Apologies - I meant the actual time spent stationary is apparently meant to be less than 30 seconds (or 27 seconds, to be precise). Let us know if what you've been told differs from that!
Yup (or is it 33tph?). And it is a tremendously, ah, popular line at some of the key stations. If the TL Core, with its projected frequencies of lengthened trains, consistently reaches those levels of overcrowding throughout, I'll still be quite interested to see how it all copes, even though it is "scaled up"!
I couldn't remember to be honest if it had gone up to 33tph so I was cautious in my example.
Are the 12 and 8 car 700s to be diagramed onto certain services or will they be pooled as one fleet?
Yes and no. The 8 cars will be a general pool for use on all routes with the 12 cars restricted to just 12 car routes. For example, there is shoulder peak 8 car Bedford - Brighton's expected but this is subject to change in line with the winning bidders.
You can't compare the Thameslink to the Victoria line. The Victoria line is a single corridor with all trains going from Brixton to walthamstow or wherever stopping at all stations en route. So if you stand at kings cross vic line southbound platform you get on the first available train and if it's too full you wait a minute or 2 for the next one. On the Thameslink we are looking at about 5 different northbound calling patterns and possibly more southbound so you have to factor in that peterbourgh commuters will want to get on the their correct train as if they miss it they may have a 20 min wait or so whilst the next few trains head to Bedford, Cambridge, St. Albans and welwyn. Therefore you also have to factor in something which the vic line dosnt have to worry about which is crowding on the platforms from people standing right up against the platform edge so they can be first onto the 4th train due...happens all the time at other similar stations and even with side mounted DOO cameras it still delays dispatch as rather than glancing at screens to check for an empty platform you have to closely look at each image in detail to check that no one is actually touching or trapped in the train. Plus add in the late runners who will run up to the doors and hold them open whilst they find out if this is the correct train or not in the rush hour. .
Actually not all Victoria line trains go to the same place. There is short workings but your idea of corridor is something you fail to follow through on while applied to Thameslink.
Thameslink is a collections of corridors with some major stations, all KO2 seeing is more the this. But what you assume and fall over on this the idea that every passenger to Peterborough can only be served by Peterborough trains. This simply isn't true.
Taking Peterborough as an example with its 2tph if you miss one in peak then it will be quicker for most to take a Cambridge or Welwyn GC and change on route to one of the services from Kings Cross. That's not including the factor that those south of Hitchin can be served by other services. I could go on but this shows just because you miss one train doesn't mean you have to wait reducing the peak flows more.
I don't your point of standing alone the platform edge is isn't the same as you make out. The same happens on the Victoria and not just in peak. All your getting on Thameslink is the same thing with wider platforms. Add in my point above about trains serving the same corridor and you get less defensive positioning.
Of course those holding doors open still happens but if a service of 32tph+ can be run with people doing this I fail to see any merit to the idea this can't happen with Thameslink.
Would it be possible to implement some kind of "virtual coupling" whereby signals become more or less irrelevant and the maximum speed of a train is dictated by the train in front of it.
So on arrival at Blackfriars northbound, for example, a train (we'll call this train A) would cruise right up to the edge of the platform but not quite enter it.
Then as the train in front (we'll call this train B) starts to move, so does train A, at the same speed.
Until, that is, train A reaches the point at which it will start slowing down for the platform.
This would have the effect of reducing the distance, and therefore time, between trains
This would only work on sections without junctions of course.
I have noticed that there is a signal mid-way down the platform at Blackfriars in both directions which I guess can be used (the old fashioned way) to emulate this. i.e. train A can start to move before train B has totally vacated the platform.
As far as I can work out this isn't being done currently though I can't tell if that is due to a delay in the drivers reaction and the acceleration of the train, or if the overlaps are such that the signal takes a while to clear.
It seems unlikely to me that this hasn't been thought of before therefore I assume it has and is a bad idea for one reason or another.
The HCI (High Capacity Infrastructure as the DfT calls it) is already capable of 20tph with trains of 24tph being controlled automatically through the Core meaning they won't work on signals but the signalling themselves. So your idea is actually whats being designed and worked on right now using the Hertford Loop.And this system will work with junctions too.
When this fails you have the PoSA signalling that has been used many times however its not great at high frequencies required today.
Don't forget the current maximum signalling section is 100m in the core, just enough to fit a single four car.