wrote in message
...

Can anyone explain why, yesterday morning, I had to wait for 25
minutes at Fulham Broadway for an Eastbound train of any description?
And when it came, it was a High Street Ken train. Is this in any way
related to the new Lassoo Line, or an example of the "normal" service
to be expected at 6.15 on a weekday morning?

The new Circle apparently does not affect the off peak service on the
Wimbledon Branch (6:6), but the 15 tph peak is now balanced 9:6 in favour of
the service towards Embankment.

I'd suggest at 0615 yesterday if there was a long gap it was more likely
down to bog standard stock availability problems. Did they have weather
issues at start of service at all?

Paul S

On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, John B wrote:

On Dec 23, 12:24*am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:29:01 -0600,
wrote:

I'm appalled and disgusted that the manifold deficiencies in passenger
information and facilities for people changing trains at Edgware Road were
not addressed in the slightest before TfL destroyed the Circle Line.

MX of the first week of it is that the Circle Line's atrocious
punctuality did not appear to have improved much, though it would be
genuinely interesting to see figures.

But 6tph *nowhere near* fulfils the demand that exists on the Circle
Line.

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines short
(e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the Circle
frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The same
applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill journeys.

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As someone
who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

Apart from that, bang on, of course!

tom

--
X is for ... EXECUTION!

On 23 Dec, 10:58, John B wrote:
On Dec 23, 12:24*am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:29:01 -0600,
wrote:

I'm appalled and disgusted that the manifold deficiencies in passenger
information and facilities for people changing trains at Edgware Road were
not addressed in the slightest before TfL destroyed the Circle Line.

MX of the first week of it is that the Circle Line's atrocious
punctuality did not appear to have improved much, though it would be
genuinely interesting to see figures.

But 6tph *nowhere near* fulfils the demand that exists on the Circle
Line.

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

*Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines
short (e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the
Circle frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The
same applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill
journeys.

*And could selective door opening
be used to allow a decent train length to run on the Circle?

Yes, this is part of the S-stock upgrade plans: 7-car S-stock trains
the length of current District stock will run all District, H&C and
Circle services.

I didn't realise that, and it seems very odd. Doesn't the problem
apply to several stations in a row? Either there will be one coach
not used by anyone on that stretch, or it would have to be a different
end at different stations.

This sort of thing was tried on the Hampstead tube wasn't it, and I
didn't think it had been all that successful?

On 23 Dec, 16:54, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, John B wrote:
On Dec 23, 12:24*am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:29:01 -0600,
wrote:

I'm appalled and disgusted that the manifold deficiencies in passenger
information and facilities for people changing trains at Edgware Road were
not addressed in the slightest before TfL destroyed the Circle Line.

MX of the first week of it is that the Circle Line's atrocious
punctuality did not appear to have improved much, though it would be
genuinely interesting to see figures.

But 6tph *nowhere near* fulfils the demand that exists on the Circle
Line.

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines short
(e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the Circle
frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The same
applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill journeys..

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As someone
who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

Maybe if they did, they could stop referring to North London as East
London at the same time.

In article
,
(MIG) wrote:

Yes, this is part of the S-stock upgrade plans: 7-car S-stock trains
the length of current District stock will run all District, H&C and
Circle services.

I didn't realise that, and it seems very odd. Doesn't the problem
apply to several stations in a row? Either there will be one coach
not used by anyone on that stretch, or it would have to be a different
end at different stations.

It think the shortfall isn't so great as to exclude a whole car everywhere
is it?

This sort of thing was tried on the Hampstead tube wasn't it, and I
didn't think it had been all that successful?

Not a fair comparison really. That was the 9 car train experiment on the
Morden-Edgware. So two cars switched out at selected stations, not SDO
affecting no more than one whole car.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

MIG wrote:
On 23 Dec, 10:58, John B wrote:
On Dec 23, 12:24 am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:

And could selective door opening
be used to allow a decent train length to run on the Circle?

Yes, this is part of the S-stock upgrade plans: 7-car S-stock trains
the length of current District stock will run all District, H&C and
Circle services.

I didn't realise that, and it seems very odd. Doesn't the problem
apply to several stations in a row? Either there will be one coach
not used by anyone on that stretch, or it would have to be a different
end at different stations.

This sort of thing was tried on the Hampstead tube wasn't it, and I
didn't think it had been all that successful?

The Hampstead tube didn't have articulated carriages.

--
We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile.

"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 23 Dec, 16:54, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, John B wrote:
On Dec 23, 12:24 am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:29:01 -0600,
wrote:

I'm appalled and disgusted that the manifold deficiencies in passenger
information and facilities for people changing trains at Edgware Road
were
not addressed in the slightest before TfL destroyed the Circle Line.

MX of the first week of it is that the Circle Line's atrocious
punctuality did not appear to have improved much, though it would be
genuinely interesting to see figures.

But 6tph *nowhere near* fulfils the demand that exists on the Circle
Line.

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines short
(e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the Circle
frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The same
applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill journeys.

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As someone
who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

Maybe if they did, they could stop referring to North London as East
London at the same time.
===========

It appears the BBC rely on post codes, often something happening in what
everyone else would think of as South London e.g Brixton, but they call
south west because it is SW3 or because adjacent Herne Hill is SE24, it
becomes SE London. They have no actual geographical knowledge.

MaxB

On Dec 23, 8:06*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
*Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines
short (e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the
Circle frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The
same applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill
journeys.

What? *This will, of course, explain why the Central Line is empty in
the peaks between NHG and Bank / Liverpool Street. Clearly there is no
need for Crossrail then!

The sub surface lines - all of them - are heavily oversubscribed in the
peaks. *If they weren't, as you allege, then what is the justification
for the Sub Surface upgrade and the additional implementation of 7 car S
Stock on the H&C / Circle routes?

Eh? Yes, of course the SSL is massively overcrowded in the peaks, and
I've never claimed otherwise.

But the vast majority of SSL peak passengers are trying to get to the
City, either from west-of-Earl's-Court or east-of-Whitechapel on the
District, from northwest-of-Baker-Street on the Met, or from west-of-
Paddington on the H&C(&C). The Circle is an irrelevance to them: Met/
H&C passengers can easily walk to all City destinations from the Met
route, and District passengers to all City destinations from the
District route.

Outside of the peaks, when flows are more evenly split throughout
central London, the Circle becomes relevant.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On Dec 23, 4:54*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, John B wrote:
On Dec 23, 12:24*am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:29:01 -0600,
wrote:

I'm appalled and disgusted that the manifold deficiencies in passenger
information and facilities for people changing trains at Edgware Road were
not addressed in the slightest before TfL destroyed the Circle Line.

MX of the first week of it is that the Circle Line's atrocious
punctuality did not appear to have improved much, though it would be
genuinely interesting to see figures.

But 6tph *nowhere near* fulfils the demand that exists on the Circle
Line.

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines short
(e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the Circle
frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The same
applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill journeys..

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As someone
who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

Apart from that, bang on, of course!

LAHNDON! ESSEX! LAHNDON! ESSEX!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKEBCG3iJtw

You are, of course, right - I thought Upminster was outside GL
boundaries, but it's LB Havering.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
rth.li...


I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As someone
who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.


What's more distressing - coming from London or Essex? I was born in
Wanstead which, in 1964, was in Essex. If I'm asked what county I was born
in I can reply either "Essex" or "London", although I would say I was *from*
Surrey or Sussex because that's where I've spent nearly all of my life.

Historically, East London *is* Essex. Similarly all of London to the south
of the Thames is Kent or Surrey. Surrey County Council has its HQ at
Kingston-upon-Thames and Surrey County Cricket Club is based at The Oval,
neither of which are in the present day county of Surrey. The rest of
London - including the cities of London and Westminster - is in Middlesex,
still used by some people on postal addresses. Middlesex Guildhall still
stands in Parliament Square - I think it now houses the Supreme Court.

It's not worth getting distressed about.

D A Stocks