On Apr 3, 7:26*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2011, 1506 wrote:
On Mar 28, 10:57 am, Robin9 wrote:

In my opinion a properly extended Chelsea/Hackney line would be far more
beneficial to London than Crossrail.

Maybe, but the perceived need, and it is a real one, is relief of the
Central Line.

Yes. I read the various east-west studies a few years ago, and the common
theme was congestion relief in the Essix [1] - City - Oxford Circus
corridor. The current plan won't do much for congestion east of Liverpool
Street, because it adds neither track nor trains (alright, it adds track
between Liverpool Street and Stratford - but is there any plan to use the
capacity released on the surface line?), but it should help enormously
between Stratford and Oxford Street.

I gave up trusting anything Network Rail were saying when I read they
wanted to send 12 car trains [3x4-car emus] along the Hertford East
branch.

Ware is likely to present them with a problem there. The station is
hemmed in by a road bridge at one end [Viaduct Road] and a level
crossing at the other [Amwell End]. The current platform can only just
accommodate 8 car trains [2x4-car emus] and the scope for extension
simply doesn't exist.

On Apr 4, 5:44*am, "Recliner" wrote:
"1506" wrote in message





Does the Jubulee Line need relief?

Try getting on a westbound Jubilee train at Southwark in the evening
peak -- train after train arrives completely full, with no spaces at all
to board.

IMHO, the Jubilee should have continued to Thamesmead beyond North
Greenwhich, perhaps crossing the Thames two more times. The North
London Line, beyond Canning Town, would heve crossed the river to
Angerstein Wharf and then turn east to meet the South London Line.
This arrangement would have given better distribution.

On Sun, 3 Apr 2011, 1506 wrote:

On Apr 3, 11:26*am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2011, 1506 wrote:
On Mar 28, 10:57 am, Robin9 wrote:

In my opinion a properly extended Chelsea/Hackney line would be far more
beneficial to London than Crossrail.

Maybe, but the perceived need, and it is a real one, is relief of the
Central Line.

Yes. I read the various east-west studies a few years ago, and the common
theme was congestion relief in the Essix [1] - City - Oxford Circus
corridor. The current plan won't do much for congestion east of Liverpool
Street, because it adds neither track nor trains (alright, it adds track
between Liverpool Street and Stratford - but is there any plan to use the
capacity released on the surface line?), but it should help enormously
between Stratford and Oxford Street.

But, if not Southwest, the route has to go somewhere.

Well, it *could* stop at a terminus under Oxford Circus. But that would be
a bit daft.

Where things are a bit woolier are what happens west of Oxford Circus.

There is a case for a link from Old Oak Common to the WCML slow AC pair.
Taking over the Western branches of the Central Line would be another
option.

Taking over the Chiltern suburban services was also suggested at one time.
Sadly, none of these plans were judged to be cost-effective.

Still, if we do eventually get Crossrail 2 / Chelsea-Hackney, then that
will presumably go in that general direction.

Chelney is a line that is always going to be built sometime in the
future.

True! Although if they build it in the future, but tunnel through to the
present, that could be quite useful.

tom

--
FRUIT ****ER has joined the party!

On Sun, 3 Apr 2011, Jamie Thompson wrote:

On Apr 3, 10:47*pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Tom Anderson" wrote

Also, 12 Crossrail in the peak hour? I thought 16tph were going to
Shenfield?

The plan is 12 Shenfield and 12 Abbey Wood in the peak. Actually I think
there is a case for 16 Shenfield and 8 Abbey Wood in the high peak,

In another forum a very good idea was put forward for a chord between
the tunnel near Puddling Mill and the tunnel west of Canary Wharf.
Essentially, it lets you use the remainder of the tunnel capacity to
operate additional services over the other branch.

i.e. Peak, your 24tph core becomes 12tph core-Shenfield, 12tph core-
Abbey Wood, and 12tph Shenfield-Abbey Wood, giving 24tph on all
branches. Using the alternative mentioned above, that could become 16tph
core-Shenfield, 8tph core-Abbey Wood, and 8tph Shenfield-Abbey Wood,
giving 24tph on the core, 24tph on the Shenfield branch, and 16tph on
the Abbey Wood branch.

An interesting but slightly mental plan. This 'chord' would actually have
to be one side of a fully grade-separated two-track delta junction if it
was to have any chance of working. And who would ride on those ten cars
every five minutes in either direction between Shenfield and Abbey Wood?
People with a pathological aversion to the Dartford Crossing? Presumably,
the proposed market is commuters from metropolitan Kent to Stratford, and
Essix to Canary Wharf. I suspect there are enough of those to justify some
level of service, but not 12 tph; the plan which delivers 8 tph makes more
sense. Although of course, that's the capacity - you wouldn't have to use
all of it.

It also gives interesting options like WAML trains down to Abbey Wood
via Canary Wharf,

Given some way for them to cross the main body of the GE formation without
wrecking the service.

greatly relieving the Jubilee at Stratford (perhaps permitting an
extension northwards somewhere).

Direct airport trains from Stansted to City, via
Stratford-change-for-Stratford-International?

Perhaps even offering the possibility of a station somewhere in Tower
Hamlets, which might be good for the area.

Might not be good for the station.

tom

--
FRUIT ****ER has joined the party!

On Apr 4, 12:22*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2011, 1506 wrote:
On Apr 3, 11:26*am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2011, 1506 wrote:
On Mar 28, 10:57 am, Robin9 wrote:

In my opinion a properly extended Chelsea/Hackney line would be far more
beneficial to London than Crossrail.

Maybe, but the perceived need, and it is a real one, is relief of the
Central Line.

Yes. I read the various east-west studies a few years ago, and the common
theme was congestion relief in the Essix [1] - City - Oxford Circus
corridor. The current plan won't do much for congestion east of Liverpool
Street, because it adds neither track nor trains (alright, it adds track
between Liverpool Street and Stratford - but is there any plan to use the
capacity released on the surface line?), but it should help enormously
between Stratford and Oxford Street.

But, if not Southwest, the route has to go somewhere.

Well, it *could* stop at a terminus under Oxford Circus. But that would be
a bit daft.

Where things are a bit woolier are what happens west of Oxford Circus.

There is a case for a link from Old Oak Common to the WCML slow AC pair..
Taking over the Western branches of the Central Line would be another
option.

Taking over the Chiltern suburban services was also suggested at one time..
Sadly, none of these plans were judged to be cost-effective.

Still, if we do eventually get Crossrail 2 / Chelsea-Hackney, then that
will presumably go in that general direction.

Chelney is a line that is always going to be built sometime in the
future.

True! Although if they build it in the future, but tunnel through to the
present, that could be quite useful.

Perhaps Doctor Emmett Brown can help us. :-)

On Apr 4, 3:16*pm, Mitdish wrote:
Ware is likely to present them with a problem there. The station is
hemmed in by a road bridge at one end [Viaduct Road] and a level
crossing at the other [Amwell End]. The current platform can only just
accommodate 8 car trains [2x4-car emus] and the scope for extension
simply doesn't exist.

Doesn't seem to bad to me. You have two options: 1) You close the
level crossing, as you have a perfectly good road bridge about 8
carriage lengths to the east ...or 2) you lengthen the bridge so
you can put platforms under it, exactly as was done at Dalston
Kingsland for the LO 4-car project.