In article
-september
..org, (Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article ,
(Recliner) wrote:

On Wed, 25 May 2016 20:39:34 -0500,
wrote:

In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 03:58:41PM -0000, Recliner wrote:

Former London Assembly Member Val Shawcross has been appointed to
Mayor Sadiq Khan's top team as deputy mayor for transport.

...

Prior to her time at City Hall she served on Croydon council ...

Maybe with a south London transport boss, and a south London mayor,
we'll start to get the same quality of service as the Northerners
get.

South London would have to get North London's geology for that,
though.

It's much less of an issue with modern tunneling machines. But the
fact remains that south London is already criss-crossed with a dense
network of surface railways, leaving less need for additional TfL
lines.

Sort of. It's too complex a network to handle the metro frequency
services required. Read "Turning South London Orange".

Yes, but the solution in most cases is to improve the surface network
(with more grade-separated junctions, etc) than building a network of
all-new deep Tube tunnels.

Can't agree or else there wouldn't be a Bakerloo Line extension project for
example. Much of inner south London already had an extensive electric
tramway network by the time Sir Herbert Walker got going.

With the trams gone and serious traffic congestion nowadays, there are major
gaps in the transport network that would not be filled by more frequent
services on Southern routes.

In some cases, like the Wimbledon-Sutton "wall of death" line which was
built to avert a District line Sutton extension, the present routing is a
poor substitute to what a District extension would have provided.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote:
In article
-september
.org, (Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article ,
(Recliner) wrote:

On Wed, 25 May 2016 20:39:34 -0500,
wrote:

In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 03:58:41PM -0000, Recliner wrote:

Former London Assembly Member Val Shawcross has been appointed to
Mayor Sadiq Khan's top team as deputy mayor for transport.

...

Prior to her time at City Hall she served on Croydon council ...

Maybe with a south London transport boss, and a south London mayor,
we'll start to get the same quality of service as the Northerners
get.

South London would have to get North London's geology for that,
though.

It's much less of an issue with modern tunneling machines. But the
fact remains that south London is already criss-crossed with a dense
network of surface railways, leaving less need for additional TfL
lines.

Sort of. It's too complex a network to handle the metro frequency
services required. Read "Turning South London Orange".

Yes, but the solution in most cases is to improve the surface network
(with more grade-separated junctions, etc) than building a network of
all-new deep Tube tunnels.

Can't agree or else there wouldn't be a Bakerloo Line extension project for
example. Much of inner south London already had an extensive electric
tramway network by the time Sir Herbert Walker got going.

With the trams gone and serious traffic congestion nowadays, there are major
gaps in the transport network that would not be filled by more frequent
services on Southern routes.

In some cases, like the Wimbledon-Sutton "wall of death" line which was
built to avert a District line Sutton extension, the present routing is a
poor substitute to what a District extension would have provided.


Note my use of the words "most cases". We already have a Northern line
extension underway and a proposed Bakerloo extension, but what else?

Bromley Council have suggested the LO should be extended
from New Cross to Bromley North, and I have suggested extending
the Hammersmith And City Line from Hammersmith to Wimbledon.
(My suggestion is unlikely to receive a sympathetic hearing!)

On a different tack, the London Overground service from
Clapham Junction to Canada Water and Dalston Junction goes
directly over Brixton Station. Is it feasible to build new platforms
with a connection to the other services, particularly the Victoria
Line?

On 28/05/2016 09:10, Robin9 wrote:
'Recliner[_3_ Wrote:
wrote:-
In article
nal-september
.org, (Recliner) wrote:
-
wrote:-
In article ,
(Recliner) wrote:

On Wed, 25 May 2016 20:39:34 -0500,
wrote:

In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 03:58:41PM -0000, Recliner wrote:

Former London Assembly Member Val Shawcross has been appointed to
Mayor Sadiq Khan's top team as deputy mayor for transport.

...

Prior to her time at City Hall she served on Croydon council ...

Maybe with a south London transport boss, and a south London mayor,
we'll start to get the same quality of service as the Northerners
get.

South London would have to get North London's geology for that,
though.

It's much less of an issue with modern tunneling machines. But the
fact remains that south London is already criss-crossed with a dense
network of surface railways, leaving less need for additional TfL
lines.

Sort of. It's too complex a network to handle the metro frequency
services required. Read "Turning South London Orange".-

Yes, but the solution in most cases is to improve the surface network
(with more grade-separated junctions, etc) than building a network of
all-new deep Tube tunnels.-

Can't agree or else there wouldn't be a Bakerloo Line extension project
for
example. Much of inner south London already had an extensive electric
tramway network by the time Sir Herbert Walker got going.

With the trams gone and serious traffic congestion nowadays, there are
major
gaps in the transport network that would not be filled by more frequent

services on Southern routes.

In some cases, like the Wimbledon-Sutton "wall of death" line which was

built to avert a District line Sutton extension, the present routing is
a
poor substitute to what a District extension would have provided.
-

Note my use of the words "most cases". We already have a Northern line
extension underway and a proposed Bakerloo extension, but what else?

Bromley Council have suggested the LO should be extended
from New Cross to Bromley North, and I have suggested extending
the Hammersmith And City Line from Hammersmith to Wimbledon.
(My suggestion is unlikely to receive a sympathetic hearing!)

On a different tack, the London Overground service from
Clapham Junction to Canada Water and Dalston Junction goes
directly over Brixton Station. Is it feasible to build new platforms
with a connection to the other services, particularly the Victoria
Line?




There is an article in this months MY ONWARD SERIAL (Modern Railways)
regarding 'Turning South London Orange' which covers this subject.
It includes the idea of a 5km tunnel (no stations)for fast SouthEastern
services from Victoria (Battersea to beyond Herne Hill) That frees up
capacity on local lines and could enable use of disused platforms at
Brixton (6 pages with maps and pics)
Jim

Many thanks. I haven't bought a copy of Modern Railways for about
40 years, but I'll change that tomorrow!

A few years ago the obvious answer would have been to
send 8 car trains stopping at Brixton to London Bridge. That of
course would involve doubling the service west of Queens Road.
I wonder if, when the London Bridge work is completed, that
would be possible. My guess is that such a Brixton station
would generate more customers than any other station on the
route except Clapham Junction itself.

Robin9 wrote:

'Paul Corfield[_2_ Wrote:
;156027']On Sat, 28 May 2016 10:10:29 +0200, Robin9
wrote:
-
On a different tack, the London Overground service from
Clapham Junction to Canada Water and Dalston Junction goes
directly over Brixton Station. Is it feasible to build new platforms
with a connection to the other services, particularly the Victoria
Line?-

Lambeth Council commissioned a study into this. TfL have also looked
at it. The last number quoted (in a Mayor's Answer) was in the region
of ï½£50m-ï½£70m to build new platforms. There a load of issues including
sloped tracks which can't be used for platforms under new standards.

The bigger problem is that it's unlikely the service could cope with
the demand. Ironic I know but peak trains are full to bursting without
a Brixton stop. You'd need 8 car trains and a higher frequency and
that throws up huge problems elsewhere on the ELL route. It'll
probably come one day but that's a big piece of work with strategic
issues about what you do with short, constrained platforms on the ELL
tunnelled section.

--
Paul C

A few years ago the obvious answer would have been to
send 8 car trains stopping at Brixton to London Bridge. That of
course would involve doubling the service west of Queens Road.
I wonder if, when the London Bridge work is completed, that
would be possible. My guess is that such a Brixton station
would generate more customers than any other station on the
route except Clapham Junction itself.

The completed London Bridge will have only six, rather than nine, low level
terminating platforms, so there's much less scope for trains to terminate
there than in the old days.

Yes, I've just seen that from an article in "Modern Railways."
Clearly the idea is to enable more trains to pass through
London Bridge to Charing Cross, Cannon Street and St. Pancras
International. But Charing Cross and Cannon Street have
limited platform capacity anyway, so how much will be gained by
reducing London Bridge's capacity to accept terminating trains?
Blackfriars

I've just looked at that article. The idea is to re-route the
trains onto the northern pair of tracks and re-use old
platforms instead of building new ones.

Not a bad idea if it's feasible, but that opens up my favorite
possibility: running a Thameslink service from Clapham Junction
via the Loughborough Junction avoiding lines. If the objective
is to offer new routes and opportunities to change trains in
South London, that's the easiest way to do it.

Robin9 wrote:

'Recliner[_3_ Wrote:
;156041']Robin9 wrote:-

'Paul Corfield[_2_ Wrote: -
;156027']On Sat, 28 May 2016 10:10:29 +0200, Robin9
wrote:
-
On a different tack, the London Overground service from
Clapham Junction to Canada Water and Dalston Junction goes
directly over Brixton Station. Is it feasible to build new platforms
with a connection to the other services, particularly the Victoria
Line?-

Lambeth Council commissioned a study into this. TfL have also looked
at it. The last number quoted (in a Mayor's Answer) was in the region
of ï½£50m-ï½£70m to build new platforms. There a load of issues
including
sloped tracks which can't be used for platforms under new standards.

The bigger problem is that it's unlikely the service could cope with
the demand. Ironic I know but peak trains are full to bursting without
a Brixton stop. You'd need 8 car trains and a higher frequency and
that throws up huge problems elsewhere on the ELL route. It'll
probably come one day but that's a big piece of work with strategic
issues about what you do with short, constrained platforms on the ELL
tunnelled section.

--
Paul C-

A few years ago the obvious answer would have been to
send 8 car trains stopping at Brixton to London Bridge. That of
course would involve doubling the service west of Queens Road.
I wonder if, when the London Bridge work is completed, that
would be possible. My guess is that such a Brixton station
would generate more customers than any other station on the
route except Clapham Junction itself.-

The completed London Bridge will have only six, rather than nine, low
level
terminating platforms, so there's much less scope for trains to
terminate
there than in the old days.

Yes, I've just seen that from an article in "Modern Railways."
Clearly the idea is to enable more trains to pass through
London Bridge to Charing Cross, Cannon Street and St. Pancras
International. But Charing Cross and Cannon Street have
limited platform capacity anyway, so how much will be gained by
reducing London Bridge's capacity to accept terminating trains?
Blackfriars

The extra capacity on the through platforms, and the whole reason for the
huge London Bridge rebuilding, is to give Thameslink trains a dedicated
route through the station in both directions, with no conflicts with other
routes. This is essential for the big increase in the frequency of TL
trains, which will be going to many more destinations, both south and north
of the river.