"Richard M Willis" wrote

Wasn't the Jubilee ("Fleet") Line originally expected to take over the
ELL,
being extended to Lewisham from NCG ?

Wasn't it also going to have an interchange at Aldwych ?

Now that the Jubilee line to "Charing Cross" is now only used for
TV adverts (apparently), is there any justification for keeping the
current
arrangement ?

It doesn't look right that there is a London Terminus that isn't on the
Circle
Line (or that it is, but it is called something other than the name of the
NR
station, towhit Embankment)

Why do we need two stations so close together on the Northern Line (on the
Bakerloo
Line, I could sort of understand it if it were renamed Trafalgar Square,
and
shewn
as a walking route to Charing Cross NR)

IIRC the intention, when the Jubilee Line was being constructed in the
1970s, was indeed that it would be extended to Lewisham. It would have
remained north of the River to somewhere around Tower Bridge, then
interchange with the ELL at Surrey Docks (now Surrey Quays) before taking
over the New Cross branch of the ELL and extending to Lewisham. There was
also talk of extending it over the Bexleyheath Line. The ELL would have
continued, but running only to New Cross Gate.

IMO Charing Cross (Northern Line and Bakerloo Line) are necessary, as they
give a much better interchange with Charing Cross Main Line station than
Embankment, though Embankment (Northern Line and Bakerloo Line) are of
course needed for interchange with the District and Circle Lines.

Peter