Richard M Willis wrote:
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...
Yes... its to replace the H&C service so that the H&C and Circle can be
combined (as detailed in some other posts in this thread).

Oh I see.

But, what an unbalanced service ? Barking to Metroland would take ages. Is
there significant traffic demand for that route ? Are there many people
wanting to go all the way ?

Probably not... but the intention isn't to allow through journeys, it's
merely a rearrangement of the service pattern across the SSL to attempt
to improve reliability and frequency.

Can you explain/describe what's going to happen to the H&C/Circle ? I
couldn't
follow the descriptions in these threads ? Is the idea that trains come from
Hammersmith H+C, travel eastwards along the top half of the circle to
Liverpool
Street, Aldgate, Tower Hill, Embankment, then on round to Edgware Road D+H+C
(so it passes through that station twice !)

That's pretty much right - but the trains terminate at Edgware Road the
second time, they don't pass through.

If so, isn't that going to confuse the passengers, having the same route
pass through the same station twice on one trip ? The next station could be
either Baker Street, Paddington H+C, or Paddington D+C depending on which
phase
and direction it's going in. Edgware Road DHC has severe platform
predictability
problems as it is.

I don't think running the new H&C in this manner would be any more
confusing than now. The next station for any given train can already be
any of the three you mentioned, and the only difference to the current
situation would be that trains to Gloucester Road and beyond would
depart from the same platforms as the Wimbledon service.

In fact, it's slightly less complicated than the current situation.
Currently, the outermost platform is for Baker St, the middle two
platforms are for Earl's Court and the innermost platform is for
Gloucester Road or Hammersmith. That means that trains to Notting Hill
Gate can depart from three different platforms.

If the new pattern runs as it should, then it would be outermost
platform for Baker Street, middle two platforms for Notting Hill Gate /
Paddington (Praed St) and innermost platform for Hammersmith and
Paddington (Bishops Rd). Trains to Paddington can depart from as many
platforms as now, but trains to NHG only depart from two instead of
three platforms.

And anyway, isn't that just the circle line under a different name, with a
long
tail to it, which will still fall foul of all the conflicting movts which
bedog the circle line currently.

Basically, yes! The plan doesn't resolve any of conflicting junction
concerns (and, as highlighted on Tupeprune's site, it makes Praed St
junction worse) but it does allow recovery time in the Circle line
timetable.

The only way to truely resolve all of those conflicting moves would be
to rebuild the offending junctions as grade-separated - which would be
incredibly expensive.

On a side note, I did wonder whether Crossrail should take over
Paddington to Hammersmith - they could send some of their wasted
terminating 14tph on from Paddington to Hammersmith, and Praed Street
junction could be eliminated. Perhaps Wimbleware services could then be
extended all the way around the Circle, as per the T Cup plan.

One problem with that would be that extending H&C stations to take
Crossrail trains might mean that Goldhawk Road, Shepherd's Bush and
White City turn into one big platform! Serving Royal Oak would also be a
problem since the Crossrail portal is west of there.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London