On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 22:35:55 +0100, Ian Jelf wrote:

In message .com,
Jonathan writes
I heard a long discussion on a London talk radio station about the re-
opened Regent's Park tube station and how it went over-budget, opened
late, lifts weren't working etc - the usual stuff, no surprise, that'll
be Metronet.

I saw it open again for the first time yesterday morning. Imagine my
surprise yesterday evening when on my return Bakerloo train the
announcement went out that it was still closed. There was some
surprise among fellow passengers, too, followed by bemusement as we
promptly stopped there and gained passengers.

I wonder how the automated announcement came not to be updated? LUL are
usually very thorough about this sort of thing in my experience.

As an occasional traveller to London, I was quite amused to find my train
passing slowly through a closed tube station (I forget which), with "Mind
the Gap" warnings still being played.

"Tom Cumming" wrote

As an occasional traveller to London, I was quite amused to find my train
passing slowly through a closed tube station (I forget which), with "Mind
the Gap" warnings still being played.

This may well have been Regents Park, before it reopened. I noticed that
when I went through there a couple of weeks ago.

Peter

I can recount an opposite incident that happened in autumn.

King's Cross St.Pancras, on the Northern Line, was closed for work on the
planned Eurostar service. There were plenty of passenger notices, yellow
warning signs at the station warning drivers not to stop, etc.

One driver did stop, however. And he opened the doors.

Passengers spilled out onto the platform, only to find that all exits from
it were blocked and that part of the platform itself was cordoned off. You
can imagine the look of surprise on some alighting passengers' faces -- they
were just walking as they normally would if the station was open, only to
find that they were trapped.

In the ensuing chaos, the driver had to leave his cab and tell the
passengers who had alighted get back on again. IIRC, some of the work staff
who were carrying out work on or around the platform had to help herd
passengers back onto the train.

After the train departed, the driver made no announcement about his cock up.

I wonder what sort of administrative sanction the driver faced as a result
of his faux pas, if anything.

I was rather surprised myself, because the train had initially come to a
full stop at the station. I thought, however, that the driver was simply
waiting for the starter to clear.

"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
...
In message .com,
Jonathan writes
I heard a long discussion on a London talk radio station about the re-
opened Regent's Park tube station and how it went over-budget, opened
late, lifts weren't working etc - the usual stuff, no surprise, that'll be
Metronet.

I saw it open again for the first time yesterday morning. Imagine my
surprise yesterday evening when on my return Bakerloo train the
announcement went out that it was still closed. There was some surprise
among fellow passengers, too, followed by bemusement as we promptly
stopped there and gained passengers.

I wonder how the automated announcement came not to be updated? LUL are
usually very thorough about this sort of thing in my experience.

--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

wrote in message
.uk...
I can recount an opposite incident that happened in autumn.

King's Cross St.Pancras, on the Northern Line, was closed for work on the
planned Eurostar service. There were plenty of passenger notices, yellow
warning signs at the station warning drivers not to stop, etc.

One driver did stop, however. And he opened the doors.

[snip]

I was rather surprised myself, because the train had initially come to a
full stop at the station. I thought, however, that the driver was simply
waiting for the starter to clear.

When I've been on tube journeys through temporarily closed stations, the
train came to a full stop, but began moving again after barely a second's
pause - I guessed the signalling/tripcock systems at such stations were
designed on the assumption that train would stop there?

--
*** http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/ ***
Rich Mackin (rich-at-richmackin-co-uk)
MSN: richmackin-at-hotmail-dot-com

I'm not exactly sure.

My normal experience of Tube trains going through temporarily closed
stations is that they may slow to 5-10 miles, but they don't stop. I guess
that they are similar to draw up signals in that they will clear if
approached at a certain speed, assuming that there is no train ahead of the
one in the station.

"Rich Mackin" wrote in message
...

When I've been on tube journeys through temporarily closed stations, the
train came to a full stop, but began moving again after barely a second's
pause - I guessed the signalling/tripcock systems at such stations were
designed on the assumption that train would stop there?

--
*** http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/ ***
Rich Mackin (rich-at-richmackin-co-uk)
MSN: richmackin-at-hotmail-dot-com

On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 14:32:52 GMT, wrote:

I'm not exactly sure.

My normal experience of Tube trains going through temporarily closed
stations is that they may slow to 5-10 miles, but they don't stop. I guess
that they are similar to draw up signals in that they will clear if
approached at a certain speed, assuming that there is no train ahead of the
one in the station.

I suspect the approach control signals are still there so they have to
slow for them.

On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 10:36:47 -0400, Christopher A.Lee
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 14:32:52 GMT, wrote:

I'm not exactly sure.

My normal experience of Tube trains going through temporarily closed
stations is that they may slow to 5-10 miles, but they don't stop. I guess
that they are similar to draw up signals in that they will clear if
approached at a certain speed, assuming that there is no train ahead of the
one in the station.

I suspect the approach control signals are still there so they have to
slow for them.

IIRC slowing down and/or briefly stopping at closed stations are the
result of near misses some years ago involving persons working at
temporarily closed stations being endangered by some trains passing
through at full speed and moving loose materials with the
consequential air movement. On lines without any approach control at
the particular station but where headways are usually short the trains
will often be stopping as usual at a red platform starter but without
the loading/unloading of passengers which usually coincides with the
time taken for the signal to clear.

Christopher A.Lee wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 14:32:52 GMT, wrote:


My normal experience of Tube trains going through temporarily closed
stations is that they may slow to 5-10 miles, but they don't stop. I
guess that they are similar to draw up signals in that they will
clear if approached at a certain speed, assuming that there is no
train ahead of the one in the station.

I suspect the approach control signals are still there so they have to
slow for them.

It's actually to do with the lengths of the signal overlaps on the exit from
the station. A train departing a closed station at full speed can crash into
another train without being stopped by the signalling. A train departing the
station having stopped, or crawled, can't.

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, John Rowland wrote:

Christopher A.Lee wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 14:32:52 GMT, wrote:

My normal experience of Tube trains going through temporarily closed
stations is that they may slow to 5-10 miles, but they don't stop. I
guess that they are similar to draw up signals in that they will clear
if approached at a certain speed, assuming that there is no train
ahead of the one in the station.

I suspect the approach control signals are still there so they have to
slow for them.

It's actually to do with the lengths of the signal overlaps on the exit
from the station. A train departing a closed station at full speed can
crash into another train without being stopped by the signalling. A
train departing the station having stopped, or crawled, can't.

Does this mean that, on the rare occasions when one of its stations is
closed, the DLR does not suffer from this problem?

tom

--
.... the gripping first chapter, which literally grips you because it's
printed on a large clamp.

In message , at
09:35:09 on Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Tom Anderson
remarked:
It's actually to do with the lengths of the signal overlaps on the
exit from the station. A train departing a closed station at full
speed can crash into another train without being stopped by the
signalling. A train departing the station having stopped, or crawled, can't.

Does this mean that, on the rare occasions when one of its stations is
closed, the DLR does not suffer from this problem?

No, the stopping pattern seems irrevocably burnt in. Even when Heron
Quays was shut for rebuilding, the trains stopped where the station
should have been.
--
Roland Perry