HS2 and the Grand Union

[cuthound]

3 hours ago, David Mack said:

It could have happened. In 1931 Charles W. Glover proposed an airport at King's Cross.

https://darkestlondon.com/2011/10/23/kings-cross-airport-1931/

 

Are you sure he wasn't just re-inventing the wheel?     

[Alan de Enfield]

4 hours ago, David Mack said:

It could have happened. In 1931 Charles W. Glover proposed an airport at King's Cross.

https://darkestlondon.com/2011/10/23/kings-cross-airport-1931/

 

 

And, 68 years later it was finished and they stood it vertical.

 

 

[Wanderer Vagabond]

1 hour ago, Tracy D'arth said:

A facetious remark, I think that the average Joe or Jill would not consider such training to be vital to learning to drive.

But we are way off topic.

I would suggest that the facetiousness began with a comment along the lines of,"....I could still drive a train though, cushy job that. Not colour blind, can sit down all day, short working hours, like to be alone, not dealing with the general public, pension, uniform, free travel, no physical exertion, overpaid, no outside working, piece of cake....". Here we have the result of someone else who thought the same way (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/travel/news/train-chaos-result-of-manager-stepping-in-to-cover-striking-drivers-union-says/ar-AA1ld7Ph), they have to instruct train drivers for a reason you know, it's not as simple as it looks.

 

Flying an airliner also looks easy after all how many kids have played 'Flight Simulator' on their computers. It's easy innit, full throttle down the runway, pull back the joystick, engage autopilot and job's a good 'un, isn't that how it works? Why do they pay them £100,000 per year? anyone could do it.......couldn't they?

[Captain Pegg]

On 25/02/2024 at 08:51, Grassman said:

 

I've been told from a very informed source that the once the HS2 trains join the existing WCML at Handsacre they will be slower than the existing trains for the rest of the journey north because they won't have the tilt mechanism, so any time gained coming from London will be lost once it joins the WCML.  Also the HS2 carriages will be shorter so the capacity might be less as well.

 

The same person told me that there's already a bottleneck on the WCML caused by Handsacre Tunnel where the existing WCML has to reduce from 4 lines to 2 lines, so the addition of HS2 trains will make it even worse and probably slow  the journey down even more.

The bit about the carriages being shorter does not appear to be true.

 

It is in any case a little irrelevant because overall train length is key. And therein lies an issue which may have rendered the message you relayed a little lost in translation.
 

Interoperability requirements for new build high speed railways require the operation of 200m or 400m long trains whereas existing trains serving the conventional route are up to 265m long.

 

Configuring the conventional network north of HS2 for 400m trains (which would be 2x200m trains) is particularly problematic hence the possibilty that trains north of Birmingham may end up being exclusively 200m long trains.

 

That’s a particular problem for Manchester - by far and away the largest market north of Birmingham - as the new station alongside Piccadilly would have been configured with 400m long platforms and there is likely a demand for such trains. The inability to operate them would reduce line capacity between Birmingham and Manchester to less than it is today. The alternative is a hugely expensive set of works to accommodate them which in itself would probably reduce station capacity along the route, particularly at Manchester.

 

What the Government don’t tell you - possibly because they don’t understand it - is that for every £1bn they save on HS2 they will need an awful lot of it to reconfigure the conventional network for the operation of the new trains and providing on board equipment on trains that they wouldn’t otherwise have needed since many would have been captive to HS2.

 

Edited February 26 by Captain Pegg

[doratheexplorer]

18 hours ago, Markinaboat said:

apologies if this has already been quoted but only just become aware of this thread. From a reliable source a few months ago:

 

EXISTING Network: 1hr 30 min Euston to Brum Intl Rail Station (with option to alight/join at many stations but slightly slower NOT an option with HS2)

 

HS2 Total HS2 time 1hr 31 min PLUS a walk at Old Oak Common!

Euston to Old Oak Common 28 mins (quickest)

Walk

Old Oak Common to new Curzon St Station/hub approx 48 mins

THEN 15 min walk to Brum Intl Rail Station

 

From HS2 site:

The first HS2 services will run between Birmingham Curzon Street and Old Oak Common in London between 2029 and 2033 and expand as new sections of the network are built.

Are you sure you mean Birmingham International?  Perhaps you mean Birmingham New Street?

[Nightwatch]

On 23/02/2024 at 16:08, JungleJames said:

Codswallop.

It is caused by government who insist on scuppering agreements at the last second. 

Staff do not want to strike. They do not want to do less work. 

Instead the government is trying to introduce plans that are unworkable and make the railways less safe.

 

They also want to scrap long held perks that would mean basically no increase in remuneration.

 

Companies which the government cannot control are not involved. Does that tell you something?

As with the NHS. Junior doctors for instance. No pay increases for years and then pitiful pay offers hoping no-one will notice.

The Armed forces are getting uncomfortable with their lot now. No wonder we are drastically short of recruits throughout each service. Mind you, there’s not enough RN ships to defend the country anyway. Even if they did work and were crewed.

[Tracy D'arth]

15 hours ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

I would suggest that the facetiousness began with a comment along the lines of,"....I could still drive a train though, cushy job that. Not colour blind, can sit down all day, short working hours, like to be alone, not dealing with the general public, pension, uniform, free travel, no physical exertion, overpaid, no outside working, piece of cake....". Here we have the result of someone else who thought the same way (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/travel/news/train-chaos-result-of-manager-stepping-in-to-cover-striking-drivers-union-says/ar-AA1ld7Ph), they have to instruct train drivers for a reason you know, it's not as simple as it looks.

 

Flying an airliner also looks easy after all how many kids have played 'Flight Simulator' on their computers. It's easy innit, full throttle down the runway, pull back the joystick, engage autopilot and job's a good 'un, isn't that how it works? Why do they pay them £100,000 per year? anyone could do it.......couldn't they?

What a silly reply. Who mentioned aircraft?  Tell me what is difficult about driving a vehicle with no steering and automatic brakes.

[Captain Pegg]

57 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:

What a silly reply. Who mentioned aircraft?  Tell me what is difficult about driving a vehicle with no steering and automatic brakes.

Trains don’t have automatic brakes.

 

Stopping a body with huge momentum and very little friction between the wheels and what they are rolling on is arguably the most difficult aspect and one that’s very much more difficult than stopping a car.

 

Learning and retaining route knowledge is a key factor as is the behavioural response to adverse signal indications.

 

A sizeable proportion of people actually don’t have the necessary cognitive and behavioural skills required for the job.

You don’t properly understand what you’re saying.

[LadyG]

7 minutes ago, Captain Pegg said:

Trains don’t have automatic brakes.

 

Stopping a body with huge momentum and very little friction between the wheels and what they are rolling on is arguably the most difficult aspect and one that’s very much more difficult than stopping a car.

 

Learning and retaining route knowledge is a key factor as is the behavioural response to adverse signal indications.

 

A sizeable proportion of people actually don’t have the necessary cognitive and behavioural skills required for the job.

You don’t properly understand what you’re saying.

Mmmmm, well I'm sure that the salary of train drivers is related to their skills and training plus supply and demand in the job market. Just like any other job.

I believe there are driverless trains, and I have no doubt that safety will improve as technology is developed. Just as in aviation, the person in the driving seat is monitoring operations.

 

Edited February 26 by LadyG

[Tracy D'arth]

1 hour ago, Captain Pegg said:

Trains don’t have automatic brakes.

 

Stopping a body with huge momentum and very little friction between the wheels and what they are rolling on is arguably the most difficult aspect and one that’s very much more difficult than stopping a car.

 

Learning and retaining route knowledge is a key factor as is the behavioural response to adverse signal indications.

 

A sizeable proportion of people actually don’t have the necessary cognitive and behavioural skills required for the job.

You don’t properly understand what you’re saying.

Ditto

[JungleJames]

2 hours ago, LadyG said:

Mmmmm, well I'm sure that the salary of train drivers is related to their skills and training plus supply and demand in the job market. Just like any other job.

I believe there are driverless trains, and I have no doubt that safety will improve as technology is developed. Just as in aviation, the person in the driving seat is monitoring operations.

 

The driverless trains in the UK are some underground lines I believe, where the driver is just watching and making sure. Plus the DLR where there is no driver.

 

On the mainline there are no driverless trains, and the drivers are very much driving. 

 

Some trains are more difficult to drive, with braking, as already mentioned, the one aspect where different trains really can differ.

 

What has improved safety is better training, and improved safety systems. But the driver is still very much in charge. 

[Tony Brooks]

5 hours ago, Captain Pegg said:

Trains don’t have automatic brakes.

 

Please, will you explain what happens if the driver does not knowledge the ATP (or whatever) buzzer/hooter within time? I was under the impression that the brakes came on automatically.

[JungleJames]

2 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

Please, will you explain what happens if the driver does not knowledge the ATP (or whatever) buzzer/hooter within time? I was under the impression that the brakes came on automatically.

That is like saying a boat with a dead man's chord has an automatic engine, so you don't need to use the power lever.

 

But no, it isn't automatic brakes as such. Basically the same thing happens underneath. It's just it is all set off via different routes, all of which are caused by drivers actions.

You either operate the brake handle, or combined power brake controller, or, you take your foot off the driver vigilance pedal and don't replace it in time. Or as you suggest, don't acknowledge it at all. At the end of the day, the brakes being applied are caused by actions taken by the driver.

The difference being, if it happens via the driver vigilance pedal, you have to wait until you come to a complete stop I believe, before you can release the brakes.

 

It will not apply brakes in order to stop you sensibly at a signal or station.

 

Automatic brakes would be able to apply the brakes without driver action or inaction, and bring the train to a controlled stop.

 

The closest we have to this, is ATP, which can bring the train to a stop before a red signal if the driver does not act in time. But it is not a controlled stop, and it would render you liable to a non too cordial meeting with your boss, as it would likely be seen as a SPAD. 

However ATP is only in use on one line. Elsewhere TPWS is in use, which does not stop you before the red signal. 

ATP is not going to be introduced elsewhere.

3 hours ago, JungleJames said:

The driverless trains in the UK are some underground lines I believe, where the driver is just watching and making sure. Plus the DLR where there is no driver.

 

On the mainline there are no driverless trains, and the drivers are very much driving. 

 

Some trains are more difficult to drive, with braking, as already mentioned, the one aspect where different trains really can differ.

 

What has improved safety is better training, and improved safety systems. But the driver is still very much in charge. 

Think I may be incorrect slightly here.

The Thameslink trains I believe can drive themselves in the central core. But driver has to be there. I think this is how it works.

 

I don't know if Crossrail is the same through the central core. 

[Bod]

SPAD  Signal Passed At Danger.

 

Bod

[Tony Brooks]

26 minutes ago, JungleJames said:

That is like saying a boat with a dead man's chord has an automatic engine, so you don't need to use the power lever.

 

But no, it isn't automatic brakes as such. Basically the same thing happens underneath. It's just it is all set off via different routes, all of which are caused by drivers actions.

You either operate the brake handle, or combined power brake controller, or, you take your foot off the driver vigilance pedal and don't replace it in time. Or as you suggest, don't acknowledge it at all. At the end of the day, the brakes being applied are caused by actions taken by the driver.

The difference being, if it happens via the driver vigilance pedal, you have to wait until you come to a complete stop I believe, before you can release the brakes.

 

It will not apply brakes in order to stop you sensibly at a signal or station.

 

Automatic brakes would be able to apply the brakes without driver action or inaction, and bring the train to a controlled stop.

 

The closest we have to this, is ATP, which can bring the train to a stop before a red signal if the driver does not act in time. But it is not a controlled stop, and it would render you liable to a non too cordial meeting with your boss, as it would likely be seen as a SPAD. 

However ATP is only in use on one line. Elsewhere TPWS is in use, which does not stop you before the red signal. 

ATP is not going to be introduced elsewhere.

Think I may be incorrect slightly here.

The Thameslink trains I believe can drive themselves in the central core. But driver has to be there. I think this is how it works.

 

I don't know if Crossrail is the same through the central core. 

 

I got the distinct impression that at least some systems sounded the "action required" sunder at regular intervals and if not acknowledged would apply the brakes - not just at red signals. In that and passing a red signal, I would suggest is a form of automatic braking. It is trying to protect the train from danger.

 

I accept it can't stop the train in a station etc, but there is an element of truth in what Tracy said. This is in no way trying to detract from the driver's job. having had a driving experience on a heritage line at 20 mph I know it would not be easy to spot and react to signals at 60mph with a full train.

[JungleJames]

25 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

I got the distinct impression that at least some systems sounded the "action required" sunder at regular intervals and if not acknowledged would apply the brakes - not just at red signals. In that and passing a red signal, I would suggest is a form of automatic braking. It is trying to protect the train from danger.

 

I accept it can't stop the train in a station etc, but there is an element of truth in what Tracy said. This is in no way trying to detract from the driver's job. having had a driving experience on a heritage line at 20 mph I know it would not be easy to spot and react to signals at 60mph with a full train.

It depends what you deem automatic brakes then. People say the brakes are applied automatically. But in reality it is still caused by drivers' actions.

 

Tracy massively undervalued the job. She also made out it was non physical. 

The only time you could suggest Tracy has any point at all, is for the very very short section of the Thameslink core. But no driver only does that section.

 

Also, it is best to pretend your so called automatic brakes are not there. Because if you keep having the vigilance device applying the brakes, your boss will soon want an explanation. It is designed to stop a train when the driver is unconscious. Likewise if you get a TPWS activation having not made any attempt to slow the train down, then you are going to SPAD. When they do the download and see you didn't touch the brakes yourself, you will find your so called automatic brakes don't actually save your job.

 

So call them what you like, but they are not a part of your driving. They are there to stop a runaway train with an unconscious driver, and to try and help stop a driver killing people if he or she screws up. 

[ditchcrawler]

4 hours ago, JungleJames said:

The driverless trains in the UK are some underground lines I believe, where the driver is just watching and making sure.  

As from 1968, the driver closes the doors and then pressed the 2 buttons to start the train

[JungleJames]

1 minute ago, ditchcrawler said:

As from 1968, the driver closes the doors and then pressed the 2 buttons to start the train

That sounds about right. 

Semi automatic. Train can drive itself, but driver has to be there 

[Tony Brooks]

3 minutes ago, JungleJames said:

That sounds about right. 

Semi automatic. Train can drive itself, but driver has to be there 

 

But is that because of union pressure or fear of how passengers might react if there was no driver. I think the DLR runs so slowly any perceived danger of driverless operation is much less than on other lines.

[Graham Davis]

1 hour ago, Bod said:

SPAD  Signal Passed At Danger.

 

Bod

No longer used, they are now S P A R : signal passed at red.

 

12 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

As from 1968, the driver closes the doors and then pressed the 2 buttons to start the train

He still has to release the brakes and apply power to get the train moving.
And on many lines the driver has no control over the doors; that is still done by guards.

Edited February 26 by Graham Davis

[ditchcrawler]

3 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

But is that because of union pressure or fear of how passengers might react if there was no driver. I think the DLR runs so slowly any perceived danger of driverless operation is much less than on other lines.

As I said , he closes doors and allows the train to set off. If they didn't have him they would need a guard to close the doors and give the train the OK to leave. I have no idea how they do this on the Dockland railway

[Tony Brooks]

8 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

As I said , he closes doors and allows the train to set off. If they didn't have him they would need a guard to close the doors and give the train the OK to leave. I have no idea how they do this on the Dockland railway

 

When I have been on the DLR the trains run without anyone in the ab, the doors operate automatically, but at busy times they seem to have an attendant who seems to pass from carriage to carriage, and they can operate the doors from various control panels. I don't know if they can also tell the computer to hold or dispatch the train or if the computer reacts to seeing all the doors are closed.

[MtB]

20 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

When I have been on the DLR the trains run without anyone in the ab, the doors operate automatically, but at busy times they seem to have an attendant who seems to pass from carriage to carriage, and they can operate the doors from various control panels. I don't know if they can also tell the computer to hold or dispatch the train or if the computer reacts to seeing all the doors are closed.

 

Also I'm fairly sure the DLR is a closed system, where one central computer is in charge of all of the trains. 

[Tracy D'arth]

Its like fishing with a large hook.

Its so easy to wind up these guys and hook them. The fact that 3 of them have no sense of humour helps to land them floundering on the forum demanding that their point of view be noticed, again and again.

I really do not care about train drivers, I prefer to drive and know that I will get there without paying a fortune and worrying about them going on strike, stranding me, at the drop of a flag by some bolshy union shouter.

[Ronaldo47]

My recollection is that the DLR on-train staff were called "Train Captains" when the first lines opened. I don't know what they are called now.  It was reported that, when Her Majesty officially opened the DLR, she arrived early and, as there was no easy way of over-riding the automatic system to make the train depart sooner, the Royal party  had to wait for several minutes until the train started at its pre-programmed time.  

 

The busy suburban lines from London into Essex have/used to have around five sets of four-aspect colour light signals to the mile in the inner area.  When a train passed, a signal,  it would go red. When it passed the next signal, that red would go to single amber. When it passed the next signal, the amber would go double amber. It would stay double amber for the next few signals passed, and then go green. So the driver of a following train would know roughly how far ahead the next train was, and adjust his speed accordingly.

 

If you were sitting behind the driver's cab, you could hear the audible signals the system generated through the wall.  From memory, green produced no sound, double amber sounded  an electric  bell, and (when the line was congested and trains were crawling, a not uncommon occurance when approaching Liverpool Street in the morning rush hour),  a single amber sounded a hooter. I understand that attempting to pass a red would have applied the brakes.  The sound signals allowed trains to continue running at around 90 second headways in the fogs we used to get at one time but rarely get now. 

 

 

Edited February 26 by Ronaldo47