On Jul 13, 9:25*pm, Jamie Thompson wrote:
On 9 July, 21:28, "Recliner" wrote:

"Jamie Thompson" wrote in message



Shame they're missing the opportunity to add the sorely-missing
flyover/under to link the DC lines with the St. Albans Abbey branch.
Handing that line over to LO would do wonders for the service, which
would then get more people actually using it.

But it's well outside London.

Yup, but one of the main reasons the passing loop got deferred is
because one of the franchise commitments that came in when LM took
over was to harmonise their fleet or some such, meaning that the line
can only be worked by a hugely excessive new 377, when a much smaller/
cheaper non-standard unit would suffice ( I believe a Silverlink Metro
unit used to operate the line before the franchise change).
Additionally, I'd imagine timings could be improved by using one or
two of the new metro-class stock built for LO (rapid acceleration and
lower top-speeds than the 377s - built to be able to handle the fast
lines without stealing too much capacity from Lord Beardie's trains as
well as run stopping services all the way from from Birmingham) -
hence the reason I suggest LO as a suitable operator, as they have a
suitable set of units already, so you wouldn't need specialist stock
or additional stabling.


Provision of the passing loop at Bricket Wood would have had nothing
to do with the costs of the units needed to run the service. The class
350s, used by LM, cost a similar amount to the new LO class 378 units,
although it is hard to compare the costs to the train operating
company, as the rental cost of units seems to be much harder to find.
What would be cheaper is for LM to run the branch with the class 321s
that they are retaining, rather than switching to any form of new
unit.

Having a flyover/under would let the service act as an extension of
the current Watford terminating one, giving the future option of not
only LO services (switching to AC at WJ to utilise the existing
infrastructure), but Chiltern services (or even Met/Bakerloo, if they
decided to install DC rails). Not having to endure a decidedly dodgy
connection at WJ might also attract more local usage from north
Watford for places south. Anyone heading to central London would be
using Thameslink or changing at WJ anyway.


But the cost of the flyover would probably pay for the passing loop at
Bricket Wood and lease costs of an additional unit to run the service
for 25 (or 50 or 100) years. Far better to make provision, when
Watford Junction gets resignalled, to run services through to Euston
from the branch, linking the planned peak Watford Junction, Bushey,
Harrow, Euston 'bounce back' service to the branch shuttle. For
several years in the 90s, the St. Albans trains connected with the
Watford - Euston trains which left from platform 10 at the Junction,
this was lost when the Southern service used the platform during the
WCML rebuilt, but the Watford-Euston services are making a comeback,
with one train already running at 08.03 from Watford (a bit of a tight
connection from the 07.44 from St. Albans) and more planned by
December.