JLE - anything they should have added at time of building?
 

Apart from moving block signalling of course!

Though some omissions will be because the whole network was designed
with the assumption of 30per hour services (was it 36 per hour at one
point?)

Personally I think they should have been a bit more infrastructure to
isolate failed trains and be able to run more of a service on parts of
the line while other bits were suspended

JLE - anything they should have added at time of building?
 

On 13 Feb, 13:47, kytelly wrote:
Apart from moving block signalling of course!

Though some omissions will be because the whole network was designed
with the assumption of 30per hour services (was it 36 per hour at one
point?)

Personally I think they should have been a bit more infrastructure to
isolate failed trains and be able to run more of a service on parts of
the line while other bits were suspended


I suppose avoiding trains or signalling failing in the first place
would be preferable.

The whole Jubilee line should be using Automatic Train Operation by
September 2011, though ATO will be introduced incrementally on
different sections of the line - this is according to the February TfL
board papers, see this entry on Mr Thant's blog (or indeed click
through via the links provided there and read the actual papers
themselves):
http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...ellaneous.html


The other thing that would have been useful would have been if the
East London line platforms at Canada Water had been built to
accommodate 6 or 8 car trains, or at least if some kind of passive
provision had been made for this. As things stand, the short platform
there places a limitation on the length on the new ELLX* trains of 4
cars. I'm not sure whether SDO* could be made to work with regards to
a 5 or 6 car ELLX train at Canada Water, given that it will be a major
interchange station.

All that said, I understand that during the JLE planning stages it was
never all that certain that the ELL would stop at Canada Water at all,
so I suppose we must be thankful of small (or should that be short)
mercies.


-----
* ELLX = East London Line eXtension
* SDO = Selective Door Opening

JLE - anything they should have added at time of building?
 

On 13 Feb, 16:22, Mizter T wrote:
The other thing that would have been useful would have been if the
East London line platforms at Canada Water had been built to
accommodate 6 or 8 car trains, or at least if some kind of passive
provision had been made for this. As things stand, the short platform
there places a limitation on the length on the new ELLX* trains of 4
cars. I'm not sure whether SDO* could be made to work with regards to
a 5 or 6 car ELLX train at Canada Water, given that it will be a major
interchange station.

Yes I forgotten about that; and while they were at it they could have
closed Rotherhithe and Surrey Quays, put a couple of travelaters in
and centred it all Canada water.

JLE - anything they should have added at time of building?
 

"kytelly" wrote in message
...
On 13 Feb, 16:22, Mizter T wrote:
The other thing that would have been useful would have been if the
East London line platforms at Canada Water had been built to
accommodate 6 or 8 car trains, or at least if some kind of passive
provision had been made for this. As things stand, the short platform
there places a limitation on the length on the new ELLX* trains of 4
cars. I'm not sure whether SDO* could be made to work with regards to
a 5 or 6 car ELLX train at Canada Water, given that it will be a major
interchange station.

Yes I forgotten about that; and while they were at it they could have
closed Rotherhithe and Surrey Quays, put a couple of travelaters in
and centred it all Canada water.


I'd still be fairly sceptical about Rotherhithe ever reopening.

BTN

JLE - anything they should have added at time of building?
 

"Mizter T" wrote in message
...

On 13 Feb, 13:47, kytelly wrote:
Apart from moving block signalling of course!

Though some omissions will be because the whole network was designed
with the assumption of 30per hour services (was it 36 per hour at one
point?)

Personally I think they should have been a bit more infrastructure to
isolate failed trains and be able to run more of a service on parts of
the line while other bits were suspended


I suppose avoiding trains or signalling failing in the first place
would be preferable.

The whole Jubilee line should be using Automatic Train Operation by
September 2011, though ATO will be introduced incrementally on
different sections of the line - this is according to the February TfL
board papers, see this entry on Mr Thant's blog (or indeed click
through via the links provided there and read the actual papers
themselves):
http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...ellaneous.html



Automatic train operation on the Jubilee Line, and starting June this year.
If the BBC said that there would be hundreds of train spotters posting here
to say that the BBC was talking ********.

Kevin

JLE - anything they should have added at time of building?
 

On 16 Feb, 22:12, "Zen83237" wrote:
Automatic train operation on the Jubilee Line, and starting June this year.
If the BBC said that there would be hundreds of train spotters posting here
to say that the BBC was talking ********.

Thanks for the correction (?) Kevin. The difference is I linked to the
original document, so you're not reliant on my interpretation. I've
reread that section and fixed my summary.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London