Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Paul Corfield" wrote in message ... On 25 May 2005 02:56:49 -0700, "Boltar" wrote: Is it just my opinion or do other people think the DLR is being pushed beyond what its really suited for? It was desinged to be a local tram-like service around the docks area. Now it seems to be turning into an east london tube/train replacement and I'm not sure its really up to the job. The trains are not very comfortable for long journeys and just don't have the capacity. I sort of understand your comments but I'm not sure I agree. I think Docklands is a valuable addition to the transport network and although it has been "reworked" several times I am pleased that we have got momentum behind the development both of Docklands / East London and the DLR itself. If we had waited for a tube line or heavy rail options then nothing new would be being built to City Airport or Woolwich and we certainly would not have the Beckton or Lewisham lines. If the choice is between having a light rail system or nothing then please give me a light rail system. It's no different to the Tyne and Wear Metro in a lot of respects and I dread to think what the old Tyneside loop line service would be like if it was a National Rail franchised service. The DLR has clearly shown it can provide a good and reliable service - having learnt a lot of hard lessons - and it is now reaping the rewards. There are no arguments about PFIs or private sector subcontracting from Ken Livingstone or Bob Kiley when it comes to the DLR. TfL and the Mayor are clearly delighted to keep pursuing a path that involves the private sector in building and owning the infrastructure with the private sector running the system. Quite a contrast to LU and PPP! DLR clearly know what they are doing when it comes to developing projects and they are skillful enough to keep ahead of traffic trends and to secure the capacity enhancement that is needed. I dread to think what the Jubilee Line would be like in the peaks if there was no DLR network. At the height of the peak then DLR is very busy and overcrowded but show me a half useful transport service in London that isn't like that - it's the nature of the beast. As for comfort - well it's not that bad and is certainly on a par with the modern seat designs on low floor buses and new trains / tube stocks. You won't get Inter City type comfort on any urban transport system that has to carry a lot of people. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! I agree with the previous poster. All they are doing is replacing the NLL section with a more frequent (and by that I mean 6-10 minute peak time services) It's hardly radical. Sure we get a few more stations but then we lose the Canning Town to North Woolwich section. (an area which is due for huge regeneration in the coming years) Why they want to scrap a railway which has a huge future potential use is beyond me. The City Airport extension will no doubt take the brunt of the traffic. Much easier would be to increase the frequency of the NLL (one of the reasons why it is underused) Plus give it a rebranding and a refurb. the NLL already has some great interchange possbilities at Canning Town, Stratford and further on at Highbury and soon Dalston with the ELL. And that just in the East. But as we know, someone has it in for the NLL. A |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
londoncityslicker wrote:
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message ... On 25 May 2005 02:56:49 -0700, "Boltar" wrote: Is it just my opinion or do other people think the DLR is being pushed beyond what its really suited for? It was desinged to be a local tram-like service around the docks area. Now it seems to be turning into an east london tube/train replacement and I'm not sure its really up to the job. The trains are not very comfortable for long journeys and just don't have the capacity. I sort of understand your comments but I'm not sure I agree. I think Docklands is a valuable addition to the transport network and although it has been "reworked" several times I am pleased that we have got momentum behind the development both of Docklands / East London and the DLR itself. If we had waited for a tube line or heavy rail options then nothing new would be being built to City Airport or Woolwich and we certainly would not have the Beckton or Lewisham lines. If the choice is between having a light rail system or nothing then please give me a light rail system. It's no different to the Tyne and Wear Metro in a lot of respects and I dread to think what the old Tyneside loop line service would be like if it was a National Rail franchised service. The DLR has clearly shown it can provide a good and reliable service - having learnt a lot of hard lessons - and it is now reaping the rewards. There are no arguments about PFIs or private sector subcontracting from Ken Livingstone or Bob Kiley when it comes to the DLR. TfL and the Mayor are clearly delighted to keep pursuing a path that involves the private sector in building and owning the infrastructure with the private sector running the system. Quite a contrast to LU and PPP! DLR clearly know what they are doing when it comes to developing projects and they are skillful enough to keep ahead of traffic trends and to secure the capacity enhancement that is needed. I dread to think what the Jubilee Line would be like in the peaks if there was no DLR network. At the height of the peak then DLR is very busy and overcrowded but show me a half useful transport service in London that isn't like that - it's the nature of the beast. As for comfort - well it's not that bad and is certainly on a par with the modern seat designs on low floor buses and new trains / tube stocks. You won't get Inter City type comfort on any urban transport system that has to carry a lot of people. I agree with the previous poster. All they are doing is replacing the NLL section with a more frequent (and by that I mean 6-10 minute peak time services) It's hardly radical. Sure we get a few more stations but then we lose the Canning Town to North Woolwich section. The loss is actually Stratford to North Woolwich, although Canning Town to North Woolwich is being lost in favour of Crossrail, a vastly more useful service than the NLL provides to the Royal Docks. (an area which is due for huge regeneration in the coming years) Why they want to scrap a railway which has a huge future potential use is beyond me. What huge future potential use is there that neither the DLR nor Crossrail provides? The City Airport extension will no doubt take the brunt of the traffic. ....making the NLL even less useful, and making it more useful to provide DLR services between Canning Town and Stratford to maintain and enhance local connections in the area. The DLR services will be more useful because they will run as far as Beckton and Woolwich Arsenal. Much easier would be to increase the frequency of the NLL (one of the reasons why it is underused) Not necessarily easier - new turnback facilities will need to be provided at Canning Town in order to provide an increased frequency service to two stations already served at high frequency by the Jubilee line. The NLL is partly underused because it is low frequency; it is also underused because the DLR and Jubilee line provide the appropriate roles in the area more attractively. Plus give it a rebranding and a refurb. the NLL already has some great interchange possbilities at Canning Town, Stratford and further on at Highbury and soon Dalston with the ELL. And that just in the East. The DLR will have great interchange opportunities at Canning Town, West Ham and Stratford too, and will provide them to more people than the NLL can. DLR and Jubilee services already provide interchange with the ELL at Shadwell and Canada Water, better than the interchange at Dalston with the NLL will. But as we know, someone has it in for the NLL. Someone wants to provide a more useful local service to the residents of the Royal Docks, whilst recognising the NLL provides an extremely useful service outside the Royal Docks and planning to enhance its frequency where it is needed. Shocking! At this rate, we might even get the Olympics. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Hertfordshire gives TfL useless land to pay for Croxley link | London Transport | |||
DLR Extension To Stratford International | London Transport | |||
DLR or Jubilee line extension to Stratford International - two questions | London Transport |