The idea of linking stations up in London is a good idea but it's
probably best to start of with closer links rather than starting with
two substantially far away from each other. Linking Moorgate to Cannon
Street and Waterloo to Waterloo East (or destroying it) would offer
plenty of benefits. Yes they would be complicated and expensive, but
I'm sure (well guessing) that they would be under or the same price as
Crossrail.

"Chetoph" wrote in message
m...
The idea of linking stations up in London is a good idea but it's
probably best to start of with closer links rather than starting with
two substantially far away from each other. Linking Moorgate to Cannon
Street and Waterloo to Waterloo East (or destroying it) would offer
plenty of benefits. Yes they would be complicated and expensive, but
I'm sure (well guessing) that they would be under or the same price as
Crossrail.

Not sure about the Waterloo one - a line already exists, but I'm not sure
how much use it is - but from discussions I've seen here in the past, the
Moorgate to Cannon Street is a non-starter: there's too much difference in
height, and the Bank of England vaults in the way.

Would it be possible to run a line slightly further east, from Moorgate
under Throgmorton, perhaps with new Bank/Moorgate platforms somewhere around
Birchin Lane, to a new underground station at the eastern end of London
Bridge station, with a portal somewhere in the vicinity of Southwark Park
Road. The line could take over services on the East Dulwich line. There may
even be room for a new stop somewhere around the bottom of Bermondsey
Street, as that area's not brilliantly served by the tube. (Yes, I'm biased
because I live in it, so sue me.)

Or is this a complete impossibility because of the way the vaults are
positioned?

Just a thought.

Jonn

Jonn Elledge wrote:
"Chetoph" wrote...
The idea of linking stations up in London is a good idea but it's
probably best to start of with closer links rather than starting with
two substantially far away from each other. Linking Moorgate to Cannon
Street and Waterloo to Waterloo East (or destroying it) would offer
plenty of benefits. Yes they would be complicated and expensive, but
I'm sure (well guessing) that they would be under or the same price as
Crossrail.

Not sure about the Waterloo one - a line already exists, but I'm not sure
how much use it is - but from discussions I've seen here in the past, the
Moorgate to Cannon Street is a non-starter: there's too much difference in
height, and the Bank of England vaults in the way.

Would it be possible to run a line slightly further east, from Moorgate
under Throgmorton, perhaps with new Bank/Moorgate platforms somewhere around
Birchin Lane, to a new underground station at the eastern end of London
Bridge station,

The main obstacle in that area is not vaults nor gradients - it's
foundations! Many City buildings (especially the taller ones) have
foundations that go down a very long way, preventing any tube line from
getting through.

A new underground station at the eastern end of London Bridge station
could also be a problem for the same reason. All those new
groundscrapers around Tooley Street may prevent the construction of any
new tunnels.

The only possible route I can see (apart from beneath the existing
lines) is under Gracechurch Street and Bishopsgate, giving interchange
with Liverpool Street station instead of Moorgate. I don't know how
easily it could be linked to Old Street, though.

with a portal somewhere in the vicinity of Southwark Park
Road. The line could take over services on the East Dulwich line. There may
even be room for a new stop somewhere around the bottom of Bermondsey
Street, as that area's not brilliantly served by the tube. (Yes, I'm biased
because I live in it, so sue me.)

If you're going to link it to the East Dulwich line, it would be better
to make it more direct. Instead of detouring through South Bermondsey
and Peckham, it could go south through Walworth, Camberwell and
Denmark Hill.

In article , Aidan Stanger
writes
The main obstacle in that area is not vaults nor gradients - it's
foundations! Many City buildings (especially the taller ones) have
foundations that go down a very long way, preventing any tube line from
getting through.

However, planning has taken this into account, with gaps being left in
the lines of buildings. One of the constraints of the route of Crossrail
is threading it through the existing gaps in the building line in the
City.

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 15:12:04 +0000 (UTC), "Jonn Elledge"
wrote:

Not sure about the Waterloo one - a line already exists, but I'm not sure
how much use it is - but from discussions I've seen here in the past, the
Moorgate to Cannon Street is a non-starter: there's too much difference in
height, and the Bank of England vaults in the way.

Leaving aside other issues, could the Bank vaults not be moved
somewhere else, if such a line was really wanted? (If there is
anything worth having in there, I'll look after it...!)


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

In article , Chetoph
wrote:
The idea of linking stations up in London is a good idea but it's
probably best to start of with closer links rather than starting with
two substantially far away from each other. Linking Moorgate to Cannon
Street and Waterloo to Waterloo East (or destroying it) would offer
plenty of benefits. Yes they would be complicated and expensive, but
I'm sure (well guessing) that they would be under or the same price as
Crossrail.


By this do you mean building a back-to-back link between London Bridge and
Waterloo, making them both straight-through stations? I think that would
be a great idea, to give the trains a non-terminating run straight across
the south side of the city centre, and making the north-south journey to
reach this route from places in the city centre a much shorter one. It
involves no tunnelling, so should be cheap. Well, cheaper than Crossrail
and coping with existing traffic rather than creating new.

Michael Bell

--

By this do you mean building a back-to-back link between London Bridge and
Waterloo, making them both straight-through stations? I think that would
be a great idea, to give the trains a non-terminating run straight across
the south side of the city centre, and making the north-south journey to
reach this route from places in the city centre a much shorter one. It
involves no tunnelling, so should be cheap. Well, cheaper than Crossrail
and coping with existing traffic rather than creating new.

Michael Bell

--

I'd have it run on the south of the station along Lower Marsh, across
Waterloo Road, to meet the existing line at around Hatfields. A
flyover could be put somewhere so that trains could turn into Cannon
Street.

On the subject of Cannon Street, I've often heard about the slope
being to much, and the vaults being in the way. However, it's just the
lines that need to be linked, not the stations. Its not a cheap option
and would cost a lot of money. But it could be more beneficial than
Crossrail.

Chetoph wrote:

By this do you mean building a back-to-back link between London Bridge and
Waterloo, making them both straight-through stations? I think that would
be a great idea, to give the trains a non-terminating run straight across
the south side of the city centre, and making the north-south journey to
reach this route from places in the city centre a much shorter one. It
involves no tunnelling, so should be cheap. Well, cheaper than Crossrail
and coping with existing traffic rather than creating new.

Michael Bell

--


I'd have it run on the south of the station along Lower Marsh, across
Waterloo Road, to meet the existing line at around Hatfields. A
flyover could be put somewhere so that trains could turn into Cannon
Street.

On the subject of Cannon Street, I've often heard about the slope
being to much, and the vaults being in the way. However, it's just the
lines that need to be linked, not the stations. Its not a cheap option
and would cost a lot of money. But it could be more beneficial than
Crossrail.

I'm not convinced. Crossrail delivers at least double benefits -
commuters into Paddington or Waterloo get direct access to the City and
West End, and the City gets fast direct access to Heathrow. Since Cannon
Street and Moorgate are already *in* the City, those benefits are
immediately lost - you wouldn't get the reduction in overcrowding on the
tube.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

I'm not convinced. Crossrail delivers at least double benefits -
commuters into Paddington or Waterloo get direct access to the City and
West End, and the City gets fast direct access to Heathrow.

Plus those in great swathes of East London get direct access to the west End
for the first time.

"Jonn Elledge" wrote in message
...

Plus those in great swathes of East London get direct
access to the west End for the first time.

The cross-platform interchange at Stratford means that they pretty much have
this already.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes