Mizter T wrote:
On Apr 29, 2:48 pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message

"Mizter T"

On Apr 29, 1:52 pm, TimB wrote:
I thought they were expected to use the same platform (2?) at
Clapham Jn?

Platform 1 is to be reinstated (across the island from platform 2).

I thought Ih ad read that this plan had been abandoned?

AIUI the current plan is to use platform 2 in two halves. Presumably
WLL trains will use the eastern half of the platform, and ELL trains
will use the western half via a new mid-platform crossover.

That's very interesting - first time I've come across that. That plan
makes the notion of sharing a platform face actually workable (having
the WLL and ELL services actually share the very same operational
platform would be a recipe for total disaster, which is why I'd
dismissed it previously - never thought of what you've mentioned
though). It's possible of course because there's a centre track in
between those on platforms 2 and 3.

Actually quite ingenious. I knew that the decking beneath the track
space of platform 1 wasn't in a very healthy state - I guess that some
time in the future that might have to be dealt with properly, then
again maybe it's fine and can continue to be patched up so long as it
doesn't need to take the weight of a train or two.

I suggested a few weeks ago somewhere (uk.transport.london?) that perhaps
they should build out the western half of the current P2 over the track bed,
which would leave a roughly 6 car long bay for the current service (to be
renumbered P1), followed by a second 6 car platform face for a new P2. That
way you'd avoid the need for points half way along the platform, and there
would be a much more obvious separation between the two platforms for
passengers, as well as more circulation space.

AIUI there are still track alterations needed such as doubling the Latchmere
Reversible to aid the higher frequency, I'm not sure about the track layout
leading to the up and down Ludgate lines, but I suspect there is additional
S&C to fit to allow completely independent operation of the two future LO
routes.

What seems noteworthy is that the current P2 is under the control of
Wimbledon ASC, and there are boundaries with Victoria Central for the WLL
and Victoria Southeastern for the Ludgate lines - surely there's scope for a
change of control responsibilities there? Although I'm not writing with any
real signalling knowledge, it doesn't seem designed for streamlined
operations...

Paul S