asdf wrote:
On 22 Jun 2006 05:09:05 -0700, Kev wrote:

Please tell me that they aren't going to extend the Bakerloo all the
way to Watford. As bad as the 313's are I don't see what the point is
let alone the expense of reinstating the 4th rail.
I had assumed that whoever held the NLL franchise would run the Watford
line as well . This is a really dumb idea.

My guess is that the reasoning is as follows:

TfL consider there to be an oversupply (9tph) of off-peak service
between Queens Park and Harrow & Wealdstone. Once they start paying
for the Silverlink franchise, they want to cut this to 6tph. They also
want the Bakerloo, where it runs, to have at least a 6tph
turn-up-and-go frequency. So the only possibilities are 6tph Bakerloo
+ 0tph Silverlink, or 0tph Bakerloo + 6tph Silverlink. An increase in
the Silverlink service isn't possible because Silverlinks run on the
WCML Slow Lines for the last 1.5 miles into Euston. So they've decided
on a complete switchover to Bakerloo off-peak.

This doesn't mean they can't continue to run a peak-hour service to
Euston, but I suppose it's cheaper for them to just not bother.

I can't see the change being popular with passengers, though. Journey
times to Euston, King's Cross, the City, etc, will significantly
increase.
But then when do the train operators ever give a toss about the
passengers. I suppose the hope is that people who use Kilburn High Rd
and South Hampstead will get so ****ed off they will find other routes
and then these two stations can be closed. So that will free up
capacity at Euston, two sites that can be sold for development, two
stations that don't have to be staffed or maintained and a bunch of
passengers who have to find an alternative route to work.
A success story all round. Now where I have I heard the one about
running services down before. I'll give Queens Park to the NLL 2 or 3
years then that will go the way of Croxley ang the Graham Rd curve.

Kevin