District Line questions

[AlbertBeale]

Firstly - is there a problem with the District's platform indicators, maybe relating to the new signalling? Both of my recent journeys were mis-desrcibed.

Heading west from Embankment the other evening, the first on the indicator was a clockwise Circle to Edgware Road (2nd and 3rd were Districts of various sorts). I got the first (Circle) one, but the on-board announcements (both the dot-matrix sign and the voice) gave it as a District. (I was only going to South Ken so it didn't matter.) Then today, at Putney Bridge, the first was shown as going northbound from Earls Court (2nd and 3rd were both shown as east through the City). I got the first one, but on board the train was announced as eastbound to Barking. (At Earls Court it was indeed indicated on the platform as Barking, and it certainly headed that way.)

I don't remember this being common in the past (though I use the District only rarely). Coincidence? (And anyway, how does it happen? Aren't the systems linked in some way?)

Secondly - at Putney Bridge today I noticed the option to terminate there no longer existed. Presumably the new trains are longer and the old track layout was a problem? But could nothing have been tweaked to allow it to continue? I seem to remember that a noticeable minority of Wimbledon branch trains (not sure whether or not from both routes) did turn back there - which was surely useful both in terms of passenger loadings and to help with service disruptions.

 

[rebmcr]

Embankment doesn't have the new signalling yet, and such locations have always had less-than-exact PIS systems.

Network Rail interactions, combined with difficult bridges, make it infeasible to turn S7's at Putney Bridge.

 

[urbophile]

Network Rail interactions, combined with difficult bridges, make it infeasible to turn S7's at Putney Bridge.

How come, since Putney Bridge is north of the junction with Network Rail tracks?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

More often than not, everything heading out of Wimbledon is misdescribed at every station as far as and including West Brompton. Screens say Edgare Road train? It'll be a City one. Screens say City train? It'll be an Edgware Road one...

 

[Mojo]

How come, since Putney Bridge is north of the junction with Network Rail tracks?

The whole Wimbledon branch is owned by LUL (it was sold by BR around the time of privatisation), but Network Rail are responsible for controlling the signals and traction current from locations beyond Putney Bridge station.

Before it was removed, the bay road at Putney Bridge station could only accommodate a C Stock train and it was not possible to extend the platform to take the longer S Stocks. In any case, in preparation for the new signalling system on the Sub-Surface Railway a number of sets of points and locations to turn around trains have been removed and with it being possible to turn around trains at the stop before, Parsons Green, it could not really be justified to have additional points here when you consider that they are being rationalised elsewhere.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Last Monday I saw the destination "Putney Bridge" appear on screens on the Wimbledon direction - this was at a time when it looked like the line was rather disrupted as there were lots of trains very close together in that direction and hardly anything at the Wimbledon end of the line.

Was that another manifestation of the screens not working properly, full stop? Was it meant to say Parsons Green?

 

[Dstock7080]

Was that another manifestation of the screens not working properly, full stop? Was it meant to say Parsons Green?

Parsons Green would be a separate destination.
It’s still possible to set-up an (erroneous) Putney Bridge description at the reminder of the signal cabins and signal control desks on the legacy system.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Parsons Green would be a separate destination.
It’s still possible to set-up an (erroneous) Putney Bridge description at the reminder of the signal cabins and signal control desks on the legacy system.

That's probably what happened then isn't it? Are the code numbers very close together, either numerically or in terms of where the number keys are in relation to each other?

Given the apparent disruption, I would have certainly expected more than a few trains to be terminating at Parsons Green.

 

[urbophile]

The whole Wimbledon branch is owned by LUL (it was sold by BR around the time of privatisation), but Network Rail are responsible for controlling the signals and traction current from locations beyond Putney Bridge station.

Before it was removed, the bay road at Putney Bridge station could only accommodate a C Stock train and it was not possible to extend the platform to take the longer S Stocks. In any case, in preparation for the new signalling system on the Sub-Surface Railway a number of sets of points and locations to turn around trains have been removed and with it being possible to turn around trains at the stop before, Parsons Green, it could not really be justified to have additional points here when you consider that they are being rationalised elsewhere.

I'd forgotten that the ex-BR bit included the bridge as well as from East Putney station. Does that mean that Network Rail, despite not owning the track, supply the current and signalling between PB and EP? I suppose it does. I'd also forgotten that trains could turn round at Parsons Green. It's 20 years since I was a regular user of that line.

 

[Dstock7080]

Are the code numbers very close together, either numerically or in terms of where the number keys are in relation to each other?

Not codes, just very adjacent buttons.

Does that mean that Network Rail, despite not owning the track, supply the current and signalling between PB and EP?

Yes, traction current supplied from NR and signalling controlled from Wimbledon ASC, although now LU assets (which is why signal heads still retain bulbs and not LEDs)