-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
DLR B23 Stock (CAF Inneo)
- Thread starter TRAX
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Impressive stuff. Hopefully they can actually get into service soon
Quite so. It seems there's hardly a weekend in May when it is possible to go right through on the line from Tower Gateway to Beckton, for example. Rather like some stretches of the Overground, it seems the engineering requirements have got comfortable with disrupting everything for their own convenience. Bear in mind the old contracts with DLR operators used to specify each branch to be closed not more than one weekend per year.
That's what they were doing more than 2 years ago. Look back in this thread to April 2023, with the same weekend closures and the same two trains; they don't seem to have any more delivered.
The whole fleet introduction is becoming a farce. Not yet at the class 701 level but give TfL some time and they might get there.
Um ... they were ordered in June 2019. It's ALREADY been 6 years !
OneTrackMinded
Member
The original promised date of introduction is what's being referred to, not when they were ordered.
Russel
Established Member
In reality, is there any chance of them being in service before the end of this year?
Keeping in mind that the pandemic happened which delayed things.
It's only May so I would say there is a chance, I would imagine it'll be like the Elizabeth Line where the rollout is announced only a short time before it begins.
burneside
Member
The Lewisham branch has just been closed for two consecutive weekends, including the bank holiday, and in the coming weeks it will be closed for three weekends out of five. It really is making life very difficult and inconvenient.
One can only hope. This has been dragging out a little bit
OneTrackMinded
Member
Maybe a complete weekend closure (like this last weekend) is now required to deliver one unit ...
Family out at the weekend to a sports event in the Royal Docks described complete disorganisation of the replacement bus, including on the Saturday waiting 25 minutes for a bus substituting for an every 5 minutes rail service. It arrived two buses together, the second seemingly having to be shown the way by the first. On the return they walked all the way back to Custom House Liz Line and didn't see a single RRB. Sunday I took them to/fro in the car. A while ago, when the blue Ensign buses used to substitute for the DLR, it was very well organised and reliable. Since they changed over to London red buses it's generally a shambles. Presumably a bit cheaper. You get what you pay for.
Family out at the weekend to a sports event in the Royal Docks described complete disorganisation of the replacement bus, including on the Saturday waiting 25 minutes for a bus substituting for an every 5 minutes rail service. It arrived two buses together, the second seemingly having to be shown the way by the first. On the return they walked all the way back to Custom House Liz Line and didn't see a single RRB. Sunday I took them to/fro in the car. A while ago, when the blue Ensign buses used to substitute for the DLR, it was very well organised and reliable. Since they changed over to London red buses it's generally a shambles. Presumably a bit cheaper. You get what you pay for.
Russel
Established Member
Just think, one day, it may even carry passengers!
Question is when will that one day be?
Russel
Established Member
Another question, what will carry passengers first, these or the 2024 stock on the Picc?
MatthewRead
On Moderation
There have been rumors since last summer that the 2024 tube stock will enter service first as TFL want to prioritize the Piccadilly line modernization over the DLR.
bluegoblin7
Established Member
Rumours from who?
Piccadilly Line Upgrade (PLU) and the DLR are completely different teams and programmes with no overlap. They'll both be in service when they're ready.
TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
What a helpful comment... it's like telling someone they'll die when they stop being alive.
MCR247
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 9,972
Probably more helpful (and more based in reality) than the previous comments saying TfL are prioritising the 2024ts over the DLR when the two projects have nothing to do with each other
Coming out with arch comments like the 2024ts account can however be useful in prising out a more meaningful statement of reality.
My own belief of the situation is that, whatever the problem might be, the DLR management actually don't know how to fix it. This one gets from the combination of various, excessively bland, statements, and the non-appearance of any account of specific dates, or technical descriptions of what they are doing. The TfL board etc presentations are unfortunately a complete gloss-over about the situation.
My own belief of the situation is that, whatever the problem might be, the DLR management actually don't know how to fix it. This one gets from the combination of various, excessively bland, statements, and the non-appearance of any account of specific dates, or technical descriptions of what they are doing. The TfL board etc presentations are unfortunately a complete gloss-over about the situation.
It does feel like a case of the left hand not talking to the right hand. Similar to when the Elizabeth line was going through it's delays with their optimistic opening for 2018. I had to laugh when it was only around 2021 that most of the stations were completed.
ChristopherJ
Repeatedly returning banned member
The reason why the B23 stock is taking so long to progress in acceptence testing is because the antiqued DLR CBTC signalling system doesn't have the functionality to accept fixed length trains and needs a total network software update.
It was designed and written in the 1990s and coded exclusively on separate length trains, it needs a total rewrite with two separate parameters for the old separate length (B90/B92/B2K, ect) and new fixed length (B23) trains.
There is a temporary workaround but TfL demanded a permanent solution.
1) use the temporary workaround aka bodge job.
2) request Thales to rewrite the 1990s version DLR software.
3) resignal the entire DLR network to a new modern version of CBTC similar to to the LUL SSR.
Number 2 is what was requested with lots of huffing and grunts from Thales. Go ask a software engineer to rewrite a software program from the 1990s nearly 35 years later. You'll be told to Foxtrot Oscar.
It was designed and written in the 1990s and coded exclusively on separate length trains, it needs a total rewrite with two separate parameters for the old separate length (B90/B92/B2K, ect) and new fixed length (B23) trains.
There is a temporary workaround but TfL demanded a permanent solution.
1) use the temporary workaround aka bodge job.
2) request Thales to rewrite the 1990s version DLR software.
3) resignal the entire DLR network to a new modern version of CBTC similar to to the LUL SSR.
Number 2 is what was requested with lots of huffing and grunts from Thales. Go ask a software engineer to rewrite a software program from the 1990s nearly 35 years later. You'll be told to Foxtrot Oscar.
That doesn't square with things on a few counts
- That the signalling didn't handle fixed length trains would have been quite apparent at the design stage, let alone years later when various now long-passed introduction dates were being passed around.
- Why on earth would trains be ordered incompatible with the existing signalling?
- Signalling from the 1990s is not "antiquated"; probably more than half the national system uses what is older. The current system does seem to run pretty faultlessly.
- There have been all sorts of major updates to the signalling software since the 1990s, in particular all the extensions, the most recent being the Stratford International branch, which opened for the 2012 Olympics. The B07 stock which came along in 2007 brought a significant revision, as previously the signalling had not been able to handle more than 99 cars on the system, done straightforwardly without anyone "forgetting" this fact until the additional trains arrived.
- Why has the TfL Board not been told publicly about this? There would be a considerable extra expenditure on such a resolution, which would need to be authorised.
- That the signalling didn't handle fixed length trains would have been quite apparent at the design stage, let alone years later when various now long-passed introduction dates were being passed around.
- Why on earth would trains be ordered incompatible with the existing signalling?
- Signalling from the 1990s is not "antiquated"; probably more than half the national system uses what is older. The current system does seem to run pretty faultlessly.
- There have been all sorts of major updates to the signalling software since the 1990s, in particular all the extensions, the most recent being the Stratford International branch, which opened for the 2012 Olympics. The B07 stock which came along in 2007 brought a significant revision, as previously the signalling had not been able to handle more than 99 cars on the system, done straightforwardly without anyone "forgetting" this fact until the additional trains arrived.
- Why has the TfL Board not been told publicly about this? There would be a considerable extra expenditure on such a resolution, which would need to be authorised.
Last edited:
Aren't the other trains still sort of fixed length?
Each unit isn't going to change length?
So what is the difference between 2 or 3 X metre units coupled versus 1 Y metre unit not coupled?
Or is this where the bodge comes in, if things HAVE to be run in multiple, and entering the B23 stock as a unit coupled to a zero metre virtual unit?
Each unit isn't going to change length?
So what is the difference between 2 or 3 X metre units coupled versus 1 Y metre unit not coupled?
Or is this where the bodge comes in, if things HAVE to be run in multiple, and entering the B23 stock as a unit coupled to a zero metre virtual unit?
Gag Halfrunt
Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2019
- Messages
- 737
Perhaps there is a limit to the permitted length of one unit, which the older trains don't breach because the computer understands that they are running in multiple.
Ok, that one might make sense. And explain why a change would be painful...
If the carriage number in a unit is represented as a 2 bit number as part of a complex data type then it could only have 4. And to extend that could mean having to rejig a lot of stuff.
The 80s and 90s were a great time for efficient coding... Really creative solutions to maximise use of finite resources.
At the cost of making future changes a lot harder
If the carriage number in a unit is represented as a 2 bit number as part of a complex data type then it could only have 4. And to extend that could mean having to rejig a lot of stuff.
The 80s and 90s were a great time for efficient coding... Really creative solutions to maximise use of finite resources.
At the cost of making future changes a lot harder