Island Line Railway - current state and the future

[hooverboy]

I bet the Island Line's equipment isn't the same as the mainland now - the mainland has been progressively upgraded mainly as new rolling stock has come on stream with more significant power demands. Yes the insulators and rail might be the same, but I wouldn't be surprised if the rest isn't now. And no, it isn't worth upgrading the Island Line to those standards - on the mainland it has been as the new rolling stock has been to meet increased demand - whereas the Island Line hasn't shown anything like that kind of uplift in demand.

nobody said it had to be brand spanking new equipment...refurbished but reliable hand-me-downs would suffice.
doesn't have to be totally outdated at all...for instance, there is lots of perfectly salvageable PC parts that go into the skip because people don't know how to resuscitate them...but it is do-able to build a fully working PC with semi-modern parts for virtually nothing from either scrap,gumtree,groupon or EBAY.

I would not be at all interested in something ancient like I386 other than for antique value, and I would baulk at anything of the windows 3.1/win 95 era...now even winXP, but something maybe 10 years old capable of running windows 7 (lets say intel core2 duo /core Q or similar...will do the job for a few years yet and still keep everything running,and can be picked up for quite literally pennies....it works, just not that fast anymore!..but in PC term's we're not trying to game on it expecting thousands of frames per second....we just want it to be moderately capable of doing emails,a few puzzles and browse the web/watch youtube without freezing or looking stuttery.Same metric applies to island line.....it's 45-60mph tops(60mph being future-proof!)....not whizzing down the countryside as x miles per second.)

it's isolated and an ecosystem unto itself.
for a route that interconnects with freqent/fast traffic, THAT's when you need the cutting edge stuff-on ALL units irrespective of age, real time data is critical on the main network.

 

[swt_passenger]

I don’t think it’s necessarily correct to say that mainland power augmentation has been achieved by replacement, in my experience it’s usually been done by adding new transportable equipment cabins either alongside the existing equipment or at new intermediate sites between the existing equipments. But I don’t see much evidence of old equipment being removed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The entire line probably is over-capacity but a 150 and 153 are the lowest capacity DMUs which are on the network (excluding the PPM). I thought the 150 / 153 split was due to availability of stock in any case as in LM as was didn't have sufficient 150s to 'standardise' the line on just one type ?

Either way there isn't the demand to cart around fresh air - that costs the TOCs unnecessarily - so I'm not sure you can say they "disagree" with me on that basis. They're trying to run that on the lowest possible cost - quite rightly - same principle needs to be followed for the Island Line.

Then why aren't they running two 153s? They do have those.

The whole reason for 230s is that a pair of 153s is inadequate.

 

[hooverboy]

Then why aren't they running two 153s? They do have those.

The whole reason for 230s is that a pair of 153s is inadequate.

PRM requirements.

Then why aren't they running two 153s? They do have those.

The whole reason for 230s is that a pair of 153s is inadequate.

back in the day it used to be a 1* 2 car 117's operating the line in each direction, with a 2*2 car set for the school run.

 

[yorksrob]

I bet the Island Line's equipment isn't the same as the mainland now - the mainland has been progressively upgraded mainly as new rolling stock has come on stream with more significant power demands. Yes the insulators and rail might be the same, but I wouldn't be surprised if the rest isn't now. And no, it isn't worth upgrading the Island Line to those standards - on the mainland it has been as the new rolling stock has been to meet increased demand - whereas the Island Line hasn't shown anything like that kind of uplift in demand.

We're talking about professional railway electrical engineers, maintaining some older equipment will be well within their skill set.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Isn't that what the entire line does? It's also the reason for the Class 150, as the 153 is adequate for other times. Therefore, they already disagree with you.

As this thread concerns The Island Line, mention made above of Class 150 and Class 153 units concerns me not a little.

 

[takno]

nobody said it had to be brand spanking new equipment...refurbished but reliable hand-me-downs would suffice.
doesn't have to be totally outdated at all...for instance, there is lots of perfectly salvageable PC parts that go into the skip because people don't know how to resuscitate them...but it is do-able to build a fully working PC with semi-modern parts for virtually nothing from either scrap,gumtree,groupon or EBAY.

I would not be at all interested in something ancient like I386 other than for antique value, and I would baulk at anything of the windows 3.1/win 95 era...now even winXP, but something maybe 10 years old capable of running windows 7 (lets say intel core2 duo /core Q or similar...will do the job for a few years yet and still keep everything running,and can be picked up for quite literally pennies....it works, just not that fast anymore!..but in PC term's we're not trying to game on it expecting thousands of frames per second....we just want it to be moderately capable of doing emails,a few puzzles and browse the web/watch youtube without freezing or looking stuttery.Same metric applies to island line.....it's 45-60mph tops(60mph being future-proof!)....not whizzing down the countryside as x miles per second.)

it's isolated and an ecosystem unto itself.
for a route that interconnects with freqent/fast traffic, THAT's when you need the cutting edge stuff-on ALL units irrespective of age, real time data is critical on the main network.

Slightly beside the point, but if you are building a machine to run a significant proportion of the time then the additional power cost for the older processors will actually make them more expensive than buying brand new low performance gear. Keeping running patched software is also hard in a world where all software gets half as efficient every 18 months. Much like the trains, there's an inflection point where you can spend far more money doing it cheap than just doing it properly in the first place

 

[yorksrob]

Slightly beside the point, but if you are building a machine to run a significant proportion of the time then the additional power cost for the older processors will actually make them more expensive than buying brand new low performance gear. Keeping running patched software is also hard in a world where all software gets half as efficient every 18 months. Much like the trains, there's an inflection point where you can spend far more money doing it cheap than just doing it properly in the first place

Or even better, take the computer out of the train alltogether.

 

[A0wen]

Or even better, take the computer out of the train alltogether.

Whilst you're at it why not do away with electric propulsion and revert to horse haulage? And scrub the internet - much easier to engrave your thoughts on bits of stone (rolls eyes).

 

[yorksrob]

Whilst you're at it why not do away with electric propulsion and revert to horse haulage? And scrub the internet - much easier to engrave your thoughts on bits of stone (rolls eyes).

I'm guessing that there's no great urgency to roll out ERTMS to the island line, so what's the point in having a whole load of computer systems that will go wrong or need updating.

A simple electrical/mechanical system will do just fine for the route - the type that the D - trains probably already have.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

.......much easier to engrave your thoughts on bits of stone (rolls eyes).

Have you ever read my website signature.....

 

[MarkyT]

A simple electrical/mechanical system will do just fine for the route - the type that the D - trains probably already have.

There is a tripcock protection system that was retrofitted back to the current units when the line's signalling was equipped with LU-style trainstop arms in 2002. This was to meet the requirements of the Railway Safety Regulations 1999 as an alternative to fitting TPWS, and it was obviously a lot easier to just put the LU system back on the trains. It is an incredibly simple thing to add onto any train, just needing an appropriately located arm connected to a valve that can dump the air in the brake pipe, and I'd expect a D-Train bogie to have a bracket in exactly the right place for such a fitting! Train-stops were fitted to the infrastructure on exactly the same risk-assessed basis as TPWS loops were on the mainland, so not at every stop signal, but at all those protecting a junction conflict and the single lines, and an overspeed installation approaching each of the buffer stops with an LU 'Moorgate-style' arrangement based on a timed distance. A track circuit or treadle starts a trackside timer when the front of the train passes a measured position. If the train reaches the subsequent trainstop before the set time has elapsed, the arm of the trainstop is still raised so the train is tripped and brakes sharply to a stand. The driver has to get down and manually reset the arm before further progress once tripped so it's a very safe and demonstrably reliable system despite its antiquity. I don't know if there are any overspeed traps protecting civil speed restrictions en route, but there could be if required, using the timed treadle or track circuit method.

 

[Bletchleyite]

FWIW LU-style trainstops are used elsewhere on NR - the Merseyrail Link and Loop have them, though TPWS is used elsewhere on that network.

 

[MarkyT]

FWIW LU-style trainstops are used elsewhere on NR - the Merseyrail Link and Loop have them, though TPWS is used elsewhere on that network.

Yes I think some kind of protection was required as a trainstop on the Link and Loop on the basis it was all classified as an underground metro-style railway when built. TPWS on the outdoor sections came later. Similar 313s on Great Northern also have tripcocks for the Moorgate line. That WAS London Underground immediately before their introduction, and already equipped with trainstops. PEP-based trains on the North London Line had tripcocks for shared working over the District Line to Richmond, but Wimbledon was rather different as theoretically any SW electric unit could use the shared section to Putney so it was unrealistic to fit them all with tripcocks. Eventually, that line received TPWS in addition to its existing trainstops and AWS as a result of the Railway Safety Regulations 1999.

 

[yorksrob]

There is a tripcock protection system that was retrofitted back to the current units when the line's signalling was equipped with LU-style trainstop arms in 2002. This was to meet the requirements of the Railway Safety Regulations 1999 as an alternative to fitting TPWS, and it was obviously a lot easier to just put the LU system back on the trains. It is an incredibly simple thing to add onto any train, just needing an appropriately located arm connected to a valve that can dump the air in the brake pipe, and I'd expect a D-Train bogie to have a bracket in exactly the right place for such a fitting! Train-stops were fitted to the infrastructure on exactly the same risk-assessed basis as TPWS loops were on the mainland, so not at every stop signal, but at all those protecting a junction conflict and the single lines, and an overspeed installation approaching each of the buffer stops with an LU 'Moorgate-style' arrangement based on a timed distance. A track circuit or treadle starts a trackside timer when the front of the train passes a measured position. If the train reaches the subsequent trainstop before the set time has elapsed, the arm of the trainstop is still raised so the train is tripped and brakes sharply to a stand. The driver has to get down and manually reset the arm before further progress once tripped so it's a very safe and demonstrably reliable system despite its antiquity. I don't know if there are any overspeed traps protecting civil speed restrictions en route, but there could be if required, using the timed treadle or track circuit method.

I've heard of a tripcock, but never known what one was, or how one would be used exactly, so thanks for explaining. It certainly sounds very robust.

 

[vlad]

As this thread concerns The Island Line, mention made above of Class 150 and Class 153 units concerns me not a little.

Once they start running through Ryde Tunnel we'll have the first open-topped trains on the network.

 

[MarkyT]

Once they start running through Ryde Tunnel we'll have the first open-topped trains on the network.

Certain main line(ish) profile stock WILL fit now apparently subject to some very minor work lowering track through a small number of bridges and platforms generally. The tunnel in particular is no longer a problem since road bridge beams within were renewed a few years ago. Double deckers (whether open top or not) are a no-no however!

 

[The Ham]

Double deckers (whether open top or not) are a no-no however!

That's also true of a minority of the mainland network, unfortunately that minority tends to split up the rest of the network by being bridges and tunnels....

 

[A0wen]

Certain main line(ish) profile stock WILL fit now apparently subject to some very minor work lowering track through a small number of bridges and platforms generally. The tunnel in particular is no longer a problem since road bridge beams within were renewed a few years ago. Double deckers (whether open top or not) are a no-no however!

The height constraint has apparently been removed, there does remain the challenge of the curves within the tunnel which limit the vehicle length.

We know ex-Merseyside 503s were considered previously and they have a car length of 17.7m (at their longest), the 483s are 15.6m.

The PEPs (313, 507 etc) have a car length of 20.3m, the class 456s are 20m, the D trains / 230 are 18.4m

Question is what the curve in the tunnel will / won't allow - the D train still looks like the best solution in some form.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Nobody said it had to be brand spanking new equipment...refurbished but reliable hand-me-downs would suffice

Now why does this wording above take my mind back to what used to be said of the previous Northern franchise.....

 

[A0wen]

Now why does this wording above take my mind back to what used to be said of the previous Northern franchise.....

You mean some posters who are quite happy for someone else to get refurb trains think they should only get brand new ones in their area? Such inconsistency on Railforums? How very dare you! What a foul and contemptible slur on some of your fellow posters.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Now why does this wording above take my mind back to what used to be said of the previous Northern franchise.....

I think most people on the island recognise that brand new stock is probably unrealistic and unaffordable for the service.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think most people on the island recognise that brand new stock is probably unrealistic and unaffordable for the service.

There again, comparing one transit mode to another, Southern Vectis do not appear to have any problems with running bus services without the need to use old and decrepit vehicles.

 

[ainsworth74]

There again, comparing one transit mode to another, Southern Vectis do not appear to have any problems with running bus services without the need to use old and decrepit vehicles.

What is the difference in price between a brand new double decker bus and two carriages of say S-Stock as the most recently completed delivery of LU rolling stock? I suspect in comparing the two you will find your answer. But doing some back of a napkin maths suggests that one vehicle of S-Stock was slightly over £1m (£1.5bn total order price divided by 1,395 vehicles delivered) so a two car set would be £2m. A Borismaster (widely accepted I think as being overpriced) came in at around £350,000.

So one would suggest that it's considerably easier for Southern Vectis to find funding to buy fleets of new buses when it can buy nearly six buses for the price of one train!

 

[SteveOfTheStow]

What is the difference in price between a brand new double decker bus and two carriages of say S-Stock as the most recently completed delivery of LU rolling stock? I suspect in comparing the two you will find your answer. But doing some back of a napkin maths suggests that one vehicle of S-Stock was slightly over £1m (£1.5bn total order price divided by 1,395 vehicles delivered) so a two car set would be £2m. A Borismaster (widely accepted I think as being overpriced) came in at around £350,000.

So one would suggest that it's considerably easier for Southern Vectis to find funding to buy fleets of new buses when it can buy nearly six buses for the price of one train!

There's also the issue of manufacturing scale. Most buses will be relatively off the shelf, with a range of asethetics to choose from. Trains are arguably more complex, have lower runs, and that's just the mainline stuff. Anything Tube or Island Line needs a non-standard design, which puts the cost of design up. Then, when manufacturing, the factory has to gear up to produce the carriages. The more that are produced, the more the cost of the tooling can be distributed across the price of the finished product (BR timed their order for the Waterloo & City in the early 90s very nicely by tagging on to the 1992 stock run for LU; they bought a tiny fleet but got it at the tooling cost of a big one). If you think about how many S stock carriages were produced, and how many of a design would need to be procured for Island line, you can imagine what the cost of each carriage would actually be! Well into the millions.

 

[DelW]

I think most people on the island recognise that brand new stock is probably unrealistic and unaffordable for the service.

Especially as I don't think there has been any brand new stock on the IoW lines within living memory. The island's railways relied on handed down mostly ex-London suburban stock at least as far back as the early 20th century.

 

[A0wen]

There again, comparing one transit mode to another, Southern Vectis do not appear to have any problems with running bus services without the need to use old and decrepit vehicles.

Well arguably the tube stock re-purposed for the Island Line on both occasions was 'old and decrepit' - more so than the D trains are.

The bus v train argument isn't really fair though - a train has an expected working life of 20 - 40 years, whereas very few buses make it to their 20th birthday - certainly the case if you look beyond the Routemaster which is not representative. Add in that a train can undergo a heavy refurb, which with most buses wasn't really an option - yes you could re-body and that did happen in the past with some coach chassis, but at the end of the day a 20 year old chassis is a 20 year old chassis with all the attendant problems.

The buses on the Island are certainly worked alot harder than the trains are.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think most people on the island recognise that brand new stock is probably unrealistic and unaffordable for the service.

The post you are replying to was part of a discussion about the third rail power supply hardware...

 

[cjmillsnun]

There again, comparing one transit mode to another, Southern Vectis do not appear to have any problems with running bus services without the need to use old and decrepit vehicles.

Southern Vectis carry more passengers and busses are significantly cheaper than rail vehicles. Southern Vectis also have the advantage of being able to cover the whole Island rather than just Ryde to Shanklin.

 

[Chris125]

Not only does the new book 'Ryde Rail' by Richard Long describe and publish the 80s proposal to use Class 503s, a former member of staff confirms the story that 03079 with original 12ft 2in cab was successfully squeezed through both tracks of Ryde Tunnel.

...however it could only get there on the Down (wrong) Line from St Johns, they tried but Rink Road overbridge was indeed too low on the Up Line.

As for upgrade news, a local councillor recently suggested a decision wasn't now due before Brexit and it seems that our MP isn't expecting anything for a few months yet either.