Transport for London reply to our concerns on new trains

We wrote back in June to TfL on their plans to upgrade trains on the Metropolitan Lane from late 2009, and also heard a presentation from them at our AGM in June. A lot of the implications for an efficient service stem from a new signalling system – line speed, capacity and managing an increase in peak service through Baker Street.

They say they’re re-negotiating the signalling contract because of the Metronet administration. They want better value for money and an improved design. But it doesn’t inspire confidence when it’s only just over a year until the first new train is due – they now say early 2010 – and they say the contract won’t now be awarded until summer 2010. So now it’s even more confusing about what’s going to happen when.

Shown below is a question and answer exchange which followed after the AGM. I’ve also added in some extra comments to show our reaction.

When the number of trains per hour is increased, how will the logistical implications be managed? (E.g. signals, platform capacity, line sharing with the Chiltern Turbo)

New signalling is being designed specifically to allow an increase in the number of trains, and will be fully compatible with the Chiltern trains. As each new train has roughly the same capacity as an existing train, we do not envisage a need for platform capacity enhancements. Questions on Chiltern trains are best addressed directly to them.

(Our comments – peak services are included in Chiltern’s timetable starting December 08, at the same times as now 06.59 and 08.03)

With the planned increase in the number of trains on the Metropolitan, Circle and Hammersmith and City Line, how do you plan to get all the extra trains through Baker Street?

The new signalling system will be designed to accommodate the increased number of trains.

(Our comments - the question is how? Surely there are some general principles without specific details relevant to an individual design contract? They add that the requirements of the contractor will be clear, the system designed to meet these and all junctions will be assessed to make sure they reach desired capacity. But it’s nearly two years until they will have re-awarded the signalling contract and new trains are arriving before that, so we’re hardly convinced that it’s in hand.)

It’s been said the timetable will not change until old trains have gone and the new signalling system is in place. The problem is the four year changeover period and new signals not working until 2012. So does that mean a gradual reduction in seats until the new timetable starts?

Careful planning work will be carried out to minimise inconvenience during changeover, however, we have not yet finalised the timetables that will operate during changeover, and once the upgrade is completed, so it’s not yet possible to exactly how many seats will be available at various stages.

(Our comments – so no real answer to this question either. But at least they have admitted since our original exchange of emails on this issue that there will be a reduction in seat numbers during the changeover. They also argue that their timetabling process is robust with publication in good time. But what does that mean? Our interpretations of “good time” could be very different!)

We’re confused over capacity. You say each new train will have 70% of the seats of the trains used now. When operating, the increase in frequency will mean a 30% increase in hourly capacity, but only 98% of the current seats. Can you show us your calculations so we know how these figures relate to each other?

The future number of seats per hour will depend on capacity and service frequency. Frequency will in turn depend on the new signalling. With a new design the figures given previously will not necessarily reflect future capability. At this stage we do not yet have any updated figures for the number of seats per hour.

(Our comments – so we’re as confused as we were before. We’re not far off new trains without any idea how they will be managed. And the original capacity figures are theirs, but now they can’t give any context to them. So why tell us in the first place? They’ve since said these figures applied to the previous signalling contract and are no longer relevant, but surely the capacity plans should be more or less consistent – with the signalling contract awarded on this basis to deliver the capacity plans, rather than the signalling contract determining what the capacity plans should be?)

What will be maximum speed limit be on the line once the new stock has been introduced and how much will the travelling time then reduce by?

Speed limits are determined more by signalling and track condition than by trains. We will not have definite information about final maximum speed limits until the redesign and re-tender of signalling has ended. But they are planned to be close enough to 62mph and will vary.

(Our comments – so it’s the signalling contract again, although at least the figure on speed is the same as what we published in the last issue of Independence)

So these were the questions of most interest to us. But we did ask others, on step-free station access, what they would do if the air conditioning stopped working, platform lengthening, noise studies, anti social behaviour/security measures and use of under seat luggage racks. Anyone wanting further details should email feedback@rickmansworth-residents-association.org

Russell Carpenter