On Jun 6, 5:18*pm, allantracy wrote:
It’s noticeable that planned Crossrail services are primarily the
inner suburban type of services rather than longer distance trains.

Contrast that with Thameslink, which reaches out to Brighton, Bedford
and, eventually, Cambridge.

Is this not a missed opportunity?

Why not Crossrail out to Oxford or Newbury, continuing the other side
to Southend, Chelmsford, Colchester, Clacton or Ipswich seems like a
monumental missed opportunity to me.

Crossrail’s inners suburban mentality is far too parochial.

Is Reading "Inner Suburban"?

If it’s going to have the feel of a glorified Tube line then why not
build it as such, note at much less cost.

Crossrail will be much high capacity than any tube line. Moreover,
the delays caused by changing trains at the termini will be
eliminated.

So what’s it to be, we’re building a mainline across London so how
about some genuine mainline services or has it all been hijacked by
that dreadful narrow-minded Overground concept?

IMHO Thameslink is going to prove very hard to manage given its many
branches and long distances. Delays will transmit thru the Thameslink
system and affect timekeeping over a wide area.

The trains being built for Crossrail are barely suitable for Reading
to Shenfield never mind further afield. Men of my age tend to need
the bathroom very often.

Hey, what is your beef with the Overground dude? Give it a chance
will ya.

On Jun 6, 5:33*pm, e27002 wrote:
On Jun 6, 5:18*pm, allantracy wrote:

It’s noticeable that planned Crossrail services are primarily the
inner suburban type of services rather than longer distance trains.

Contrast that with Thameslink, which reaches out to Brighton, Bedford
and, eventually, Cambridge.

Is this not a missed opportunity?

Why not Crossrail out to Oxford or Newbury, continuing the other side
to Southend, Chelmsford, Colchester, Clacton or Ipswich seems like a
monumental missed opportunity to me.

Crossrail’s inners suburban mentality is far too parochial.

Is Reading "Inner Suburban"?



If it’s going to have the feel of a glorified Tube line then why not
build it as such, note at much less cost.

Crossrail will be much high capacity than any tube line. *Moreover,
the delays caused by changing trains at the termini will be
eliminated.



So what’s it to be, we’re building a mainline across London so how
about some genuine mainline services or has it all been hijacked by
that dreadful narrow-minded Overground concept?

IMHO Thameslink is going to prove very hard to manage given its many
branches and long distances. *Delays will transmit thru the Thameslink
system and affect timekeeping over a wide area.

The trains being built for Crossrail are barely suitable for Reading
to Shenfield never mind further afield. *Men of my age tend to need
the bathroom very often.

Hey, what is your beef with the Overground dude? *Give it a chance
will ya.

Is it officially going to Reading yet? We know it will do, but isn't
it officially Maidenhead, which is still hardly Inner Suburban?
Tim

Hey, what is your beef with the Overground dude? *Give it a chance
will ya.

It's fine for inner London but extending the Overground (Underground
really) concept any further, like to Croydon (for example), is just
too far.

Try the Tube to Heathrow as a particularly **** poor example of the
Underground going too far out – takes forever – and we didn’t always
have Heathrow Express.

It should be horses for courses.

On Jun 6, 5:56*pm, TimB wrote:
On Jun 6, 5:33*pm, e27002 wrote:





On Jun 6, 5:18*pm, allantracy wrote:

It’s noticeable that planned Crossrail services are primarily the
inner suburban type of services rather than longer distance trains.

Contrast that with Thameslink, which reaches out to Brighton, Bedford
and, eventually, Cambridge.

Is this not a missed opportunity?

Why not Crossrail out to Oxford or Newbury, continuing the other side
to Southend, Chelmsford, Colchester, Clacton or Ipswich seems like a
monumental missed opportunity to me.

Crossrail’s inners suburban mentality is far too parochial.

Is Reading "Inner Suburban"?

If it’s going to have the feel of a glorified Tube line then why not
build it as such, note at much less cost.

Crossrail will be much high capacity than any tube line. *Moreover,
the delays caused by changing trains at the termini will be
eliminated.

So what’s it to be, we’re building a mainline across London so how
about some genuine mainline services or has it all been hijacked by
that dreadful narrow-minded Overground concept?

IMHO Thameslink is going to prove very hard to manage given its many
branches and long distances. *Delays will transmit thru the Thameslink
system and affect timekeeping over a wide area.

The trains being built for Crossrail are barely suitable for Reading
to Shenfield never mind further afield. *Men of my age tend to need
the bathroom very often.

Hey, what is your beef with the Overground dude? *Give it a chance
will ya.

Is it officially going to Reading yet? We know it will do, but isn't
it officially Maidenhead, which is still hardly Inner Suburban?

No Reading is not official, YET! But, if I was a gambling man . . .

On Jun 6, 6:02*pm, allantracy wrote:
Hey, what is your beef with the Overground dude? *Give it a chance
will ya.

It's fine for inner London but extending the Overground (Underground
really) concept any further, like to Croydon (for example), is just
too far.

Try the Tube to Heathrow as a particularly **** poor example of the
Underground going too far out – takes forever – and we didn’t always
have Heathrow Express.

It should be horses for courses.

100% agreed.

We were about to embark at Dover, when
(allantracy) came up to me and whispered:

It's fine for inner London but extending the Overground
(Underground really) concept any further, like to Croydon (for
example), is just too far.

Like Met to Watford then?

--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx

---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----

A sensible criticism of extending the Overground to West Croydon is that
it mainly duplicated a service that was already being provided, in contrast
to the new extension to Clapham Junction. The distance covered is irrelevant.

Extending the Piccadilly Line to Heathrow was an obvious move. Most of
the people who work at Heathrow live locally. They don't travel in from
Central London. Passengers who live further afield are not obliged
to travel by Underground. Many go by minicab, particularly
if they have luggage.

In message , at 13:59:02 on
Thu, 7 Jun 2012, Paul Corfield remarked:

One service should run at standard fares

You could call it.. Heathrow Connect, perhaps?

(OK not within the zones, but neither is the excess from H&H very much).

and if people want to pay extra for a premium express then fair enough.

For which the fare is cheaper than a taxi, which was *all* it was ever
supposed to achieve.
--
Roland Perry

On 07/06/2012 14:59, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 13:59:02 on
Thu, 7 Jun 2012, Paul Corfield remarked:

One service should run at standard fares

You could call it.. Heathrow Connect, perhaps?

(OK not within the zones, but neither is the excess from H&H very much).

Er, yes it is - it's GBP5.20 from H&H to Heathrow.

(And the service is only half-hourly.)


and if people want to pay extra for a premium express then fair enough.

For which the fare is cheaper than a taxi, which was *all* it was ever
supposed to achieve.

I dare say the official justification for HEx was a bit more extensive
than just that.

In message , at 15:49:33 on Thu, 7 Jun 2012,
Mizter T remarked:
One service should run at standard fares

You could call it.. Heathrow Connect, perhaps?

(OK not within the zones, but neither is the excess from H&H very much).

Er, yes it is - it's GBP5.20 from H&H to Heathrow.

That's not very much. About 1% of the cheapest transatlantic ticket.

(And the service is only half-hourly.)

If you are in a hurry, use the tube!

and if people want to pay extra for a premium express then fair enough.

For which the fare is cheaper than a taxi, which was *all* it was ever
supposed to achieve.

I dare say the official justification for HEx was a bit more extensive
than just that.

It was primarily to get traffic off the roads, and the main target for
that was taxis. hence the need to be cheaper than a taxi, but not a
giveaway - especially as it's not subsidised by the government.

--
Roland Perry