"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

Surely they could extend the ELL services to take over the existing WLL
Clapham - Willesden ones?

Which way? Clapham Junction would require a time-consuming reversal and
there isn't enough capacity on the NLL to extend ELL services from
Highbury to Willesden. I also suspect that it would be difficult to
ensure a robust service as timetabling would be a nightmare on the scale
of Virgin's Cross Country services! And we know how reliable those
were/are :-)

I suppose the reversal would be a little awkward. And the timetable would
be more robust if the WLL/ELL were kept separate at Clapham Jn.

Also they've missed out the planned station on the ELL extension at
Brixton.
Not having an ELL station at Brixton would be a cardinal sin IMHO.

I agree - missing out Loughborough Junction would also be sinful as it
allows interchange with Thameslink (and thus orbital connections for
those from Wimbledon, Sutton, & Streatham). The problem is the viaduct;
new stations on the SLL viaduct at Brixton and Lougborough Jcn will be
expensive.

Indeed. Though it would make the ELL/SLL infinitely more useful if these
stations could be built. The cost could be justified from the regeneration
benefits too.

Angus

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

The problem on the Victoria line is in the centre rather than at the
edges. You *could* extend it to Croydon - but there'd be no room on the
trains for anyone else to actually get on them. In the outer areas, it
might be possible to dedicate existing track to Crossrail-like services
and thus improve the frequency (part of the current problem in South
London is conflicting movements as trains cross each other's routes).

Thinking about this, I wonder how many of the passengers leaving and joining
the Victoria Line at Victoria are actually headed for stations which would
be served by an extension? If it is quicker to stay on board and go to
Streatham Common or Thornton Heath, say, then they wouldn't be tempted to
change at Victoria, so congestion would reduce.

Presumably you would use the slow lines from Streatham Common to Croydon for
the Victoria line trains?
--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm
E-mail:
URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

"Martin Underwood" wrote in message ws.com...
Actually, the situation at Clapham Junction is interesting because the map
shows the existing Willesden Junction to Clapham Junction line as Silverlink
Metro, continuing unbroken (implying no change of train) as the ELL
extension. Does this mean WJ-CJ trains will be routed to use one of the
high-numbered platforms at CJ (as for long-distance trains that use the
WJ-CJ line), since Platform 2 at CJ is a terminus platform!

No. My understanding (and it could be wrong) is that WJ-CJ trains and
ELL trains will use Platforms 1 and 2, which are opposite faces of the
same platform. Platform 1 doesn't have track at the moment, but that
should be easily remedied. Which will use which, I'm not sure because
I can't quite remember the exact layout of the tracks right now -- I
think ELL will get Platform 1. Either way, both approach CJ from the
east (London end).

Lots of interesting additions:

- Shepherd's Bush to Uxbridge, presumably along GW Main line for some of the
route - will it then use the disused trackbed of the GW Main Line - Uxbridge
Vine Street line, I wonder?

No, it's on-street along the A4020.

- Heathrow to Essex and Kent via Crossrail: I wonder if this will be the
death knell of the premium-rate Heathrow Express service?

Crossrail's documents state that it will replace HEx. I don't know if
premium fares will be charged -- my guess is that they will, to
Heathrow only.

- North London Line terminating at Stratford instead of continuing to North
Woolwich

That's the only actual closure on the map, I think. It's planned
basically because (a) the NLL beyond Stratford will be almost
completely duplicated once the DLR extension to City Airport/North
Woolwich/Woolwich is open, (b) half of it is single and really cramps
the timetable on the rest of the line, (c) turning Stratford to
Canning Town into a DLR line is the most feasible method of serving
Stratford International.

- Greenwich Waterfront line - interesting!

Yes, I liked that -- hadn't seen details of that before. Amazing how
many tram (or tram-like) systems there are planned in London (one
existing system with extensions and three new ones on the map). Hope
they're all compatible enough so that if at some point they join up
you can get through running (a la Cologne/Bonn where the two systems
do run through)

- Cross River Transit using a re-opened Aldwych station

Using a surface station near the old Aldwych station.

- Thameslink using ECML as well as existing MML - I wonder how far north it
will serve on the ECML

That's just TL3K. Goes to Peterborough/Kings Lynn.

Of course, the biggest omission is Chelney and any concept of where
that will go and what it will serve. I'd love to have seen that. And
have they really cut the ELL back that far at the north end? Sure it
can't run via Primrose Hill to Willesden Junction platform 2?

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...
Martin Underwood wrote:

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

Martin Underwood wrote:


- Heathrow to Essex and Kent via Crossrail: I wonder if this will be
the
death knell of the premium-rate Heathrow Express service?

It's a shame that GW
and TT services from the west can't introduce Southall or Hayes &
Harlington
as an additional stop for connection to Heathrow: a cross-platform
change at
a railway station would be much easier than having to lug your cases
down
the steps at Reading and enduring the delays while the luggage is loaded
onto the coach and endure the slow journey out of Reading and along the
M4
to Heathrow.

Also a good idea, and I think this is planned - almost certainly for FGW
Link services along the Thames Valley to Reading, not sure about other
services but quite possible (perhaps alternating stops at Slough with
stops at Ealing Broadway like MML alternate Luton and Luton Airport
Parkway).

However in my view, even that's not really good enough; I think that
electrification of the route to Reading and services from Reading to
Heathrow (perhaps fasts calling at Maidenhead and Slough, and stoppers
too) would do more to combat motorway congestion (on the M4) than any
other rail project, since those Thames Valley towns depend a lot on
Heathrow in their economies.

I hope the GW line isn't electrified any further out: the thought of
Maidenhead bridge festooned with OHLE gantries doesn't bear thinking about
:-( Are there any classes of multiple unit that are
diesel/overhead-electric (like the 319s are third-rail/overhead)? If so,
maybe these should be used to provide a service from Reading to Heathrow,
using diesel from Reading to the point where the Heathrow line branches off
and OHLE from there onwards.

Certainly passengers from the west need a better means of connection than a
rail-air bus. Anything that reduces congestion on the M4 has got to be a
good thing. But it has to be affordable. And secure long-term parking would
be needed at stations along the way, for air travellers to leave their cars
while they went on holiday. That's a lot of joined-up thinking needed - too
much for us in the UK?

"Solar Penguin" wrote in message ...
"John Rowland" wrote...
The omissions are more interesting.
West Hampstead Met Interchange
A West Hampstead Chiltern interchange might be more interesting

I think that's part of the plan for the Met interchange. Might simply
be 'not interesting enough' to put on the map.

Crazy ideas I'd like to have seen, but there always was No Chance:

Morden Road interchange for Tramlink and Northern line.
South Hampstead interchange for Chiltern Line.
Colindeep Lane interchange between Thameslink and Northern Line.

Yes, these are always No Chance ones -- if you're going to dig out new
stations in deep tunnels you have to have a VERY good reason.

Extension of DLR from Lewisham to Hayes and Beckenham Jn.

Not going to happen. The commuters out there won't stand for switching
from real trains to 'toy trains' (and losing their non-stop services
from Ladywell to London Bridge in the peak) and it isn't anywhere near
compelling enough. If they got the Bakerloo or something out to
Lewisham, then they might convert, but I still think it would be
unlikely. I'm wondering if a Bakerloo conversion to Beckenham Junction
plus a Tramlink conversion of New Beckenham to Hayes (with Elmers End
as a triangular station) might fly. Doubt it though.

Extension of Northern line to Morden South.

Interesting idea, but I don't see enough merit. Could happen, I guess,
if they were to radically revamp the Wall of Death.

Brixton interchange on South (or East?) London Line.
Re-open Primrose Hill line to take ELLE to Kilburn.

These two are no-brainers and ought to happen. I'd take ELLE through
to Willesden Junction though. On the other hand, there may well be
constraints on the flat junction at Camden Road, and if they have to
build a flyover or something, it's probably a non-starter given
property prices and the like

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 at 18:54:17, Dave Arquati wrote:

I agree - missing out Loughborough Junction would also be sinful as it
allows interchange with Thameslink (and thus orbital connections for
those from Wimbledon, Sutton, & Streatham). The problem is the
viaduct; new stations on the SLL viaduct at Brixton and Lougborough
Jcn will be expensive.

Not new, though, that's the whole point. Way back when, there was a
station called "East Brixton", situated on the viaduct at the junction
of Barrington Road and Brixton Station Road, just off Coldharbour Lane.
Not beyond the bounds of possibility to reopen it. And Loughborough
Junction has disused platforms - hence it is a "junction" - which could
easily be brought into use.
--
Annabel Smyth
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html
Website updated 6 June 2004

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 at 18:43:59, Dave Arquati wrote:

The problem on the Victoria line is in the centre rather than at the
edges. You *could* extend it to Croydon - but there'd be no room on
the trains for anyone else to actually get on them. In the outer areas, it
might be possible to dedicate existing track to Crossrail-like services
and thus improve the frequency (part of the current problem in South
London is conflicting movements as trains cross each other's routes).

The thing is, at the moment, the Tube empties out at Brixton and
everybody crowds on to southbound buses. Which, admittedly, mostly
start in Brixton so are empty (but not for long). It's better than it
was, but trying to get on a southbound bus in Brixton at about 5.30-6.00
pm is still a nightmare. What it will be like if/when the CRT opens, I
dread to think.

At least if people didn't have to get off the Tube or CRT in Brixton,
the buses would be emptier for those who chose to use them!

I think south London needs more *capacity* into the centre (either
through higher frequency or longer/double-deck trains). Rapidity
certainly seems to be good from key centres such as East Croydon
(about 30 mins to Victoria or London Bridge on a fast train?), Bromley
South and Wimbledon (SWT).

It is good, and the trains are (allegedly) frequent, even if they don't
run on time. But there are some black spots, and getting from Brixton
to Streatham is one of them. Where I live in Brixton, I can't even go
there directly, but have to either walk, or change buses.....
--
Annabel Smyth
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html
Website updated 6 June 2004

Martin Underwood wrote:
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

Martin Underwood wrote:


"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...


Martin Underwood wrote:


- Heathrow to Essex and Kent via Crossrail: I wonder if this will be

the

death knell of the premium-rate Heathrow Express service?


It's a shame that GW
and TT services from the west can't introduce Southall or Hayes &

Harlington

as an additional stop for connection to Heathrow: a cross-platform

change at

a railway station would be much easier than having to lug your cases

down

the steps at Reading and enduring the delays while the luggage is loaded
onto the coach and endure the slow journey out of Reading and along the

M4

to Heathrow.

Also a good idea, and I think this is planned - almost certainly for FGW
Link services along the Thames Valley to Reading, not sure about other
services but quite possible (perhaps alternating stops at Slough with
stops at Ealing Broadway like MML alternate Luton and Luton Airport
Parkway).

However in my view, even that's not really good enough; I think that
electrification of the route to Reading and services from Reading to
Heathrow (perhaps fasts calling at Maidenhead and Slough, and stoppers
too) would do more to combat motorway congestion (on the M4) than any
other rail project, since those Thames Valley towns depend a lot on
Heathrow in their economies.


I hope the GW line isn't electrified any further out: the thought of
Maidenhead bridge festooned with OHLE gantries doesn't bear thinking about
:-( Are there any classes of multiple unit that are
diesel/overhead-electric (like the 319s are third-rail/overhead)? If so,
maybe these should be used to provide a service from Reading to Heathrow,
using diesel from Reading to the point where the Heathrow line branches off
and OHLE from there onwards.

Certainly passengers from the west need a better means of connection than a
rail-air bus. Anything that reduces congestion on the M4 has got to be a
good thing. But it has to be affordable. And secure long-term parking would
be needed at stations along the way, for air travellers to leave their cars
while they went on holiday. That's a lot of joined-up thinking needed - too
much for us in the UK?

Hopefully a larger proportion of people would get rail from near to
their starting locations if there were a direct rail link into Heathrow
from Reading - since there would be a single change for a variety of
stations across the First Great Western and Virgin Cross Country networks.

I have wondered whether, if Airtrack were built, Reading's park-and-ride
site at Winnersh Triangle could be expanded to cater for park-and-ride
Heathrow travellers. (Services would run Reading - Winnersh - Staines
(High St) - Heathrow T5)


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

Annabel Smyth wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 at 18:54:17, Dave Arquati wrote:


I agree - missing out Loughborough Junction would also be sinful as it
allows interchange with Thameslink (and thus orbital connections for
those from Wimbledon, Sutton, & Streatham). The problem is the
viaduct; new stations on the SLL viaduct at Brixton and Lougborough
Jcn will be expensive.


Not new, though, that's the whole point. Way back when, there was a
station called "East Brixton", situated on the viaduct at the junction
of Barrington Road and Brixton Station Road, just off Coldharbour Lane.
Not beyond the bounds of possibility to reopen it. And Loughborough
Junction has disused platforms - hence it is a "junction" - which could
easily be brought into use.

East Brixton seems to be an irritating distance from Brixton station
itself - it's not as close as Clapham High St is to Clapham North.

I Googled for the Loughborough Junction platforms but I couldn't find
them. But East Brixton seems to be an incredibly short distance from
Loughborough Junction - were there really platforms at both locations?
Maybe the L'boro Jcn platforms are on the tracks for Elephant & Castle -
Denmark Hill services?

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

Dave Arquati wrote:
Annabel Smyth wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 at 18:54:17, Dave Arquati
wrote:


I agree - missing out Loughborough Junction would also be sinful
as it allows interchange with Thameslink (and thus orbital
connections for those from Wimbledon, Sutton, & Streatham). The
problem is the viaduct; new stations on the SLL viaduct at
Brixton and Lougborough Jcn will be expensive.


Not new, though, that's the whole point. Way back when, there was
a station called "East Brixton", situated on the viaduct at the
junction of Barrington Road and Brixton Station Road, just off
Coldharbour Lane. Not beyond the bounds of possibility to reopen
it. And Loughborough Junction has disused platforms - hence it is
a "junction" - which could easily be brought into use.

East Brixton seems to be an irritating distance from Brixton station
itself - it's not as close as Clapham High St is to Clapham North.

I Googled for the Loughborough Junction platforms but I couldn't
find them. But East Brixton seems to be an incredibly short
distance from Loughborough Junction - were there really platforms
at both locations? Maybe the L'boro Jcn platforms are on the tracks
for Elephant & Castle - Denmark Hill services?


Here's a rough diagram of the lines (needs to be viewed in a fixed-width
font):

|to Blackfriars
|
LLL
to Victoria / | \
___________________/__|__\______DH______
B |
__________\___EB______|_________DH______
\ | S. London Line
\ |
to Herne Hill

B=Brixton
EB=East Brixton, only on the high-level South London Line.
LLL=Loughborough Junction, originally with platforms on all three lines
through the junction; only the centre 'L' now exists.
DH= Denmark Hill

Note that Loughborough Junction has never had platforms on the SLL


See also the map at http://www.semg.org.uk/sr_map/1962map5.html


--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)