Thursday, 23 November 2017 09:42:08 UTC, David Walters wrote:
Promise of 24 Thameslink trains running through central London each hour will not be fulfilled until another £900m of work is carried out https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-december-2019 I live near Mitcham Eastfields, which is on Thameslink. There is a level crossing associated with the station. Sometimes three trains are scheduled to go through the station, let's say, NB, SB and a fast. This can mean that the barriers stay down for 7-10 minutes. By that time pedestrians and drivers are starting to get cranky. If the barriers stayed down for much longer I think people would start edging forward. |
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed until
In article ,
(Offramp) wrote: On Thursday, 23 November 2017 09:42:08 UTC, David Walters wrote: Promise of 24 Thameslink trains running through central London each hour will not be fulfilled until another £900m of work is carried out https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-completion-de layed-london-december-2019 I live near Mitcham Eastfields, which is on Thameslink. There is a level crossing associated with the station. Sometimes three trains are scheduled to go through the station, let's say, NB, SB and a fast. This can mean that the barriers stay down for 7-10 minutes. By that time pedestrians and drivers are starting to get cranky. If the barriers stayed down for much longer I think people would start edging forward. I'm amazed people don't realise how long level crossings can stay down. When I was a kid in the 1960s we knew that. My parents always turned the car engine off to wait at one as most motorists did. People can be so impatient these days. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
In London, 7 minutes is a long time.
I know the road lay-out at Mitcham Eastfields, and it's one of those locations where there is not room to take the road either over or under the railway. As with Highams Park Station, it's a classic, don't-raise-the-bridge, lower-the-water situation. As politicians and Network Rail have such a casual attitude to spending tax-payers' money, and regard 100 million pounds as loose change, they might usefully consider the very expensive option of lowering the railway into a cutting in this type of situation. Yes, I do know that would involve closing a very busy commuter route for a long time. |
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed until
In article ,
(Robin) wrote: On 24/11/2017 08:44, wrote: In article , (Offramp) wrote: On Thursday, 23 November 2017 09:42:08 UTC, David Walters wrote: Promise of 24 Thameslink trains running through central London each hour will not be fulfilled until another £900m of work is carried out https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-completion-de layed-london-december-2019 I live near Mitcham Eastfields, which is on Thameslink. There is a level crossing associated with the station. Sometimes three trains are scheduled to go through the station, let's say, NB, SB and a fast. This can mean that the barriers stay down for 7-10 minutes. By that time pedestrians and drivers are starting to get cranky. If the barriers stayed down for much longer I think people would start edging forward. I'm amazed people don't realise how long level crossings can stay down. When I was a kid in the 1960s we knew that. My parents always turned the car engine off to wait at one as most motorists did. People can be so impatient these days. with 5 times as many cars, travelling 5 times as many miles, I find it neither surprising nor wholly reprehensible that people are no longer content to wait for the signalman to change the signals, then come down from the box to open the gates. And those figures are national. In London and the SE the changes have been greater. That level crossing model, while normal in the 1960s, largely went out long ago. So signalling is as likely as not automatic or controlled by route setting. 5 crossings are supervised from Cambridge PSB by CCTV. Almost no crossing gates require a signalman to come down from his box to open the gates now. Indeed gates opened by wheel from within the box existed before the war! -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed untilDecember 2019
On Fri, 24 Nov 2017 10:59:06 +0000, Robin9
wrote: In London, 7 minutes is a long time. I know the road lay-out at Mitcham Eastfields, and it's one of those locations where there is not room to take the road either over or under the railway. As with Highams Park Station, it's a classic, don't-raise-the-bridge, lower-the-water situation. As politicians and Network Rail have such a casual attitude to spending tax-payers' money, and regard 100 million pounds as loose change, they might usefully consider the very expensive option of lowering the railway into a cutting in this type of situation. Yes, I do know that would involve closing a very busy commuter route for a long time. I grew up in Walthamstow & had family in Highams Park, imagine the traffic problems there when the peak service on the Chingford Branch was 9 TPH...... Off peak was 6 TPH, at least until the Victoria Line was completed. DC |
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed until
|
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed until
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote: In message , at 09:47:06 on Fri, 24 Nov 2017, remarked: with 5 times as many cars, travelling 5 times as many miles, I find it neither surprising nor wholly reprehensible that people are no longer content to wait for the signalman to change the signals, then come down from the box to open the gates. And those figures are national. In London and the SE the changes have been greater. That level crossing model, while normal in the 1960s, largely went out long ago. So signalling is as likely as not automatic or controlled by route setting. 5 crossings are supervised from Cambridge PSB by CCTV. Almost no crossing gates require a signalman to come down from his box to open the gates now. Littleport station crossing! With an underpass like at Ely! How much traffic does that crossing get? Again, the signalling to King's Lynn is long overdue for modernising. It should have been done with the electrification. Why that crossing missed out on replacement of gates by lifting barriers GOK. Part of the decades of under-investment because of cutting taxes on motorists. OK, I was a bit too strong with "almost no" but I'm not aware of any others in East Anglia. And until only a couple of years ago, Shippea Hill station crossing. Yes, Ely-Norwich signalling was modernised. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
I suspect one reason there has never been a revival of the
service between Chingford and Stratford despite the new station in Leyton is that the Highams Park level crossing would become even busier and traffic chaos would inevitably result. |
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed until
In message , at 04:17:18
on Sat, 25 Nov 2017, remarked: In article , (Roland Perry) wrote: In message , at 09:47:06 on Fri, 24 Nov 2017, remarked: with 5 times as many cars, travelling 5 times as many miles, I find it neither surprising nor wholly reprehensible that people are no longer content to wait for the signalman to change the signals, then come down from the box to open the gates. And those figures are national. In London and the SE the changes have been greater. That level crossing model, while normal in the 1960s, largely went out long ago. So signalling is as likely as not automatic or controlled by route setting. 5 crossings are supervised from Cambridge PSB by CCTV. Almost no crossing gates require a signalman to come down from his box to open the gates now. Littleport station crossing! With an underpass like at Ely! Don't mention Ely! (You'll annoy Basil). But the underpass is even lower. So a van like this probably too high: https://goo.gl/maps/3LiuoCLXQZm How much traffic does that crossing get? Very little. Since the bypass (a while ago now) it's on a road essentially from nowhere to nowhere. -- Roland Perry |
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed until
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote: In message , at 04:17:18 on Sat, 25 Nov 2017, remarked: In article , (Roland Perry) wrote: In message , at 09:47:06 on Fri, 24 Nov 2017, remarked: with 5 times as many cars, travelling 5 times as many miles, I find it neither surprising nor wholly reprehensible that people are no longer content to wait for the signalman to change the signals, then come down from the box to open the gates. And those figures are national. In London and the SE the changes have been greater. That level crossing model, while normal in the 1960s, largely went out long ago. So signalling is as likely as not automatic or controlled by route setting. 5 crossings are supervised from Cambridge PSB by CCTV. Almost no crossing gates require a signalman to come down from his box to open the gates now. Littleport station crossing! With an underpass like at Ely! Don't mention Ely! (You'll annoy Basil). But the underpass is even lower. So a van like this probably too high: https://goo.gl/maps/3LiuoCLXQZm 2.51m at Littleport compared to 2.7m at Ely. That van would just about get under judging by the amount of clearance visible there. Although judging by what's on Google Streetview, their car probably couldn't get under it. How much traffic does that crossing get? Very little. Since the bypass (a while ago now) it's on a road essentially from nowhere to nowhere. So it comes low down the priority list for replacing the gates, unsurprisingly. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed until
In message , at 09:30:44
on Sat, 25 Nov 2017, remarked: Littleport station crossing! With an underpass like at Ely! Don't mention Ely! (You'll annoy Basil). But the underpass is even lower. So a van like this probably too high: https://goo.gl/maps/3LiuoCLXQZm 2.51m at Littleport compared to 2.7m at Ely. That van would just about get under You reckon there's 20cm extra clearance here - really?? https://goo.gl/maps/hso9PDgdviT2 judging by the amount of clearance visible there. Although judging by what's on Google Streetview, their car probably couldn't get under it. The best I can find is that the streetview cameras are "at 8.2ft". It's not clear if that's the height of the lens, or perhaps the lenses are at 8ft and the top of the camera housing at 8.2ft. That's so close to 2.5m it's not obvious which measuring system they were designed for. But when this last came up I mentioned that same view above, which is pretty much along the line of the roof of the white van, so I'm inclined to think the 8.2ft/2.5m is the lens (despite being designed in imperial-measuring USA), and hence the top of the housing is more like 8.4ft = 2.6m -- Roland Perry |
Completion of London's Thameslink rail project delayed until
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote: In message , at 09:30:44 on Sat, 25 Nov 2017, remarked: Littleport station crossing! With an underpass like at Ely! Don't mention Ely! (You'll annoy Basil). But the underpass is even lower. So a van like this probably too high: https://goo.gl/maps/3LiuoCLXQZm 2.51m at Littleport compared to 2.7m at Ely. That van would just about get under You reckon there's 20cm extra clearance here - really?? https://goo.gl/maps/hso9PDgdviT2 I see now. I was going by the van body and reckoning that the view showed the minimum bridge height. I didn't notice the things on the roof, so no, there isn't another 19cm there. judging by the amount of clearance visible there. Although judging by what's on Google Streetview, their car probably couldn't get under it. The best I can find is that the streetview cameras are "at 8.2ft". It's not clear if that's the height of the lens, or perhaps the lenses are at 8ft and the top of the camera housing at 8.2ft. That's so close to 2.5m it's not obvious which measuring system they were designed for. But when this last came up I mentioned that same view above, which is pretty much along the line of the roof of the white van, so I'm inclined to think the 8.2ft/2.5m is the lens (despite being designed in imperial-measuring USA), and hence the top of the housing is more like 8.4ft = 2.6m 2.5m = 8'2½". It's the maximum width of buses (or was). I suppose the 2.51m on the sign would be 8'3", what the other sign on the bridge shows. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:43 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk