3 ms·

Of all the things TFL could do to improve the tube, cell service would not even be close to top of my list. We've had WiFi on the platforms for about 10 years w

Of all the things TFL could do to improve the tube, cell service would not even be close to top of my list. We've had WiFi on the platforms for about 10 years which is enough to send/receive whatsapp messages while the train is stopped. I'm not sure it's fair to dig out TFL for being backwards. They introduced the Oyster in 2003, something NYC didn't get until 2019.

londons_explore 3y ago
Reliable comms everywhere allows fully centralized train control, with no employees on each train. You can use cameras to check no passengers are stuck in doors, on the track, or fighting in the carriages or platforms. Now you can redeploy the staff away from repetitive tasks of driving trains and supervising stations, and towards engineering a better service. Get the typical journey speed up from 12 mph up to 45 mph. Make one direction of all tracks an express route that only stops at one station in 10 and drives 60 mph through all the others. Modify the old tunnels with an extra rail on a wall or ceiling for places where the tunnel alignment can't do 60 mph.
- walthamstow 3y ago
  Are you a railway engineer or in some other related field? Some of these suggestions sound a bit bizarre to a layman, especially considering your idea that the only thing standing in our way is 4G signal and reshuffling some staff. > Get the typical journey speed up from 12 mph up to 45 mph. So instead of 30 minutes from Walthamstow to Brixton it'll be 8 minutes? How is that possible? There are 16 stations, or 14 stops excluding the terminii. If you stop for 30secs at each, that's 7 minutes in itself. > Make one direction of all tracks an express route that only stops at one station in 10 and drives 60 mph through all the others So we would have an express lane in one direction and a stopping lane in the other? Why is that a good thing? To me an express service seems /slower/ than the status quo, because I would have to wait longer for the train that stops where I want it to.
  - londons_explore 3y ago
    > So we would have an express lane in one direction and a stopping lane in the other? Why is that a good thing? Simulate it and see... Turns out that despite most users needing to make more changes, they will complete their journey far faster. The few journeys that are not completed faster (eg. taking the tube one stop) tend to either be walking distance or have an equivalent bus. Combine it with the fact there are multiple routes from A to B and there are many people who can take the fast train in both directions. For the railway operator, the trains are a big capital and operational cost. If you can make the trains run faster, you can get better utilisation of the seats, and therefore extra capacity/revenue. That more than outweighs the extra maintenance and electricity costs of going faster.
  - londons_explore 3y ago
    > So instead of 30 minutes from Walthamstow to Brixton it'll be 8 minutes? How is that possible? > There are 16 stations, or 14 stops excluding the terminii. If you stop for 30secs at each, that's 7 minutes in itself. Or... you could stop at only 6 of the stops (express service). You could stop for 15 seconds door-open-time (as long as the crowd waiting for the train entirely fits on the train, thats very achievable - and crowd control can be managed by controlling platform ingress). Busses often achieve 3 seconds of door open time for comparison. At a top speed of 60 mph, max acceleration of 0.2g, max jerk of 3 m/s^3 and travel distance of 2 miles per stop, the whole travel time becomes 13 minutes. Plus the 1.5 minutes for stops. =14.5 mins = 49 mph. Lets schedule in one 30 second slowdown (ie. drunk guy holds door for mate for 30 seconds), and the average speed hits the 45 mph target. I suspect the victoria line, being more modern in its track alignment, could easily be made to go 100 mph too...
    - walthamstow 3y ago
      Ok, so your big plan for quadrupling the speed of the tube is for trains to breeze through most stations without stopping. It's like amputation as a weight-loss tactic.
      - londons_explore 3y ago
cjrp 3y ago
Just having accurate next-train-arrival boards on each platform is a huge win, and not something every other subway system seems to have.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
Nextgrid 3y ago
That Wi-Fi is unusable. Not only does the association & DHCP negotiation take a large part of the time the train spends stopped at the station, but there's a stupid captive portal that also wastes whatever valuable time & bandwidth you manage to get despite the other issues. I've been travelling to places where conventional mobile service is available in the subway and it's such an improvement. Being able to look at maps, message or browse the net is a godsend especially as a tourist in a foreign country.

londons_explore 3y ago

Reliable comms everywhere allows fully centralized train control, with no employees on each train. You can use cameras to check no passengers are stuck in doors, on the track, or fighting in the carriages or platforms. Now you can redeploy the staff away from repetitive tasks of driving trains and supervising stations, and towards engineering a better service. Get the typical journey speed up from 12 mph up to 45 mph. Make one direction of all tracks an express route that only stops at one station in 10 and drives 60 mph through all the others. Modify the old tunnels with an extra rail on a wall or ceiling for places where the tunnel alignment can't do 60 mph.

walthamstow 3y ago
Are you a railway engineer or in some other related field? Some of these suggestions sound a bit bizarre to a layman, especially considering your idea that the only thing standing in our way is 4G signal and reshuffling some staff. > Get the typical journey speed up from 12 mph up to 45 mph. So instead of 30 minutes from Walthamstow to Brixton it'll be 8 minutes? How is that possible? There are 16 stations, or 14 stops excluding the terminii. If you stop for 30secs at each, that's 7 minutes in itself. > Make one direction of all tracks an express route that only stops at one station in 10 and drives 60 mph through all the others So we would have an express lane in one direction and a stopping lane in the other? Why is that a good thing? To me an express service seems /slower/ than the status quo, because I would have to wait longer for the train that stops where I want it to.
- londons_explore 3y ago
  > So we would have an express lane in one direction and a stopping lane in the other? Why is that a good thing? Simulate it and see... Turns out that despite most users needing to make more changes, they will complete their journey far faster. The few journeys that are not completed faster (eg. taking the tube one stop) tend to either be walking distance or have an equivalent bus. Combine it with the fact there are multiple routes from A to B and there are many people who can take the fast train in both directions. For the railway operator, the trains are a big capital and operational cost. If you can make the trains run faster, you can get better utilisation of the seats, and therefore extra capacity/revenue. That more than outweighs the extra maintenance and electricity costs of going faster.
- londons_explore 3y ago
  > So instead of 30 minutes from Walthamstow to Brixton it'll be 8 minutes? How is that possible? > There are 16 stations, or 14 stops excluding the terminii. If you stop for 30secs at each, that's 7 minutes in itself. Or... you could stop at only 6 of the stops (express service). You could stop for 15 seconds door-open-time (as long as the crowd waiting for the train entirely fits on the train, thats very achievable - and crowd control can be managed by controlling platform ingress). Busses often achieve 3 seconds of door open time for comparison. At a top speed of 60 mph, max acceleration of 0.2g, max jerk of 3 m/s^3 and travel distance of 2 miles per stop, the whole travel time becomes 13 minutes. Plus the 1.5 minutes for stops. =14.5 mins = 49 mph. Lets schedule in one 30 second slowdown (ie. drunk guy holds door for mate for 30 seconds), and the average speed hits the 45 mph target. I suspect the victoria line, being more modern in its track alignment, could easily be made to go 100 mph too...
  - walthamstow 3y ago
    Ok, so your big plan for quadrupling the speed of the tube is for trains to breeze through most stations without stopping. It's like amputation as a weight-loss tactic.
    - londons_explore 3y ago

cjrp 3y ago

Just having accurate next-train-arrival boards on each platform is a huge win, and not something every other subway system seems to have.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Nextgrid 3y ago

That Wi-Fi is unusable. Not only does the association & DHCP negotiation take a large part of the time the train spends stopped at the station, but there's a stupid captive portal that also wastes whatever valuable time & bandwidth you manage to get despite the other issues. I've been travelling to places where conventional mobile service is available in the subway and it's such an improvement. Being able to look at maps, message or browse the net is a godsend especially as a tourist in a foreign country.