A blog that I read (diamond geezer) had a posting today where tfl's business plan was published last week was mentioned.

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/board-2016...iness-plan.pdf

It no longer contains the Metropolitan line extension to Watford Junction.
The only listed projects are the Bakerloo line extension to Lewisham, the Northern line extension to Battersea and the London Overground extension to Barking Riverside.

Has the Metropolitan line project been quietly dropped?

John

On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 04:44:27 -0800 (PST), John Leach
wrote:

A blog that I read (diamond geezer) had a posting today where tfl's business plan was published last week was mentioned.

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/board-2016...iness-plan.pdf

It no longer contains the Metropolitan line extension to Watford Junction.
The only listed projects are the Bakerloo line extension to Lewisham, the Northern line extension to Battersea and the London Overground extension to Barking Riverside.

Has the Metropolitan line project been quietly dropped?

Yes, I saw Geezer's blog as well, but I think the project has gone too
far to be dropped. I think the mayor's document was talking about new
projects, not ones that date back a long way. Remember, this isn't
primarily a TfL project:

"The £284·4m cost includes a local contribution of £125·4m, £109·8m
from the Department for Transport and £49·2m from Transport for
London. The local funding includes £87·9m from the Hertfordshire Local
Enterprise Partnership, which represents 40% of its total Growth Deal
funding from the government "

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/s...ng-agreed.html

John Leach wrote:
A blog that I read (diamond geezer) had a posting today where tfl's
business plan was published last week was mentioned.

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/board-2016...iness-plan.pdf

It no longer contains the Metropolitan line extension to Watford Junction.
The only listed projects are the Bakerloo line extension to Lewisham, the
Northern line extension to Battersea and the London Overground extension
to Barking Riverside.

Has the Metropolitan line project been quietly dropped?

Aha, the plot thickens:

http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...ley-rail-link/

In summary, with work having barely started, there's yet another cost
over-run, which nobody is volunteering to fund. Taylor Woodrow has been
dropped as the main contractor, and no replacement has been appointed.

But the bigger question that always gets raised here, is how an earth such
a small, simple project can cost close to £300m.

On Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:57:20 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...ecarious-statu
-croxley-rail-link/

In summary, with work having barely started, there's yet another cost
over-run, which nobody is volunteering to fund. Taylor Woodrow has been
dropped as the main contractor, and no replacement has been appointed.

But the bigger question that always gets raised here, is how an earth such
a small, simple project can cost close to £300m.

The whole point of the project eludes me frankly. It won't be used as a
route into central london - people will just get the quicker overground to
euston instead. There may be some demand for commuter traffic from watford to
various western points on the met but nowhere near enough to justify the cost.
If the point is simply to have a tube line at watford junction then surely
re-extending the bakerloo would be far quicker and cheaper.

--
Spud

wrote:
On Fri, 16 Dec 2016 16:57:20 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...ecarious-statu
-croxley-rail-link/

In summary, with work having barely started, there's yet another cost
over-run, which nobody is volunteering to fund. Taylor Woodrow has been
dropped as the main contractor, and no replacement has been appointed.

But the bigger question that always gets raised here, is how an earth such
a small, simple project can cost close to £300m.

The whole point of the project eludes me frankly. It won't be used as a
route into central london - people will just get the quicker overground to
euston instead. There may be some demand for commuter traffic from watford to
various western points on the met but nowhere near enough to justify the cost.
If the point is simply to have a tube line at watford junction then surely
re-extending the bakerloo would be far quicker and cheaper.

I think the local interest is more about serving the two new stations,
connecting them both to the Junction and LU. There will also be some
traffic from Met stations to the Junction. As for traffic from the Junction
to Euston, surely the much faster LM services are far more popular than the
slow, stopping LO?

On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 09:46:07 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
The whole point of the project eludes me frankly. It won't be used as a
route into central london - people will just get the quicker overground to
euston instead. There may be some demand for commuter traffic from watford
to
various western points on the met but nowhere near enough to justify the
cost.
If the point is simply to have a tube line at watford junction then surely
re-extending the bakerloo would be far quicker and cheaper.

I think the local interest is more about serving the two new stations,
connecting them both to the Junction and LU. There will also be some
traffic from Met stations to the Junction. As for traffic from the Junction

A lot of money just for that tbh.

to Euston, surely the much faster LM services are far more popular than the
slow, stopping LO?

Don't know. I guess it depends how frequent they are compared to the overground.
Also I'm sure a lot of people change onto the bakerloo instead of going all the
way to euston.

I never really got the rationalle behind cutting the bakerloo back to harrow.
There's obviously a commuter demand for it (hence LO) and it wasn't even the
longest tube line when it did run there so its not as if it was going miles.

--
Spud

On 2016-12-19 09:46:07 +0000, Recliner said:

I think the local interest is more about serving the two new stations,
connecting them both to the Junction and LU. There will also be some
traffic from Met stations to the Junction. As for traffic from the Junction
to Euston, surely the much faster LM services are far more popular than the
slow, stopping LO?

Near nobody uses LO into London from WFJ, it takes ages. Anyone who
wants the Bakerloo changes at HRW.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

In article , d () wrote:

I never really got the rationalle behind cutting the bakerloo back to
harrow.
There's obviously a commuter demand for it (hence LO) and it wasn't
even the longest tube line when it did run there so its not as if it
was going miles.

The Bakerloo only had a limited peak hour service (to access Croxley Green
Depot) long before even that was withdrawn.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 19-Dec-16 1:25 PM, wrote:
In article , d () wrote:

I never really got the rationalle behind cutting the bakerloo back to
harrow.
There's obviously a commuter demand for it (hence LO) and it wasn't
even the longest tube line when it did run there so its not as if it
was going miles.

The Bakerloo only had a limited peak hour service (to access Croxley Green
Depot) long before even that was withdrawn.

Oh to be back in 1954, when the off-peak service at all stations between
Watford Jct and Queens Park was 8 tph - 4 Bakerloo, 4 LM.

Peter Beale

On 2017-01-09 13:52:45 +0000, Peter Beale said:

Oh to be back in 1954, when the off-peak service at all stations
between Watford Jct and Queens Park was 8 tph - 4 Bakerloo, 4 LM.

But the mainline local "LM" service was 2tph if that, so it would have
carried substantial numbers of passengers from Watford and Harrow that
it now doesn't. The current service is far better for the vast
majority of passengers.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.