London Banter - View Single Post

[email protected] · September 18th 09, 09:50 PM posted to uk.transport.london

wrote:
In article ,
() wrote:

Mizter T wrote:
On Sep 16, 10:10 pm, "
wrote:

Graham Harrison wrote:

"Basil Jet" wrote:
Is there a reason why this is not just billed as part of the
Underground, especially since it will soon have some deep tube
bits? If the Underground can include the Chesham branch, why not
the North London Line? Do staff at Gospel Oak station get paid
less than staff at Chesham, in which case keeping the Overground
separate from the Underground is a divide-and-conquer wheeze
against the rail workers?
What is now called the "Overground" is actually part of "British
Rail". The government put those lines out to tender and "Overground"
won it. Therefore, it's not part of Tfl as such - for instance it
works under National Rail rules/signalling and passenger terms/
conditions not LU.
But doesn't the Metropolitan line between Uxbridge and Amersham?
No.
The starting signal at Amersham eastbound was definitely set up as
a National Rail signal, and it was not a road signal over a
repeater signal.

What about between Putney and Wimbledon and between Gunnersbury and
Richmond?

To some extent they are both - Network Rail signalling but with train
stops.

Besides the train stops, trains that carry both NR and Underground
trains are also equipped with AWS.