wrote:
Any idea if these trains will be air conditioned?

The prequalification document mentions only drivers cab airconditioning
with forced ventilation for the passengers when supplied but allows for
later upgrade. They will have end exit doors and inter unit
connections. I am not sure whether the whole fleet will be fitted for
25kv AC and 750v DC ab initio.

Quote
EAST LONDON LINE ROLLING STOCK PREQUALIFICATION
3.2 Rolling Stock Requirements
3.2.1 The initial rolling stock requirement is for a minimum of 18
trains for service
with sufficient spare trains to accommodate fleet maintenance and
ensure fleet
availability. The trains will be Electric Multiple Units ('Units')
with each Unit
being no more than 83 metres long over coupler faces. The Units are to
be
capable of operation on the Extended East London Line and associated
main
line routes. Additional Units may be required to accommodate further
expansion of operations.
3.2.2 The proposed service plan is for a minimum of 18 trains in
service for
approximately 19 hours a day, 7 days a week. The service pattern will
be
constant from start-up to closure (i.e. there will be no peak and
off-peak service
pattern).
3.2.3 From the initial timetabling, the predicted annual passenger
mileage per Unit is approximately 100,000 miles (160,000km).
3.2.4 The Units are intended for use on inner suburban metro type
services with
typical distances between stations on the core route being less than
1km. The
performance characteristics of the Units must be suitable for this type
of
operation with high acceleration performance levels between 0.8m/s²
and
1.0m/s² up to the maximum core route line speed of 40mph.
3.2.5 A fully rated friction braking system will be required such that
a Unit may
operate normally with the dynamic brake isolated. Blended regenerative
and
fully rated rheostatic braking systems are also required. However,
these
systems must each be capable of isolation by maintenance staff. To
reflect the
metro type service, the braking system must have a high performance to
optimise the operational performance of the Units.
3.2.6 The Units must be designed for a maximum speed of not less than
75mph in order to maximize flexibility in operation.
3.2.7 The interior layout of the Units should maximize passenger
capacity and
facilitate the efficient access and egress of passengers in order to
minimize
station dwell times. A fully loaded Unit with fully occupied seats and
standing
passengers at 5.5 passengers/m² should have a minimum capacity of 750
passengers.
3.2.8 Toilets are not required.
3.2.9 The Units shall be supplied with driver's cabs fitted with
independent Heating,
Ventilation and Air Conditioning ('HVAC') units.
3.2.10 The passenger compartment should have, as a minimum, a forced
pressure ventilation system. If only a forced pressure ventilation
system is proposed it should be possible to upgrade it to air-cooling
or full air conditioning.
3.2.11 The supplied Units must meet the requirements of BS6853 and
comply with at least Category 1b fire rating.
3.2.12 The Units must be capable of being Driver-Only-Operated
('DOO') and fitted with the necessary onboard equipment to monitor
passengers' access and
egress.
Unquote
3.2.13 The Units must represent a low technical and commercial risk.
Therefore the use of proven systems, designs and configurations is
preferred.
3.2.14 The Units will operate in narrow single bore tunnels. For
emergency egress each Unit must include end access doors and emergency
egress steps/ramps at each end. The end access doors should allow for
Unit-to-Unit evacuation as well as Unit-to-track evacuation. The
vehicles shall be semi-permanently coupled, preferably with wide
through gangways within the Unit.
3.2.15 Potential design options may include number and layout of seats,
fittings and equipment. An ability to accommodate design options as
late as possible is
preferred, in order to reflect the requirements of the appointed
operator.
3.2.16 The Units must be capable of operation on the national rail
third rail
electrification system. An ability to be readily converted to 25 kV AC
overhead
operation is desirable.
3.2.17 The Rolling Stock Supplier will be responsible for all
activities required to
enable the passenger service operator to obtain a Route Acceptance
Safety
Case and any other approvals required to allow the Units to operate.
3.2.18 The supply, operation and maintenance of the Units will be
required to comply with Railway Group Standards, ATOC Standards, HMRI
requirements and guidance and other standards and requirements as more
specifically detailed in the Invitation to Tender and detailed
specification (see section 10 below for further information).
3.2.19 The Units will operate through Network Rail and LU operated
stations. The Rolling Stock Supplier will be required to take due
cognizance of pertinent LU Standards and other special requirements
that may apply at these stations.
3.2.20 The supplied Units are required to interface efficiently with
the upgraded
infrastructure and installations. The Rolling Stock Supplier will be
required to
co-operate with the infrastructure contractors and the Contracting
Authority to
ensure an efficient and effective interface.
3.2.21 The integration and delivery of the rolling stock is programmed
over an
approximate thirty-six month period. Test running of the rolling stock
on the
upgraded East London Line infrastructure is anticipated to commence in
early
2009. See section 8 below for further information.
3.2.22 The provision of a driver cab simulator unit as part of a
developed driver training programme is also anticipated to form part of
the Rolling Stock Supply
Contract.
3.2.23 The Units must be fully compliant with the Rail Vehicle
Accessibility Regulations (RVAR) 1999 and the Disability Discrimination
Act (DDA) 1995.

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:54:32 GMT, Jack Taylor wrote:

So they're getting 24 3-car Electrostars for the North London Railway,
replacing 23 3-car 313s and 3 3-car 508s? That's not much of a
capacity upgrade - some might even call it the opposite.

That was my immediate thought. It's all very wooly and unclear. It certainly
looks as if it's replacement on like-for-like basis *unless* by North London
Railway they mean the North London Line (Richmond to Stratford) on its own,
releasing the current 313s to strengthen Euston to Watford and West London
Line services or increase frequency?

The plans are for the current (self-contained) WLL service to be
replaced with through running from the NLL (Stratford to Clapham
Junction), so it wouldn't be possible to use a different type of stock
just for the WLL. The Euston to Watford service will be axed
completely, but this only uses something like 4 of the 23 313 units.

It seems apparent to me from the figures that the proposed doubling of
the frequency on the WLL and NLL (and the reopening of the Queens Park
- Camden Road route) will be achieved simply by running the 376s in
addition to the 313s, rather than the 376s replacing the 313s. The
options in the contract would then allow the 313s to be replaced at a
later date with a subsequent build of 376s.

asdf wrote:

The plans are for the current (self-contained) WLL service to be
replaced with through running from the NLL (Stratford to Clapham
Junction), so it wouldn't be possible to use a different type of stock
just for the WLL. The Euston to Watford service will be axed
completely, but this only uses something like 4 of the 23 313 units.

It seems apparent to me from the figures that the proposed doubling of
the frequency on the WLL and NLL (and the reopening of the Queens Park
- Camden Road route) will be achieved simply by running the 376s in
addition to the 313s, rather than the 376s replacing the 313s. The
options in the contract would then allow the 313s to be replaced at a
later date with a subsequent build of 376s.

Yehbutnobut.

As far as I can tell (certainly according to NR's RUS -
http://tinyurl.com/hbkhq ), the medium-term plan to take effect by 2009
when these trains are introduced is for:

Stratford - Richmond x 4
Stratford - QP x 2
Barking - Clapham x 2
Barking - Gospel Oak x 2
Watford - Croydon (via Clapham) x 1
Shepherds Bush - Croydon (via Clapham) x 1

This is the same frequency as at present on Stratford to Richmond. The
Stratford to QP service should involve roughly the same amount of stock
as the current Euston to Watford service (slightly longer journey time
but 2tph instead of 3tph). The Barking services will all need to be
diesel (Turbostars with a 376-style interior are preferred, according
to the RUS).

The only requirement for additional electric stock is on
Watford/Shepherds Bush to Croydon, and that's only if it's decided that
these services should be operated by NLR instead of Southern (the
through Brighton to Watford service will be axed either way). So I
don't think we're going to see 313s and 376s running together after the
full 376 fleet has been delivered.

The longer-term plan (2014 onwards) is the same, except that it
involves infrastructure works that allow 4tph to QP and all GOBLIN
trains running through to Clapham. This would also be the timescale for
any GOBLIN electrification, so it would either involve a big new order
of 376s if electrification goes ahead, or a couple of new 376s and a
couple of new Turbostars. The 313s will have been out of use for some
years by this point so probably won't be effective even as a stopgap.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:56:36 +0100, "Peter Masson"
wrote:


"R.C. Payne" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Is it really sensible/cost-effective to have 100mph capability for
these, rather than modify (presumably re-gear) for better acceleration
- or have a lower-spec traction package? I can't imagine that there's
much chance of the units exceeding 50mph, unless they operate on other
(non-TfL) routes at some point in the future.

Perhaps it's cheaper that way, as they can just supply another
off-the-shelf electrostar. What is the top speed of a 376? I'm
guessing that is what these trains will end up being.

100 mph isn't mentioned in the TfL press release. It looks as though the
Beeb saw the word Electrostar, looked up the details of the Southern and
Kent Coast 375/377s. put two and two together and made five.

Or maybe the BBC was simply being accurate when it said "the
Bombardier company said"?
http://www.bombardier.com/en/0_0/pre...724&sCateg=1_0

Bombardier Wins A £223 Million Order From Transport For London For 152
Electric Multiple Unit Cars For The United Kingdom

"The 100mph Class 376 units are specially designed for suburban
operations and are part of the proven and reliable Electrostar family
of products. 1,614 Electrostar cars are already in daily passenger
service with three UK operators, c2c, South East Trains and Southern
Railways."

It is not really the BBC's fault if they have taken the data from
official sources - I doubt they employ teams of Class 376 spotters to
verify official statements by train builders.
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

John B wrote:
asdf wrote:
The plans are for the current (self-contained) WLL service to be
replaced with through running from the NLL (Stratford to Clapham
Junction), so it wouldn't be possible to use a different type of stock
just for the WLL. The Euston to Watford service will be axed
completely, but this only uses something like 4 of the 23 313 units.

It seems apparent to me from the figures that the proposed doubling of
the frequency on the WLL and NLL (and the reopening of the Queens Park
- Camden Road route) will be achieved simply by running the 376s in
addition to the 313s, rather than the 376s replacing the 313s. The
options in the contract would then allow the 313s to be replaced at a
later date with a subsequent build of 376s.

Yehbutnobut.

As far as I can tell (certainly according to NR's RUS -
http://tinyurl.com/hbkhq ), the medium-term plan to take effect by 2009
when these trains are introduced is for:

Stratford - Richmond x 4
Stratford - QP x 2
Barking - Clapham x 2
Barking - Gospel Oak x 2
Watford - Croydon (via Clapham) x 1
Shepherds Bush - Croydon (via Clapham) x 1

This is the same frequency as at present on Stratford to Richmond.
(snip)

The information coming out of various transport orifices regarding the
future "Orbirail" service patterns is a bit of a mess. The most recent
TfL plan prior to the publication of NR's RUS was relatively simple. THe
first phase was:

4tph Stratford to Richmond
4tph CJ to Stratford
2tph Gospel Oak to Barking.

However, NR's RUS now says that TfL's proposal (service variant SLC2 for
implementation in Jan 2011) is the rather bewildering:

4tph Stratford to Richmond
2tph Gospel Oak to Barking
2tph CJ to Willesden Jcn
2tph CJ to Barking
4tph Caledonian Rd to Stratford
and a possible 4tph Caledonian Rd to Dalston "ELL precursor" (what
purpose that would serve, I have no idea - they don't even say whether
that's supposed to be to Kingsland or Junction, and if it's to Junction,
why not just run the proper ELL service?)

Compare that the NR's medium-term proposal; the TfL one offers the
Queen's Park services only as far as Caledonian Road, and offers a
better service on the WLL (4tph exclusive of any Southern services,
rather than inclusive in the NR proposal).

The long-term NR proposal does match up with what TfL proposed for its
second phase:

4tph Stratford to Richmond
4tph CJ to Barking
4tph QP to Stratford

....which would (together with the non-TfL Watford J to East Croydon and
Shepherd's Bush to East Croydon services) also offer an excellent 6tph
between Shepherd's Bush and Clapham Junction.

I'm going to assume that what NR state TfL's SLC2 specification to be in
this Cross-London RUS supercedes what TfL originally submitted to the
RUS consultation.

The newer version only offers half the service (4tph) between Gospel Oak
and Camden Road - although perhaps this is to avoid the scenario in the
previous proposal where new demand might be generated by the 8tph along
that corridor, only for the service to fall back to 4tph later on. I'm
also unsure quite why TfL offer 2 extra tph on the WLL from the start
whilst NR delay it until the long-term.

It's all very confusing! Previous reports also suggested that the
Olympics transport package was funding improvements for 6-car trains on
the NLL, but that now seems unnecessary...

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, Dave Arquati wrote:

4tph Caledonian Rd to Stratford

I think we should start referring to the former of those two stations as
Barnsbury. As it is, every time i read about NLL service patterns, i start
wondering where the Picc/NLL curve is.

tom

--
Baby got a masterplan. A foolproof masterplan.

In article , Dave Arquati
writes
However, NR's RUS now says that TfL's proposal (service variant SLC2
for implementation in Jan 2011) is the rather bewildering:
[...]
and a possible 4tph Caledonian Rd to Dalston "ELL precursor" (what
purpose that would serve, I have no idea

Could it be to let them get experience with the effects of pathing the
ELL on to the NLL, before it opens?

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In article , Dave Arquati
writes
However, NR's RUS now says that TfL's proposal (service variant SLC2
for implementation in Jan 2011) is the rather bewildering:
[...]
and a possible 4tph Caledonian Rd to Dalston "ELL precursor" (what
purpose that would serve, I have no idea

Could it be to let them get experience with the effects of pathing the
ELL on to the NLL, before it opens?

That's what I thought, but it doesn't seem to work - it must either run
to Dalston Kingsland or Dalston Junction; if it's the former, then
wouldn't they need to build expensive and temporary turnback facilities?
If it's the latter, then there seems to be little point running a
precursor when the proper ELL could be run through.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

In article , Dave Arquati
writes
Could it be to let them get experience with the effects of pathing
the ELL on to the NLL, before it opens?
That's what I thought, but it doesn't seem to work - it must either run
to Dalston Kingsland or Dalston Junction; if it's the former, then
wouldn't they need to build expensive and temporary turnback
facilities? If it's the latter, then there seems to be little point
running a precursor when the proper ELL could be run through.

Not if they build the junction, with temporary buffer stops on the ELL
route, early, well before finishing the rest of the ELL stuff (in
particular, the link from Whitechapel to the viaduct).

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

On Mon, 4 Sep 2006 13:25:16 +0100, Clive D. W. Feather wrote:

Could it be to let them get experience with the effects of pathing
the ELL on to the NLL, before it opens?
That's what I thought, but it doesn't seem to work - it must either run
to Dalston Kingsland or Dalston Junction; if it's the former, then
wouldn't they need to build expensive and temporary turnback
facilities? If it's the latter, then there seems to be little point
running a precursor when the proper ELL could be run through.

Not if they build the junction, with temporary buffer stops on the ELL
route, early, well before finishing the rest of the ELL stuff (in
particular, the link from Whitechapel to the viaduct).

The link from Whitechapel to the viaduct is part of ELLX Phase 1. The
connection from Dalston Junction to Canonbury, and through running
onto the NLL, is part of Phase 2, so it won't need to happen till much
later.