|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jun 4, 2021 9:24:44 GMT
Why is it the majority of the drivers on these trains are so slow. It is irritating. If it is one line I wish to see been turned to ATO is this. The drivers on the Metropolitan line who run over a lot of the same stretch seems to be much quicker, they are quick at opening doors, accelerating up to the limit and getting to the limit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jun 4, 2021 9:49:32 GMT
The Circle, Hammersmith and City Line are already ATO along most of the stretch shared with the Metropolitan so they do all run on the same speed even if it may not seem like it.
The only reason I can think of is that the Circle and H&C are busier than the Metropolitan but have shorter trains, and the Circle/H&C are less frequent for the lower Circle/Barking branches meaning that they are often quite crowded when they rock up as opposed to the Metropolitan line which usually carries fresh air along the upper circle. This extra crowding on the H&C/Circle probably means that doors can take longer to close and open which obviously then adds onto overall travel time.
I have always been of the view that more Mets should be truncated short to allow additional Circles and H&Cs, although this would then interfere with the District Line which gets quite frequent on the lower Circle and out to Barking so it's probably a dead start. It obviously then makes sense for the Met to run along the upper circle to use the capacity, even if the trains may not always seem the best value for track capacity.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulsw2 on Jun 4, 2021 9:52:51 GMT
Why is it the majority of the drivers on these trains are so slow. It is irritating. If it is one line I wish to see been turned to ATO is this. The drivers on the Metropolitan line who run over a lot of the same stretch seems to be much quicker, they are quick at opening doors, accelerating up to the limit and getting to the limit. The only part of the Circle that is NOT ATO at present is Sloane Square to Paddington via Hight St Ken. ( goes ATO in Nov ) and The H&C is ATO between Hammersmith and Stepney Green.The slow door opening is down to the train having to berth at 0 metres to its target point then giving a release to the door opening control. Speeds won’t be able to fully adjusted until the District H&C Circle and Met have there timetables recast possibility in Dec |
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Jun 4, 2021 10:57:47 GMT
I always found these two lines to be very fast.
|
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jun 4, 2021 12:20:01 GMT
The Circle, Hammersmith and City Line are already ATO along most of the stretch shared with the Metropolitan so they do all run on the same speed even if it may not seem like it. The only reason I can think of is that the Circle and H&C are busier than the Metropolitan but have shorter trains, and the Circle/H&C are less frequent for the lower Circle/Barking branches meaning that they are often quite crowded when they rock up as opposed to the Metropolitan line which usually carries fresh air along the upper circle. This extra crowding on the H&C/Circle probably means that doors can take longer to close and open which obviously then adds onto overall travel time. I have always been of the view that more Mets should be truncated short to allow additional Circles and H&Cs, although this would then interfere with the District Line which gets quite frequent on the lower Circle and out to Barking so it's probably a dead start. It obviously then makes sense for the Met to run along the upper circle to use the capacity, even if the trains may not always seem the best value for track capacity. I previously wondered if it might be worth cutting the Metropolitan line as you suggest, possibly even converted to Overground, or with Chiltern taking over the Amersham/Chesham services. However, rather than having extra short services, I would simply restructure the other sub surface lines, giving 3 simpler routes each with an off-peak frequency of every 5 minutes within central London. The Circle Line could revert back to operating in a circle (removing the Hammersmith section), with both this and the H&C lines doubled in frequency. The District line would be reduced in frequency, operating from Upminster to Wimbledon or Richmond (no longer going to Edgware Road). The Piccadilly line would cover Ealing Broadway as already proposed. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jun 4, 2021 12:34:14 GMT
The Circle, Hammersmith and City Line are already ATO along most of the stretch shared with the Metropolitan so they do all run on the same speed even if it may not seem like it. The only reason I can think of is that the Circle and H&C are busier than the Metropolitan but have shorter trains, and the Circle/H&C are less frequent for the lower Circle/Barking branches meaning that they are often quite crowded when they rock up as opposed to the Metropolitan line which usually carries fresh air along the upper circle. This extra crowding on the H&C/Circle probably means that doors can take longer to close and open which obviously then adds onto overall travel time. I have always been of the view that more Mets should be truncated short to allow additional Circles and H&Cs, although this would then interfere with the District Line which gets quite frequent on the lower Circle and out to Barking so it's probably a dead start. It obviously then makes sense for the Met to run along the upper circle to use the capacity, even if the trains may not always seem the best value for track capacity. I previously wondered if it might be worth cutting the Metropolitan line as you suggest, possibly even converted to Overground, or with Chiltern taking over the Amersham/Chesham services. However, rather than having extra short services, I would simply restructure the other sub surface lines, giving 3 simpler routes each with an off-peak frequency of every 5 minutes within central London. The Circle Line could revert back to operating in a circle (removing the Hammersmith section), with both this and the H&C lines doubled in frequency. The District line would be reduced in frequency, operating from Upminster to Wimbledon or Richmond (no longer going to Edgware Road). The Piccadilly line would cover Ealing Broadway as already proposed. While I do thing your three lines proposal could work, it in the grand scheme is unfeasible. The Metropolitan Line being split into National Rail networks would still end up inconveniencing quite a few people. I did mention earlier it's relatively lightly used in the Central portion, but it is still used. I imagine people could change at Baker Street, but it may not be worth it. Moving the line to Overground also brings in the problems of converting the LU lines into National Rail lines and while possible, it would probably work out to be a logistical nightmare. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 4, 2021 13:26:19 GMT
The Circle, Hammersmith and City Line are already ATO along most of the stretch shared with the Metropolitan so they do all run on the same speed even if it may not seem like it. The only reason I can think of is that the Circle and H&C are busier than the Metropolitan but have shorter trains, and the Circle/H&C are less frequent for the lower Circle/Barking branches meaning that they are often quite crowded when they rock up as opposed to the Metropolitan line which usually carries fresh air along the upper circle. This extra crowding on the H&C/Circle probably means that doors can take longer to close and open which obviously then adds onto overall travel time. I have always been of the view that more Mets should be truncated short to allow additional Circles and H&Cs, although this would then interfere with the District Line which gets quite frequent on the lower Circle and out to Barking so it's probably a dead start. It obviously then makes sense for the Met to run along the upper circle to use the capacity, even if the trains may not always seem the best value for track capacity. I previously wondered if it might be worth cutting the Metropolitan line as you suggest, possibly even converted to Overground, or with Chiltern taking over the Amersham/Chesham services. However, rather than having extra short services, I would simply restructure the other sub surface lines, giving 3 simpler routes each with an off-peak frequency of every 5 minutes within central London. The Circle Line could revert back to operating in a circle (removing the Hammersmith section), with both this and the H&C lines doubled in frequency. The District line would be reduced in frequency, operating from Upminster to Wimbledon or Richmond (no longer going to Edgware Road). The Piccadilly line would cover Ealing Broadway as already proposed. Are you seriously suggesting the Circle Line should go back to being a circle when the problems it had because it ran in a circle were well documented and why it eventually was unraveled from such a format? Speculation to a degree is welcome but some people should do some research first. |
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Jun 4, 2021 15:39:04 GMT
I previously wondered if it might be worth cutting the Metropolitan line as you suggest, possibly even converted to Overground, or with Chiltern taking over the Amersham/Chesham services. However, rather than having extra short services, I would simply restructure the other sub surface lines, giving 3 simpler routes each with an off-peak frequency of every 5 minutes within central London. The Circle Line could revert back to operating in a circle (removing the Hammersmith section), with both this and the H&C lines doubled in frequency. The District line would be reduced in frequency, operating from Upminster to Wimbledon or Richmond (no longer going to Edgware Road). The Piccadilly line would cover Ealing Broadway as already proposed. Are you seriously suggesting the Circle Line should go back to being a circle when the problems it had because it ran in a circle were well documented and why it eventually was unraveled from such a format? Speculation to a degree is welcome but some people should do some research first. What are examples of said problems? |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jun 4, 2021 15:58:04 GMT
I previously wondered if it might be worth cutting the Metropolitan line as you suggest, possibly even converted to Overground, or with Chiltern taking over the Amersham/Chesham services. However, rather than having extra short services, I would simply restructure the other sub surface lines, giving 3 simpler routes each with an off-peak frequency of every 5 minutes within central London. The Circle Line could revert back to operating in a circle (removing the Hammersmith section), with both this and the H&C lines doubled in frequency. The District line would be reduced in frequency, operating from Upminster to Wimbledon or Richmond (no longer going to Edgware Road). The Piccadilly line would cover Ealing Broadway as already proposed. Are you seriously suggesting the Circle Line should go back to being a circle when the problems it had because it ran in a circle were well documented and why it eventually was unraveled from such a format? Speculation to a degree is welcome but some people should do some research first. An alternative option could be to keep the Circle line at Hammersmith and doubled in frequency, and possibly cut back at the other end to High Street Kensington. Then replace the H&C with a new line from Wimbledon to Barking via Earls Court, Edgware Road and Liverpool Street - with the District line reduced to operating between Richmond and Upminster. |
|
|
|
Post by paulsw2 on Jun 4, 2021 16:15:51 GMT
Are you seriously suggesting the Circle Line should go back to being a circle when the problems it had because it ran in a circle were well documented and why it eventually was unraveled from such a format? Speculation to a degree is welcome but some people should do some research first. An alternative option could be to keep the Circle line at Hammersmith and doubled in frequency, and possibly cut back at the other end to High Street Kensington. Then replace the H&C with a new line from Wimbledon to Barking via Earls Court, Edgware Road and Liverpool Street - with the District line reduced to operating between Richmond and Upminster. As someone who actually drives the district line there is NO way that the Circle could reverse at high street as it takes the platform that any train going to Edgware Road requires you CANNOT get a Circle train into bay platforms 3 or 4. A circle line can reverse off platform 2 but it would block through services whilst driver detrains shuts down ( possibly needs to use loo) changes ends opens up train logs in necessary information into onboard computer system waits for target speed the carry out PTI checks then close doors and depart. It only needs a door failing to close or obstructed then blocking back occurs into Earls Court plus trains coming from Edgware Road into platform 1 can’t move as the route is set for the train on platform 2. As to not serving Ealing Broadway remember that a large number of trains are stabled at Ealing Common so trains will have to run to Ealing to facilitate stabling stock changeovers and to a degree crew relief at Acton as one of the lines depots. |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jun 4, 2021 16:16:43 GMT
I previously wondered if it might be worth cutting the Metropolitan line as you suggest, possibly even converted to Overground, or with Chiltern taking over the Amersham/Chesham services. However, rather than having extra short services, I would simply restructure the other sub surface lines, giving 3 simpler routes each with an off-peak frequency of every 5 minutes within central London. The Circle Line could revert back to operating in a circle (removing the Hammersmith section), with both this and the H&C lines doubled in frequency. The District line would be reduced in frequency, operating from Upminster to Wimbledon or Richmond (no longer going to Edgware Road). The Piccadilly line would cover Ealing Broadway as already proposed. While I do thing your three lines proposal could work, it in the grand scheme is unfeasible. The Metropolitan Line being split into National Rail networks would still end up inconveniencing quite a few people. I did mention earlier it's relatively lightly used in the Central portion, but it is still used. I imagine people could change at Baker Street, but it may not be worth it. Moving the line to Overground also brings in the problems of converting the LU lines into National Rail lines and while possible, it would probably work out to be a logistical nightmare. Might not be as complicated due to already sharing some tracks with Chiltern services. And if converted to London Overground, another option might be to cut the Piccadilly line back to Rayners Lane rather than sharing tracks. Though has worked with the Bakerloo/District sharing tracks with the Overground, and the East London line moving to the Overground network. Besides being underused towards Aldgate, I think another issue with the Metropolitan line is that a tube service is not ideal for journeys to outer stations around Amersham. Existing Chiltern services are useful alongside, but have limited capacity with far fewer carriages than the S8 stock, likely due to use beyond Amersham. Though unlikely to happen, my suggestion would be to have Rickmansworth as more of a hub station, being within the M25 and probably the furthest station where a stopping service is appropriate. The station would need to be relocated slightly to the east, alongside the station car park, with the existing sidings used for terminating platforms. This would segregate TFL stopping services, with additional Chiltern services introduced alongside towards Amersham. This role of Rickmansworth as a hub would also take over from Moor Park, which doesn't require as many services here. Another option might also be to have a shuttle service between Watford and Chesham, at 2 or 3 tph. The Watford branch is lightly used, with much faster services to London at Watford Junction. Passengers nearer to Watford tube and Croxley would be able to change at Rickmansworth for faster services into Marylebone or Baker Street. In this case, TFL services could provide 8tph from Baker Street to Northwood, with 4tph continuing to Moor Park and Rickmansworth. Regardless, I also think it might be worth renaming Watford tube to something like Watford West, as the current name could be misleading given the distance from the town centre. |
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Jun 4, 2021 16:51:03 GMT
While I do thing your three lines proposal could work, it in the grand scheme is unfeasible. The Metropolitan Line being split into National Rail networks would still end up inconveniencing quite a few people. I did mention earlier it's relatively lightly used in the Central portion, but it is still used. I imagine people could change at Baker Street, but it may not be worth it. Moving the line to Overground also brings in the problems of converting the LU lines into National Rail lines and while possible, it would probably work out to be a logistical nightmare. Might not be as complicated due to already sharing some tracks with Chiltern services. And if converted to London Overground, another option might be to cut the Piccadilly line back to Rayners Lane rather than sharing tracks. Though has worked with the Bakerloo/District sharing tracks with the Overground, and the East London line moving to the Overground network. Besides being underused towards Aldgate, I think another issue with the Metropolitan line is that a tube service is not ideal for journeys to outer stations around Amersham. Existing Chiltern services are useful alongside, but have limited capacity with far fewer carriages than the S8 stock, likely due to use beyond Amersham. Though unlikely to happen, my suggestion would be to have Rickmansworth as more of a hub station, being within the M25 and probably the furthest station where a stopping service is appropriate. The station would need to be relocated slightly to the east, alongside the station car park, with the existing sidings used for terminating platforms. This would segregate TFL stopping services, with additional Chiltern services introduced alongside towards Amersham. This role of Rickmansworth as a hub would also take over from Moor Park, which doesn't require as many services here. Another option might also be to have a shuttle service between Watford and Chesham, at 2 or 3 tph. The Watford branch is lightly used, with much faster services to London at Watford Junction. Passengers nearer to Watford tube and Croxley would be able to change at Rickmansworth for faster services into Marylebone or Baker Street. In this case, TFL services could provide 8tph from Baker Street to Northwood, with 4tph continuing to Moor Park and Rickmansworth. Regardless, I also think it might be worth renaming Watford tube to something like Watford West, as the current name could be misleading given the distance from the town centre. Or just keep it as it is rather than complicate things in the name of making them simpler |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jun 4, 2021 18:41:34 GMT
Or run a fast Amersham and Chesham each hour to possibly free up a train by cutting the journey time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Jun 4, 2021 22:38:01 GMT
Why is it the majority of the drivers on these trains are so slow. It is irritating. If it is one line I wish to see been turned to ATO is this. The drivers on the Metropolitan line who run over a lot of the same stretch seems to be much quicker, they are quick at opening doors, accelerating up to the limit and getting to the limit. Yes.....I know what you mean. As Paul says the north part of the Circle is already CBTC signalled (so it’s ATO) and a lot of it is to do with using a timetable written when the old signalling system was used. The plan is to launch a new timetable in September with faster running times on that part of the line. However, the way things are currently is pretty irritating as you say. When trains are running on time, CBTC system keeps trains to time at each platform and works out a speed so the train arrives at the next platform when it should do. Some of the results are very slow. Edgware Road eastbound to Baker Street is typically 16mph (all the way), same as Moorgate to Liverpool Street. I’ve known Farringdon westbound to King’s Cross to run at 25mph all the way and also seen 19mph for Great Portland Street westbound all the way to Baker Street. The braking rates aren’t set to be very fast coming into most platforms either, it certainly doesn’t come in Central/Victoria line style. When trains are late, or the signaller has intervened to speed the train up, things do change. Farringdon to Kings Cross hits a maximum speed of 53mph and other parts get to the mid forties. If you’re on a train running on time the journey will seem pretty slow, my guess is that the faster Met trains were running late so got the higher speeds. There’s other elements too, since CBTC was introduced the eastbound line from Hammersmith to Edgware Road is subject to a 31mph maximum speed limit (because of issues with the signalling system when it rains) and the trains start braking earlier for stations than they did before. Hopefully as time goes on things will be tweaked to improve things. Door opening can take a few seconds, this is because the train equipment needs to communicate with the equipment back at base, which then has to communicate with the train again to say it’s safe to open the doors. Beforehand, equipment mounted at the stations indicated to the train things were safe and the process was pretty instant, but the new process is longer. |
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Jun 4, 2021 23:10:29 GMT
Why is it the majority of the drivers on these trains are so slow. It is irritating. If it is one line I wish to see been turned to ATO is this. The drivers on the Metropolitan line who run over a lot of the same stretch seems to be much quicker, they are quick at opening doors, accelerating up to the limit and getting to the limit. Yes.....I know what you mean. As Paul says the north part of the Circle is already CBTC signalled (so it’s ATO) and a lot of it is to do with using a timetable written when the old signalling system was used. The plan is to launch a new timetable in September with faster running times on that part of the line. However, the way things are currently is pretty irritating as you say. When trains are running on time, CBTC system keeps trains to time at each platform and works out a speed so the train arrives at the next platform when it should do. Some of the results are very slow. Edgware Road eastbound to Baker Street is typically 16mph (all the way), same as Moorgate to Liverpool Street. I’ve known Farringdon westbound to King’s Cross to run at 25mph all the way and also seen 19mph for Great Portland Street westbound all the way to Baker Street. The braking rates aren’t set to be very fast coming into most platforms either, it certainly doesn’t come in Central/Victoria line style. When trains are late, or the signaller has intervened to speed the train up, things do change. Farringdon to Kings Cross hits a maximum speed of 53mph and other parts get to the mid forties. If you’re on a train running on time the journey will seem pretty slow, my guess is that the faster Met trains were running late so got the higher speeds. There’s other elements too, since CBTC was introduced the eastbound line from Hammersmith to Edgware Road is subject to a 31mph maximum speed limit (because of issues with the signalling system when it rains) and the trains start braking earlier for stations than they did before. Hopefully as time goes on things will be tweaked to improve things. Door opening can take a few seconds, this is because the train equipment needs to communicate with the equipment back at base, which then has to communicate with the train again to say it’s safe to open the doors. Beforehand, equipment mounted at the stations indicated to the train things were safe and the process was pretty instant, but the new process is longer. on the DLR our "braking rates" are adjusted so trains start braking earlier when it rains to prevent wheel slip and trains dropping out of Automatic |
|
