Overnight Tube

Paul Weaver <usenet@isorox.co.uk> wrote in message news:<pan.2003.10.15.22.33.36.562871@isorox.co.uk> ...
> 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

jdikseunm (JDikseun) wrote in message news:<cd3fa41a.0310152213.6aa59397@ com>...
> Paul Weaver <usenet@isorox.co.uk> wrote in message news:<pan.2003.10.15.22.33.36.562871@isorox.co.uk> ...
> > 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!

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 23:34:51 +0100, Paul Weaver <usenet@isorox.co.uk>
wrote:

>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.
[snip]

this will seem like a negative answer but I'm trying to tell it
straight.

typically the signalling system will not allow this form of reverse
working. It would also be expensive to install for relatively little
benefit.

There are considerable safety issues concerning working in adjacent
"closed" tunnels or even within the stations which would need to remain
open. Huge amounts of maintenance works occur right throughout the
stations at night including those jobs which cannot be undertaken when
trains run because there are restrictions on working too close to the
platform edge. Even simple tasks like deep cleans or use of mechanical
cleaners cannot be done if people are traipsing through the stations.

There is the fact that very large scale improvement projects are planned
across the LUL network over the next few years and they need amounts of
time when the system is closed to allow efficient working. I'm not
saying it's impossible to work round a limited night service but
delivery of these improvements would be much later than planned.

>Is there a demand for all night services?

If you look at the demand for night buses and taxis the answer would
appear to be yes. However I think the demand is different to daytime
demand as there is not a lot of short hop, zone 1 travel. It is much
more about Zone 1 to home with possibly a bit of zone 2 to home travel
for those inner london areas with popular clubs, pubs etc. This is
certainly reflected in the Night Bus network design and the usage
thereof.

Another big issue with your proposed "staggered" service pattern would
be how it is communicated to and understood by people who to a large
degree are not at the height of their faculties after a night on the
time. There are too many accidents associated with alcohol at present
and a more complicated service pattern that would not necessarily run
from the "normal" platforms or the "normal" direction could present
increased safety risks. The management of those passenger flows and
identifying which train is going where would be a considerable issue.

Just some thoughts which I'm pretty sure will be derided by the core
faction of anti LUL sentiment on the group.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

"Robin May" <northcircular@> wrote in message
news:Xns9416F1BBAB924tosser@130.133.1.4...
>
> 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.

Sad but true...

Btw, where on LUL do you work?

"Paul Corfield" <aooy65@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:m7mtovgeaj76bovqodvba3n49fcau155oc@...
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 23:34:51 +0100, Paul Weaver <usenet@isorox.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >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.
> [snip]
>
> this will seem like a negative answer but I'm trying to tell it
> straight.
>
> typically the signalling system will not allow this form of reverse
> working. It would also be expensive to install for relatively little
> benefit.
>
> There are considerable safety issues concerning working in adjacent
> "closed" tunnels or even within the stations which would need to remain
> open. Huge amounts of maintenance works occur right throughout the
> stations at night including those jobs which cannot be undertaken when
> trains run because there are restrictions on working too close to the
> platform edge. Even simple tasks like deep cleans or use of mechanical
> cleaners cannot be done if people are traipsing through the stations.
>
> There is the fact that very large scale improvement projects are planned
> across the LUL network over the next few years and they need amounts of
> time when the system is closed to allow efficient working. I'm not
> saying it's impossible to work round a limited night service but
> delivery of these improvements would be much later than planned.
>
> >Is there a demand for all night services?
>
> If you look at the demand for night buses and taxis the answer would
> appear to be yes. However I think the demand is different to daytime
> demand as there is not a lot of short hop, zone 1 travel. It is much
> more about Zone 1 to home with possibly a bit of zone 2 to home travel
> for those inner london areas with popular clubs, pubs etc. This is
> certainly reflected in the Night Bus network design and the usage
> thereof.
>
> Another big issue with your proposed "staggered" service pattern would
> be how it is communicated to and understood by people who to a large
> degree are not at the height of their faculties after a night on the
> time. There are too many accidents associated with alcohol at present
> and a more complicated service pattern that would not necessarily run
> from the "normal" platforms or the "normal" direction could present
> increased safety risks. The management of those passenger flows and
> identifying which train is going where would be a considerable issue.
>
> Just some thoughts which I'm pretty sure will be derided by the core
> faction of anti LUL sentiment on the group.
> --
> Paul C
>
>
> Admits to working for London Underground!
>
>

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 18:57:04 +0100, "Darren Wiltshire"
<erk@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

>Sad but true...
>
>Btw, where on LUL do you work?

in an office. More than that I am not saying on a newsgroup given past
experiences on this group.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

"Robin Mayes" <zen23703@zen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3f91b622$0$10989$fa0fcedb@lovejoy.zen.co.uk.. .
>
> "Kat" <kat@kat22.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1066480709.1920.0@iris.uk.clara.net...
> > --
> > >Kat< in Downtown Toronto
> >
>
> Ah, so that's what all those holes advertising CTRL works, the tube's
going
> to Canada!
>

In partnership with Air Canada ;-)

--
>Kat< in Downtown Toronto

"Kat" <kat@kat22.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1066480709.1920.0@iris.uk.clara.net...
> --
> >Kat< in Downtown Toronto
>

Ah, so that's what all those holes advertising CTRL works, the tube's going
to Canada!