As I understand it, the tube has to be closed overnight because of
maintenance work. The NYC subway has 4 tunnel lines so they can be open
all night.

What about a limited service using just one track? You'd have one train
running back and forth between 2 to 3 stations. Take the victoria for
example, one train would run Brixton - Stockwell - Vauxhall - Pimlico -
Victoria and back again, giving a frequency of one train every 20 minutes
in each direction, then a train would run victoria to kings cross, again a
20 minutes service, kings cross - seven sisters, seven sisters -
waltahstow.

As only one tunnel would be used, the other could be maintained. Until 4AM
the trains could be timetabled to allow leaving the center easilly,
minimising connections - on the victoria line the victoria - kings x train
would arrive, then leave, then a minute later the kx - seven sisters train
would arrive. After 4AM the flow would be reversed allowing access to the
city.

If the service was popular enough, you could have trains running every 10
minutes, so brixton-vauxhall, vauxhall-victoria, vic-oxcirc ox-kingsx,
kingsx-finsbury, fins-tottenham hale, th - walthamstow
Central could be ealing broadway - north acton - white city - notting hill
- bond street - holburn - liverpool street - stratford - leytonstone
Piccadilly could be finsbury - kingsx - holburn - green park - glocester
road - Hammersmith

Well, you get the idea. Going against the traffic flow would take a long
time, but going with the flow should only take an extra 10 minutes per
hour. I'm guessing outside the tunnels it's easy to switch trains from one
track to another allowing trains to pass each other at key points. With
careful timetabling and planning, routine maintenence could be done
while a limited service would still be operational.

Is there a demand for all night services?

Paul Weaver wrote in message ...
As I understand it, the tube has to be closed overnight because of
maintenance work. The NYC subway has 4 tunnel lines so they can be open
all night.

What about a limited service using just one track?

Is there a demand for all night services?

Nice question, Paul, you're using your cdf (common dog f..., er,
common sense).
The standard answer they always give me is that signals won't allow it
- signals aren't set up to protect trains operating this way. Also,
you can't move materials and plant around stations while passengers
are still about (safety issue). Working near crossovers, where workers
could accidently step onto the running line is another issue (also
safety). There are cross-passages between tunnels as well, staff using
them for storing materials could also accidently wander onto the
running line (safety again). And.....

It would be good to see some collective will to overcome these
problems, everyone would benefit. Especially if they could shut down
the one line earlier than they do now, and open it later.


John

(JDikseun) wrote in message . com...
Paul Weaver wrote in message ...
As I understand it, the tube has to be closed overnight because of
maintenance work. The NYC subway has 4 tunnel lines so they can be open
all night.

What about a limited service using just one track?

Is there a demand for all night services?


This kind of idea may explain something I've noticed on the Berlin
S-Bahn. Late at night the train I took was on the "wrong track" - i.e.
on the left rather than right side. It mystified me at the time, but
maybe this is why!

"JDikseun" wrote in message
om...
Paul Weaver wrote in message
...

What about a limited service using just one track?

Nice question, Paul, you're using your cdf
(common dog f..., er, common sense).
The standard answer they always give me
is that signals won't allow it - signals aren't
set up to protect trains operating this way.

Since there would only be one train on each open section, and each open
section would be separated by several miles from the next open section on
the same track, signals wouldn't be needed. So long as the last section at
the end of the line operated on the correct line towards the terminus (and
wrong line away from it), and the tripcocks were operating here, and each
train had a driver in each end, I don't see many safety problems... although
any sections with speed-operated trainstops (whatever they are called), such
as the southbound into Archway, would need to have tripcocks operational as
well.

Trying to get a trainload of drunks and potheads from one platform to the
opposite platform quickly might be more of a challenge. Fitting hoppers in
the floors of trains and using stations like St Pauls where one track is
directly above the other might do the trick.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

"John Rowland" wrote in message ...
Since there would only be one train on each open section, and each open
section would be separated by several miles from the next open section on
the same track, signals wouldn't be needed. So long as the last section at
the end of the line operated on the correct line towards the terminus (and
wrong line away from it), and the tripcocks were operating here, and each
train had a driver in each end, I don't see many safety problems... although
any sections with speed-operated trainstops (whatever they are called), such
as the southbound into Archway, would need to have tripcocks operational as
well.

Then you'd be using alternate northbound/sb sections, or (eb/wb).
Which would dramatically reduce the sections you could work on. Add to
this the arrangement of current sections, and there'd be even less
areas you could access to do maintenance.......Wouldn't that then put
us right back to: "Shut the whole line down so we can get some
maintenance done"?


Trying to get a trainload of drunks and potheads from one platform to the
opposite platform quickly might be more of a challenge. Fitting hoppers in
the floors of trains and using stations like St Pauls where one track is
directly above the other might do the trick.

Chuckle.

In article , John Rowland
writes
Since there would only be one train on each open section, and each open
section would be separated by several miles from the next open section on
the same track, signals wouldn't be needed. So long as the last section at
the end of the line operated on the correct line towards the terminus (and
wrong line away from it), and the tripcocks were operating here, and each
train had a driver in each end, I don't see many safety problems.

Actually you'd have a problem with the tripcocks. A train can be
"back-tripped" if the rear car passes over a raised trainstop. On bits
of track where trains move both ways the trainstops have to be lowered
as a train approaches and raised once it's passed. Plain track is
signalled like this.

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8371 1138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

(JDikseun) wrote in message . com...
Paul Weaver wrote in message ...
As I understand it, the tube has to be closed overnight because of
maintenance work. The NYC subway has 4 tunnel lines so they can be open
all night.

What about a limited service using just one track?

Is there a demand for all night services?

Nice question, Paul, you're using your cdf (common dog f..., er,
common sense).
The standard answer they always give me is that signals won't allow it
- signals aren't set up to protect trains operating this way. Also,
you can't move materials and plant around stations while passengers
are still about (safety issue). Working near crossovers, where workers
could accidently step onto the running line is another issue (also
safety). There are cross-passages between tunnels as well, staff using
them for storing materials could also accidently wander onto the
running line (safety again). And.....

It would be good to see some collective will to overcome these
problems, everyone would benefit. Especially if they could shut down
the one line earlier than they do now, and open it later.

With the nanny state we have here that wants to wrap everyone in cotton
wool and tie a big bow around them , it'll never happen. When we get some
common sense into the health and safety industry (ie , that some very minor
risks in life are worth it when weighed against the benefits) then possibly...

Also don't forget theres there question of money. Not only the extra cost of
powering the trains in the night but staff wages. I don't suspect theres a
hope in hell of getting *any* LU staff to work night shifts (who don't have
to already past about 1am) without a payrise never mind the drivers.

B2003

"Boltar" wrote in message don't suspect theres a
hope in hell of getting *any* LU staff to work night shifts (who don't
have
to already past about 1am) without a payrise never mind the drivers.

Well would you? just to take aload of ****heads home.

--
regards,
Pre`38 tube [DR]
westLondon, UK

"Pre-38" wrote the following in:



"Boltar" wrote in message don't suspect
theres a
hope in hell of getting *any* LU staff to work night shifts (who
don't
have
to already past about 1am) without a payrise never mind the
drivers.

Well would you? just to take aload of ****heads home.

I have to admit, there's a lot of truth in that.

--
message by Robin May, consumer of liquids
Hello. I'm one of those "roaring fascists of the left wing".

Hacker is to computer as boy racer is to Ford Escort.

"Robin May" wrote in message
...

Hacker is to computer as boy racer is to Ford Escort.

Vauxhall Nova these days, surely? The boy racer Escorts of old are all
becoming collectors items now.