At the moment there doesn't seem to be a day that goes by without me hearing
on the travel news that the jubilee is shut for engineering works or theres
severe delays on the line. Who's running it at the moment, Mickey Mouse?

B2003

On Jul 13, 11:49*am, wrote:
At the moment there doesn't seem to be a day that goes by without me hearing
on the travel news that the jubilee is shut for engineering works or there's
severe delays on the line. Who's running it at the moment, Mickey Mouse?

Re the weekend closures - extra weekend closures on the Jubilee line
were requested recently by Tube Lines (the infraco), and these were
granted by LU:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...ive/11760.aspx

Basically the rush is on to get the new signalling system online by
the December deadline. I'd be interested to know if Tube Lines is
compensating LUL - or more to the point LUL is paying Tube Lines less
- because of these weekend closures (over and above the cost of rail
replacement buses and associated staffing)? Or is LUL just keen for
the work to get done ASAP?

On 13 July, 12:06, Mizter T wrote:
Basically the rush is on to get the new signalling system online by
the December deadline. I'd be interested to know if Tube Lines is
compensating LUL - or more to the point LUL is paying Tube Lines less
- because of these weekend closures (over and above the cost of rail
replacement buses and associated staffing)? Or is LUL just keen for
the work to get done ASAP?

I'd think it'd be a simple financial calculation by Tubelines over how
much compensation they have to pay LUL for weekend closures vs the
financial penalty for missing the December deadline (plus keeping
signalling contractors on beyond December, etc).

The root cause is that the new signalling system simply isn't working.

U

On Jul 13, 12:15*pm, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 13 July, 12:06, Mizter T wrote:

Basically the rush is on to get the new signalling system online by
the December deadline. I'd be interested to know if Tube Lines is
compensating LUL - or more to the point LUL is paying Tube Lines less
- because of these weekend closures (over and above the cost of rail
replacement buses and associated staffing)? Or is LUL just keen for
the work to get done ASAP?

I'd think it'd be a simple financial calculation by Tubelines over how
much compensation they have to pay LUL for weekend closures vs the
financial penalty for missing the December deadline (plus keeping
signalling contractors on beyond December, etc).

The root cause is that the new signalling system simply isn't working.

Any more detail on that - specifically, whether it's just 'not
working', or whether it's mostly working but with some flaws that mean
it can't be rolled out to live without quite a bit more bug-fixing,
which can only be done with the lines closed to passengers?

Obviously the chaps at the DD forum think that it's irredeemably
shafted &c, but they're Tube drivers and signallers so being cynical
about management is their primary hobby...

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

On 13 July, 12:15, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 13 July, 12:06, Mizter T wrote:

Basically the rush is on to get the new signalling system online by
the December deadline. I'd be interested to know if Tube Lines is
compensating LUL - or more to the point LUL is paying Tube Lines less
- because of these weekend closures (over and above the cost of rail
replacement buses and associated staffing)? Or is LUL just keen for
the work to get done ASAP?

I'd think it'd be a simple financial calculation by Tubelines over how
much compensation they have to pay LUL for weekend closures vs the
financial penalty for missing the December deadline (plus keeping
signalling contractors on beyond December, etc).

The root cause is that the new signalling system simply isn't working.

They might as well have continued working on it today, rather than
leave it in chaos, as seems to have happened.

"Mutiple signal failures" reported at London Bridge.

On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 04:15:03 -0700 (PDT)
Mr Thant wrote:
The root cause is that the new signalling system simply isn't working.

Why are train building and railway infrastructure companies constantly trying
to re-invent the wheel? Why don't they just use one of the systems running
happily on the central line or DLR for gods sake or has Not Invented Here
Syndrome raised its ugly head again?

B2003

On Jul 13, 12:15*pm, Mr Thant
wrote:

On 13 July, 12:06, Mizter T wrote:

Basically the rush is on to get the new signalling system online by
the December deadline. I'd be interested to know if Tube Lines is
compensating LUL - or more to the point LUL is paying Tube Lines less
- because of these weekend closures (over and above the cost of rail
replacement buses and associated staffing)? Or is LUL just keen for
the work to get done ASAP?

I'd think it'd be a simple financial calculation by Tubelines over how
much compensation they have to pay LUL for weekend closures vs the
financial penalty for missing the December deadline (plus keeping
signalling contractors on beyond December, etc).

Yes, that'd make sense. LUL are obviously amenable enough to the cause
to have granted the extra weekends, though I suppose it would have
been somewhat churlish if they hadn't.


The root cause is that the new signalling system simply isn't working.

As John B says, any more on that?

On 13 July, 12:29, wrote:
Why are train building and railway infrastructure companies constantly trying
to re-invent the wheel? Why don't they just use one of the systems running
happily on the central line or DLR for gods sake or has Not Invented Here
Syndrome raised its ugly head again?

It is the system from the DLR.

I don't know anything beyond what's in the board papers, which have
variously mentioned communication problems and specifically "works to
replace the
concentric cable with newly installed multi-core cable", which I think
refers to the leaky feeder cable that runs along the track and tells
the train where it is.

U

"Mr Thant" wrote in message
...
On 13 July, 12:29, wrote:
Why are train building and railway infrastructure companies constantly
trying
to re-invent the wheel? Why don't they just use one of the systems
running
happily on the central line or DLR for gods sake or has Not Invented Here
Syndrome raised its ugly head again?

It is the system from the DLR.

..... and we've had some threads looking at how the DLR handles temporary
speed restrictions through a reboot of the computers, and reports of trains
overrunning stops, etc. Seems the DLR system isn't as watertight or well-run
as we'd thought.

DW downunder



I don't know anything beyond what's in the board papers, which have
variously mentioned communication problems and specifically "works to
replace the
concentric cable with newly installed multi-core cable", which I think
refers to the leaky feeder cable that runs along the track and tells
the train where it is.

U

On Tue, 14 Jul 2009, DW downunder wrote:

"Mr Thant" wrote in message
...
On 13 July, 12:29, wrote:

Why are train building and railway infrastructure companies constantly
trying to re-invent the wheel? Why don't they just use one of the
systems running happily on the central line or DLR for gods sake or
has Not Invented Here Syndrome raised its ugly head again?

It is the system from the DLR.

.... and we've had some threads looking at how the DLR handles
temporary speed restrictions through a reboot of the computers, and
reports of trains overrunning stops, etc. Seems the DLR system isn't as
watertight or well-run as we'd thought.

This is a standard cycle in IT. System is procured, procurement goes a bit
wobbly, system is ********, people put up with it, a new procurement is
started to replace it, but that doesn't get the money it needs, or the
time, or the unified vision controlling it, or a good understanding of the
problem, or it just turns out that the problem was harder than people
think - oh and of course this time, it has to have some kind of backwards
compatibility or handover relationship with the first. The new system is
as ******** as the first, but in an exciting new way. People work like
mad, money gets spent, and nobody ever gets a working solution.

tom

--
Everyone has to die sooner or later, whether they be killed by germs,
crushed by a collapsing house, or blown to smithereens by an atom bomb. --
Mao Zedong