The London Office Crane Survey
I liked this survey from Deloitte!
Up Yours, Putin!
I tend to think that the reports of doping by Russia’s athletes, like this report in the Guardian entitled How Russian athletics’ rotten system built a wall to conceal doping and deceit, could be more significant politically. than anybody thinks. After all it follows a very similar pattern to their dealings with Ukraine and other former Soviet possessions, where Russia thinks itself to be able to ignore the standards of the rest of the World.
They should be banned from the Olympics in Rio!
I also suspect that the bombing of the airliner in Egypt was not deliberately targeted at a Russian plane. If that is the case, as some experts have said, it was Putin’s bad luck and our good!
The sooner Putin is removed from power, the better it will be for everyone. Except perhaps for a few Russian oligarchs!
My father, who was a very strong anti-dictator and anti-fascist would rate Putin alongside Hitler and Stalin.
He would have laughed like a drain at Peter Brookes cartoon in The Times, where Putin is shown laying a wreath sfter the air crash, with a speech bubble of “What sort of a rat blows hundreds of innocent civilians out of the sky?” As he turns to walk away, you can see his rodent’s tail.
Is liking cartoons in my genes?
Ipswich Town’s Away Support
At Rotherham on Saturday, where I saw Ipswich win 5-2, the away end was pretty full.
It’s always the same, even if the match is a long way away!
Ipswich does seem to have a large diaspora, but a surprising number travelled up from Suffolk.
Compared to some of the pathetic away crowds we see at Portman Road, Ipswich Town’s away support always surprises me. I think the team appreciate it too!
They’re Not So Silly In Suffolk
I once had a letter published in The Times after C died, in which I praised the joined up thinking, between the Registrars and the Council, which got me a virtually automatic Council Tax reduction.
Have you ever wondered what happened to all those businesses, that were displaced by the Olympics in Stratford?
Quite a few ended up in Haverhill, as St. Edmundsbury Council thought that would be a good place to relocate and they had the sites available. So the Council achieved the highest rate of inward investment of any Council in England in 2012, by some intelligent marketing of the businesses to be displaced. One unlikely story, I heard, was that someone from the Council walked around and knocked on doors!
BBC Breakfast was joking this morning that Bury St. Edmunds-based brewer, Greene King have an export boom to China after David Cameron took the Chinese leader to the local pub and gave him a pint of Greene King IPA.
It’s all reported in this article in the Guardian, entitled Greene King strikes gold as Chinese demand soars after Xi Jinping pint.
An Advantage Of IPEMU Trains
My correspondent from the Corbedian Republic Of North Islington, has visited family in Newcastle over the weekend.
But things coming home didn’t go to plan and I received this text.
Our train dropped it’s pantograph.
Driver can’t put it back and train has been declared a failure. I quote. Now waiting to be rescued from Doncaster.
Later I received another text.
Train guard and driver not in touch. Could turn long and silly!
It all got me thinking!
As the train dropped a pantograph it was probably an InterCity 225 and not a diesel InterCity 125, which are built to Carry On Regardless. When I travel North from Kings Cross, I’ll look to see if the train is going to Aberdeen or Inverness, which means it will be a 125, with a reliable lump of a massive diesel engine front and back!
Incidentally, I found this extract in the Wikipedia entry for the Class 91 locomotive that pulls the InterCity 225.
In November 2012, unit 91114 had a second pantograph added as a pilot project operated jointly by Eversholt Rail Group, East Coast, ESG, Wabtec Rail and Brecknell-Willis. The new design uses the same mounting positions as a conventional pantograph but pairs two pantograph arms in an opposing configuration. If there is an ADD (Automatic Dropping Device) activation or the pantograph becomes detached, the train can keep going, so the system provides redundancy in the event of a pantograph/OLE failure.
So it could be that Class 91s regularly drop pantographs like whores drop their drawers!
As far as I can find out, only one locomotive has been fitted with the new pantograph.
But in future, I have a feeling that this type of problem could give a big advantage to an IPEMU train, which has on-board energy storage.
As it rolls along, it will be charging the battery, so if the pantograph fails, it will have a full battery and should be able to run for perhaps another fifty miles or so to a convenient station.
Having two independent systems, is not a bad way of improving reliability.
Crossrail 2 Consultation – Angel Station
This Crossrail document is entitled Angel Station.
The current Angel station is not a run-of-the-mill station with long escalators, an unusual platform layout and a situation in the ground-floor of an office block!
But as it was only built in the 1990s, I suspect the design is such to aid the construction of the Crossrail 2 station.
This is TfL’s proposal for the Crossrail 2 station at Angel.
-
2×250 metre long platforms.
-
Station platform tunnels around 30 metres below ground level to the top of tunnel
-
An increase in capacity within the existing Northern line ticket hall to accommodate a Crossrail 2 ticket hall on Islington High Street
-
An enlarged station entrance and a new second entrance onto Torrens Street
-
An underground connection between Crossrail 2 and Northern line services
-
A facility for reversing Crossrail 2 trains
The last item is possibly surprising, as although they need reversing facilities, I didn’t think it would be Angel.
This map from the document shows the layout of the station and the work-sites.
Crossrail 2 – Angel Station
The four work-sites are as follows.
- Site A – The site of the Royal Bank of Scotland building would be used for station tunnelling works and construction of the station entrance, station box and station shaft.
- Site B – Includes Iceland and other properties to the north of White Lion Street. This site would be used for construction of the station shaft. Impacts on Chapel market would be avoided.
- Site C – At the southern part of Torrens Street, the location of the old entrance to Angel station would be used as access to support the construction of the underground connection between Crossrail 2 and the Northern line.
- Site D – The Public Carriage Office site, which is owned by Transport for London, could be used for construction of a facility for reversing Crossrail 2 trains at Angel. This is subject to further investigation.
I have walked round the Angel and the various sites taking pictures in the order A, C, D and B.
All of this leaves me with these observations, thoughts and conclusions.
- All sites except D are bordered by roads carrying large amounts of traffic.
- The chaotic Junction At The End of White Lion Street needs easing before rebuilding Angel station.
- It is quite surprising how far the Northern Line platforms are from the entrance to the station. Sadly, this history will probably mean that there will be no simple interchange between the two lines as is promised at Balham.
- I would split the Northern Line into two lines before building Crossrail 2, as this might take pressure off Angel station during building of Crossrail 2.
- I think it is also a pity, that there is no entrance to the station shown on the Chapel Market side of the road.
On the plus side, I can’t see the design of the station causing too many problems in both design and construction.
A 2020 Update
It is now over five years since I wrote this post, so these are some new thoughts.
The Reversing Facility
The TfL document says that the facility will be for reversing trains at Angel station.
- As the site is to the West of Angel station, it would reverse trains from the East.
- Usually reversing sidings are between the two tracks and would be long enough to take a full-length train.
- The facility would be underground and it could be built in the traditional way as the new Bank tunnel was recently.
- The effect on buildings, would probably be the same as the main Crossrail 2 tunnels.
Operation of the reversing siding would be as follows.
- Trains would pull into the Westbound platform at the Angel.
- After all passengers had got out, the train would move forward into the siding.
- The driver would then change ends.
- When the line was clear move into the Eastbound platform.
It should be noted that Crossrail doesn’t have a reversing facility under London, and I think it would have been useful in enabling the route to open in sections.
Swansea Tidal Lagoon In The Independent
I have a feeling that the Swansea Tidal Lagoon could be a very worthwhile way of generating electricity.
Today, there is this article in the Independent entitled Swansea’s tidal lagoon project delayed amid concerns over costs.
It is a comprehensive review of the technology and contains some interesting nuggets.
- The Swansea scheme has a capacity of 320MWh
- The company is saying up to five other places could have a lagoon power station and together they would develop eight per cent of our electricity.
But to me, its biggest advantage, is once it is built, with maintenance, it will continue to produce zero-carbon energy for a long time.
I shall be watching this project with a lot of interest.
Is This Another Line For A Great Western Railway IPEMU?
Nothing much has happened since I wrote Rumours Of Battery Powered Trains, which said that a report had appeared in Modern Railways saying that Great Western Railway was looking at Class 387 IPEMUs.
But I did find this article on the Get Reading web site entitled Green Park Station may open without any trains stopping there.
Apparently, the problem is that diesel multiple units can’t accelerate fast enough to keep to the schedule with the stop at Reading Green Park station, but electric ones can.
As it appears the wires won’t go up in time for the station’s opening of 2018, then the trains won’t be electric.
Unless of course an IPEMU could stick to the schedule. It would certainly have a lot of power in the battery, as Reading to Basingstoke must be less than twenty miles and it’s electrified at both ends.
The line is a classic for use of IPEMU technology.
Crossrail 2 October 2015 – King’s Road Chelsea Station
The reason for my walk this morning, between Sloane Square and Imperial Wharf stations, was to look at Crossrail 2’s plans for King’s Road Chelsea station.
If the station is built it will sit between Victoria and Clapham Junction stations.
This Google Map shows the area.
Victoria To Clapham Junction
Victoria station is in the top right corner and Clapham Junction is at the bottom of the map.
So what do Crossrail 2 say about the need for a King’s Road Chelsea station in their document about the station. They say this.
A station in the Chelsea area has always been part of the Chelsea – Hackney line safeguarding since it was first proposed in 1989. A Crossrail 2 station in Chelsea would improve community access to rail based public transport in an area where current service levels are low in comparison to similar inner London locations. It would also improve connectivity to the Royal Brompton and Royal Marsden hospitals and provide access to the existing retail and commercial developments along King’s Road. Providing a Crossrail 2 station in Chelsea would also improve journey times for those travelling to or from King’s Road.
Chelsea currently suffers weekday congestion and delays on its main roads. By 2031 congestion on London’s roads is expected to increase by 60 per cent. Providing a Crossrail 2 station would encourage more people to use public transport, which would help to reduce traffic congestion in the area and improve air quality.
That is an answer that would persuade someone like me, who doesn’t drive and knows the arguments for buses and trains, but to the average selfish driver of a high-powered car or off-road vehicle, that is almost an insult.
The Google Map does show the enormous problem in working out the route of Crossrail 2.
Victoria and Clapham Junction stations are about four kilometres apart, so for safety and ventilation reasons any tunnel between the two stations will need an access shaft.
And what lies between the two stations? The River Thames!
I’m sure that part of the reason for a new station in the Chelsea area, is to provide the necessary shaft for the tunnels, as the only other alternative is somewhere in Battersea and that is probably too close to Clapham Junction.
This creates a wonderful irony for Chelsea. Suppose that Crossrail 2 decide that because of opposition, they are going to drop building a station in Chelsea.
They might still decide to build a shaft in perhaps a block of flats, in the same way they did on Moorgate with Moor House.
So Chelsea would have an unseen emergency access and ventilation shaft, but no station.
This map from the Crossrail 2 document shows the proposed station and its shafts, entrances and work-sites.
King’s Road Chelsea Station
This Google Map shows the area of Site A in an enlarged format.
King’s Road Chelsea Station Site A
Site A is described like this by Crossrail 2.
Includes the Chelsea Garden Centre and Farmers Market. This would be the main worksite for construction of the station tunnels, station entrance, ticket hall and station shaft. Although the site boundary includes 250 King’s Road and 151 Sydney Street, these buildings would be retained.
I would assume that the buildings to be retained are these on the corner.
This Google Map shows the area of Site B in an enlarged format.
King’s Road Chelsea Station Site B
Site B is described like this by Crossrail 2.
Includes retail and office buildings adjacent to The Pheasantry and extends across Jubilee Place, which would be closed temporarily. This site would be used for construction of the eastern station shaft.
The Pheasntry, where Pizza Express has their restaurant is to the right of Waterstones and Ryman
Jubilee Place is to the left of Waterstones and appears to be one-way away from the King’s Road.
This station design is not very ambitious, when you compare it to Balham or Dalston, in that it appears to be single as opposed to double-ended.
Is this because there is no interchange with other lines or because Crossrail 2 want to have to argue only one entrance with protestors?
What Will The New Buildings Be Like?
Obviously I don’t know, but I can make a few points.
- On both sites A and B, I suspect that both shafts and the station at Site A will be incorporated into buildings in keeping with the area.
- It looks from the proposed position of the station entrance, that if the building on the corner of Site A is to be retained as Crossrail 2 say, then it will double as the station.
Surely, this would be two briefs that would be welcomed by one of our world-class architects.
Conclusion
This is probably the most difficult station to build for Crossrail 2.
Not in terms of the actual engineering, but in the sensitive nature of the site and the local residents.
But as I said earlier, I have a feeling that if Crossrail 2 is built it will have to build something in the Chelsea area, due to London’s geography.
A Wall Of Flats At West Hampstead Station
I stopped off at West Hampstead station to see anything was happening on the new station.
Nothing much yet!
This article on West Hampstead Life gives details of the new station.
I will reserve judgement on the flats until they’re finished. Especially, on a windy day!
The Anonymous Widower 