On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 09:12:26 +0200
Robin9 wrote:
Overground system, which now of course serves Denmark Hill, has two main

weaknesses: the platforms are too short and there are not nearly enough

interchange stations.

I wouldn't hold your breath. This is the same overground that happily
bypasses the piccadilly and both branches of the northern line london without
an interchange making it essentially useless as an outer circle line for most
of north london unless you fancy a nice hike between stations.

--
Spud

In message , Robin9
wrote:
Does anyone have either more details

If I may plug my site:

http://www.davros.org/rail/culg/future.html#existing

has a fair amount.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Yes but that's exactly my point. Because the Overground network does not
have nearly enough connections with other rail routes - Underground or
surface lines - any new lines or extensions should have as one of the primary
objectives a new connection with the London Overground service.

One of the many failings of the over-ambitious Crossrail 2 scheme is that the
planners intend the route to go deep into north London without connecting
with London Overground!

Living in Leyton, I am well served by the London Overground system, and I
use it as much as I use any other part of public transport in London. It is very
noticeable that far more passengers board and alight from trains at
interchange stations than at non-interchange stations.

Although the very rapid increase in patronage since the re-branding of London
Overground means it has been a major success, it is still working far below its
real potential because it does not connect with other routes.

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 09:12:26 +0200
Robin9 wrote:
Overground system, which now of course serves Denmark Hill, has two main

weaknesses: the platforms are too short and there are not nearly enough

interchange stations.

I wouldn't hold your breath. This is the same overground that happily
bypasses the piccadilly and both branches of the northern line london
without
an interchange making it essentially useless as an outer circle line for
most
of north london unless you fancy a nice hike between stations.

What is it that you expect them to do?

whilst building a new surface station isn't going to be too difficult a new
underground station on a running line, is.

The latter might cost up up to a billion pounds.

I suggest that there are better uses for such sums of money

tim

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 10:43:12 +0100
"tim....." wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 09:12:26 +0200
Robin9 wrote:
Overground system, which now of course serves Denmark Hill, has two main

weaknesses: the platforms are too short and there are not nearly enough

interchange stations.

I wouldn't hold your breath. This is the same overground that happily
bypasses the piccadilly and both branches of the northern line london
without
an interchange making it essentially useless as an outer circle line for
most
of north london unless you fancy a nice hike between stations.

What is it that you expect them to do?

Nothing - as you say it would cost a fortune. The point I was making is that
the overground isn't the connect all outer circle line that TfL like to
pretend it is. But even when they could have done something very useful like
terminating the ELL at finsbury park so people could interchange directly
from the ECML and great northern lines they didn't bother, citing costs
and rubbish about pathing difficulties. Meanwhile they spend hundreds of
millions on new buses no one asked for and trains on the victoria line that
won't fit anywhere else so can't be cascaded and have to be brought in by
road costing a small fortune.

--
Spud

This recent consultation and the discussions provoked by it have convinced me to switch my preferences from the Camberwell route to the OKR option - the opportunity to serve New Cross Gate and gain interchange with the BML is too good to miss, even if it does mean missing out on interchange with the SLL at Peckham Rye or Queens Road Peckham...a shame though.

As for beyond Lewisham...I am still firmly of the opinion that Hayes is completely the wrong option. The route will need vast amounts of new depot capacity, and there is nowhere with the land available on that route. Taking over the surface line from Lewisham to Beckenham via Catford also removes a very useful bit of mainline railway from the network.

No, if you were desperate to remove the Hayes line from Lewisham, then I think the solution is a short tunnel under (through?) South Norwood Country Park to the underused line through Crystal Palace. Perhaps a new station on the BML slow lines at the interchange, though I suspect Crystal Palace would suffice. Both rail lines heading to Beckenham could then be given to the trams.

My preference is for the new tunnels to continue slightly further past Lewisham - through Blackheath - and surfacing past Blackheath Junction. The line then would take over the Bexleyheath line through to Slade Green (expansion of which would give the depot space required), then diving back into tunnel to serve Dartford (so adding more capacity on the lines into it from the west), then heading south east to terminate under Bluewater (adding a major traffic generator to the end of the line to generate contraflow traffic)..

On Thursday, September 18, 2014 4:26:03 PM UTC+1, Robin9 wrote:
I've just read an article in today's Evening Standard about some London

Assembly politicians disagreeing with a southward extension of the
Bakerloo Line.
I didn't know an extension was being seriously considered - in fact I
still don't -
but apparently the Mayor has instructed TfL to plan an extension via
Lewisham
to Bromley. According to the Standard, those disagreeing feel an
extension in a
more south-westerly direction would serve Londoners better.

Does anyone have either more details or a firm opinion on this?




So currently Northern Line tubes coming into Waterloo from the South have often started from Kennington and have plenty of available seats, and standing space. And, Bakerloo line trains coming into Waterloo from the South, have started from Elephant and Castle, and have ample seating, and standing space.

Those brilliant politicians have decided that since commuters arriving at Victoria Mainline station have to suffer impossibly packed tube trains, the same pain should be inflicted on Waterloo's commuters.

Absolutely Brilliant thinking.

e27002 wrote:
On Thursday, September 18, 2014 4:26:03 PM UTC+1, Robin9 wrote:
I've just read an article in today's Evening Standard about some London

Assembly politicians disagreeing with a southward extension of the
Bakerloo Line.
I didn't know an extension was being seriously considered - in fact I
still don't -
but apparently the Mayor has instructed TfL to plan an extension via
Lewisham
to Bromley. According to the Standard, those disagreeing feel an
extension in a
more south-westerly direction would serve Londoners better.

Does anyone have either more details or a firm opinion on this?




So currently Northern Line tubes coming into Waterloo from the South have
often started from Kennington and have plenty of available seats, and
standing space. And, Bakerloo line trains coming into Waterloo from the
South, have started from Elephant and Castle, and have ample seating, and standing space.

There will also be more frequent services on both those lines before the
extensions open.

Those brilliant politicians have decided that since commuters arriving at
Victoria Mainline station have to suffer impossibly packed tube trains,
the same pain should be inflicted on Waterloo's commuters.

Absolutely Brilliant thinking.

Have you forgotten Crossrail 2? It will take a lot of Waterloo and
Victoria mainline pax directly to central London, so they no longer have to
use the existing terminals.

In article ,
(e27002) wrote:

On Thursday, September 18, 2014 4:26:03 PM UTC+1, Robin9 wrote:
I've just read an article in today's Evening Standard about some
London Assembly politicians disagreeing with a southward extension of
the Bakerloo Line.
I didn't know an extension was being seriously considered - in fact I
still don't - but apparently the Mayor has instructed TfL to plan an
extension via Lewisham to Bromley. According to the Standard, those
disagreeing feel an extension in a more south-westerly direction
would serve Londoners better.

Does anyone have either more details or a firm opinion on this?

So currently Northern Line tubes coming into Waterloo from the South
have often started from Kennington and have plenty of available
seats, and standing space. And, Bakerloo line trains coming into
Waterloo from the South, have started from Elephant and Castle, and
have ample seating, and standing space.

Those brilliant politicians have decided that since commuters
arriving at Victoria Mainline station have to suffer impossibly
packed tube trains, the same pain should be inflicted on Waterloo's
commuters.

Absolutely Brilliant thinking.

Huh? The Victoria Line always seems pretty empty south of Victoria when I
use it.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote:
In article ,
(e27002) wrote:

On Thursday, September 18, 2014 4:26:03 PM UTC+1, Robin9 wrote:
I've just read an article in today's Evening Standard about some
London Assembly politicians disagreeing with a southward extension of
the Bakerloo Line.
I didn't know an extension was being seriously considered - in fact I
still don't - but apparently the Mayor has instructed TfL to plan an
extension via Lewisham to Bromley. According to the Standard, those
disagreeing feel an extension in a more south-westerly direction
would serve Londoners better.

Does anyone have either more details or a firm opinion on this?

So currently Northern Line tubes coming into Waterloo from the South
have often started from Kennington and have plenty of available
seats, and standing space. And, Bakerloo line trains coming into
Waterloo from the South, have started from Elephant and Castle, and
have ample seating, and standing space.

Those brilliant politicians have decided that since commuters
arriving at Victoria Mainline station have to suffer impossibly
packed tube trains, the same pain should be inflicted on Waterloo's
commuters.

Absolutely Brilliant thinking.

Huh? The Victoria Line always seems pretty empty south of Victoria when I
use it.

Sure, but that wasn't the point Adrian was making. He was saying, quite
correctly, that when Victoria mainline commuters try and get on Victoria
line trains heading into central London they often find the Tube station
closed through overcrowding on those trains.