Can you explain?Guess the designers didn't like the look of the tunnel invert.
Can you explain?Guess the designers didn't like the look of the tunnel invert.
Slab track is really rather awesome - saves loads of maintenance, doesn't have the ballast based geometry issues conventional track has, and means you get really nice alignment between track and OLE. It's also nicer to deal with from a drainage standpoint. It buys you a fair number of mm for the OLE too, if tunnel diameter is tight.
Cheers, I understand now.Civil engineers use the term "invert" as shorthand for "inverted arch", for referring to the bottom portion of a tunnel - the bottom half for tunnels of circular cross section.
Absolute b*stard to replace whe it’s life expired though.
How does slab track impact vibrations from trains (how it feels riding on a train). Doesn't ballast absorb some of the vibrations?
They aren't laid on to that bed of concrete - that is just the sub-base for what comes later...Thank you for these pics- good to see progress being made at this time.
On behalf of 'amateurs' like myself I guess you are referring to the fact that the rails are to be laid direct onto this bed of concrete rather than on sleepers. Is that not happening in other places? I can't imagine it is being done in the way it is unless that makes good sense.
How does slab track impact drainage? I'm guessing just flowing off to the sides of the concrete into a drain.
Thanks for clarifying my engineering jargon.Civil engineers use the term "invert" as shorthand for "inverted arch", for referring to the bottom portion of a tunnel - the bottom half for tunnels of circular cross section.
At risk of going over old discussions or too much of a tangent- train lengths at KX.
I note the diagrams suggest platform lengthenings. I know there is limited space in relation to the tunnels.
Are there expectations of longer trains? I hear suggestions of cost savings and increased reliability with fewer but longer trains.
I believe the works are to do with strengthening Camden Sewer.Does anyone have a summary of the intended works this weekend.
This 'thread' seems remarkably 'bare' for such a major project.
I've noted possessions of KX platforms almost every night for the last few weeks, so lots must be going on there - just doesn't seem to surface here sadly.
I understand viewing access is minimal.
For a new layout, stand back is a major issue for signal sighting and if the signal is on the wrong (righthand) side it may need to be as much as 20m ahead of the nose to get an adequate view from the seated driving position. On the correct (left) side, equipped with coacting heads etc, that distance can often be reduced considerably, but at some older existing terminus platforms around the country, starting signal sighting is atrocious for some train lengths used, with signals almost parallel with the cab and completely invisible from the controls; I don't know if that's a particular problem at KX on any platforms. Often at resignalling and remodelling, some fairly large apparent increases in physical standage actually result in no official increase in train length capacity. The new layout invariably results in better sighting and a greater margin for stopping accuracy though, which is always a good thing for operating reliability.Its probably to do with stand back from buffer stops (stop 2m / 6ft from buffers) and being able to see station starter signals (again is this standard 6ft / 2m)? I imagine the distances whilst of the agreed standard when Kings Cross was last remodelled are now substandard and with remodelling must meet newer more recent standards
I believe the works are to do with strengthening Camden Sewer.
I don’t believe so, the former Fleet culvert passes the front of Kings Cross and basically heads up Pancras Rd, it’s heading well to the west of the Kings Cross station throat and tunnels.Camden Sewer - is that what we locals call the former Fleet River?
Hi, if you didn’t notice it on a quick read through, there are before and after 1970s changes in post #67.KX lost quite a few suburban platforms when it was last resignalled in the 70s.
Which given nearly all of the inner suburban services were transferred to Moorgate in 1976 wasn't an unreasonable thing to do.KX lost quite a few suburban platforms when it was last resignalled in the 70s.
Curious to know how much faster Finsbury Park to Moorgate is now in comparison to the old route via Kings Cross. I would assume substantially faster due to less distance and electric acceleration.
Back in the late 1960s typical times via King's Cross (York Road) southbound or via the Hotel Curve and old suburban platform were 15 or 16 minutes between Moorgate and Finsbury Park.Well, Kings Cross Thameslink to Moorgate was 8-10 minutes. Add in an imaginary time for Finsbury Park to Kings Cross Thameslink (5-6 mins?) and you have your answer. You might add in a couple of extra minutes to allow for the rolling stock of the day and the 8mph restrictions are the old, old Kings X.
Back in the late 1960s typical times via King's Cross (York Road) southbound or via the Hotel Curve and old suburban platform were 15 or 16 minutes between Moorgate and Finsbury Park.
Looking back to a 1966 timetable there were only 8 weekday southbound services via York Road onwards to Moorgate, so the frequency of service was completely transformed by running via Essex Road