On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:15:53 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:


This consultation dates from 2020 BC (Before Covid) so I'm not sure if
this project is even alive now. There's a map at
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...smead-advance/

I'm mystified by the plan. Would the trains reverse at Beckton to get
there? Or would Beckton have its own service and Thamesmead have its own
service? Extending from Woolwich seems to make more sense - or reversing
at Woolwich, since the trains actually curve around under the river to
come into Woolwich from the east. This would give people in Thamesmead
direct service to Woolwich and City Airport, whereas plugging them into
the Beckton Branch doesn't really give them much. It would also remove
the extra Thames Tunnel from the plan, so should work out cheaper.

What other alternatives are there?

Extend Barking Riverside under the river?
Take Crossrail into Thamesmead?
Some kind of high capacity local feeder system (aka tramway)?

On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 15:28:38 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 01/08/2020 15:29, Recliner wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 13:28:36 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 01/08/2020 08:31, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:15:53 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
This consultation dates from 2020 BC (Before Covid) so I'm not sure if
this project is even alive now. There's a map at
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...o-thamesmead-a
dvance/

I'm mystified by the plan. Would the trains reverse at Beckton to get
there? Or would Beckton have its own service and Thamesmead have its own
service? Extending from Woolwich seems to make more sense - or reversing
at Woolwich, since the trains actually curve around under the river to
come into Woolwich from the east. This would give people in Thamesmead
direct service to Woolwich and City Airport, whereas plugging them into
the Beckton Branch doesn't really give them much. It would also remove
the extra Thames Tunnel from the plan, so should work out cheaper.

IMO the DLR is already too big for what it is and couldn't cope with
the traffic flow even when I last commuted on it in 2014. Any further
transport enhancements in that area should involve the jubilee line.

Jubilee train = 875 passengers
DLR triple train = 852 passengers

I think the new CAF 5-car DLR trains will have a slightly greater
capacity than the current 3-car DLR fleet.


Or maybe you meant something else?

Also, the central section of the Jubilee line was already running at
max capacity. The last thing it needs is a branch to a new catchment
area.


Given you can interchange from DLR to Jubilee, that's not going to help
matters much.


Yes, but the DLR also interchanges with the Crossrail, GA and C2C main
lines as well as the District, H&C and Central lines. Those provide better
journey opportunities to most parts of central London than the crowded
Jubilee.

But a lot of that isn't at stations the Becton branch currently
serves. Not only that but Becton serves Tower Gateway so even where
interchanges do exist they aren't perfect.

I don't see any suggestion that the current service pattern would
change if a Thamesmead extension happened.

Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:15:53 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:


This consultation dates from 2020 BC (Before Covid) so I'm not sure if
this project is even alive now. There's a map at
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...smead-advance/

I'm mystified by the plan. Would the trains reverse at Beckton to get
there? Or would Beckton have its own service and Thamesmead have its own
service? Extending from Woolwich seems to make more sense - or reversing
at Woolwich, since the trains actually curve around under the river to
come into Woolwich from the east. This would give people in Thamesmead
direct service to Woolwich and City Airport, whereas plugging them into
the Beckton Branch doesn't really give them much. It would also remove
the extra Thames Tunnel from the plan, so should work out cheaper.

What other alternatives are there?

Extend Barking Riverside under the river?
Take Crossrail into Thamesmead?
Some kind of high capacity local feeder system (aka tramway)?

Yes, I think a north/south tram network centred on Abbey Wood might be a
much cheaper, acceptable alternative.

On 02/08/2020 17:11, Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:15:53 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:


This consultation dates from 2020 BC (Before Covid) so I'm not sure if
this project is even alive now. There's a map at
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...smead-advance/

I'm mystified by the plan. Would the trains reverse at Beckton to get
there? Or would Beckton have its own service and Thamesmead have its own
service? Extending from Woolwich seems to make more sense - or reversing
at Woolwich, since the trains actually curve around under the river to
come into Woolwich from the east. This would give people in Thamesmead
direct service to Woolwich and City Airport, whereas plugging them into
the Beckton Branch doesn't really give them much. It would also remove
the extra Thames Tunnel from the plan, so should work out cheaper.

What other alternatives are there?

Extend Barking Riverside under the river?
Take Crossrail into Thamesmead?

Wasn't the original version (Fleet Line) of the Jubilee line supposed to
have gone to Thamesmead in the first place.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graham Harrison wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 15:28:38 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 01/08/2020 15:29, Recliner wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 13:28:36 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 01/08/2020 08:31, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:15:53 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
This consultation dates from 2020 BC (Before Covid) so I'm not sure if
this project is even alive now. There's a map at
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...o-thamesmead-a
dvance/

I'm mystified by the plan. Would the trains reverse at Beckton to get
there? Or would Beckton have its own service and Thamesmead have its own
service? Extending from Woolwich seems to make more sense - or reversing
at Woolwich, since the trains actually curve around under the river to
come into Woolwich from the east. This would give people in Thamesmead
direct service to Woolwich and City Airport, whereas plugging them into
the Beckton Branch doesn't really give them much. It would also remove
the extra Thames Tunnel from the plan, so should work out cheaper.

IMO the DLR is already too big for what it is and couldn't cope with
the traffic flow even when I last commuted on it in 2014. Any further
transport enhancements in that area should involve the jubilee line.

Jubilee train = 875 passengers
DLR triple train = 852 passengers

I think the new CAF 5-car DLR trains will have a slightly greater
capacity than the current 3-car DLR fleet.


Or maybe you meant something else?

Also, the central section of the Jubilee line was already running at
max capacity. The last thing it needs is a branch to a new catchment
area.


Given you can interchange from DLR to Jubilee, that's not going to help
matters much.


Yes, but the DLR also interchanges with the Crossrail, GA and C2C main
lines as well as the District, H&C and Central lines. Those provide better
journey opportunities to most parts of central London than the crowded
Jubilee.

But a lot of that isn't at stations the Becton branch currently
serves. Not only that but Becton serves Tower Gateway so even where
interchanges do exist they aren't perfect.

I don't see any suggestion that the current service pattern would
change if a Thamesmead extension happened.

The Thamesmead branch woukd take years of planning and building. Recasting
the timetable takes months. Clearly a major new branch would change a lot.

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 02/08/2020 17:11, Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:15:53 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:


This consultation dates from 2020 BC (Before Covid) so I'm not sure if
this project is even alive now. There's a map at
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...smead-advance/

I'm mystified by the plan. Would the trains reverse at Beckton to get
there? Or would Beckton have its own service and Thamesmead have its own
service? Extending from Woolwich seems to make more sense - or reversing
at Woolwich, since the trains actually curve around under the river to
come into Woolwich from the east. This would give people in Thamesmead
direct service to Woolwich and City Airport, whereas plugging them into
the Beckton Branch doesn't really give them much. It would also remove
the extra Thames Tunnel from the plan, so should work out cheaper.

What other alternatives are there?

Extend Barking Riverside under the river?
Take Crossrail into Thamesmead?

Wasn't the original version (Fleet Line) of the Jubilee line supposed to
have gone to Thamesmead in the first place.

Yes, but that was before Canary Wharf subsidised the diversion, and the
Olympics.

On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 16:35:21 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Graham Harrison wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 15:28:38 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 01/08/2020 15:29, Recliner wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 13:28:36 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 01/08/2020 08:31, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:15:53 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
This consultation dates from 2020 BC (Before Covid) so I'm not sure if
this project is even alive now. There's a map at
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...o-thamesmead-a
dvance/

I'm mystified by the plan. Would the trains reverse at Beckton to get
there? Or would Beckton have its own service and Thamesmead have its own
service? Extending from Woolwich seems to make more sense - or reversing
at Woolwich, since the trains actually curve around under the river to
come into Woolwich from the east. This would give people in Thamesmead
direct service to Woolwich and City Airport, whereas plugging them into
the Beckton Branch doesn't really give them much. It would also remove
the extra Thames Tunnel from the plan, so should work out cheaper.

IMO the DLR is already too big for what it is and couldn't cope with
the traffic flow even when I last commuted on it in 2014. Any further
transport enhancements in that area should involve the jubilee line.

Jubilee train = 875 passengers
DLR triple train = 852 passengers

I think the new CAF 5-car DLR trains will have a slightly greater
capacity than the current 3-car DLR fleet.


Or maybe you meant something else?

Also, the central section of the Jubilee line was already running at
max capacity. The last thing it needs is a branch to a new catchment
area.


Given you can interchange from DLR to Jubilee, that's not going to help
matters much.


Yes, but the DLR also interchanges with the Crossrail, GA and C2C main
lines as well as the District, H&C and Central lines. Those provide better
journey opportunities to most parts of central London than the crowded
Jubilee.

But a lot of that isn't at stations the Becton branch currently
serves. Not only that but Becton serves Tower Gateway so even where
interchanges do exist they aren't perfect.

I don't see any suggestion that the current service pattern would
change if a Thamesmead extension happened.

The Thamesmead branch woukd take years of planning and building. Recasting
the timetable takes months. Clearly a major new branch would change a lot.

You see, I read your previous post as extolling the virtues of all the
current interchanges which would be available to passengers on trains
from Becton today (much less Thamesmead).

On 02/08/2020 17:35, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 02/08/2020 17:11, Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:15:53 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:


This consultation dates from 2020 BC (Before Covid) so I'm not sure if
this project is even alive now. There's a map at
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...smead-advance/

I'm mystified by the plan. Would the trains reverse at Beckton to get
there? Or would Beckton have its own service and Thamesmead have its own
service? Extending from Woolwich seems to make more sense - or reversing
at Woolwich, since the trains actually curve around under the river to
come into Woolwich from the east. This would give people in Thamesmead
direct service to Woolwich and City Airport, whereas plugging them into
the Beckton Branch doesn't really give them much. It would also remove
the extra Thames Tunnel from the plan, so should work out cheaper.

What other alternatives are there?

Extend Barking Riverside under the river?
Take Crossrail into Thamesmead?

Wasn't the original version (Fleet Line) of the Jubilee line supposed to
have gone to Thamesmead in the first place.

Yes, but that was before Canary Wharf subsidised the diversion, and the
Olympics.


The rerouting was long before the Olympics were a consideration.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 02/08/2020 17:35, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 02/08/2020 17:11, Graham Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:15:53 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:


This consultation dates from 2020 BC (Before Covid) so I'm not sure if
this project is even alive now. There's a map at
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...smead-advance/

I'm mystified by the plan. Would the trains reverse at Beckton to get
there? Or would Beckton have its own service and Thamesmead have its own
service? Extending from Woolwich seems to make more sense - or reversing
at Woolwich, since the trains actually curve around under the river to
come into Woolwich from the east. This would give people in Thamesmead
direct service to Woolwich and City Airport, whereas plugging them into
the Beckton Branch doesn't really give them much. It would also remove
the extra Thames Tunnel from the plan, so should work out cheaper.

What other alternatives are there?

Extend Barking Riverside under the river?
Take Crossrail into Thamesmead?

Wasn't the original version (Fleet Line) of the Jubilee line supposed to
have gone to Thamesmead in the first place.

Yes, but that was before Canary Wharf subsidised the diversion, and the
Olympics.


The rerouting was long before the Olympics were a consideration.


Yes, but the Olympics triggered the redevelopment of the area to the
northwest of Stratford station.

wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 13:28:36 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
On 01/08/2020 08:31, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:15:53 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
This consultation dates from 2020 BC (Before Covid) so I'm not sure if
this project is even alive now. There's a map at

https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...o-thamesmead-a

dvance/

I'm mystified by the plan. Would the trains reverse at Beckton to get
there? Or would Beckton have its own service and Thamesmead have its own
service? Extending from Woolwich seems to make more sense - or reversing
at Woolwich, since the trains actually curve around under the river to
come into Woolwich from the east. This would give people in Thamesmead
direct service to Woolwich and City Airport, whereas plugging them into
the Beckton Branch doesn't really give them much. It would also remove
the extra Thames Tunnel from the plan, so should work out cheaper.

IMO the DLR is already too big for what it is and couldn't cope with
the traffic flow even when I last commuted on it in 2014. Any further
transport enhancements in that area should involve the jubilee line.

Jubilee train = 875 passengers
DLR triple train = 852 passengers

Well for a start the transverse seating in DLR trains severly retricts the
number of standees compared to a jubilee train and secondly the DLR trains
trundle along at a slow to moderate speed, there are far too many stops
and too many branches all cramming their trains into the central sections.

The only 'central section' through Poplar is 4-track. But not every DLR
route goes that way. It's not a core route with branches, but a genuine
network.

But, as far as Thamesmead is concerned, I think it would be much better
served by a tram route to Abbey Wood. That would provide much more capacity
and speed into central London, both via the classic route into London
Bridge and Crossrail.