![]() |
London Connections Map
Steve M wrote:
MIG wrote: I can never remember which runs which, but I know it reverses, ie whichever operator runs it clockwise in the morning runs it anticlockwise in the evening. Thameslink seem to run both ways round in the evening peak, causing two trains clockwise within 4 minutes, then a 26 minute gap. I honestly feel the maze of lines in South London needs unravelling and a simplified service pattern introduced. Even as someone who works in the industry I often get confused with the direction and routing of trains! Such a service pattern has been considered before; I believe that reliability and possibly frequency enhancements were identified as advantages to a simplified network of Tube-style lines. However, simplification generally means restricting services from most stations to a single London terminal; that proved unpopular with south London residents last time they were considering simplification. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
London Connections Map
"Matthew Dickinson" wrote in message
... | There's a new London Connections map out with Heathrow Connect | depicted as a seperate service between Ealing Broadway & Heathrow | Terminals 1,2 & 3. | | The BAA stations are depicted outside the Zone 6 shading. | | It also has updated the opening dates for Shepherds Bush & Imperial | Wharf to 2006. | | (These two stations were listed as calling points for the Silverlink | service on the platform indicator at Clapham Junction yesterday) :) | That's because the times are in the Train Service Data Base, even though the stations aren't open yet. This is because it was originally intended to open the stations this year. The December NRT bore the legend "Station expected to open during the currency of the timetable" although this publication shows no times. Get down to Clapham Junction quick and you will find those two stations listed on the A-Z posters with the "relations" to nearby stations for when the service starts. The Editor has found out about the delays to the station openings, so the new posters which will go up on Sunday will still mention the stations under construction but reference to any train times has gone until we get some firm idea of when they will actually open. I doubt if anyone has even thought to look at what the CIS displays are showing and may not even be aware that these station stops are in TSDB, so those "ghost" stations will continue to show until either the penny drops at the control centre or the stops are removed from TSDB for the June-December period. -- - Yokel - oo oo OOO OOO OO 0 OO ) ( I ) ( ) ( /\ ) ( "Yokel" now posts via a spam-trap account. Replace my alias with stevejudd to reply. |
London Connections Map
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, John Rowland wrote:
"Tom Anderson" wrote in message .li... Except on a few bits of the network (Mill Hill East, for example). That said, even MHE gets 6 tph, Really? I thought this single-track branch couldn't handle more than 5tph. Er, ah, well, you see, two of the trains are Mill Hill East to Mill Hill East services, taking zero time to run and so not having a lot of track occupancy. Sort of a bit of a zen thing. I hear LU are planning to increase the frequency of these to 4 tph, in fact. Okay, so maybe it's not 6 tph. It'd still be pretty decent for an NR line. tom -- never mind your fingers, i've got blisters on my brain |
London Connections Map
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Dave Arquati wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote: On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, 1577+2260 wrote: On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 00:22:00 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote: That's one way of looking at it. My approach to a map like this would to be try to erase superfluous distinctions; since i don't think the difference between NR and LU lines is important per se (i think the difference in service level is, but not the operator!), i wouldn't try to display it. I think the difference in service pattern is important, and so there should be some distinction. Absolutely - but the map should reflect the service pattern, not the operator, so high-frequency mainlines should look similar to normal tube lines, and low-frequency tubes should look similar to normal mainlines, rather than having all mainlines look similar and all tube lines look similar. I disagree, for the moment; Tube and NR should be indicated separately for now, mainly because of ticketing issues. I know you can use Travelcards anywhere, but through tickets between LU and NR are a bit of a pain at the moment, particularly for Oyster users. Well, yes, that's true. Even if fares were integrated, there is then the issue that low-frequency Tube routes are often equivalent to what would be considered high frequency on NR. The only sections of NR that approach Tube standards of high frequency are sections like Clapham Junction - Victoria / Waterloo. 6tph is an average frequency on outer Tube routes, but it could be considered quite high frequency for some NR routes (e.g. trains via Forest Hill). Well, that doesn't actually mean my idea is a bad one, it just means that, since all tube lines (okay, not quite all) would count as high-frequency and none of the NR lines would (okay, not quite none), it's actually exactly equivalent (okay, not quite exactly) to drawing tube and NR lines differently! Still, it's the principle of the thing that matters. tom -- I content myself with the Speculative part [...], I care not for the Practick. I seldom bring any thing to use, 'tis not my way. Knowledge is my ultimate end. -- Sir Nicholas Gimcrack |
London Connections Map
Well, that doesn't actually mean my idea is a bad one, it just means that,
since all tube lines (okay, not quite all) would count as high-frequency and none of the NR lines would (okay, not quite none), it's actually exactly equivalent (okay, not quite exactly) to drawing tube and NR lines differently! Still, it's the principle of the thing that matters. The similarity in off-peak daytime frequency is not enough. A significantly different feature of Underground lines is that they run all day every day at high frequencies in both directions. NR routes which have high frequencies don't necessarily run all the time and nearly always close down hours earlier in one direction than the other. The types of service are so different that they can't be shown in the same way, certainly not on the grounds of daytime frequency. |
London Connections Map
Tom Anderson wrote: Mad props to this excellent website on the history of interchange symbology: http://www.ursasoft.com/maps/LURS/ The real overground network of the only real railway in London is here : http://virtualportmeirion.com/network/largemap.htm -- Nick |
London Connections Map
Tom Anderson wrote:
Okay, so maybe it's not 6 tph. It'd still be pretty decent for an NR line. Actually, the frequency of trains *to a Central London terminus* at many stations in my part of the world is at least as good as that. Off peak, for example, Gipsy Hill has 4 tph to Victoria and 6tph to London Bridge (4 via Tulse Hill and 4 via Forest Hill), which makes 10tph "to London". The problem is that, unlike Tube lines with end to end running, they don't serve the same intermediate stations. This is fine if you just want to get into Zone 1 quickly, but if you need to get to Clapham Junction the frequency suddenly drops to 4tph. The service at North Dulwich and East Dulwich is far more 'tube-like', at least in the northbound direction - all trains go to London Bridge, calling at the same stations, and at regular 10 minute intervals. Which makes it feel much more 'turn up and go', but is a real nuisance if you want to go anywhere other than London Bridge! This would be a major argument in favour of simplification (as discussed somewhere else in this thread) - but I think most people who actually use the services regularly get used to having to look at a timetable, and appreciate the one-seat ride to either London Bridge or Victoria/Blackfriars or Victoria/Cannon St or LB/Waterloo East/Charing Cross. |
London Connections Map
D7666 wrote: The real overground network of the only real railway in London is here : http://virtualportmeirion.com/network/largemap.htm That's a fantastic map - clearly the 'new' ON map was heavily inspired by that! Much more useful to the passenger than the current idea of distinguishing services by TOC. Actually, I think this is a hang over from the original NSE/London Connections map, which was the first to divide the map by operating areas (Kent Link, South London Lines etc). But even that used to distinguish Victoria/Blackfriars and Cannon St/Charing Cross services from each other with different shades of green. |
London Connections Map
Rupert Candy wrote: http://virtualportmeirion.com/network/largemap.htm That's a fantastic map - clearly the 'new' ON map was heavily inspired by that! It shows nothing is 'new'. THe story of that BR SR map came about is linked from the SEMG web site, here is the direct link to the index of the maps' author : http://virtualportmeirion.com/network/index.htm -- Nick |
London Connections Map
Rupert Candy wrote:
D7666 wrote: The real overground network of the only real railway in London is here : http://virtualportmeirion.com/network/largemap.htm That's a fantastic map - clearly the 'new' ON map was heavily inspired by that! Much more useful to the passenger than the current idea of distinguishing services by TOC. Actually, I think this is a hang over from the original NSE/London Connections map, which was the first to divide the map by operating areas (Kent Link, South London Lines etc). But even that used to distinguish Victoria/Blackfriars and Cannon St/Charing Cross services from each other with different shades of green. It is definitely a good map - superior to the TfL high-frequency map because it is easy to see which terminal trains end up at, and better than the ATOC map because it doesn't force an arbritary distinction between service of different TOCs. The ON map is very similar, just adding in the useful frequency element. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk