Why does the North Kent Line currently route most trains through
Woolwich from London Bridge via Lewisham and not via Greenwich, which
is surely a much more direct route?

"lonelytraveller" wrote in
message
...
Why does the North Kent Line currently route most trains through
Woolwich from London Bridge via Lewisham and not via Greenwich, which
is surely a much more direct route?

It doesn't. There are 6tph via Greenwich and only 2tph via Lewisham.

Peter Smyth

On 26 Sep, 11:07, "Peter Smyth" wrote:
"lonelytraveller" wrote in
...

Why does the North Kent Line currently route most trains through
Woolwich from London Bridge via Lewisham and not via Greenwich, which
is surely a much more direct route?

It doesn't. There are 6tph via Greenwich and only 2tph via Lewisham.

Peter Smyth

Not only that, but the whole of the peak service between Blackheath
and Charlton has been withdrawn, without a whimper that I noticed.

"North Kent" is one of those phrases that was originally based on the
name of a route, but now means "via Lewisham and Woolwich", so that
you'd get bizarre announcements at London Bridge on the lines of
"Plumstead via North Kent".

"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 26 Sep, 11:07, "Peter Smyth" wrote:
"lonelytraveller" wrote in
...

Why does the North Kent Line currently route most trains through
Woolwich from London Bridge via Lewisham and not via Greenwich, which
is surely a much more direct route?

It doesn't. There are 6tph via Greenwich and only 2tph via Lewisham.

Peter Smyth

Not only that, but the whole of the peak service between Blackheath
and Charlton has been withdrawn, without a whimper that I noticed.

"North Kent" is one of those phrases that was originally based on the
name of a route, but now means "via Lewisham and Woolwich", so that
you'd get bizarre announcements at London Bridge on the lines of
"Plumstead via North Kent".

In pre 1976 rebuilding days, the indicators on London Bridge down platforms
were marked as "North Kent via Greenwich or Lewisham, and Woolwich". I have
a feeling that they also said NK via Bexleyheath and via Sidcup. This
reflected the original NK route via Lewisham and Charlton before the line
from Greenwich was finally extended (to the annoyance of the Astronomer
Royal) to Charlton.

MaxB

On 26 Sep, 11:07, "Peter Smyth" wrote:
"lonelytraveller" wrote in
...

Why does the North Kent Line currently route most trains through
Woolwich from London Bridge via Lewisham and not via Greenwich, which
is surely a much more direct route?

It doesn't. There are 6tph via Greenwich and only 2tph via Lewisham.

Peter Smyth

Ok. But if that's the case, why do all the main route utilisation
strategies and the latest study for possible Bakerloo extensions
(carried out on behalf of Lewisham council) treat it like its a minor
branch with the main route from Woolwich etc. being the one that goes
via Lewisham?

lonelytraveller wrote on
27 September 2010 20:33:27 ...
On 26 Sep, 11:07, "Peter wrote:
"lonelytraveller"nospam_lonelytraveller_nos...@ho tmail.co.uk wrote in
...

Why does the North Kent Line currently route most trains through
Woolwich from London Bridge via Lewisham and not via Greenwich, which
is surely a much more direct route?

It doesn't. There are 6tph via Greenwich and only 2tph via Lewisham.

Peter Smyth

Ok. But if that's the case, why do all the main route utilisation
strategies and the latest study for possible Bakerloo extensions
(carried out on behalf of Lewisham council) treat it like its a minor
branch with the main route from Woolwich etc. being the one that goes
via Lewisham?

*ALL* the main route utilisation strategies? Please provide references
to the three or more RUSs that relate to this route. As for some study
carried out on behalf of Lewisham council, isn't it obvious why they
should want to focus on the route via Lewisham?
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)