Ah, but your Amersham-London nice cheap tube ticket would not entitle you
to use the Chiltern...

But it would... Which Exactly is the problem
--
To reply direct, remove NOSPAM and replace with railwaysonline
For Train Information, The Latest News & Best photos around check out the
Award Winning Railways Online at http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk
"Hating Thames Trains since 2003"

Tonight (Monday) the 19:15 Marylebone to Aylesbury (first stop Great
Missenden) departed approx 30 secs late from Marylebone (due to the last
minute substitution of a Class 168 from an adjacent platform, as the
country-end 165 of a pair was defective, trapping in the set to form the
service). Arrived H-on-H virtually on time, crawled through the platform
and
then staggered all the way to Amersham. Why? Because the buggers in Harrow
box had let out an all-stations Amersham stopper in front of it! Again.

I have *far* more complaints about the signallers at Marylebone - from
putting a train infront of another that is ready to depart to putting a
4-car train into one that only has room for 2 more
--
To reply direct, remove NOSPAM and replace with railwaysonline
For Train Information, The Latest News & Best photos around check out the
Award Winning Railways Online at http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk
"Hating Thames Trains since 2003"

Even better to hand over *all* the services on the line via Harrow
(including the Watford services) to Chiltern Railways and leave LUL to do
what it does best: short-distance high-intensity services rather than long
distance services. I'm amazed that people choose to travel all the way
from
Amersham to London in a clapped-out LUL train rather than a fast,
comfortable DMU, for the dubious advantage of not changing at Marylebone /
Baker Street.

Not really a good idea, because it will require many more DMUs and fill up
the train for pax travelling from Aylesbury etc.

The thought of Crossrail, in the form that it has been proposed, is
horrendous: yet another railway line irreparably spoiled by the erection
of
ugly OHLE gantries; the probable closure of Marylebone after it's had all
that money invested in modernising it - the exchange of a light and airy
terminus station in London for either Paddington (very out-of-the-way for
passengers coming from central London) or else cramped Underground-style
stations closer into Central London. The Crossrail money would be much
better spent upgrading the line north of Aylesbury to provide a service to
Milton Keynes, feeding into a reopened Oxford-MK line. With all services
being DMU or 3rd-rail EMU rather than OHLE EMU. If only the people that I
have to share this planet with weren't too stupid to realise that you
don't
touch the live rail, it wouldn't be banned on H&S grounds.

Marylebone won't close, Brum services still need to use it. I do agree that
the LNE line should be reopened and would create many more freight
opportunities and create a reliable, nice service to MK, (Much better than
the X15)

In article yZ1%b.19786$ft.13786@newsfe1-win, MetroGnome
writes
"Jack Taylor" wrote:

Try reading the follow-ups before going into an apoplectic rant.

I read all the follow-ups (at least, all that appeared on my server) before
replying.

I'm aware of the suggestion that there *might* not be a survey (with some
sort of revenue/track access bartering agreement being used instead) - but
as far as I can see, this wasn't confirmed. Hence, I began my comments with
the phrase "Assuming that an annual passenger survey is indeed used" -
clearly showing that the following comments only applied if a survey *was*
used.

I don't consider that pointing out the flaws in your logic constitutes a
rant.




Well Metrognome you're wrong. All the revenue from Amersham southwards
to (I believe) Harrow goes to LU who in return give Chiltern access to
their 'metals.'

All the revenue north of Amersham goes to Chiltern.

Now shut up.
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

I thought the plans were originally for services on the High Wycombe line
to
use Paddington instead of Marylebone and for serices on the Aylesbury line
to use Baker Street and further stations in central London instead of
Marylebone.

Which would involve running on single-track between Northolt Jctn and
Greenford Junction, plus Park Royal Branch Junction and Old Oak West
Junction, plus running along a crowded section of line into a busy station,
not fitting in with 1 TOC per terminal policy. Stupid idea whoever thought
of it
--
To reply direct, remove NOSPAM and replace with railwaysonline
For Train Information, The Latest News & Best photos around check out the
Award Winning Railways Online at http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk
"Hating Thames Trains since 2003"

"MetroGnome" wrote in message
news:yZ1%b.19786$ft.13786@newsfe1-win...

I'm aware of the suggestion that there *might* not be a survey (with some
sort of revenue/track access bartering agreement being used instead) - but
as far as I can see, this wasn't confirmed. Hence, I began my comments
with
the phrase "Assuming that an annual passenger survey is indeed used" -
clearly showing that the following comments only applied if a survey *was*
used.

I don't consider that pointing out the flaws in your logic constitutes a
rant.

Fairy nuff. I got shot down to some order last year when mentioning that
CRCL got no benefit from LUL passengers using their trains so I'm probably a
bit over-sensitive on the subject. I'm pleased to have found out that, after
all the abuse, other posters have recently confirmed that I was correct
after all!

The point still stands though that, with rising passenger numbers over the
past ten years, those of us from Amersham and beyond are getting fed up with
having to stand on peak journeys from Marylebone whilst LUL passengers for
Harrow, Ricky, Chorleywood and Chalfont (who contribute nothing to CRCL's
coffers) occupy the seats, due to the ridiculous demands of the Passenger
Service Requirement, formulated on 1995 figures. Even four years ago, when I
was using the 18:57 from Marylebone almost daily, it was impossible to get a
seat if you arrived later than 18:45.

Personally I think that a fun (although impractical) solution would be to
place LUL ticket holders in a queue at Marylebone, like that used when
assembling footie fans travelling to Wembley, whilst 'proper' Chiltern
passengers board. Then, say four minutes before departure, let the LUL
passengers onto the platform to take up any unused seats or to stand. That
way any Chiltern passengers who arrive in reasonable time for the train get
a seat, whilst the bulk of the 'short hop', non-revenue earning passengers
stand.

(Dons flak jacket and ducks for cover!)